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 am just going to assume you didn't really read much of this conversation.
I've read about every version of this same conversation by way of several other sports articles, and it's basically the same people kicking the same horse.
I've read about every version of this same conversation by way of several other sports articles, and it's basically the same people kicking the same horse.
Here's a good summary of what I'VE been discussing.
Nowhere in it will you find anyone trying to "get their 6-6 team into the playoffs".
In fact I argued that the NBA and NHL were ridiculously too inclusive. Even the MLB and NFL are a bit more inclusive than I would like.
Unless you'd just rather read every other version while responding in this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chadgates
To expand on that and put it in perspective:
There are 20 MLS teams. 20 make the playoffs = 60%
There are 30 NBA teams. 16 make the playoffs = 53.3%
There are 30 NHL teams. 16 make the playoffs = 53.3%
There are 32 NFL teams. 12 get playoff births = 37.5%
There are 30 MLB teams. 10 make the post season = 33.3%
There are 347 NCAA basketball teams. 68 get into the tourney = 19.6%
There are 125 Division 1-AA (FCS) football teams. 24 make the post season = 19.2%
There are 170 Division 2 football teams. 28 make the playoffs = 16.5%
There are 247 Division 3 football teams. 32 make the playoffs = 13%
There are 128 NCAA (FBS) football teams. 4 make the playoffs = 3.1%
Expand to 8 = 6.3%
Expand to 16 = 12.5%
I think it is ridiculous what the MLS, NBA and NHL do. No way over half the teams should be involved.
NFL and MLB are still a bit high at a third +, but not terribly so.
But it is equally ridiculous to have only 3%.
I'm not asking for 16 (which would still be the least amount in any other major sport in this country)
I'm simply saying lets not continue in a system that leaves out the Baylors and TCUs of last season.
Lets not leave out the 2006 Boise St. team who finished unbeaten after their upset of Oklahoma and still got nothing for it.
Lets not leave out a Memphis if they run the table.
For anyone who actually cares, I went back and looked at the schedules and BCS ratings over the last 5 seasons. If we had what I am proposing here, this would have been the initial seeding:
2014
1 Florida St 13-0
2 Alabama 12-1
3 Ohio St 12-1
4 Oregon 12-1
5 Baylor 11-1
6 TCU 11-1
7 Michigan St 10-2
8 Mississippi St 10-2
2013
1 Florida St 13-0
2 Auburn 12-1
3 Michigan St 12-1
4 Stanford 11-2
5 Baylor 11-1
6 Alabama 11-1
7 Ohio St. 12-1
8 Oregon 10-2
That would have made for quite a few tasty 1st round match ups.
Here ya go Howard.
Now in these above playoff scenarios I believe I just simply took the top 8 with no other rules applied. Simply the top 8 in the final rankings before the bowl match-ups are announced.
Re-post of what I had proposed on the first page with a couple of changes:
Simply take the 5 conference champs of the Power 5 conferences, and three at large bids.
The at-large bids are decided as follows:
1) The highest ranked mid major provided they have no more than 1 loss.
2) Any and all remaining undefeated teams
3) Any and all one loss teams regardless of conference affiliation
If the above doesn't fill out the full 8 then simply take the highest ranked remaining team(s).
I saw where some were discussing a rule to limit the number of teams from any single conference to 2, which makes sense on the surface but I think if there is a 1 loss team out there and some 2 loss teams are already in, it seems like all 1 loss teams (from power 5 conferences) should get in.
I can't recall any season that ever had more than 6 1-loss teams from the Power 5, and most of those were conference champs.
The one year that presents a problem and a need for one last rule is 2012. There were a few things that all coincided which would cause a problem for the format described above.
Here are the 9 eligible teams and their rankings for that season before the bowl selections:
1) ND (12-0) - IND & only unbeaten left
2) Alabama (12-1) - SEC champ
3) Florida (11-1)
4) Oregon (11-1)
5) Kansas St. (11-1) - Big 12 champ
6) Stanford (11-2) - PAC champ
12) Florida State (11-2) - ACC champ
15) N. Illinois (12-1) - Highest ranked mid major
NR) Wisconsin (8-4) - B1G champ
So with ND already taking one at large and N Illinois qualifying for another as the highest ranked mid major with less than 2 losses, that leaves only one at large up for grabs. You have both Florida and Oregon sitting at 11-1 and ranked 3 & 4 who both clearly deserve a spot.
The biggest thing that stands out is Wisconsin won its conference with an 8-4 record and were unranked, even after having won that game. IMO they are the team least deserving especially considering they are ranked below N. Illinois. If Nebraska would have beaten them and won the B1G then N. Illinois probably gets left out.
So the rule would have to be something along the lines of:
If there are more than 8 teams who meet the criteria described above, the 8 highest ranked teams will fill out the field.
So in that scenario Wisconsin at 8-4 would be left out.
I don't really like leaving out a conference champ, but it basically comes down to them or N Illinois (and I hate not giving the best mid major team a shot) or either 1-loss Florida or Oregon.
To me Wisconsin is the easy choice and the rule in blue above is about the fairest way to alleviate such a problem if it were to occur again.
I will cull through some other seasons and see if I can find another instance of a similar problem, but I don't think any season other than 2012 presents a challenge using the 3 simple criterion listed above.
So 2009 presents another challenge, with 3 mid majors finishing unbeaten, and a Florida team with only 1 loss fighting for only three spots. In this scenario if we used the added in blue rule above an 11-2 GA Tech gets left out. I feel less satisfied leaving a 2 loss conference champ out than I did leaving out an 8-4 Wisconsin. Additionally the three mid majors who were unbeaten were all pretty solid and all ranked in the top 6, an even more compelling reason to keep their seats at the table.
The only team I could legitimately see kicking to the curb instead of 9th ranked GA Tech would be #5 Florida. they aren't a conference champ and they aren't unbeaten.
SO lets hear some more input from you guys.
Do you rate Conference champs highest of all?
Cause remember that lets in the 8-4 Wisconsin squad from 2012, but keeps Ga Tech in 2009.
Personally although I'm not a big fan of leaving out GA tech, I still think the rule is pretty solid and would stand by it even for the 2009 season.
One last note. Even the AP had all three mid majors ranked in the top6, so it wasn't the result of some crazy computer BS.
So 2009 presents another challenge, with 3 mid majors finishing unbeaten, and a Florida team with only 1 loss fighting for only three spots. In this scenario if we used the added in blue rule above an 11-2 GA Tech gets left out. I feel less satisfied leaving a 2 loss conference champ out than I did leaving out an 8-4 Wisconsin. Additionally the three mid majors who were unbeaten were all pretty solid and all ranked in the top 6, an even more compelling reason to keep their seats at the table.
The only team I could legitimately see kicking to the curb instead of 9th ranked GA Tech would be #5 Florida. they aren't a conference champ and they aren't unbeaten.
SO lets hear some more input from you guys.
Do you rate Conference champs highest of all?
Cause remember that lets in the 8-4 Wisconsin squad from 2012, but keeps Ga Tech in 2009.
Personally although I'm not a big fan of leaving out GA tech, I still think the rule is pretty solid and would stand by it even for the 2009 season.
One last note. Even the AP had all three mid majors ranked in the top6, so it wasn't the result of some crazy computer BS.
I think I agree that you just drop the lowest ranked of all the qualifying teams. That seems like a good solution and you will notice that most of the time the Go5 team is ranked in the teens, so for three to be ranked in the top6 says something.
I hate to break it to you, but if you go back one more year you'll find that 2008 is going to present more than 8 qualifiers again.
2008
1) Oklahoma (12-1) Big 12
2) Florida (12-1) SEC
3) Texas (11-1)
4) Alabama (12-1)
5) USC (11-1) PAC
6) Utah (12-0)
7) Texas Tech (11-1)
8) Penn St (11-1) B1G
9) Boise St (12-0)
19) VA Tech (9-4) ACC
So here you would drop Boise and Virginia Tech. If it were me I would rather a third Big12 team get left out than an unbeaten Boise, but i'm not sure how you do that consistently.
Most of the time it won't be an issue, but the fact is it isn't as rare as you seemed to think it is to have many 1 loss teams and more than 1 Go5 teams who are unbeaten.
Overall I would be happy with this setup though. Definitely better than 4.
Maybe say something like "any unbeaten team in the top 10 gets an auto bid"? IDK.
Realistically I have a hard time believing the Power 5 conferences would sign off on any playoff system that allowed too many Go5 teams in the mix. It is all about the $$ and they aren't very keen on sharing.
Yes, definitely need a stipulation that any unbeaten team gets an auto-bid.
The BIG downside tho that stipulation is that you would likely end up with a race to the bottom sort of scheduling going forward.
The moment you make that announcement you can say goodbye to Alabama vs USC and Ohio St vs Oklahoma.
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.
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.
