Final Playoff Rankings Thread

[BuffUp]

as much as I am tired of bama, the committee got it right. Those are some pretty good games...I would maybe said usc vs theosu. The georgia vs ou will be allsome.

 

[Highlander]

Back to back years with controversy and the first year with 2 of 5 conferences being left out of the playoff. I love it!

It won't be long now before we get an 8 team playoff.

4 teams was never the answer. But it was the right first step that the bowl purists couldn't complain about too loudly.

 

[Buffnik]

Back to back years with controversy and the first year with 2 of 5 conferences being left out of the playoff. I love it!

It won't be long now before we get an 8 team playoff.

4 teams was never the answer. But it was the right first step that the bowl purists couldn't complain about too loudly.

Got to go one of two ways.

1) 8-team playoff (5 conference champs + 3 wildcards)

or

2) Major restructuring where we've got everyone playing relatively equal schedules (i.e., 9 conference games and no more than 1 G5 opponent).

If we went to #2, I could actually support going back to the BCS era way of things with 2 teams playing for the title and everyone else going to bowl games.

 

[somebody]

LOL at the 4 people who voted Alabama AFTER the committee announcement.

 

[Buffnik]

100% agree with the Ducks fan on this. We have to stop rewarding teams for not playing.

 

[hawg1]

SIAP. Importantly, Coaches on Committee who watched film liked Bama.

 

[J-R-K]

Not saying that USC should be in ahead of Alabama....but its BS that USC played 12 power conferences teams this year while mighty Bama played just 9 power conference teams.

 

[hokiehead]

great thread. my thoughts:

• I think the bitching about the SEC schools scheduling FCS opponents late in the season is misplaced. I blame my teams' AD's and coaching staffs for not taking full advantage of scheduling rules that allow this (really, ACC, B1G and Pac teams outsmarted by SEC -- should be embarrassed).
• I don't get the bitching about 9 game conference schedules. The playoff criteria are clear that SoS is what matters -- no suggestion in there that SoS should be weighted heavier if it comes from within a team's conference or from OOC opponents. If Pac fans feel that their scheduling rules given them an unfair advantage over other conferences w/r/t playoff selection, Pac should change, not advocate that every other conference be like them. I see this bitching about 8 game conference schedules in the same light as SEC schools wanting other conferences to adopt the same rules about satellite camps or ACC schools wanting other conferences to adopt the same rules over transferring or B1G schools wanting other conferences to adopt the same academic standards. Each conference should be free to adopt rules and policies that fit their member institutions without forcing policies driven by their values onto other conferences.
• despite the correlations between SoR and playoffs -- SoS is one of the four required criteria. SoR is not mentioned in the charter at all.
• the playoff committee charter requires them to consider "championships won" as one of four criteria. it does not specify, or imply for that matter, "championships won this season" and does not specify "conference championships", which many believe it should. It's very possible that the committee is fulfilling the charter as currently written by giving weight to Alabama's 16 historical MNC's.
• When looking backwards, I don't believe bowl performance, outside of playoff bowls, the Rose bowl or a former BCS championship bowl, is indicative at all. Most coaches, to one degree or another, shift focus to "next year" in determining bowl preparations, who gets practice snaps, who gets playing time, etc...

None of these points would be a problem if we'd scrap the playoffs and give up trying to determine a consensus national championship and acknowledge that Pac and B1G and ACC and SEC, etc... are different leagues, each with their own champion.

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

A couple years ago I was almost positive the Big 12 was going to implode and we would get to those 4 16 team conferences. That conference has stabilized, and for the time being the power is out of UT's hands. I think the Big 12 will hang around for quite a while.

So with that being the case, lets standardize schedules across the P5, expand the playoff to 8, with 5 conference champs and 3 wildcards. Ranks those 8 teams and put together the bracket, just like we do in the NCAA Tournament. It really is that simple. Would anyone really complain about watching:

2017

Sugar Bowl 1 Clemson / 8 USC
Orange Bowl 4 Bama / 5 OSU

Cotton Bowl 2 OU / 7 Auburn
Peach Bowl 3 UGA / 6 Wiscy

2016

Sugar Bowl 1 Bama / 8 Wiscy
Rose Bowl 4 UW / 5 PSU

Orange Bowl 2 Clemson / 7 OU
Cotton Bowl 3 OSU / 6 Michigan

2015

Sugar Bowl 1 Clemson / 8 ND
Cotton Bowl 4 OU / 5 Iowa

Orange Bowl 2 Bama / 7 OSU
Rose Bowl 3 MSU / 6 Stanford

2014

Sugar Bowl 1 Bama / 8 MSU
Cotton Bowl 4 OSU / 5 Baylor

Rose Bowl 2 Oregon / 7 Miss St
Orange Bowl 3 FSU / 6 TCU

 

[AeroBuff99]

You don't have to touch scheduling at all if you have 5 conference champions receive autobids, 1 G5 (highest ranked) and 2 wild cards (highest non-champ teams). Then who cares who everyone plays. Winning the conference becomes the most important thing as it guarantees a slot in the playoff. Then PAC12 can continue to schedule how they want, and SEC can do their thing. And the ESPN can always make sure they have 2 SEC teams in for promotional purposes. Problem solved. 3 rounds, 1st round at high seed before Christmas, semis and 1st round losers in the traditional NY 6 bowls on New Years Day, Championship, the next weekend (Jan 8th or later).

 

[CUAviator]

Back to back years with controversy and the first year with 2 of 5 conferences being left out of the playoff. I love it!

It won't be long now before we get an 8 team playoff.

4 teams was never the answer. But it was the right first step that the bowl purists couldn't complain about too loudly.

Unlike