Your playoff thoughts

[joplin gamecock1]

2 years ago bama finneshed 11-1 in regular season and won national title. Last year clemmy finished 11-1 and won title. This year bama fineshed 11-1 and prbly wont make playoffs after being no1 through the firstt 10 games. If they dont get in,and possiby all 4 teams or at least 3 of them get in with same record, do you think a nuff hell raising and complaing might get playoff extended to more than 4 teams? I know the reason they currenty are out of is because theire 1 lost was the last regullar season game, but i have a feeling if they dont get in there will be sum hell raising

 

[EssoClub2]

2 years ago bama finneshed 11-1 in regular season and won national title. Last year clemmy finished 11-1 and won title. This year bama fineshed 11-1 and prbly wont make playoffs after being no1 through the firstt 10 games. If they dont get in,and possiby all 4 teams or at least 3 of them get in with same record, do you think a nuff hell raising and complaing might get playoff extended to more than 4 teams? I know the reason they currenty are out of is because theire 1 lost was the last regullar season game, but i have a feeling if they dont get in there will be sum hell raising

I think 8 is the right number - Teams 9-20will still be mad , but 8 teams would have gotten most deserving teams in a playoff historically

 

[Boom4life]

After the top 5 or 6 who deserves to get in. I think keep it at 4 anything larger downplays the regular season.

 

[ExpatCarolinian]

4 is perfect. Bama not making it doesn’t change anything.

 

[DarkCock]

I hate the playoff

 

[jonesz21]

2 years ago bama finneshed 11-1 in regular season and won national title. Last year clemmy finished 11-1 and won title. This year bama fineshed 11-1 and prbly wont make playoffs after being no1 through the firstt 10 games. If they dont get in,and possiby all 4 teams or at least 3 of them get in with same record, do you think a nuff hell raising and complaing might get playoff extended to more than 4 teams? I know the reason they currenty are out of is because theire 1 lost was the last regullar season game, but i have a feeling if they dont get in there will be sum hell raising

I think they should take all the conference champs from the major conferences ONLY. That takes people with hidin agenda out of it. You know if you win the conference you are in and if not you are out. No need for a committee or rankings

 

[Judson1]

People are sick of Bama. They better hope things change on the field or they’re screwed.
I’d much rather the taters have to beat them and someone else.
Hate the playoff but hate the taters more.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

I think they should take all the conference champs from the major conferences ONLY. That takes people with hidin agenda out of it. You know if you win the conference you are in and if not you are out. No need for a committee or rankings

If you did this, that is 5 playoff spots, so either you need to leave at 4 or expand to 8.

 

[Cock-a-Doo]

I think 8 teams is too much, it creates another week of games for the top 2 teams which are made up of (mostly) unpaid athletes....so I don't think 8 games is right for the athlete.
I've heard mention then drop the season schedule down 1 game but in doing so you're cutting out games vs. the smaller schools and the fact is those programs are vital to the overall health of college football.
I like it at 4 teams...I think if you have 4 teams in then the likelihood of you capturing the #1 team in that group of 4 (which to me is the goal, to find the #1 team) would be extremely high.

 

[GR8K9]

8 teams ....P5 conference champions and 3 other "selections"

 

[uscusc1987]

The old system was better. This system has made a lot of regular season games meaningless. Auburn may be the best team in the country now, but the outcome of games should matter. They lost twice. Clempson lost to Syracuse, Oklahoma to Iowa State. The new system favors heavily playing in a weak conference without a true national power you have to beat. Even if every team but auburn and alabama sucked in the sec you still must beat the other. This year add Georgia in the mix. The acc in comparison the powerhouse clempson must beat is Miami. Its laughable. FSU or nobody else in the acc is a national power anymore, top 5 team being a national power. So clempson has a very easy path to the playoff. In the old BCS system they wouldn't have played for the national title in 16. The Pitt loss at home would have mattered. Everybody knows Miami is over ranked now being in the top 10.

 

[Boom4life]

The old system was better. This system has made a lot of regular season games meaningless. Auburn may be the best team in the country now, but the outcome of games should matter. They lost twice. Clempson lost to Syracuse, Oklahoma to Iowa State. The new system favors heavily playing in a weak conference without a true national power you have to beat. Even if every team but auburn and alabama sucked in the sec you still must beat the other. This year add Georgia in the mix. The acc in comparison the powerhouse clempson must beat is Miami. Its laughable. FSU or nobody else in the acc is a national power anymore, top 5 team being a national power. So clempson has a very easy path to the playoff. In the old BCS system they wouldn't have played for the national title in 17. The Pitt loss at home would have mattered. Everybody knows Miami is over ranked now being in the top 10.

That’s laugable because playing no one in a easy conference is the very thing that is going to bite alabama. If they had played a tougher schedule that loss to auburn would not be as bad. The playoff has put more emphasis on who you beat not who you lose to. That’s the way it should be.

If a team beat 6 top ten teams. It lost to a top 15 team, is that team not better than a team that did not play a single ranked opponent and goes undefeated?

In the old system if you started in the top 10 it did not matter who you played. If you went undefeated you had a chance of playing in the NC. I will also leave you with this. In 16 and 15 who would have gone to the national Championship over Clemson. They were ranked in the top two in the AP both years.

 

[HI Cock]

I think 8 teams is too much, it creates another week of games for the top 2 teams which are made up of (mostly) unpaid athletes....so I don't think 8 games is right for the athlete.
I've heard mention then drop the season schedule down 1 game but in doing so you're cutting out games vs. the smaller schools and the fact is those programs are vital to the overall health of college football.
I like it at 4 teams...I think if you have 4 teams in then the likelihood of you capturing the #1 team in that group of 4 (which to me is the goal, to find the #1 team) would be extremely high.

I would agree with you, but history's not on your side. There used to be 11 games and only about 10-12 bowls. So MOST teams played 11 games. Now MOST teams play 13 games (40 bowls this year=80 teams).

Get rid of cupcake week. If the schools want to give money to others in state, find a way to do a scrimmage or something. If FCS can manage to have a 24 team playoff, then D1A can find a way to have an 8-game playoff.

8 is only fair. UCF deserves a shot to take down one of the bigs.

 

[EssoClub2]

I would agree with you, but history's not on your side. There used to be 11 games and only about 10-12 bowls. So MOST teams played 11 games. Now MOST teams play 13 games (40 bowls this year=80 teams).

Get rid of cupcake week. If the schools want to give money to others in state, find a way to do a scrimmage or something. If FCS can manage to have a 24 team playoff, then D1A can find a way to have an 8-game playoff.

8 is only fair. UCF deserves a shot to take down one of the bigs.

I agree that the extra game for (4 teams ) , if you went from the 4 to an 8 team format is just being used as an excuse to protect the big bowls that are not in the rotation of playoffs each year.

Those bowls could be incorporated into an 8 team format as well.

8 teams is big enough to eliminate 80% of the complaints about a deserving team being left out.

 

[uscdoug]

Six teams.

Six plays three, and, four plays five, Numbers 1 and 2 get a first week bye.

 

[Quisp]

Jeez a team that lost by 34 on the road is probably going to make the four. And some of you want to go to eight. Crazy.

A flawed system was replaced by another flawed system. Adding more teams won't fix flaws it will just add different ones.

Just go back to the old system and add the "plus one". That's it.

 

[SCexpat38]

I really liked the old I-AA playoffs -- your top 16 teams, conference champs plus the at-large bids, and seed 'em 1-16. That gives more folks a shot at the title. How cool would it be if, say, South Carolina got in as a No. 16 seed and ran the table. That would be like Carolina's Final Four run all over again.

Right now the championship is pretty much locked up by the elite conferences, and I'm not sure that's a good thing.
Use the bowls as playoff games like they do now, only use more of them. Share the wealth, give more folks a shot at competing for a title.

 

[joplin gamecock1]

Ive often wondered if no.1 at the end of regular season got a bye to the big game, and the other 4 conference champs played as they currently do may be more fair. As it is now, nobody needs to be no 1 at the end of the season, they only need to be in the top 4. I think thats puts a lil more importantance on the regular season when you are playing for that no 1 bye.

 

[SomebodyLookatThis]

4 teams is enough, they are already playing a max of 15 games for the 2 that get in the title game. I don't see them putting anymore games on these coaches and players unless they shortened the regular season back to 11. As for Bama getting in, its just the timing of the loss, timing is everything. They pretty much have to hope for OK or Wis to lose to have a shot. Its just weird hearing people talk about who can knock Clem out, when they weren't even suppose to be in the conversation this year after losing the great D. Watson and all those other weapons.

 

[joplin gamecock1]

Timing is everything and i have noticed some rivalry games are now being played earlier in the season based on the fact that if you lose it really needs to be as early as possible. I expect in the future to see more schedules reflect that fact by playing the toughest teams earlier than in the past

 

[HI Cock]

I really liked the old I-AA playoffs -- your top 16 teams, conference champs plus the at-large bids, and seed 'em 1-16. That gives more folks a shot at the title. How cool would it be if, say, South Carolina got in as a No. 16 seed and ran the table. That would be like Carolina's Final Four run all over again.

Right now the championship is pretty much locked up by the elite conferences, and I'm not sure that's a good thing.
Use the bowls as playoff games like they do now, only use more of them. Share the wealth, give more folks a shot at competing for a title.

This is a great point. More teams in a playoff would bring more parity to NCAAF. If you have a great shot at making a playoff appearance at 4 or 5 schools, you might just think twice about going to Alabama (or Clemson).

 

[bosoxcock]

if the goal is to rank the 4 best teams, watch heads explode when Alabama is #4 in a few minutes

 

[jeff2001]

If OSU beats Wisconsin, they should jump Bama and get in. Bama is champs of nothing.

 

[TigersWin66]

2 years ago bama finneshed 11-1 in regular season and won national title. Last year clemmy finished 11-1 and won title. This year bama fineshed 11-1 and prbly wont make playoffs after being no1 through the firstt 10 games. If they dont get in,and possiby all 4 teams or at least 3 of them get in with same record, do you think a nuff hell raising and complaing might get playoff extended to more than 4 teams? I know the reason they currenty are out of is because theire 1 lost was the last regullar season game, but i have a feeling if they dont get in there will be sum hell raising

I would not expand the playoff because essentially last week and this weeks games are playoff games as it is. If I did expand, I’d go with 6. The 5 conference champions and one at large. 1 & 2 would get a first round bye to keep the season from getting too long.

 

[Ken M.]

The old system was better. This system has made a lot of regular season games meaningless. Auburn may be the best team in the country now, but the outcome of games should matter. They lost twice. Clempson lost to Syracuse, Oklahoma to Iowa State. The new system favors heavily playing in a weak conference without a true national power you have to beat. Even if every team but auburn and alabama sucked in the sec you still must beat the other. This year add Georgia in the mix. The acc in comparison the powerhouse clempson must beat is Miami. Its laughable. FSU or nobody else in the acc is a national power anymore, top 5 team being a national power. So clempson has a very easy path to the playoff. In the old BCS system they wouldn't have played for the national title in 17. The Pitt loss at home would have mattered. Everybody knows Miami is over ranked now being in the top 10.

The BCS system currently has Clemson at 1 and Wisconsin at 2. Clemson would play for the N.C. if they win this weekend under the BCS. Clemson also played a tougher schedule than any SEC team. Basically, everything you made up in your post is wrong.

 

[DarkCock]

Sooo...if you were a Bama fan, would you root for Auburn on Saturday? An Auburn win would increase your team's chances of getting in the playoff.

 

[uscusc1987]

The BCS system currently has Clemson at 1 and Wisconsin at 2. Clemson would play for the N.C. if they win this weekend under the BCS. Clemson also played a tougher schedule than any SEC team. Basically, everything you made up in your post is wrong.

Last year they wouldn't have. So I'm right about what I'm saying. They,would have no NC from last year. You aren't real sharp.

 

[lowcountry_cock13]

I hate the playoff

Not a fan. And people want it to go to 8? It use to be 11 games then a bowl. Then it went to 12 games regular season, there’s conference championships and now you have to play two games after that, that’s 15 games to win a championship. Put more risk on players getting injured and further reduces the role of student athlete. If they go to 8 games hope they go back to 11 game seasons because 16 games at major college level is too much

 

[Ken M.]

Last year they wouldn't have. So I'm right about what I'm saying. They,would have no NC from last year. You aren't real sharp.

So your contention that the BCS system is better is based on...Clemson being #3 last year and being left out of the national championship game in lieu of Ohio State who would have been #2 in the BCS. Because OSU was better than Clemson last year. And that system is better. Because it would have left Clemson out.

Such a fanboy. Blinded by hate.

 

[DarkCock]

So your contention that the BCS system is better is based on...Clemson being #3 last year and being left out of the national championship game in lieu of Ohio State who would have been #2 in the BCS. Because OSU was better than Clemson last year. And that system is better. Because it would have left Clemson out.

Such a fanboy. Blinded by hate.

fanboy? This is the Fighting Gamecock Forum. GTFO! If you want objective discussion, then you've come to the wrong place. Seriously, why are you here?

 

[Ken M.]

fanboy? This is the Fighting Gamecock Forum. GTFO! If you want objective discussion, then you've come to the wrong place. Seriously, why are you here?

I enjoy football discussion. You?

 

[DarkCock]

I enjoy football discussion. You?

Because I'm a fan of the Fighting Gamecocks. Why else would I be here?

 

[Ken M.]

Because I'm a fan of the Fighting Gamecocks. Why else would I be here?

Cool. Glad we got this settled.

 

[DarkCock]

Cool. Glad we got this settled.

It's neither cool nor settled. However, I am glad.

 

[Garnet chicken]

I would not expand the playoff because essentially last week and this weeks games are playoff games as it is. If I did expand, I’d go with 6. The 5 conference champions and one at large. 1 & 2 would get a first round bye to keep the season from getting too long.

To make it right 8 is the right number. With 2 byes that means Clemson and Auburn would get a bye and sorry neither deserves it with their record. The committee over looking a loss to a bad team because of injuries is dumb and putting Auburn at 2 with 2 losses is also beyond reasoning. There will be some arguments with 8 teams but this solves more problems than staying with 4 and leaving capable teams out. It is become more of a beauty contest than based on facts.

 

[Ken M.]

It's neither cool nor settled. However, I am glad.

Again...it's just football conversation. Do you agree with uscusc1987 that the BCS was a better system than the playoff? Take 2014, for example. BCS would have pitted Bama against FSU, and Bama would have cruised to their 78th national title. Instead, Bama was easily handled by OSU, and FSU was CRUSHED by Oregon. Clearly, the BCS national title game wouldn't have given us either of the top 2 teams in the country. Agree, or disagree?

 

[DarkCock]

Again...it's just football conversation. Do you agree with uscusc1987 that the BCS was a better system than the playoff? Take 2014, for example. BCS would have pitted Bama against FSU, and Bama would have cruised to their 78th national title. Instead, Bama was easily handled by OSU, and FSU was CRUSHED by Oregon. Clearly, the BCS national title game wouldn't have given us either of the top 2 teams in the country. Agree, or disagree?

All I care about is -- "is it good for the Gamecocks." The current system is terrible for us.

 

[Quisp]

The comparison between the current system and the one it replaced (the BCS) is misplaced. The comparison should be with the old system which had the conference tie ins and at large berths. Merely adding the extra game after New Years Day solves so many problems and would be easy to implement and understand.

 

[Ken M.]

All I care about is -- "is it good for the Gamecocks." The current system is terrible for us.

I guess that's reasonable if you're only focusing on Clemson, but be careful what you wish for. It could also bite the Gamecocks. Take 2012 (or maybe it was 2013), when the Gamecocks were right around #4 in the country going into bowl season. Wouldn't an opportunity to make the playoffs as a 4 seed and play for a national championship be better than the BCS simply taking the top 2 teams (which it did)?

 

[DarkCock]

By the way, Ken, I do appreciate that you don't pretend to be a Gamecock poster. I honestly don't mind Clemson fans who are transparent. But you can't expect us to be other than "fanboys" on here. That's why we're here.