ADVERTISEMENT

Four Best Teams

PlutoDroid

Rowdy Reptile
Aug 16, 2015
1,725
1,166
113
Ok, we all love to pile on Kirby Smart. Rightfully so, Alabama owns your psyche Bulldog fans. That's just reality.


Now if were being honest with ourselves and had to pick the four best teams, by that I mean when you look at them play their best ball they just look bigger, faster, stronger and more talented. On their best days I would have to say these are the four best teams, my opinion.

1. Alabama
2. Clemson
3.Georgia
4. Ohio State

Some will question Ohio State's inclusion but I would direct them to the Michigan tape. I still buy into the Wolverines and they looked like second stringers.

Urban Meyer also is exceptionally good in bowl games. If this is his last hoorah I would expect a very hungry and motivated bunch.


Clemson and Georgia don't need any explanation.

Oklahoma and Notre Dame are going to get exposed in the CFP.

It will be Alabama vs Oklahoma and Clemson vs Notre Dame.

Then we will get part 4 of Clemson vs Alabama. Oh goody.
 
It shouldn’t just be the four “best” teams. It should be the four “best” teams who earn the right to be included in the CFB playoff. Conference titles should be given huge deference.

People wanted a playoff system because they wanted the best teams in.

Making automatic qualifiers is silly.

Northwestern or Texas or Pitt could have upset in their games and been auto qualifiers.

That's ridiculous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GADAWGinIraq
It is far from obvious that Georgia and OSU are among the four best. Really good yes. But the best don't get slobber knocked by Purdue and don't get manhandked by LSU.
 
Georgia is pretty young and I think they could have lost to an Oklahoma this year. Next year they will probably be a real threat to win a championship again.

On a best game basis I would have it:

Bama
Clemson
OSU
Georgia
 
The argument for UGA being a top 4 team stems almost entirely from all the hype about Bama being the best team ever. So anybody that plays them close gotta be elite. Don't the possibility exist that they're a little bit overrated? Everybody shits on OU or OSU for bad losses but UGA also got housed by 20 by a mediocre LSU team. Even we beat LSU and we aren't that good. They played above their head and Bama made a lot of dumb unforced errors, lost their starting QB, and still won.
 
It is far from obvious that Georgia and OSU are among the four best. Really good yes. But the best don't get slobber knocked by Purdue and don't get manhandked by LSU.

Do the best lose to an Ole Miss team that couldn't even beat Vanderbilt that season? I tend to look at the good wins more than the loss.
 
It's all subjective, all schedules and conferences are not created equally. One of the biggest reasons I believe a true playoff should be 8.

You have people in suits arguing different merits of worthyness. All the drama and we still don't know what criteria they use. A two loss Georgia would have gotten an immediate rematch with Alabama had Oklahoma lost to Texas. Think about that, they rated them 5th and tOSU 6th because of losing closely to the #1 team vs beating #21.

Don't give me the fact they would have not rated them that way had the #4 seed been up for debate between Ohio State and Georgia. Oklahoma losing or winning shouldn't determine their view on who is better between Ohio State and Georgia.

This is not a true playoff, this is a farce of a system. Either go to 8 or just go back to the old system. I am tired of suits dictating which conference champion is better, let them decide the 3 wild cards. That way the 5 champions get to prove their worth.
 
It's all subjective, all schedules and conferences are not created equally. One of the biggest reasons I believe a true playoff should be 8.

You have people in suits arguing different merits of worthyness. All the drama and we still don't know what criteria they use. A two loss Georgia would have gotten an immediate rematch with Alabama had Oklahoma lost to Texas. Think about that, they rated them 5th and tOSU 6th because of losing closely to the #1 team vs beating #21.

Don't give me the fact they would have not rated them that way had the #4 seed been up for debate between Ohio State and Georgia. Oklahoma losing or winning shouldn't determine their view on who is better between Ohio State and Georgia.

This is not a true playoff, this is a farce of a system. Either go to 8 or just go back to the old system. I am tired of suits dictating which conference champion is better, let them decide the 3 wild cards. That way the 5 champions get to prove their worth.

I think they would have took OSU over Georgia if they didn't have Oklahoma in there despite doing that with the rankings. It would be crazy to ever take a 2 loss team over a 1 loss conference champ in this system.
 
I think they would have took OSU over Georgia if they didn't have Oklahoma in there despite doing that with the rankings. It would be crazy to ever take a 2 loss team over a 1 loss conference champ in this system.


Isn't that just asinine though? I mean to rank them 5th just because 5 or 6 don't matter. I just don't understand it, no problem with the top 4. I just don't see how a 2 loss Georgia could ever be ahead of a 1 loss major conference champion.

Until they go to 8 this is going to continue to happen. I love the respect our conference gets but come on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sadgator
Isn't that just asinine though? I mean to rank them 5th just because 5 or 6 don't matter. I just don't understand it, no problem with the top 4. I just don't see how a 2 loss Georgia could ever be ahead of a 1 loss major conference champion.

Until they go to 8 this is going to continue to happen. I love the respect our conference gets but come on.

I am thinking they may have done it just to appease a few Georgia pushers on the committee a little bit that they took their arguments serious.
 
Ok, we all love to pile on Kirby Smart. Rightfully so, Alabama owns your psyche Bulldog fans. That's just reality.


Now if were being honest with ourselves and had to pick the four best teams, by that I mean when you look at them play their best ball they just look bigger, faster, stronger and more talented. On their best days I would have to say these are the four best teams, my opinion.

1. Alabama
2. Clemson
3.Georgia
4. Ohio State

Some will question Ohio State's inclusion but I would direct them to the Michigan tape. I still buy into the Wolverines and they looked like second stringers.

Urban Meyer also is exceptionally good in bowl games. If this is his last hoorah I would expect a very hungry and motivated bunch.


Clemson and Georgia don't need any explanation.

Oklahoma and Notre Dame are going to get exposed in the CFP.

It will be Alabama vs Oklahoma and Clemson vs Notre Dame.

Then we will get part 4 of Clemson vs Alabama. Oh goody.

Exposed huh? Last year a team beat BOTH ALABAMA and Georgia who played for the National Championship, a team of mainly 2, 3 and some NO Star recruits from a college called Central Fl. Looks doesn’t include coaching, desire, playing under pressure etc. Georgia could lose to U.C.F. OR not but, unless they play who knows? The 16-0 Patriots lost to the Giants in the Super Bowl and who was the better team?
 
Exposed huh? Last year a team beat BOTH ALABAMA and Georgia who played for the National Championship, a team of mainly 2, 3 and some NO Star recruits from a college called Central Fl. Looks doesn’t include coaching, desire, playing under pressure etc. Georgia could lose to U.C.F. OR not but, unless they play who knows? The 16-0 Patriots lost to the Giants in the Super Bowl and who was the better team?


What is your point? Auburn beat Alabama and Georgia, they also lost to Clemson, LSU and the rematch to Georgia. They got beat in the Peach Bowl to an undefeated UCF team who play in the American and won a shootout over Memphis.

I give UCF full marks for that win, I didn't see it coming. I don't think their 3 or 2 stars would have held out over Alabama or Clemson but I don't know. None of us will ever know because they never got a shot.

Unless they play two really good out of conference teams and win , the Knights won't ever get into a four team playoff.

I think it should have been an 8 team playoff from the start. I'm tired of the what ifs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GADAWGinIraq
I am thinking they may have done it just to appease a few Georgia pushers on the committee a little bit that they took their arguments serious.


I guess, that undermines their credibility to me. It's irrelevant because only the top 4 matter, just an odd fact I took note of.
 
People wanted a playoff system because they wanted the best teams in.

“People” like sadgator wanted a playoff because we wanted an objective way to fairly determine a champion. sadgator couldn’t give a crap less whether any of the subjectively perceived “best” 4 teams are in if one of those “best” teams doesn’t earn its way in...
 
  • Like
Reactions: PlutoDroid
“People” like sadgator wanted a playoff because we wanted an objective way to fairly determine a champion. sadgator couldn’t give a crap less whether any of the subjectively perceived “best” 4 teams are in if one of those “best” teams doesn’t earn its way in...
I wish they would have kept the BCS formula and let the four best scores in. It was the right mix of human element with objective numbers weighing it all together.
 
I wish they would have kept the BCS formula and let the four best scores in. It was the right mix of human element with objective numbers weighing it all together.

I haven't checked for this year. But I believe the committee and the BCS have had the same final 4 every year (maybe in a slightly different order.)

But I agree, there was no sense in getting rid of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fsumc
So I used to be a guy that complained about how stupid it was that D1 football didn’t have a playoff.

Now that we have one, I take no joy in it. In fact I think it’s ruining cfb

If you’re old enough to remember the pre Bowl Coalition/BCS days, then you will remember when college football was at its greatest. When rabid fans argued and campaigned for 12 months a year and rarely did you have to admit that one team was the true champ. There was more passion and more interest in the college game then.

Now I’ll admit, that the BCS gave us a system where the “best” team held up the trophy almost every year. That’s why the SEC won it so many times. But since the playoff has started the door has been opened to lesser teams winning the championship. Remember the 18-0 Patriots losing the super bowl to a 7 loss Giants team?

If Bama goes 14-1, this season is a failure. If you are a buckeye, this season is a waste. For 100 years if a one loss team won its conference and got in a New Year’s Day bowl then it's fans celebrated and commenced campaigning about who was the real best team until next season. Now if your 1 loss team doesn’t make the playoff you check out on cfb until next year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bradleygator
I can almost hear the Go Dawgs! when you post LOL

lol Nope just putting a bit of looking at what is actually going on out there. I was on the Smart was going to be a bust after the 1st year train until I started seeing the recruiting and on the field results lately. As it stands right now it will be an upset for us to beat them next season.
 
Ok, we all love to pile on Kirby Smart. Rightfully so, Alabama owns your psyche Bulldog fans. That's just reality.


Now if were being honest with ourselves and had to pick the four best teams, by that I mean when you look at them play their best ball they just look bigger, faster, stronger and more talented. On their best days I would have to say these are the four best teams, my opinion.

1. Alabama
2. Clemson
3.Georgia
4. Ohio State

Some will question Ohio State's inclusion but I would direct them to the Michigan tape. I still buy into the Wolverines and they looked like second stringers.

Urban Meyer also is exceptionally good in bowl games. If this is his last hoorah I would expect a very hungry and motivated bunch.


Clemson and Georgia don't need any explanation.

Oklahoma and Notre Dame are going to get exposed in the CFP.

It will be Alabama vs Oklahoma and Clemson vs Notre Dame.

Then we will get part 4 of Clemson vs Alabama. Oh goody.

In 2006 OSU and Michigan were #1 and #2 and played with OSU winning. There were a lot of calls for them to rematch for the title, but instead OSU played Florida, and Michigan played USC. Both Big 10 schools got blown out.

Since then I take intra-conference results with a grain of salt.

Bama beat UGa, UGa needs to take a seat. Pretty simple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gator Fever
So I used to be a guy that complained about how stupid it was that D1 football didn’t have a playoff.

Now that we have one, I take no joy in it. In fact I think it’s ruining cfb

If you’re old enough to remember the pre Bowl Coalition/BCS days, then you will remember when college football was at its greatest. When rabid fans argued and campaigned for 12 months a year and rarely did you have to admit that one team was the true champ. There was more passion and more interest in the college game then.

Now I’ll admit, that the BCS gave us a system where the “best” team held up the trophy almost every year. That’s why the SEC won it so many times. But since the playoff has started the door has been opened to lesser teams winning the championship. Remember the 18-0 Patriots losing the super bowl to a 7 loss Giants team?

If Bama goes 14-1, this season is a failure. If you are a buckeye, this season is a waste. For 100 years if a one loss team won its conference and got in a New Year’s Day bowl then it's fans celebrated and commenced campaigning about who was the real best team until next season. Now if your 1 loss team doesn’t make the playoff you check out on cfb until next year.

Agree with this. More of a commentary on the fans though. If you’re an OSU fan and you’re disappointed with a 13 win Rose Bowl winning season, I don’t know what to tell you. Get a new interest that you can control the outcome and get real good at it and never lose.
 
So I used to be a guy that complained about how stupid it was that D1 football didn’t have a playoff.

Now that we have one, I take no joy in it. In fact I think it’s ruining cfb

If you’re old enough to remember the pre Bowl Coalition/BCS days, then you will remember when college football was at its greatest. When rabid fans argued and campaigned for 12 months a year and rarely did you have to admit that one team was the true champ. There was more passion and more interest in the college game then.

Now I’ll admit, that the BCS gave us a system where the “best” team held up the trophy almost every year. That’s why the SEC won it so many times. But since the playoff has started the door has been opened to lesser teams winning the championship. Remember the 18-0 Patriots losing the super bowl to a 7 loss Giants team?

If Bama goes 14-1, this season is a failure. If you are a buckeye, this season is a waste. For 100 years if a one loss team won its conference and got in a New Year’s Day bowl then it's fans celebrated and commenced campaigning about who was the real best team until next season. Now if your 1 loss team doesn’t make the playoff you check out on cfb until next year.

Well said.

There's a reason CFB has always been a year-round, passion filled sport unlike any other. You don't see people posting on NFL message boards like they do in college or following free agency moves like CFB fans follow recruiting. Why people insist on turning CFB into a bootleg version of the NFL is beyond me. It used to mean something to win your conference of all the traditional rivalries, now people are even wanting to do away with conference championships so more 2-3 loss teams can get in some lower level playoff spot, so damn dumb. Like with anything else in life people can't leave well enough alone. It was too good before so they had to tinker with something. In 10 years CFB will be the NFL with shittier talent, so just a bootleg version of the sport that's losing viewers every damn year. Yay!
 
  • Like
Reactions: keyzer soze
Well said.

There's a reason CFB has always been a year-round, passion filled sport unlike any other. You don't see people posting on NFL message boards like they do in college or following free agency moves like CFB fans follow recruiting. Why people insist on turning CFB into a bootleg version of the NFL is beyond me. It used to mean something to win your conference of all the traditional rivalries, now people are even wanting to do away with conference championships so more 2-3 loss teams can get in some lower level playoff spot, so damn dumb. Like with anything else in life people can't leave well enough alone. It was too good before so they had to tinker with something. In 10 years CFB will be the NFL with shittier talent, so just a bootleg version of the sport that's losing viewers every damn year. Yay!

Exactly.

I hate to do it, but I’m bringing up politics.

It’s the same think with leftist progressive ideology. Being progressive for the sake of “progress” is foolish. What are we progressing to? There is no perfect world where everybody is equal and happy. Doesn’t exist. It belies human nature and the natural state of things. Life’s not fair. We aren’t equal or the same.

So apparently it’s just a human trait to want to keep “improving” things to make them fair or equal or more inclusive. We can’t stand the idea of the haves and have-nots. We need a 9-3 team dragged into the ring with a 13-0 team to “give them their shot”. They had their damn shot and blew it by losing 3 games.
 
Your instinct about bringing up politics was correct.

Better served without that.

Why should we progress? Why should we conserve?

Indeed, the BCS and playoff have for the most part diminished other big bowls. Would almost be satisfied going back to pre BCS, which would have ended up with

Sugar Alabama v.
Orange Clemson v.
Rose Washington v. Ohio State
Fiesta Oklahoma v.

Where would Notre Dame play. I would guess against Alabama. Does pretty much remove Clemson and Oklahoma from title contention even if they win, but all four games much bigger and everyone hoping for a Notre Dame win. Clemson v. Georgia. Oklahoma v. UCF? Michigan?
 
Your instinct about bringing up politics was correct.

Better served without that.

Why should we progress? Why should we conserve?

Indeed, the BCS and playoff have for the most part diminished other big bowls. Would almost be satisfied going back to pre BCS, which would have ended up with

Sugar Alabama v.
Orange Clemson v.
Rose Washington v. Ohio State
Fiesta Oklahoma v.

Where would Notre Dame play. I would guess against Alabama. Does pretty much remove Clemson and Oklahoma from title contention even if they win, but all four games much bigger and everyone hoping for a Notre Dame win. Clemson v. Georgia. Oklahoma v. UCF? Michigan?
It would be glorious. And we would have some of the best bowl matchups ever.

Also there’s an old adage that says if it ain’t broke don fix it.
Nothing and nobody can be all things to all people. To seek progress in the name of diversity and inclusion is wrong. In politics and football.
 
Exactly.

I hate to do it, but I’m bringing up politics.

It’s the same think with leftist progressive ideology. Being progressive for the sake of “progress” is foolish. What are we progressing to? There is no perfect world where everybody is equal and happy. Doesn’t exist. It belies human nature and the natural state of things. Life’s not fair. We aren’t equal or the same.

So apparently it’s just a human trait to want to keep “improving” things to make them fair or equal or more inclusive. We can’t stand the idea of the haves and have-nots. We need a 9-3 team dragged into the ring with a 13-0 team to “give them their shot”. They had their damn shot and blew it by losing 3 games.

Exactly. You aren’t making everybody happy. We heard for the longest that a 4 team playoff would be perfect, we get 4 teams and now people want 8. Soon we’ll get 8 and people will bitch that it should really be 16. Hell the NCAA Tournament has 64 slots and every year there’s a bunch of mediocre teams bitching about being snubbed. It’s ridiculous.

Now we’re to the point where people are lobbying to remove conference championships entirely so some team who lost 2 or 3 games can get an 8th playoff spot. Participation trophy garbage. Look if you lose 2 games in a 12 game regular season that’s almost 20% of your games lost, you have no right to bitch about not being in the running for a championship. That’s reserved for elite teams, or should be anyway. But everybody deserves a shot because, well, it’ll make us all feel good.
 
It would be glorious. And we would have some of the best bowl matchups ever.

Also there’s an old adage that says if it ain’t broke don fix it.
Nothing and nobody can be all things to all people. To seek progress in the name of diversity and inclusion is wrong. In politics and football.

I like your posts but hilarious you think being overly inclusive is our problem. Rich get richer, poor get poorer and the Rich aren’t trying to be inclusive. Doesn’t matter who’s in White House or in congress.

Anyway I liked the bowls better, but I liked the days of the big 8 and swac and the triple option.
 
Exactly.

I hate to do it, but I’m bringing up politics.

It’s the same think with leftist progressive ideology. Being progressive for the sake of “progress” is foolish. What are we progressing to? There is no perfect world where everybody is equal and happy. Doesn’t exist. It belies human nature and the natural state of things. Life’s not fair. We aren’t equal or the same.

So apparently it’s just a human trait to want to keep “improving” things to make them fair or equal or more inclusive. We can’t stand the idea of the haves and have-nots. We need a 9-3 team dragged into the ring with a 13-0 team to “give them their shot”. They had their damn shot and blew it by losing 3 games.


I get your view I really do, but if you have 5 district heads and you have a yearly end of the year competition to determine the best and award them a shot at a 10,000 dollar bonus. Does it make sense to only allow 4 of them to compete?

I'm not talking about expanding the playoffs to 8 because more teams should get a crack just because it's more equitable. I'm talking about giving more people a shot because it is called a playoff, not an invitational. Capitalism works because people generally get to keep what they earn proportionally to their work and success rate.

You can't have politicians dictating which CEOs get to keep the tax breaks due to a changing set of rules you make up to fit your opinion.

If General Motors, Ford, Toyota, Harley Davidson and Dodge all had equal quarterly earning, job growth and energy efficient quarters and you exclude one based off a confusing chart on only allowing 4 to qualify, that is not unfair because it is purely exclusionary. It is also just dumb to limit it to such a small number when you have 5 companies you have told are all looked at as equal franchises worthy of equal rewards if they meet the set goals.
 
So, take a note of this.

One of the biggest, if not the biggest, proponents of expanding the playoffs is sad.

Sad is an admitted and proud liberal.

Sad doesn't think 8 is enough, but that it really needs to be 16.

Ah yes, fair for everyone, right?

Except the 17th team.


Very, very few seasons have I thought that a team ranked 7th or 8th was championship worthy (we've had some years where no two teams really separated themselves and you had several 1 loss teams in the top 10 that you might be able to swap around significantly, but that's a pretty big outlier).

I've realized that in a lot of my arguments about college football vs the NFL, I say "the college system strives to REWARD the best team, whereas the NFL just demands that you fill some criteria and you're in."


I always go back to the 2007 NFL playoffs. It applies here.

Everyone in their right mind knows that the Patriots weren't just the best team, but they were an historically great team.

The Giants were 10-6.

"But Danny! They proved it on the field!"

Indeed, they did. Of course, the Giants got loss number 6 that year in the final game of the regular season when the Patriots beat them.

But, the Giants got hot, caught a lot of breaks, and beat the Patriots in a rematch a few weeks later.

So we should laid the Giants for getting hot late andthe Patriots falling just short to them? Yeah that's great.

Or the next time they played them in 2011 when a 9-6 Giants team beat them; in basically the same scenario.

Now, I get it. Sure. It's egalitarian. They DESERVED to be there....it was fair. But they managed to get in the playoffs while playing a mediocre regular season, got hit, and won it all.


I want my college football champion to be the best team of THAT season, or at least close to it. And I'm a 4 team playoff preceded by conference championships, any one of those 4 teams has proven themselves enough to deserve the title.

Does that mean that there's some Georgia's and Ohio States that have to sit home and not get the chance?

Yeah. But maybe they shouldn't have big losses to Purdue and LSU. Maybe Georgia should have beaten Alabama, then they wouldn't have to sit there and wonder.


Participation trophies are so lame, but that's what a portion of our country thinks we should do to college football, even though it's a fantastic product.

But yeah, go ruin it for everyone else who doesn't think there's anywhere close to 16 teams that deserve to even sniff a championship.
 
And you definitely put yourself in a sticky situation making winning your conference an automatic qualifier.

Whacky shit happens.

9-3 Texas has Oklahoma and it slipped away. Ohio State got destroyed by Ourdue and damned near lost to Maryland. Don't tell me there's no way they couldnt have lost to Northwestern andtheir 4 losses. Hell, the Pac12 always seems to have some disparity in their divisions. Didn't UCLA win their division once at 6-6? God forbid an upset happens and they actually WON the conference championship.

Conference champ auto-qualifiers sounds nice until upsets happen or a power division is garbage and the winner has 3 losses.
 
You sound like you want college football to go back to the way it was before, bowls aligned to set conference champions and the crowning of the team that had the best season overall.

There is a huge problem there which caused the BCS system of matching up the top two teams based off numbers most fans didn't understand. Split champions and 2 loss teams being named because of newspaper affiliations or perceptions of the teams opponents. Number 1 Nebraska beat number 5 Miami while number 2 Florida beat number 15 UCLA. Nebraska is better.

Ok, well let's take it to four and eliminate the issue. Well that is fine except there are five power conferences that play disproportionate conference and out of conference games scheduled years in advance.

Who is the best? Well you or I may not agree, thus the best place to settle that is not in a boardroom but rather on the field.

If you are better than me then there is one surefire way to prove it. Don't knock me out with your words or your claims of doing a better job, do it against me face to face. That is not a participation trophy, you and I both knew the stakes.

The New York Giants were punished by having to play an extra game, all of their games were on the road against teams perceived to be better. New York punched them in the mouth. New England lost the game fair and square, they were great but not great enough apparently.

Should we just cancel all postseason and award titles due to regular season accomplishments? Well the sixth or seventh didn't get a shot, that is a shoddy argument for not having a playoff.

It's still going to be extremely difficult to get into the playoffs if it goes to 8. Five Conference champions , one slot to a little guy if he is undefeated. Two slots to major conference teams if they are good enough.

We already have the format with the six big bowls. Each year they could host quarter and semifinal games.

I'm tired of arguing this on paper or a board. Georgia, Ohio State and Oklahoma would get to prove it. The positives far outweigh the negatives, prove it or shut it.
 
You sound like you want college football to go back to the way it was before, bowls aligned to set conference champions and the crowning of the team that had the best season overall.

There is a huge problem there which caused the BCS system of matching up the top two teams based off numbers most fans didn't understand. Split champions and 2 loss teams being named because of newspaper affiliations or perceptions of the teams opponents. Number 1 Nebraska beat number 5 Miami while number 2 Florida beat number 15 UCLA. Nebraska is better.

Ok, well let's take it to four and eliminate the issue. Well that is fine except there are five power conferences that play disproportionate conference and out of conference games scheduled years in advance.

Who is the best? Well you or I may not agree, thus the best place to settle that is not in a boardroom but rather on the field.

If you are better than me then there is one surefire way to prove it. Don't knock me out with your words or your claims of doing a better job, do it against me face to face. That is not a participation trophy, you and I both knew the stakes.

The New York Giants were punished by having to play an extra game, all of their games were on the road against teams perceived to be better. New York punched them in the mouth. New England lost the game fair and square, they were great but not great enough apparently.

Should we just cancel all postseason and award titles due to regular season accomplishments? Well the sixth or seventh didn't get a shot, that is a shoddy argument for not having a playoff.

It's still going to be extremely difficult to get into the playoffs if it goes to 8. Five Conference champions , one slot to a little guy if he is undefeated. Two slots to major conference teams if they are good enough.

We already have the format with the six big bowls. Each year they could host quarter and semifinal games.

I'm tired of arguing this on paper or a board. Georgia, Ohio State and Oklahoma would get to prove it. The positives far outweigh the negatives, prove it or shut it.

I was fine with the BCS. I understood the call for a 4 team, and hoped that it would quell the call for further playoffs.

Instead, there's a demand for the power 5 teams to get a team in.

Pre-BCS, there was always the chance of a disputed champion (and no, teams like UCF don't count.)
 
I was fine with the BCS. I understood the call for a 4 team, and hoped that it would quell the call for further playoffs.

Instead, there's a demand for the power 5 teams to get a team in.

Pre-BCS, there was always the chance of a disputed champion (and no, teams like UCF don't count.)


If that is your stance I get it, people are upset over the degrading values of traditional bowls.

On the flip side people who lobbied for a definite and decisive champion aren't satisfied with this invitational system we have now. If you want to crown a champion by way of a playoff ( like every other sport) it boggles the mind how they came up with such a flawed system. Either you want to define the champion based off your perception of who was the best during the 12 regular season and 1 bowl game, or you want to see a field of teams earn a spot in a playoff to determine the champion.

If you chose the latter and wished to eliminate the what if discussion , this was a failure. To tell us that four is perfectly fine and adequate is insane. Going to 8 will not appease everyone (nothing ever does) but it will allow all power conference champions to compete instead of being told whose conference was superior.

It will make the Rose, Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, Cotton and Peach bowls meaningful every year as they host the quarters and semifinals. It will make all the conference championship games more appealing, the positives are just too apparent.

The negativesvare that it devalues the regular season or prestige of the championship? Really? If Florida got hot and won the East with two losses then proceeded to knock off Alabama, Michigan, Clemson and Notre Dame to claim our fourth title would be devalued?

One of the things the committee bases their selection off of is how the team finishes. So getting hot is already an aspect they use to determine a tiebreaker of sorts.
 
If that is your stance I get it, people are upset over the degrading values of traditional bowls.

On the flip side people who lobbied for a definite and decisive champion aren't satisfied with this invitational system we have now. If you want to crown a champion by way of a playoff ( like every other sport) it boggles the mind how they came up with such a flawed system. Either you want to define the champion based off your perception of who was the best during the 12 regular season and 1 bowl game, or you want to see a field of teams earn a spot in a playoff to determine the champion.

If you chose the latter and wished to eliminate the what if discussion , this was a failure. To tell us that four is perfectly fine and adequate is insane. Going to 8 will not appease everyone (nothing ever does) but it will allow all power conference champions to compete instead of being told whose conference was superior.

It will make the Rose, Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, Cotton and Peach bowls meaningful every year as they host the quarters and semifinals. It will make all the conference championship games more appealing, the positives are just too apparent.

The negativesvare that it devalues the regular season or prestige of the championship? Really? If Florida got hot and won the East with two losses then proceeded to knock off Alabama, Michigan, Clemson and Notre Dame to claim our fourth title would be devalued?

One of the things the committee bases their selection off of is how the team finishes. So getting hot is already an aspect they use to determine a tiebreaker of sorts.

Don't totally disagree, but getting hot in college is a little different than the NFL.

A month less of regular season games they routinely drop games all the time.

So how about this.

Let's say Florida is undefeated going into the FSU game. A 9-3 Auburn has won the West.

Think we might be tempted to rest starters? Think we might view the likelihood of us getting in, even with a loss, pretty high if 8 teams get in?

NFL teams do it all the time in week 17.

Other teams would do it too.


I think it creates the potential for a slippery slope where teams don't worry about winning every game. That's one of the things that makes college so interesting.

One loss and all of a sudden you don't know what the future holds for you.

Watch teams in bad conferences start having 3-4 losses, banking on that auto qualifier.


Just saying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fsu939913
It shouldn’t just be the four “best” teams. It should be the four “best” teams who earn the right to be included in the CFB playoff. Conference titles should be given huge deference.

This 100%....this isnt a ****ng beauty contest or some liberal bullsh## (they look better) contest. You go by facts, and facts dont care about your feelings. It should be the best 4 teams that EARNED it by wins and losses... Any1 who puts UGA in the top 4 is a clueless moron and just an overall dumb person.


Imagine football being played this way. Well, the Gators beat the Noles 31-24 but the noles looked better so we are going to give them the win. Plain stupid.
 
This 100%....this isnt a ****ng beauty contest or some liberal bullsh## (they look better) contest. You go by facts, and facts dont care about your feelings. It should be the best 4 teams that EARNED it by wins and losses... Any1 who puts UGA in the top 4 is a clueless moron and just an overall dumb person.


Imagine football being played this way. Well, the Gators beat the Noles 31-24 but the noles looked better so we are going to give them the win. Plain stupid.

Except sad thinks a conference winner should automatically be allowed in, even if they suck.
 
ADVERTISEMENT