SEC's Opinion on the 4 Team Playoff

[JJReddawg]

http://www.ajc.com/sports/uga/sec-coaches-dont-limit-1448810.html

I wonder if they'll try getting the Big XII to agree with them considering they have that bowl agreement. I don't see the Pac 12, Big Ten or ACC falling in line with this thinking though.

Here's a breakdown of the playoff if it's just the top 4 teams since the start of the BCS:

98 - Tennessee, Florida State, Kansas State, & Ohio State
99 - Florida State, Va Tech, Nebraska, & Alabama
00 - Oklahoma, Florida State, Miami, & Washington
01 - Miami, Nebraska, Colorado, & Oregon
02 - Miami, Ohio State, Georgia, & USC
03 - Oklahoma, LSU, USC & Michigan
04 - USC, Oklahoma, Auburn, & Texas
05 - USC, Texas, Penn State & Ohio State
06 - Ohio State, Florida, Michigan & LSU
07 - Ohio State, LSU, Va Tech, & Oklahoma
08 - Oklahoma, Florida, Texas, & Alabama
09 - Alabama, Texas, Cincinnatti, & TCU
10 - Auburn, Oregon, TCU & Stanford
11 - LSU, Alabama, Oklahoma St., & Stanford

2006 would have been a Big Ten/Sec playoff. 2008 would have been a Big XII/SEC playoff.

The Big Ten, Pac 12, Big XII and SEC would all have had years with two teams in the playoff. The ACC and Big East would have had 0 years with two teams.

 

[mscanlo]

not for it. SEC already gets inflated rankings. i thought the point of the playoffs was to move away from a subjective crowning of the national championship. SEC has some how clouded the voters logic where the following scenarios occur: #1 loses to #25 in the nation, who are both SEC teams, and #3 in the nation (a SEC team) barely lost to #1, so #3 becomes #1, #1 only falls to #2 (because they are still the best team in the opinions of the polls/media) and #25 sky rockets to a top 5 team.

 

[PhatOrange]

http://www.ajc.com/sports/uga/sec-coaches-dont-limit-1448810.html

I wonder if they'll try getting the Big XII to agree with them considering they have that bowl agreement. I don't see the Pac 12, Big Ten or ACC falling in line with this thinking though.

Here's a breakdown of the playoff if it's just the top 4 teams since the start of the BCS:

98 - Tennessee, Florida State, Kansas State, & Ohio State
99 - Florida State, Va Tech, Nebraska, & Alabama
00 - Oklahoma, Florida State, Miami, & Washington
01 - Miami, Nebraska, Colorado, & Oregon
02 - Miami, Ohio State, Georgia, & USC
03 - Oklahoma, LSU, USC & Michigan
04 - USC, Oklahoma, Auburn, & Texas
05 - USC, Texas, Penn State & Ohio State
06 - Ohio State, Florida, Michigan & LSU
07 - Ohio State, LSU, Va Tech, & Oklahoma
08 - Oklahoma, Florida, Texas, & Alabama
09 - Alabama, Texas, Cincinnatti, & TCU
10 - Auburn, Oregon, TCU & Stanford
11 - LSU, Alabama, Oklahoma St., & Stanford

2006 would have been a Big Ten/Sec playoff. 2008 would have been a Big XII/SEC playoff.

The Big Ten, Pac 12, Big XII and SEC would all have had years with two teams in the playoff. The ACC and Big East would have had 0 years with two teams.

Thanks for compiling this. Check the year 2000 though.

 

[cusenole9]

Does anyone know how the "conference champions" model would work? Do they just take the top 4 conference champions as long as they're ranked in the top 6?

 

[Scooch]

Of course they do, why wouldn't they.

Personally I like the idea of giving preference to a conference champ, as long as they're ranked in the top 6 overall. I mean it's not like the top 4 isn't pretty arbitrary anyway, based on the whims of algorithms and GAs ranking teams. Might as well make the conference races interesting.

 

[SU2NASA]

http://www.ajc.com/sports/uga/sec-coaches-dont-limit-1448810.html

I wonder if they'll try getting the Big XII to agree with them considering they have that bowl agreement. I don't see the Pac 12, Big Ten or ACC falling in line with this thinking though.

Here's a breakdown of the playoff if it's just the top 4 teams since the start of the BCS:

98 - Tennessee, Florida State, Kansas State, & Ohio State
99 - Florida State, Va Tech, Nebraska, & Alabama
00 - Oklahoma, Florida State, Miami, & Washington
01 - Miami, Nebraska, Colorado, & Oregon
02 - Miami, Ohio State, Georgia, & USC
03 - Oklahoma, LSU, USC & Michigan
04 - USC, Oklahoma, Auburn, & Texas
05 - USC, Texas, Penn State & Ohio State
06 - Ohio State, Florida, Michigan & LSU
07 - Ohio State, LSU, Va Tech, & Oklahoma
08 - Oklahoma, Florida, Texas, & Alabama
09 - Alabama, Texas, Cincinnatti, & TCU
10 - Auburn, Oregon, TCU & Stanford
11 - LSU, Alabama, Oklahoma St., & Stanford

2006 would have been a Big Ten/Sec playoff. 2008 would have been a Big XII/SEC playoff.

The Big Ten, Pac 12, Big XII and SEC would all have had years with two teams in the playoff. The ACC and Big East would have had 0 years with two teams.

If this SEC-B12 bowl game happens outside of the four-team playoff as much expect, then it would have pitted the conference champions against each other exactly 0 times since the start of the BCS.

 

[MaxwellCuse]

Thanks for compiling this. Check the year 2000 though.

You mean the last year the ACC and the Big East had a team in the Top 4 at the same time?

 

[JJReddawg]

Thanks for compiling this. Check the year 2000 though.

Checked. It's right. I was noting years where the individual conferences had two teams in them. The ACC wouldn't of had two teams in and neither would the Big East. In 2000, Miami was still in the Big East.

 

[PhatOrange]

Checked. It's right. I was noting years where the individual conferences had two teams in them. The ACC wouldn't of had two teams in and neither would the Big East. In 2000, Miami was still in the Big East.

I get that and you're right I was just looking at it in terms of two ACC teams. Not Big East and ACC.

 

[Chip]

Somewhat strange thing about the SEC recently is that even with all those mega power programs, there has always been one dominant program out front with 0 or 1 loss at the end of the season. And that several teams have had their turn (Florida, Auburn, Alabama, LSU). You would think that it's a league that will ultimately create parity, spoilers, and at some point a conference championship game with a couple 2-3 loss teams. They are going to hate Best 4 teams idea if and when that happens. But given the last few years, you can see why they are all in on best 4.

Wonder what they will think the first time it's a year where the league starts beating each other up and no one is in that Top 4. I'm sure they'll be fine with their regular old Sugar Bowl game with Kansas State, because Texas and Oklahoma are both in the Final 4.

 

[Madbiker]

Any system like Best 4 is total BS because the rankings that determine it are subjective polls that are total BS. With conference champs they at least won something objective to earn their way in. If they would expand the number of playoff spots to 6 or 8 they could create 2 at-large berths for the best 2nd place finishers (usually 1 loss teams) and/or indies like ND, BYU. But that is just too simple it seems. Of course the goal for Slive is to get a system where 3 or 4 SEC teams get in. I'm really starting to dislike the whole college football scene and I bet there are millions of fans around the country that are just as fed up with the greed that is killing the sport.

 

[OrangePA]

http://www.ajc.com/sports/uga/sec-coaches-dont-limit-1448810.html

I wonder if they'll try getting the Big XII to agree with them considering they have that bowl agreement. I don't see the Pac 12, Big Ten or ACC falling in line with this thinking though.

Here's a breakdown of the playoff if it's just the top 4 teams since the start of the BCS:

98 - Tennessee, Florida State, Kansas State, & Ohio State
99 - Florida State, Va Tech, Nebraska, & Alabama
00 - Oklahoma, Florida State, Miami, & Washington
01 - Miami, Nebraska, Colorado, & Oregon
02 - Miami, Ohio State, Georgia, & USC
03 - Oklahoma, LSU, USC & Michigan
04 - USC, Oklahoma, Auburn, & Texas
05 - USC, Texas, Penn State & Ohio State
06 - Ohio State, Florida, Michigan & LSU
07 - Ohio State, LSU, Va Tech, & Oklahoma
08 - Oklahoma, Florida, Texas, & Alabama
09 - Alabama, Texas, Cincinnatti, & TCU
10 - Auburn, Oregon, TCU & Stanford
11 - LSU, Alabama, Oklahoma St., & Stanford

2006 would have been a Big Ten/Sec playoff. 2008 would have been a Big XII/SEC playoff.

The Big Ten, Pac 12, Big XII and SEC would all have had years with two teams in the playoff. The ACC and Big East would have had 0 years with two teams.

Another indication of how the vaunted SEC sees the college football landscape.

All that matters is the SEC.

I really hope that the conference is finally put in its place.

 

[All4SU]

If this SEC-B12 bowl game happens outside of the four-team playoff as much expect, then it would have pitted the conference champions against each other exactly 0 times since the start of the BCS.

Exactly. And that's why people are being foolish by giving that agreement so much importance.

 

[All4SU]

This entire thing just re-emphasizes why we need conference champs AND a minimum of 8 teams, so that there are at-large spots available.

 

[HtownOrange]

I think there are other reasons for wanting a 4 team playoff.

1) The ultimate goal is a full playoff, probably 16 teams, too much money to not work for it.
2) All the conferences want to keep the bowls, 4 teams is easy enough to start with, but not incorporate the full playoff immediately
3) The bowls and the playoffs are still NOT under the aegis of the NCAA; therefore teh money stays with the football schools instead of being spread throughout all of the NCAA, as opposed to the NCAA Tourney.
4) The SEC did the Big 12 bowl deal knowing they would almost never send their champion to the bowl.
5) The SEC does not want the Rose Bowl to become the defacto championship or semifinal game.
6) The SEC knows that the B1G and Pac 12 are not as often represeneted they pretend to be, making the Rose Bowl a semifinal would guarantee one of them a championship slot, which they do not deserve.
7) Obviously, the SEC believes they can get multiple teams in the playoffs, why not go for it.

Anyway, just a thought.

 

[orangeinjersey]

Any system like Best 4 is total BS because the rankings that determine it are subjective polls that are total BS. With conference champs they at least won something objective to earn their way in. If they would expand the number of playoff spots to 6 or 8 they could create 2 at-large berths for the best 2nd place finishers (usually 1 loss teams) and/or indies like ND, BYU. But that is just too simple it seems. Of course the goal for Slive is to get a system where 3 or 4 SEC teams get in. I'm really starting to dislike the whole college football scene and I bet there are millions of fans around the country that are just as fed up with the greed that is killing the sport.

My sentiments exactly. I like watching teams from ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. I LIKE Big East Football. I will now learn to like ACC football. But if this playoff turns into an SEC, B10, B12 circle jerk, I will stop watching college football. And i imagine there are a bunch of folks on the east coast who will stop watching also.

 

[omniorange]

The best compromise remains, in my mind, the 3 top rated conference champions (as long as they are within the Top 6) and the fourth participant either a 4th conference champion or an at-large which is at least 4 spots ahead of the 4th conference champion. This latter selection will automatically be seeded 4th regardless of where they actually rank.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[N.Y. Orangeman]

The best compromise remains, in my mind, the 3 top rated conference champions (as long as they are within the Top 6) and the fourth participant either a 4th conference champion or an at-large which is at least 4 spots ahead of the 4th conference champion. This latter selection will automatically be seeded 4th regardless of where they actually rank.

Cheers,
Neil

Interesting...do you think that proposal would force ND into a conference?

 

[omniorange]

Interesting...do you think that proposal would force ND into a conference?

Not necessarily. I think they would still believe this leaves them an avenue to the play-offs if they are good enough. Last year the 4th ranked champion Wisconsion was ranked 10th. So basically an at-large would only need to be ranked in the Top 6 to potentially get in if that were to happen although realistically they would have to be at least as high as #4, assuming the top three conference champs were #1, #2, and #3.

But I'm sure ND would support a simple Top 4 over the compromise proposal, but I doubt the Big East or other non-power conferences would.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[kingottoiii]

I think the system HAS to have the Top 2 teams not matter what. Then if you want to give conference champs first dibs at the #3 and #4 playoff slots should they be Top 6 I am all for it.

Also it is very interesting that the SEC took off as the dominate league the exact same time FSU and Miami went down. From 1998-2005 they SEC had two Top 2 teams. While current ACC schools were Top 2 six times.

Also if I am FSU then I push hard to have Miami on my side of the divisions. It is crazy that FSU and Miami might have to play each other twice in a season. That benefits NO ONE in the ACC. It is great for ESPN but to expect a team to beat another twice in a season AND finish Top 4 (or 6 depending on the system) is too much to ask. They should switch the divisions as so:

FSU, Miami, Pitt, SU, BC, NC St, Wake
Clemson, GA Tech, VT, UVA, MD, UNC, Duke

 

[omniorange]

I think the system HAS to have the Top 2 teams not matter what. Then if you want to give conference champs first dibs at the #3 and #4 playoff slots should they be Top 6 I am all for it.

Also it is very interesting that the SEC took off as the dominate league the exact same time FSU and Miami went down. From 1998-2005 they SEC had two Top 2 teams. While current ACC schools were Top 2 six times.

Also if I am FSU then I push hard to have Miami on my side of the divisions. It is crazy that FSU and Miami might have to play each other twice in a season. That benefits NO ONE in the ACC. It is great for ESPN but to expect a team to beat another twice in a season AND finish Top 4 (or 6 depending on the system) is too much to ask. They should switch the divisions as so:

FSU, Miami, Pitt, SU, BC, NC St, Wake
Clemson, GA Tech, VT, UVA, MD, UNC, Duke

I think you're right that since the current BCS guaranteed a match-up of 1 vs 2, then the Football Four probably should do at least that much. I could live with that set-up as well, 1 and 2 get in automatically, then any 2 conference champions ranked between 3-6. If only 1 is ranked between 3 and 6, take the highest rated at-large. I believe FrankTheTank had this as a possible compromise as well.

But honestly, all of this realignment stuff is making me :crazy:

Cheers,
Neil