If you were on the NCAA playoff committee ?

1970s

How would you approach making your decision as to who made it in to the 4 team playoff at the end of the season ?

I guess the easy way out would be to award a spot to.......

1. SEC winner
2. Pac 12 winner
3. Big 12 winner
4. ACC winner or Big 10 winner


Or would you award it to the teams that looked the most impressive over the duration of the college football season no matter what conference they came from ?
Would an early season loss have more or less value than a late season loss ?
Would a 1 loss SEC team get preference over an undefeated Big 10 team ?

How would all this play out in your selection ?

MGLICKER

Two teams will be obvious. Probably a third as well.

Fight for fourth will be between a weak undefeated and a strong two loss team.

...sorry for not answering the question.

arex

<< <i>How would you approach making your decision as to who made it in to the 4 team playoff at the end of the season ?

I guess the easy way out would be to award a spot to.......

1. SEC winner
2. Pac 12 winner
3. Big 12 winner
4. ACC winner or Big 10 winner


Or would you award it to the teams that looked the most impressive over the duration of the college football season no matter what conference they came from ?
Would an early season loss have more or less value than a late season loss ?
Would a 1 loss SEC team get preference over an undefeated Big 10 team ?

How would all this play out in your selection ? >>


I think those are how it works. With the 4th being the ACC winner unless FSU slips up and somehow doesnt win the ACC (cant see that happening)
I dont think a conference champ gets left out unless...
The Pac 12 has a conference champ with 2 losses and
The SEC has a team with one loss which would have to be in the SEC championship game to a 0-1 loss team. Like say South Carolina runs the table in SEC East, Bama runs the table in the SEC West and SC beats Bama in the championship game. That leaves a conference champ with 1 loss and the runner up only having 1 loss.

larryallen73

They should NEVER just look at the conference winners. That is the worst way. That is why marginal teams have been in BCS bowl games. Almost every year there has been a marginal bowl game and it would be a team nobody cares about (like a 8-4 Pitt team) against a media darling like Boise State. It's horrible. It should be the 4 BEST. If it's 4 teams from the SEC then so be it. I could easily see a year where you end up with two undefeated SEC teams playing in the SEC championship (being 1-2 in the country) and both being invited to the playoff. The other two would be the next best two; presumably conf champions from 2 of the other 3 conferences but not necessarily. I hope the committee is looking at this with a wide open mind. The whole point is to have the four best teams.

arex

The thing is that in most cases in most years the conference champs from each conference will be the best.
Sure there ar shears where the PAC 12 or big10 or ACC have a really screwy conference champ that isn't the best of that conference.
But I do believe that general the best teams are the conference champs.
But if they aren't I completely agree with you that the best teams should be in the playoffs. And if conference champs are left on the sideline then so be it

arex

The thing is that in most cases in most years the conference champs from each conference will be the best.
Sure there ar shears where the PAC 12 or big10 or ACC have a really screwy conference champ that isn't the best of that conference.
But I do believe that general the best teams are the conference champs.
But if they aren't I completely agree with you that the best teams should be in the playoffs. And if conference champs are left on the sideline then so be it

arex

The thing is that in most cases in most years the conference champs from each conference will be the best.
Sure there ar shears where the PAC 12 or big10 or ACC have a really screwy conference champ that isn't the best of that conference.
But I do believe that general the best teams are the conference champs.
But if they aren't I completely agree with you that the best teams should be in the playoffs. And if conference champs are left on the sideline then so be it

TennisCoach

If I was on the playoff committee I would look at each team's overall body of work. I place a higher value on beating quality opponents than a teams overall record. Also did the team that is up for consideration schedule a bunch of easy wins between tough games. If one team is playing tough mid-level non-conference opponents and the other team is playing teams that have no business even being on the same field I am going to give the edge to team playing tougher competition. I look at a team like Wisconsin and their overall schedule does not look very impressive, so even if they finished the year with just 1 loss I would probably put another team ahead of them for that 4th playoff spot. The tough part would be deciding between the 2nd best SEC team against the winner of the BIG 10. The 2nd best SEC team will have played a tougher schedule and have more quality wins, but leaving the BIG 10 champion out will upset a lot of college football fans. I would put the best 4 teams in even if I had to leave a conference champion out, but since college football is a business I would think the decision makers will have 4 conference champions in its inaugural playoff.

garnettstyle

Since there are only 4 spots, only conference champions should qualify. If there was a playoff last year, the pac 12 would've been left out.

larryallen73

<< <i>Since there are only 4 spots, only conference champions should qualify. If there was a playoff last year, the pac 12 would've been left out. >>



I don't recall what happened last year with the Pac 12 but if they are left out they are left out. Has to be the four BEST teams. I don't understand the conference champion argument since that will always leave one of the major 5 out anyway. It should be the 4 best teams. For example, a year or two ago UCLA backed into the Pac 10/12 championship game against a significantly better Oregon team. Had UCLA gotten lucky that day and won they would not have been worthy of going to the playoffs. Oregon was still a significantly better team. Having lost that day may have pushed Oregon out of the top 4 and so be it but that wouldn't have made UCLA playoff worthy. This can happen in any conference. A few years ago South Carolina made it to the SEC championship game but they were barely in the top 25 at the time (if at all). You have to look at the body of work I think. Basically the top 4 teams in the land after the conference games. If it's 4 teams from the SEC then so be it. Should be the best 4. If there were 16 spots then we could let in some weak conference champions but not with only 4.

JHS5120

<< <i>I don't recall what happened last year with the Pac 12 but if they are left out they are left out. Has to be the four BEST teams. I don't understand the conference champion argument since that will always leave one of the major 5 out anyway. It should be the 4 best teams. For example, a year or two ago UCLA backed into the Pac 10/12 championship game against a significantly better Oregon team. Had UCLA gotten lucky that day and won they would not have been worthy of going to the playoffs. Oregon was still a significantly better team. Having lost that day may have pushed Oregon out of the top 4 and so be it but that wouldn't have made UCLA playoff worthy. This can happen in any conference. A few years ago South Carolina made it to the SEC championship game but they were barely in the top 25 at the time (if at all). You have to look at the body of work I think. Basically the top 4 teams in the land after the conference games. If it's 4 teams from the SEC then so be it. Should be the best 4. If there were 16 spots then we could let in some weak conference champions but not with only 4. >>



I agree with most of this, but I think the playoffs should consist of the most intriguing games, which granted, is usually the four best teams.

An example:

Say you have a top 10 team who went undefeated during the season, but ended the rankings as #6. I would like to see that team in the playoffs over say a 2 loss Alabama team.

I think the top 2 teams will be easy (there is always a clear #1 and #2 team), the third team should be whomever is the best of the rest and the 4th team should be whomever deserves it most. If FSU losses two games it's very possible they can still end the season ranked #4 overall. I would rather see an underdog team that deserves a chance at the big game over a powerhouse that played below expectations.

That's just my thought.

Barndog

reality: if I am on the NCAA committee, I choose the four teams that will bring the NCAA the most money.

garnettstyle

<< <i>

<< <i>I don't recall what happened last year with the Pac 12 but if they are left out they are left out. Has to be the four BEST teams. I don't understand the conference champion argument since that will always leave one of the major 5 out anyway. It should be the 4 best teams. For example, a year or two ago UCLA backed into the Pac 10/12 championship game against a significantly better Oregon team. Had UCLA gotten lucky that day and won they would not have been worthy of going to the playoffs. Oregon was still a significantly better team. Having lost that day may have pushed Oregon out of the top 4 and so be it but that wouldn't have made UCLA playoff worthy. This can happen in any conference. A few years ago South Carolina made it to the SEC championship game but they were barely in the top 25 at the time (if at all). You have to look at the body of work I think. Basically the top 4 teams in the land after the conference games. If it's 4 teams from the SEC then so be it. Should be the best 4. If there were 16 spots then we could let in some weak conference champions but not with only 4. >>





Say you have a top 10 team who went undefeated during the season, but ended the rankings as #6. I would like to see that team in the playoffs over say a 2 loss Alabama team.

>>



Same here. I think the committee is going to try to avoid putting more than one team from the same conference. A huge reason why they decided to go to a playoff system was because of the LSU vs Alabama championship game that drew poor ratings. The four best teams will always be an opinion, so that's why I think only conference champions should qualify. Even if its a conference champion outside of a major conference.