sleeper;1600517 wrote:The one I have outlined gives all D1 schools a shot at the championship.

No it doesn't. Your system still has subjectivity in it. You even outlined one case when describing your situation where a school may not be given a chance. Your system would give most schools a very good shot at a championship. But does not give all D-1 schools a shot.

sherm03;1600528 wrote:No it doesn't. Your system still has subjectivity in it. You even outlined one case when describing your situation where a school may not be given a chance. Your system would give most schools a very good shot at a championship. But does not give all D-1 schools a shot.

Never in the history of D1 football have 4 mid majors/independents gone undefeated. Your desperation to preserve a broken system is rather obvious.

sleeper;1600531 wrote:Never in the history of D1 football have 4 mid majors/independents gone undefeated. Your desperation to preserve a broken system is rather obvious.

So "never happened in the past" = "never will happen in the future." Good to know...

sherm03;1600532 wrote:So "never happened in the past" = "never will happen in the future." Good to know...

I just find it absolutely hilarious that a system has been proposed that will given all D1 schools a chance at the title game with 99.9999% certainty is being dismissed because you think a team beating another team doesn't mean they are better and the losing team deserves another shot because SEC.

sleeper;1600534 wrote:I just find it absolutely hilarious that a system has been proposed that will given all D1 schools a chance at the title game with 99.9999% certainty is being dismissed because you think a team beating another team doesn't mean they are better and the losing team deserves another shot because SEC.

Did I say that I am dismissing your idea? I must have misread my own post (#104) that said I agree with your proposal. It gives conference champs a reward for being conference champs, but still has at-large options that account for the fact that the best teams may come from the same conference.

You are overlooking my point that, while your proposal is a good idea, it is not the idea we have. What we have is 4 teams that will get the chance to play for a National Title. It's still important to take into account that the two best teams could come from the same conference (notice how I haven't said anything about the SEC here...just conference). The only way to take into account the fact that the two best teams could come from the same conference UNDER THE CURRENT SYSTEM would be to make all 4 spots at-large bids.

No go ahead and try to spin it differently, and make fun of Notre Dame, and rip me for pursuing my dream job. It's your M.O. and really the only thing you're good at.

sherm03;1600543 wrote:Did I say that I am dismissing your idea? I must have misread my own post (#104) that said I agree with your proposal. It gives conference champs a reward for being conference champs, but still has at-large options that account for the fact that the best teams may come from the same conference.

You are overlooking my point that, while your proposal is a good idea, it is not the idea we have. What we have is 4 teams that will get the chance to play for a National Title. It's still important to take into account that the two best teams could come from the same conference (notice how I haven't said anything about the SEC here...just conference). The only way to take into account the fact that the two best teams could come from the same conference UNDER THE CURRENT SYSTEM would be to make all 4 spots at-large bids.

No go ahead and try to spin it differently, and make fun of Notre Dame, and rip me for pursuing my dream job. It's your M.O. and really the only thing you're good at.

Conference championships are filters. Use them. The only way your system makes sense is we had no conferences and everyone played everyone. In other words, you are a moron.

sleeper;1600549 wrote:Conference championships are filters. Use them. The only way your system makes sense is we had no conferences and everyone played everyone. In other words, you are a moron.

The only way your system makes sense is if all conferences were equal. They aren't. In other words, you are an asshole.

What the hell was so wrong with keeping the BCS rankings and just having the top 4 in the rankings at the end of the year play in the playoff? How are they going to be figuring out the rest of the bowl games if they aren't using the BCS anymore?

tk421;1600754 wrote:What the hell was so wrong with keeping the BCS rankings and just having the top 4 in the rankings at the end of the year play in the playoff? How are they going to be figuring out the rest of the bowl games if they aren't using the BCS anymore?

The same way they always have. Conference tie ins.

I got it the answer to all our prayers a playoff that makes sense (kills the bowl games) but WTH we want a true champion

Eight game regular season vs your confrence then a a 64 team bracket in football. First weekend in November we get rolling no excuses no confrence champs just old school win and move on lose your done. I hate to use a basketball idea for this but hell it seems to work out every year that have a champ so mid majors win when most think they should lose and what else would be better then not being able to bitch and moan about your team getting knockout out by Rice, Duke, Rutgers, etc...

Thoughts?????

Schools would hate the money they would lose for ticket sales on home games.

Also the southern schools can't travel up north to play games in the cold. There scared!!!

lakeflyerMike;1600773 wrote:Schools would hate the money they would lose for ticket sales on home games.

Also the southern schools can't travel up north to play games in the cold. There scared!!!

*They're

[INDENT]Schools would hate the money they would lose for ticket sales on home games.

Also the southern schools can't travel up north to play games in the cold. There scared!!! [/INDENT]






Four home games against your confrence and it would rotate on who you play some good years some bad years (maybe) but then you use the big venues for the host sites: Jerry world, Superdome, Ohio stadium, Big House, Tenns statdium, Rose bowl, etc... can you imagine LSU vs Oregon in the big house second weekend in November snow on the ground 10 degrees outside. Then the next game Michigain vs Alabama at the rose bowl. Come on this sh$T would be the best football EVERY!!!!!

No. That is terrible.

coachchuck;1600782 wrote:Four home games against your confrence and it would rotate on who you play some good years some bad years (maybe) but then you use the big venues for the host sites: Jerry world, Superdome, Ohio stadium, Big House, Tenns statdium, Rose bowl, etc... can you imagine LSU vs Oregon in the big house second weekend in November snow on the ground 10 degrees outside. Then the next game Michigain vs Alabama at the rose bowl. Come on this sh$T would be the best football EVERY!!!!!

Wut

ts1227;1600797 wrote:Wut

keeping the big venues for the schools to keep money in the schools from the lose of home games

coachchuck;1600799 wrote:keeping the big venues for the schools to keep money in the schools from the lose of home games

The NCAA would never allow the schools to keep the ticket sales, that's money out of they're pockets

coachchuck;1600782 wrote:[INDENT]Schools would hate the money they would lose for ticket sales on home games.

Also the southern schools can't travel up north to play games in the cold. There scared!!! [/INDENT]






Four home games against your confrence and it would rotate on who you play some good years some bad years (maybe) but then you use the big venues for the host sites: Jerry world, Superdome, Ohio stadium, Big House, Tenns statdium, Rose bowl, etc... can you imagine LSU vs Oregon in the big house second weekend in November snow on the ground 10 degrees outside. Then the next game Michigain vs Alabama at the rose bowl. Come on this sh$T would be the best football EVERY!!!!!

I'd be willing to pay money to go to the shit house for that game

sherm03;1600742 wrote:The only way your system makes sense is if all conferences were equal. They aren't. In other words, you are an asshole.

They are equal. Stop crying.

sleeper;1600811 wrote:They are equal. Stop crying.

Texas A&M is the 8th best team in the SEC, Penn St is the 8th best team in the B1G. How is that equal?

sleeper;1600811 wrote:They are equal. Stop crying.

LOL. You are delusional.

Regardless of equality, until you have a system where the 5 major conferences have an automatic bid for its champion, the system will forever be flawed.

In my opinion, 1 vs. 2 is less flawed then selecting the top 4 teams, when you have 5 major conferences.

lakeflyerMike;1600812 wrote:Texas A&M is the 8th best team in the SEC, Penn St is the 8th best team in the B1G. How is that equal?

That's not the equality that's been discussed.

Nowadays many of the conference are split into two, and have a conference championship game.

Great for money, but could also throw a wrench into a playoff type of scenario.

A scenario, that could happen.

OSU and Michigan are undefeated going into the last game of the season. Michigan wins in a very close game. They end up playing a 2 loss Wisky in the conference championship game, one loss which was to OSU in a romp.

Wisky wins.....and gets the nod.
I know, I know......Wisky winning the champ is what it is all about, but now in the age of the divisions in the conferences this type of scenario could happen where one could be much weaker, or stronger, and end up with 2 losses and this could happen.

Before the conf championships this really couldnt happen as it would go strictly on league records.

coachchuck;1600771 wrote:I got it the answer to all our prayers a playoff that makes sense (kills the bowl games) but WTH we want a true champion

Eight game regular season vs your confrence then a a 64 team bracket in football. First weekend in November we get rolling no excuses no confrence champs just old school win and move on lose your done. I hate to use a basketball idea for this but hell it seems to work out every year that have a champ so mid majors win when most think they should lose and what else would be better then not being able to bitch and moan about your team getting knockout out by Rice, Duke, Rutgers, etc...

Thoughts?????

If you want to make it more like March Madness, you don't need anywhere near 64 teams. You currently have 10 conferences. You could have a 16 team tournament with the 10 conference champs and 6 at-large. You could have a 12 team tournament with 10 conference champs and 2 at large (top 4 conference winners would have byes). If the first 2 rounds were played in early December, you would be down to 4 teams by mid-December. Two bowls could be used as semi-finals like they will be under the new format. The teams that were eliminated early could still go to the other bowls.