Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't understand college football's aversion to a normal postseason. Half the Super Bowl champions of the past decade were not among the 4 highest seeded teams when the playoffs began...
Well, there's the difference between building a team of student athletes and building a team of professional athletes. You do know the student athletes have to attend classes and make the grades to remain eligible, right?
Not correct. Within that 30 years they won a title, and recently played for another. Maybe they arent the powerhouse they were yesteryear, but to say they havent been relevant for 30 years is absurd.
Whoops. 28 years. In other words, six years before your senior class was born. Glory days remain way in the rearview mirror for your guys.
Well, there's the difference between building a team of student athletes and building a team of professional athletes. You do know the student athletes have to attend classes and make the grades to remain eligible, right?
I think an 8 team playoff would be fine. But to keep the length of the season within reason either deep six conference championships or shorten the regular season to accommodate a conference championship game. The longer a season or post season get the more it favors a team like Bama that basically stockpiles talent and can absorb inevitable injuries.
Rainy day and too much time on my hands. I did some research on the last 20 years of AP top 25 rankings preseason and final. I did the Pac 12 the Big 10 and the Sec and got tired of the numbers. So if I missed your team go ahead and check and give us the result. What I did, as a example, was give a team that was ranked 10 in the preseason and finished rank 20th, 10 points to overrated. Or unrated preseason and finished rated 1 they get 25points underrated. Make sense?
Pac 12
ASU 4 under
UofA 3 over
CAl 33 over
Col 29 over
OR 13 under
OR ST 24 under
USC 63 over
UCLA 10 over
Utah 64 under (not once overrated)
Wash 4 over
Wash st 51 under (not once overrated)
Stan 4 over
SEC
ALA 24 under
AUB 14 under
ARK 12 under
FLO 72 over
Gor 30 over
Ken 0
LSU 49 over
Missouri 20 under
Miss 7 under
Miss st 29 under
S-Car 4 under
Tenn 61 over
T A&M 41 over
Vandy 5 under(not once over)
Big ten
Wisc 1 over
ILL 11 under
Ind 0
Iowa 20 under
Mich 28 over
Mich st 38 under
Minn 13 under
Neb 78 over
N- West 1 under
Ohio st 38 over
Penn st 31 over
Purdue 2 over
Rutg 4 under
Maryland 20 under
A couple more-
Notre dame 34 over
Flor st 91 over ( winner of most overrated)
Okla 53 over
Tex 78 over
Boise st 68 under (winner of most underrated)
That argument has been debunked so many times its just not valid. If you have 8 or 12 or 16 playoff spots out of 128 FBS schools, it will not water down the regular season. It could actually greatly enhance it. Not only would you have teams fighting for a playoff spot, but also fighting for seeding. Even the pathetic 4 team playoff system right now is vastly better than its every been, BCS being the worst.
16 teams would ruin the regular season.
An easy example of why is the Mich/OhSt game. That is pretty much a playoff game (as it stands now) this year. With 16 teams that game really means nothing.
Another easy example is that teams would start pulling starters in the last couple regular season games if they're already locked into their conf. championship games. All conf. champs get into a 16 team playoff.
Last edited by Dport7674; 10-13-2016 at 07:44 PM..
An easy example of why is the Mich/OhSt game. That is pretty much a playoff game (as it stands now) this year. With 16 teams that game really means nothing.
Another easy example is that teams would start pulling starters in the last couple regular season games if they're already locked into their conf. championship games. All conf. champs get into a 16 team playoff.
Could not agree more.
I don't like that one conference inevitably gets left out of this current 4 team, and it also is extremely difficult for a group of 5 school to get in.
I think 8 is ideal, because every conference gets represented and then a group of 5 school could also get in.
I have heard arguments for 6, which would be alright, except that buys the top 2 seeds a bye week, which I think is too big of an advantage that late in the season.
Just the conference champs from the power 5 conferences and then the 3 highest ranked group of 5 champs (which could also include ND if they were deserving in any given year).
An easy example of why is the Mich/OhSt game. That is pretty much a playoff game (as it stands now) this year. With 16 teams that game really means nothing.
Another easy example is that teams would start pulling starters in the last couple regular season games if they're already locked into their conf. championship games. All conf. champs get into a 16 team playoff.
Well, that certainly makes it worthwhile to watch good 2-loss teams play for a pat on the back in some Walmart Chick-fil-A Napa Auto Parts Whatever Bowl that means nothing.
I don't like that one conference inevitably gets left out of this current 4 team, and it also is extremely difficult for a group of 5 school to get in.
I think 8 is ideal, because every conference gets represented and then a group of 5 school could also get in.
8 would definitely be an improvement for that reason. I think that would make a legitimate playoffs. 16 would make it even more interesting.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.