Conference Champs Only in Playoffs!

by **NigelUno** 2014-09-23, 17:52

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11575745/mark-dantonio-michigan-state-spartans-says-only-conference-champions-play-college-football-playoff

by **NigelUno** 2014-09-23, 17:52

(Unless it's UM, this is a good idea)

by **InTenSity** 2014-09-23, 18:09

That seems to have riled up other conference fans. 277 comments when I looked.

by **NigelUno** 2014-09-23, 18:10

It will eventually get to that point when they make it an 8 team playoff. 5 champs and 3 at large bids.

by Herbie Green 2014-09-23, 18:13

I tend to agree. The only good solution though is a system where they get an automatic bid.

by **InTenSity** 2014-09-23, 18:17

Herbie Green wrote:I tend to agree. The only good solution though is a system where they get an automatic bid.

Even if the winning team has three or more losses?

by Herbie Green 2014-09-23, 18:21

NigelUno wrote:It will eventually get to that point when they make it an 8 team playoff. 5 champs and 3 at large bids.

That would be a wonderful thing. It essentially turns the conference championship games into a first round playoff game. I think it would actually be cool if say an 8-4 NW team knocked off 11-1 OSU team and took their bid and left them to sweat it out. Right now everyone in the Big Ten could still have a dream to play for.

by Herbie Green 2014-09-23, 18:24

InTenSity wrote:
Even if the winning team has three or more losses?

Haha I guess I anticipated this question. Everyone knows the rules. Win your conference or go politic on the bubble like in March Madness.

by **WBill** 2014-09-23, 18:26

I think this will de facto be the case anyway. Have a hard time seeing the committee inviting a team that just lost the week before, absent the meeting of two undefeated teams in the conference title game.

by Herbie Green 2014-09-23, 18:33

WBill wrote:I think this will de facto be the case anyway. Have a hard time seeing the committee inviting a team that just lost the week before, absent the meeting of two undefeated teams in the conference title game.

I think that one year you had Bama-LSU. Same division within the SEC. Bama goes 11-1 with only loss to LSU. So Bama doesn't even play in SEC Champ game but then is one of two teams chosen for national title game.

by SawGreen 2014-09-23, 18:37

It makes sense. The committee can choose among the conferences.

Losing your conference and winning a national championship doesn't ring true to me, and it drives a more diverse audience.

by SawGreen 2014-09-23, 18:38

Is "titlist" a word?

by Herbie Green 2014-09-23, 18:54

SawGreen wrote:Is "titlist" a word?

Conference Champs Only in Playoffs! 2Q==

by **y2kMgrad** 2014-09-23, 19:19

Well, in essence he's arguing that two teams from the SEC shouldn't get in. I agree with him, but I doubt the committee does. They'll probably take the top 4 teams regardless of conference affiliation.

by **NigelUno** 2014-09-24, 10:07

That's weird. I don't see any ghost replies in here...

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2014-09-24, 10:10

especially when that conference is the Big 10 and a team is otherwise very unlikely to get in..

by **InTenSity** 2014-09-24, 10:11

Well, in essence he's arguing that two teams from the SEC shouldn't get in. I agree with him, but I doubt the committee does. They'll probably take the top 4 teams regardless of conference affiliation.

I don't see PAC12, Big12, ACC and B1G representatives all agreeing enough to put 2 SEC teams in the playoffs. That's 8 of the 13 votes, even if the SEC and independents want it, I don't think it will happen. The other conferences would rather see 4 representatives from multiple conferences, I would think.

by **Heat Miser** 2014-09-24, 10:11

NigelUno wrote:That's weird. I don't see any ghost replies in here...

That is weird. scratch

by **Heat Miser** 2014-09-24, 10:23

InTenSity wrote:
Well, in essence he's arguing that two teams from the SEC shouldn't get in. I agree with him, but I doubt the committee does. They'll probably take the top 4 teams regardless of conference affiliation.
I don't see PAC12, Big12, ACC and B1G representatives all agreeing enough to put 2 SEC teams in the playoffs. That's 8 of the 13 votes, even if the SEC and independents want it, I don't think it will happen. The other conferences would rather see 4 representatives from multiple conferences, I would think.

Let's say 'Bama, Oregon, & FSU run the table. Everyone else has at least one loss. Let's say A&M's only loss is 'Bama. I'd say A&M has a pretty good argument for being in.

by **NigelUno** 2014-09-24, 10:26

Heat Miser wrote:

Let's say 'Bama, Oregon, & FSU run the table. Everyone else has at least one loss. Let's say A&M's only loss is 'Bama. I'd say A&M has a pretty good argument for being in.

But if say a BigTen team had only one loss (to say...Oregon), they would get in ahead of A&M.

by **Heat Miser** 2014-09-24, 10:27

NigelUno wrote:
Heat Miser wrote:

Let's say 'Bama, Oregon, & FSU run the table. Everyone else has at least one loss. Let's say A&M's only loss is 'Bama. I'd say A&M has a pretty good argument for being in.

But if say a BigTen team had only one loss (to say...Oregon), they would get in ahead of A&M.

Hopefully.

by **NigelUno** 2014-09-24, 10:28

InTenSity wrote:
I don't see PAC12, Big12, ACC and B1G representatives all agreeing enough to put 2 SEC teams in the playoffs. That's 8 of the 13 votes, even if the SEC and independents want it, I don't think it will happen. The other conferences would rather see 4 representatives from multiple conferences, I would think.

Yes. There are going to be all kinds of back room deals going on. That's how committees work. The other conferences will outvote the SEC.

by **InTenSity** 2014-09-24, 10:30

Heat Miser wrote:

Let's say 'Bama, Oregon, & FSU run the table. Everyone else has at least one loss. Let's say A&M's only loss is 'Bama. I'd say A&M has a pretty good argument for being in.

Over MSU? I could argue MSU in. A&M doesn't play anyone in OOC, and plays UL Monroe in November, essentially giving themselves another bye. Although A&M had to travel to Bama, it is later in the year and not out of their timezone. MSU has one loss earlier in the year and at least they traveled across the country to play the PAC12 champions and since then the mistakes in that game have been corrected. MSU is the B1G champion and won the championship game, having to play an extra game and as a committee we said we were going to reward OOC scheduling as well. MSU has a slight edge over A&M who didn't have to play an extra game, and a bigger edge over Baylor who's one loss comes to ISU.

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2014-09-24, 10:37

InTenSity wrote:
Over MSU? I could argue MSU in. A&M doesn't play anyone in OOC, and plays UL Monroe in November, essentially giving themselves another bye. Although A&M had to travel to Bama, it is later in the year and not out of their timezone. MSU has one loss earlier in the year and at least they traveled across the country to play the PAC12 champions and since then the mistakes in that game have been corrected. MSU is the B1G champion and won the championship game, having to play an extra game and as a committee we said we were going to reward OOC scheduling as well. MSU has a slight edge over A&M who didn't have to play an extra game, and a bigger edge over Baylor who's one loss comes to ISU.

GO GREEN!!!

by **Heat Miser** 2014-09-24, 10:40

InTenSity wrote:
Heat Miser wrote:

Let's say 'Bama, Oregon, & FSU run the table. Everyone else has at least one loss. Let's say A&M's only loss is 'Bama. I'd say A&M has a pretty good argument for being in.
Over MSU? I could argue MSU in. A&M doesn't play anyone in OOC, and plays UL Monroe in November, essentially giving themselves another bye. Although A&M had to travel to Bama, it is later in the year and not out of their timezone. MSU has one loss earlier in the year and at least they traveled across the country to play the PAC12 champions and since then the mistakes in that game have been corrected. MSU is the B1G champion and won the championship game, having to play an extra game and as a committee we said we were going to reward OOC scheduling as well. MSU has a slight edge over A&M who didn't have to play an extra game, and a bigger edge over Baylor who's one loss comes to ISU.

I agree. I'm just saying A&M would have a pretty good argument too. They play 5 ranked teams. MSU plays 3 (hopefully Ped State makes it 4 & B1GCG makes 5). I would think the Big 12 is out under this scenario w/o a conference championship game & being so weak after OU & Baylor.

by **InTenSity** 2014-09-24, 10:43

Heat Miser wrote:

I agree. I'm just saying A&M would have a pretty good argument too. They play 5 ranked teams. MSU plays 3 (hopefully Ped State makes it 4 & B1GCG makes 5). I would think the Big 12 is out under this scenario w/o a conference championship game & being so weak after OU & Baylor.

Sort of depends on how the committee ranks the teams, we don't know if they are going to play 5 ranked teams or not. Maybe the committee really punishes conferences for only playing themselves and rewards others for playing upper tier P5 teams.

by **Heat Miser** 2014-09-24, 10:49

InTenSity wrote:
Heat Miser wrote:

I agree. I'm just saying A&M would have a pretty good argument too. They play 5 ranked teams. MSU plays 3 (hopefully Ped State makes it 4 & B1GCG makes 5). I would think the Big 12 is out under this scenario w/o a conference championship game & being so weak after OU & Baylor.
Sort of depends on how the committee ranks the teams, we don't know if they are going to play 5 ranked teams or not. Maybe the committee really punishes conferences for only playing themselves and rewards others for playing upper tier P5 teams.

Agreed. It will be interesting to see the variance between the committees first rankings & the AP/Coaches polls. Then it'll be interesting to see how the AP/Coaches polls change afterward.

by Herbie Green 2014-09-24, 11:09

Here is what the conference champions looked like the last two seasons before the bowls with regards to the BCS:
2013
MSU: 12-1, #4 BCS
Stanford: 11-2, #5
Auburn: 12-1, #2
FSU: 13-0, #1
Baylor: 11-1, #6
Final BCS:
1. FSU
2. Auburn
3. Bama
4. MSU

2012
Wisconsin: 8-5, unranked
Stanford: 11-2, #6
Bama: 12-1, #2
FSU: 11-2, #12
KSU: 11-1, #5
Final BCS
1. Notre Dame
2. Bama
3. Florida
4. Oregon

You can imagine the kind of debates that would have taken place.

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2014-09-24, 11:27

Herbie Green wrote:Here is what the conference champions looked like the last two seasons before the bowls with regards to the BCS:
2013
MSU: 12-1, #4 BCS
Stanford: 11-2, #5
Auburn: 12-1, #2
FSU: 13-0, #1
Baylor: 11-1, #6
Final BCS:
1. FSU
2. Auburn
3. Bama
4. MSU

2012
Wisconsin: 8-5, unranked
Stanford: 11-2, #6
Bama: 12-1, #2
FSU: 11-2, #12
KSU: 11-1, #5
Final BCS
1. Notre Dame
2. Bama
3. Florida
4. Oregon

You can imagine the kind of debates that would have taken place.

an 8-5 Wisconsin team - the conference champion - would've absolutely belonged in the playoff.

by **The_Dude** 2014-09-24, 11:37

Just like the BCS, how can you not reward teams that go and play a very tough game in their conference title when the other team is sitting at home?

Last year, if auburn lost to Missouri, Bama would have jumped then. Why? Both were 11-1 after the regular season, and Auburn had beat Bama. So you can sit at home while another team has to play a tough game, and that outcome could benefit you? Doesn't make sense.

by **NigelUno** 2014-09-24, 12:12

The_Dude wrote:Just like the BCS, how can you not reward teams that go and play a very tough game in their conference title when the other team is sitting at home?

Last year, if auburn lost to Missouri, Bama would have jumped then. Why? Both were 11-1 after the regular season, and Auburn had beat Bama. So you can sit at home while another team has to play a tough game, and that outcome could benefit you? Doesn't make sense.

Not necessarily. Missouri would have taken Auburn's spot, and that win would have impacted Alabama's rating. Not sure it makes sense to say Bama would have gone to a 4 team playoff last year using BCS rankings, because the committee won't be using those rankings this year.

by Herbie Green 2014-09-24, 12:33

The committee will have their own ranking but the problem would be the same. You will have X number of teams that look legitimately qualified for Y number of playoff spots. And X is greater than Y.

In a 2013 playoff you would have Auburn and FSU and then Bama, MSU, Stanford, and Baylor for the other two spots. All with equal arguments but they can only pick two. Christ, I actually think they might be better off going with a BCS type ranking. This committee is going to sit around at a table and subjectively pick which ones get to go. This is almost guaranteed to cause even more controversy than the BCS.

by **NigelUno** 2014-09-24, 12:37

Herbie Green wrote:The committee will have their own ranking but the problem would be the same. You will have X number of teams that look legitimately qualified for Y number of playoff spots. And X is greater than Y.

In a 2013 playoff you would have Auburn and FSU and then Bama, MSU, Stanford, and Baylor for the other two spots. All with equal arguments but they can only pick two. Christ, I actually think they might be better off going with a BCS type ranking. This committee is going to sit around at a table and subjectively pick which ones get to go. This is almost guaranteed to cause even more controversy than the BCS.

Yes. It will create more controversy in that the top 4 teams (using whatever computer poll/ranking) probably won't make the Final 4. But, that controversy will lead to the power conferences separating from the NCAA and then running an 8 team playoff. 5 conference champs and 3 at large bids will make the 8 team playoff.

by **Ass Dan** 2014-09-24, 12:41

Robert J Sakimano wrote:an 8-5 Wisconsin team - the conference champion - would've absolutely belonged in the playoff.

12-0 OSU belonged in the playoff, they just couldn't stand to assess a self-imposed bowl ban and it boned them in the long run. They cost themselves a national championship. 8-5 wisconsin was just the benefactor of OSU's misgivings

by **Wally Fairway** 2014-09-24, 12:53

Meh - Spartan fans are getting worked up because it affects them this year, but wait until a #1 MSU faces a #3 Wisconsin in the B1G championship game....then listen for all the folks arguing that both teams deserve to be in the playoffs.

Really it could happen - especially since those team will play each other only twice every six years in conference play.

The "solution" is dilution - going to 8 teams would make it easier, although there would still have to be some sort of rule to block a team like 2012 8-5 Wisconsin from getting a berth in the playoffs.

by **Wally Fairway** 2014-09-24, 13:00

gHost Spartan wrote:Notre Dame gets in if they win all their games, which will include W's over now ranked @ ASU, OKL, & FSU

Fuck Notre Dame - join a conference, or watch it on TV.

and in case anyone missed it tl:dr

Fuck Notre Dame

by **Robert J Sakimano** 2014-09-24, 13:01

Ass Dan wrote:

12-0 OSU belonged in the playoff, they just couldn't stand to assess a self-imposed bowl ban and it boned them in the long run. They cost themselves a national championship. 8-5 wisconsin was just the benefactor of OSU's misgivings

and, because of that, was the conference champion. And, at 8-5, would deserve to be in the play-off.

by **NigelUno** 2014-09-24, 13:02

gHost Spartan wrote:I think we're all Way ahead of ourselves, m anyway but I see a team from outside the conversation enter ing the conversation later in the seass on

I know, right? We probably shouldn't even be talking about it!!!

Pride before the fall!!!

by **The_Dude** 2014-09-24, 13:05

gHost Spartan wrote:Notre Dame gets in if they win all their games, which will include W's over now ranked @ ASU, OKL, & FSU

ND doesn't play OU. They have a very tough schedule that includes ASU, Stanford, USC, FSU, BYU. Not once as tough as people may have thought because North Carolina, Michigan, and Louisville dont appear to be that good but still very tough. If they go undefeated they are in. 11-1 ND is still probably in consideration too.

by **NigelUno** 2014-09-24, 13:09

Ass Dan wrote:

12-0 OSU belonged in the playoff, they just couldn't stand to assess a self-imposed bowl ban and it boned them in the long run. They cost themselves a national championship. 8-5 wisconsin was just the benefactor of OSU's misgivings

If there was a playoff in 2012, Bama would have rolled OSU.

by Sponsored content