Every time I watched Alabama, except for the South Carolina game,they looked like one of the best teams in the country. Obviously, Michigan State was not as good as their record indicated, but after watching Alabama I wonder why they lost any games.

If I were seeding the tournament Alabama would be a top 5 seed and probably a 3 seed.

Prescott;621099 wrote:Every time I watched Alabama, except for the South Carolina game,they looked like one of the best teams in the country. Obviously, Michigan State was not as good as their record indicated, but after watching Alabama I wonder why they lost any games.

If I were seeding the tournament Alabama would be a top 5 seed and probably a 3 seed.

I take it you didnt watch the LSU game or the 2nd half of the Auburn game?

If it was a 16 seed tourney, Bama wouldnt be in yours if they were a 5 seed. Thats if you went with 4 regions.

I'd just like to see Bama face a defense like the Bucks.

i'd figure bama would be seeded whatever they were at the end of the season.

I bet Bama sky rockets in the poll.

Bama will probably end up inside the Top 10, whether you like it or not

darbypitcher22;621151 wrote:Bama will probably end up inside the Top 10, whether you like it or not

I wouldnt like it, it would be a joke. If LSU wins their bowl game and Bama jumps them, that would be ridiculous.

Alabama finished 5-3 in the SEC and should have been 4-4 in the SEC because Arkansas choke one away against them.

johngrizzly;621106 wrote:I'd just like to see Bama face a defense like the Bucks.

We don't have anyone that can cover Julio Jones, I can tell you that.

Prescott;621099 wrote:Every time I watched Alabama, except for the South Carolina game,they looked like one of the best teams in the country. Obviously, Michigan State was not as good as their record indicated, but after watching Alabama I wonder why they lost any games.

If I were seeding the tournament Alabama would be a top 5 seed and probably a 3 seed.

Just love how winning a game in a meaningless,non BCS Bowl game, changes the fact that Alabama lost 3 games in the regular season.

#4

Just love how winning a game in a meaningless,non BCS Bowl game, changes the fact that Alabama lost 3 games in the regular season.

Kind of like the NFL playoffs. Losing a few games and you still qualify for the post season tournament. Alabama is a team I would like to avoid. Yea, they lost (3) games, but when they play to their potential, they are very good. They had a bad loss at South Carolina, but there is no shame in losing at LSU by 3 and Auburn by 1.

Prescott;621532 wrote:Kind of like the NFL playoffs. Losing a few games and you still qualify for the post season tournament. Alabama is a team I would like to avoid. Yea, they lost (3) games, but when they play to their potential, they are very good. They had a bad loss at South Carolina, but there is no shame in losing at LSU by 3 and Auburn by 1.

If its like the NFL then Alabama wouldn't be in the Playoffs they were the 4th best team in their own Division, no way a team in 4th place of their Division and 5th in the Conf makes the Playoffs.

If its like the NFL then Alabama wouldn't be in the Playoffs they were the 4th best team in their own Division, no way a team in 4th place of their Division and 5th in the Conf makes the Playoffs.

It was example of a team that nobody wants to play. That was the point.

If there were a 16 team playoff this year Alabama would have been on the outside looking in.

Let's be very clear about how a 16 team playoff would work in college football. Currently there are 11 D-1A conferences. If there were a 16 team playoff them all 11 conference champions would be in the playoff. That would leave you with five at large spots, who would likely be the five highest ranked teams in the BCS who did not win their conference (you wouldn't be able to limit one at-large per conference like you do now or you would end up with #19 Utah as the final at-large team this year, leaving six higher ranked teams out). You would then use the BCS rankings (or something similar) to seed the teams. There would not be a selection committee picking the at-large teams or seeding the bracket. Since this is how a 16 team playoff would break down, here is what it would look like this year:

1. Auburn (SEC)
16. FIU (Sun Belt)

8. Arkansas (At-large)
9. Michigan State (At-large)

5. Wisconsin (Big Ten)
12. Nevada (WAC)

4. Stanford (At-large)
13. UConn (Big East)

3. TCU (MWC)
14. UCF (CUSA)

6. Ohio State (At-large)
11. Virginia Tech (ACC)

7. Oklahoma (Big XII)
10. Boise State (At-large)

2. Oregon (Pac-10)
15. Miami (OH) (MAC)

Obviously there are lots of problems with this system. These aren't the top 16 teams in the country. Higher seeds would likely have to host first round games. Hard to balance teams from the same conference on the same or opposite side of the bracket. Boise who is an at-large is seeded higher than Nevada who beat them and won their conference. Of course, no system for crowning a champion, including a playoff, is perfect, which is why I still favor the BCS, but that's a discussion for another thread. The point here is that Alabama would not be in a 16 team playoff this year because there would never be a selection committee and they would never use straight rankings for a 16 team playoff in college football.

The point here is that Alabama would not be in a 16 team playoff this year because there would never be a selection committee and they would never use straight rankings for a 16 team playoff in college football.

How do you know this?? Since a playoff system does not exist, your hypothesis, while interesting, is not a the blueprint that would be used.

Prescott;623205 wrote:How do you know this?? Since a playoff system does not exist, your hypothesis, while interesting, is not a the blueprint that would be used.

ccrunner609;623433 wrote:Most people that arent in a vegatative state or missing a chromosome would know that the BCS system would determine this.

The BCS or something very similar to it would choose the at-large teams. A selection committee for a 16 team tournament would be stupid. When picking a 68 team tournament from nearly 300 teams like NCAA tournament there is room to be subjective. There isn't room in a 16 team playoff in D-1A football for a selection committee to pick and seed the teams, especially when most agree that the BCS rankings would do a good enough job seeding the teams.

And I don't know for sure that this is how a 16 team playoff would work, but I do know that if it is 16 teams every conference champ would get in. There's just no way they could do a playoff that big and not grant that level of equity. In an eight team playoff or smaller there likely wouldn't be any autobids, and it would just be the eight highest ranked teams. Right now it's not a big deal if UConn gets into a BCS bowl over say Michigan State or Boise State (the highest ranked teams to not make the BCS) because they aren't competing for the national championship. An unranked team getting in over potentially the #8 team in a playoff scenario would be a big deal thought because that unranked four loss team could win the national championship while the #8 one loss team doesn't get a shot. If you have 16 teams though you need to let every conference champion into the playoff

And I don't know for sure that this is how a 16 team playoff would work, but I do know that if it is 16 teams every conference champ would get in. There's just no way they could do a playoff that big and not grant that level of equity.

I disagree. This ,like most other things, would be dictated by money. Getting the best PERCEIVED match-ups would be paramount. Auburn -vs-FIU isn't going to generate much money.

If your assumptions are correct, then the tournament should be expanded.

Krambman - not a big deal, but you left out CUSA champ and put in 6 at-large teams. I'm assuming Missouri was the last at-large you have listed, so they would also be out.

I agree, if there is a 16 team field, then I can't see how they will not let all 11 1-A conference champions into the tournament. If a team doesn't win their conference, and isn't one of the next 5 best at-large teams in the country, they should have no complaint about being left out. I would love to see a format like this, but seriously doubt it will happen. The most likely scenario would be a plus-1 format.

Wooball;624246 wrote:Krambman - not a big deal, but you left out CUSA champ and put in 6 at-large teams. I'm assuming Missouri was the last at-large you have listed, so they would also be out.

I agree, if there is a 16 team field, then I can't see how they will not let all 11 1-A conference champions into the tournament. If a team doesn't win their conference, and isn't one of the next 5 best at-large teams in the country, they should have no complaint about being left out. I would love to see a format like this, but seriously doubt it will happen. The most likely scenario would be a plus-1 format.

Thanks, I fixed it.

Here is why there would be autobids for all 11 conferences if there were a 16 team playoff. Right now it isn't a big deal that only 6 conference have autobids into the BCS, because they were contracted with these bowls before the BCS, and playing in a BCS bowl is not playing for a national championship. Under the current system any team in the country can finish in the top two and play in the title game. You don't have to be from an autobid conference or even win your conference to play in the title game (we can discuss voting bias, but by the rules there is no inherent advantage). If only certain conference got autobids into a playoff that large there's a complete lack of equity. Either every conference has to have an autobid, or no one gets an autobid and you just take the top sixteen teams, and no one would agree to that.

To be honest, I don't care how you seed them or really how you pick them.....8 or 16 teams having a shot to win the title would be better than 2. I didn't like the idea of TCU having a shot, but I can't help but wonder what I would be feeling after going undefeated and not having at least a shot to win a title???

krambman;623078 wrote:If there were a 16 team playoff this year Alabama would have been on the outside looking in.

Let's be very clear about how a 16 team playoff would work in college football. Currently there are 11 D-1A conferences. If there were a 16 team playoff them all 11 conference champions would be in the playoff. That would leave you with five at large spots, who would likely be the five highest ranked teams in the BCS who did not win their conference (you wouldn't be able to limit one at-large per conference like you do now or you would end up with #19 Utah as the final at-large team this year, leaving six higher ranked teams out). You would then use the BCS rankings (or something similar) to seed the teams. There would not be a selection committee picking the at-large teams or seeding the bracket. Since this is how a 16 team playoff would break down, here is what it would look like this year:

1. Auburn (SEC)
16. FIU (Sun Belt)

8. Arkansas (At-large)
9. Michigan State (At-large)

5. Wisconsin (Big Ten)
12. Nevada (WAC)

4. Stanford (At-large)
13. UConn (Big East)

3. TCU (MWC)
14. UCF (CUSA)

6. Ohio State (At-large)
11. Virginia Tech (ACC)

7. Oklahoma (Big XII)
10. Boise State (At-large)

2. Oregon (Pac-10)
15. Miami (OH) (MAC)

Obviously there are lots of problems with this system. These aren't the top 16 teams in the country. Higher seeds would likely have to host first round games. Hard to balance teams from the same conference on the same or opposite side of the bracket. Boise who is an at-large is seeded higher than Nevada who beat them and won their conference. Of course, no system for crowning a champion, including a playoff, is perfect, which is why I still favor the BCS, but that's a discussion for another thread. The point here is that Alabama would not be in a 16 team playoff this year because there would never be a selection committee and they would never use straight rankings for a 16 team playoff in college football.

Gee, what a compelling playoff this would create....

And yet this is exactly what it would look like if a playoff were implemented. I wonder how many people would champion the idea of Miami U against Oregon, or Auburn against Florida International?

Skyhook79;621227 wrote:Just love how winning a game in a meaningless,non BCS Bowl game, changes the fact that Alabama lost 3 games in the regular season.

This to an extent. Obvioiusly, Bama did look impressive. But as others have pointed out, Bama did lose 3 games, and didn't look good at all during times of those games. And given a month to prepare, get healthy makes a world of difference for some teams as well. MSU overacheived and had the ball bounce their way all season long. This was ONE game, and Bama played the best game of the year, and MSU was aweful. On any given ONE game scenario...it can happen and we have seen it many a time.