A
anon_n4c0cp5zhdxn7
Guest
I think they are better off tweaking how the top 4 are selected rather than increasing the amount of teams.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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)?
OK, but you see where I'm going with it, right? It's probably more likely that we see a post-regular season where the Gamecocks are ranked 3-6 before we see them at 1 or 2. That's where you'd benefit (potentially) from a playoff system, obviously.We only got to #4 in 2013 after the bowl games. We didn't win our division, so there's no way we were going to be the second SEC team in a playoff with two losses.
OK, but you see where I'm going with it, right? It's probably more likely that we see a post-regular season where the Gamecocks are ranked 3-6 before we see them at 1 or 2. That's where you'd benefit (potentially) from a playoff system, obviously.
I’ll believe that a conference gets 2 teams in when it happens. Your primary obstacle is Bama, but it’s been that way for nearly a decade, and for every other SEC team, too. Bama could get into the BCS title game without even winning their division. That is ridiculous by pretty much any standard, especially when it was a rematch with a team they already lost to on their home field.Bama is currently ranked 5th; they have one of the best coaches in history of the game and ton of 5 star talent; they are 11-1 and their only loss is, on the road, against the number 2 team in the country...and they might not make the playoff. So I don't think our chances of making it our very good under the current format. We need less teams or more teams. Each conference getting no more than one team in is a disaster for us.
P5 Champs, ND, and two selections. That's how it will go when ND wins 9 or more in a season.8 teams ....P5 conference champions and 3 other "selections"
Which is, wait for it, the pre BCS NewYears Day bowl system!!!!P5 Champs, ND, and two selections. That's how it will go when ND wins 9 or more in a season.
I’ll believe that a conference gets 2 teams in when it happens. Your primary obstacle is Bama, but it’s been that way for nearly a decade, and for every other SEC team, too. Bama could get into the BCS title game without even winning their division. That is ridiculous by pretty much any standard, especially when it was a rematch with a team they already lost to on their home field.
The playoff may not be better for USC, per se...I don’t see it being any worse though, either. You still gotta win the SEC (unless you’re Bama).
All I care about is -- "is it good for the Gamecocks." The current system is terrible for us.
Bama will get in. Trust me on this one!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
of the top 4 now, who loses then? It will take that to remotely happen. I hate to say it is not automatic if Clempson loses they are out. That hurt to type that...Bama will get in. Trust me on this one!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
Don't know who will lose but the NCAA will make sure one of them loses. No way Alabama doesn't make it. Simple as that. I hope that they don't make it but I'm certain they will.of the top 4 now, who loses then? It will take that to remotely happen. I hate to say it is not automatic if Clempson loses they are out. That hurt to type that...
The current system would be good for the gamecocks if the gamecocks were good lol. Winning the SEC least would’ve given you guys the opportunity to at least make an argument for consideration but ummm....
You seem pretty hung up on Clemson's loss, so let's unpack it a little. First, a couple questions:Why is winning the championship without winning your division any more ridiculous than winning the championship after losing to a 4-8 team? The latter team just got lucky they were in a sorry division.
All I care about is -- "is it good for the Gamecocks." The current system is terrible for us.
You seem pretty hung up on Clemson's loss, so let's unpack it a little. First, a couple questions:
1. Is Syracuse a better team than Clemson?
2. Should Clemson be categorically eliminated from playoff contention due to losing to a team that ultimately ended up 4-8?
3. In the interest of picking the 4 strongest teams in the country, what 4 are better than Clemson, and why?
I was referring to the 2011 season (sorry, I said 2012 previously) in which only the top 2 teams get a shot at the national championship. Non-division-winning Bama would have and should have made a 4 team playoff. Non-division-winning Bama should NOT have gotten into a two-team title game over 1 loss Oklahoma State or 1 loss Stanford (not sure I'd make an argument for 1 loss Boise State or not, even though they were giant killers in those days with Peterson). They had their shot at LSU during the regular season, and lost. And lost at home, at that.I didn't suggest Clemson wasn't one of the 4 strongest teams. You stated Bama wasn't deserving of winning a championship because they didn't win their division, regardless of whether they are one of the 4 best teams. Do you see the contradiction?
I’m curious give me your top 6 looking at the whole year. Is it really different then what the committee has?All I know is, nobody has yet to go 15-0 during this CFP era....a team is going to be expected to have a hick up during the season, that's why the eye ball and common sense test is part of what they look at as well. OSU lost to a 6 win VT team when they won it, Bama lost to Ole Miss, Clemson lost to Pitt and unless Wis runs the table...its going to be the same again and possibly have a 2 loss Champion this year. Quality wins over losses is heavily favored by the committee also. Bottomline is again, timing is everything when it comes to losses, the committee is going to pick who they think are the Top 4 teams RIGHT NOW at that very moment......not week 1,6,8 or 11.
Needs to be 16 teams.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
. Bottomline is again, timing is everything when it comes to losses, the committee is going to pick who they think are the Top 4 teams RIGHT NOW at that very moment......not week 1,6,8 or 11.
Was I right?Don't know who will lose but the NCAA will make sure one of them loses. No way Alabama doesn't make it. Simple as that. I hope that they don't make it but I'm certain they will.
Four is the right number. This thing thrives on the selection drama and tumult. One of these four is certainly the best team in America and probably two of the other three are the closest to them. The system is fine. Parenthetically, the regular season is elevated in importance. What if Ohio State had lost to Iowa by seven or less?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
What would be a better system for us? Just because it’s resulting in our rival having success doesn’t make it worse. Had we had this system in the Spurrier days we may have been in the conversation.All I care about is -- "is it good for the Gamecocks." The current system is terrible for us.
Four is the right number. This thing thrives on the selection drama and tumult. One of these four is certainly the best team in America and probably two of the other three are the closest to them. The system is fine. Parenthetically, the regular season is elevated in importance. What if Ohio State had lost to Iowa by seven or less?
No one deserves to have their problem solved. Play your way into the top four. I maintain that the at least the best three teams are in there, probably the top four teams are in there and certainly the top team is in there. No need to expand.The current system has worked out well for Clemson so far but I do think 8 takes care of the problem of OSU, USC, AL all having valid arguments for being in. Maybe even Wisconsin and UCF?
Leave the selection process the exact same and go to 8. If you take a look at the top 8 since CFP started I think it would have gotten every team that reasonable people believed should be included.
Again, I am very happy with the way it has worked , but like OSU and USC found out this year, it is a small difference between 4-8
No one deserves to have their problem solved. Play your way into the top four. I maintain that the at least the best three teams are in there, probably the top four teams are in there and certainly the top team is in there. No need to expand.
What would be a better system for us? Just because it’s resulting in our rival having success doesn’t make it worse. Had we had this system in the Spurrier days we may have been in the conversation.