Look at the bright side

[Irish_inPSU]

For all the bitching and whining everyone is doing about this playoff situation, at least we can all complain about it. Not that long ago, there was this thing called the BCS where a computer under someone's desk decided who deserved to play for the title. Now, we have four teams and its coming down to the last week, once again, to decide who can play for the title. The system isn't perfect, but its far better than what we had before. If the BCS was still in place, its pretty much all but guaranteed that Alabama/Clemson would be the the title game, end of story.

I'd love to see the playoffs expand to 8 teams though.

 

[echowaker]

For all the bitching and whining everyone is doing about this playoff situation, at least we can all complain about it. Not that long ago, there was this thing called the BCS where a computer under someone's desk decided who deserved to play for the title. Now, we have four teams and its coming down to the last week, once again, to decide who can play for the title. The system isn't perfect, but its far better than what we had before. If the BCS was still in place, its pretty much all but guaranteed that Alabama/Clemson would be the the title game, end of story.

I'd love to see the playoffs expand to 8 teams though.

i was in the minority but i liked the BCS. they got it right more often than not. the current system is still subjective. jeff long admitted last night that there were plenty of debates on teams 3-6.

 

[FightingIrish44]

Plus, it wasn't like that computer was programmed to evaluate football games. It was computing what the voters were picking anyway.

 

[BGI User 1596]

At least we don't have to get the doors blown off by Alabama again.

 

[NDSMC78]

At least we don't have to get the doors blown off by Alabama again.

That's the spirit.

 

[Classic Irish]

At least we don't have to get the doors blown off by Alabama again.

Still maintaining the charade that you're an ND fan?

 

[DieHard_Irish]

For all the bitching and whining everyone is doing about this playoff situation, at least we can all complain about it. Not that long ago, there was this thing called the BCS where a computer under someone's desk decided who deserved to play for the title. Now, we have four teams and its coming down to the last week, once again, to decide who can play for the title. The system isn't perfect, but its far better than what we had before. If the BCS was still in place, its pretty much all but guaranteed that Alabama/Clemson would be the the title game, end of story.

I'd love to see the playoffs expand to 8 teams though.

Disagree, we should have kept the BCS selection process in place and taken the top 4 or 8 for the CFP. This committee voting is a absolute joke.

 

[Telx1]

Disagree, we should have kept the BCS selection process in place and taken the top 4 or 8 for the CFP. This committee voting is a absolute joke.

That is the exact correct solution.

 

[Telx1]

BCS selection process with top 8 teams for a NC playoff is the best answer going forward.

 

[NDVT]

"At least we don't have to get the doors blown off by Alabama again."

Amen. I was waiting for someone else to say this.

 

[echowaker]

"At least we don't have to get the doors blown off by Alabama again."

Amen. I was waiting for someone else to say this.

why would you like a clearly idiotic post ?

 

[ftnfan62]

ND struggled against Wake (IMHO) but the BC game was really never in doubt. That could have easily been a 30-3 game so it tells me the "committee" doesn't really watch. OK go extremely lucky. TCU lobs that pass over the defender and they lose. I don't really have a huge issue with MSU as they beat OSU but they did lose to Nebraska. Iowa I have no idea what they are thinking. For all the posturing about SOS, they did not back it up. Just goes to show you we would be better scheduling 1 to 2 20-25 teams traditionally and staying away from the top 15.

However, if ND beats Stanford I still don't see them being excluded. You could have 4, top 25 wins. 1 loss to #1 and beat both teams playing for the Pac 10 championship and the American Conf championship. Only AL has a better SOS and ND will be 11-1 with a last play loss to #1. If they do, its all about the conferences. In that case, they should just move to the top 8 getting in (1 from each major conf) and a few at large.

 

[francade]

Count me in the group that didn't like the BCS. W/ that said, I don't agree that they got it right more often than not. How exactly is that even assessed w/ only two teams getting the nod? How do we know that the teams left out wouldn't have won or the teams that lost wouldn't have won had they played a different opponent? Again, don't see how anyone can say they got it right more than not. There's absolutely no way to validate that.

 

[NDSMC78]

Count me in the group that didn't like the BCS. W/ that said, I don't agree that they got it right more often than not. How exactly is that even assessed w/ only two teams getting the nod? How do we know that the teams left out wouldn't have won or the teams that lost wouldn't have won had they played a different opponent? Again, don't see how anyone can say they got it right more than not. There's absolutely no way to validate that.

There's no way to ever validate that the right teams were selected, whether it be 2 or 4 or 8. That why we have so many different opinions being expressed here now.

 

[kellys heroes 35]

BCS selection process with top 8 teams for a NC playoff is the best answer going forward.

Agreed Tex

Style points?

Iowa needed a FG late to beat Pitt @ Iowa 24-21 -. We were up late @ Pitt 42-17 .

We beat WF by 21 and played like shit and Wake was bleeding the clock the whole game to keep it close -- WF lost to Clemson by 20

This is a pathetic farce as fballcoach stated earlier when winning is not the only thing that matters then the process becomes way too subjective .

 

[francade]

There's no way to ever validate that the right teams were selected, whether it be 2 or 4 or 8. That why we have so many different opinions being expressed here now.

That's right, but the 2 team system, as opposed to a 4 or 8 team system, is less likely to "get it right". The BCS was a flawed system based on good intentions but bad foresight.

 

[NDSMC78]

That's right, but the 2 team system, as opposed to a 4 or 8 team system, is less likely to "get it right". The BCS was a flawed system based on good intentions but bad foresight.

I don't know about that. I suppose we could argue forever concerning which were the two best teams, or the four best teams, in a given year. I personally don't like having only 12 or 13 people vote on who is going to be in the playoffs. When you have a lot of voters, as we did when the participants were determined by polls, bias tended to be diluted. Not so now with such a small number of voters.

 

[francade]

I don't know about that. I suppose we could argue forever concerning which were the two best teams, or the four best teams, in a given year. I personally don't like having only 12 or 13 people vote on who is going to be in the playoffs. When you have a lot of voters, as we did when the participants were determined by polls, bias tended to be diluted. Not so now with such a small number of voters.

I don't like 12 people deciding it either but there is no debate that a 2 team system is less likely to get it right simply based on the math. Leaving #3 & #4 out is worse than leaving #5 & #6 (or #9 & #10). The complaints get less warranted as you increase the teams. #3 has a more valid complaint than #5 and certainly more than #9. Trying to pinpoint the the two top teams every year was asking for controversy and proved way too difficult to do. Again. I don't like that 12 people decide, but the BCS way sucked.

 

[NDSMC78]

Fran, it depends on the year. In some years, there are only two legitimate contenders. In other years, there can be four or even more.

 

[francade]

Fran, it depends on the year. In some years, there are only two legitimate contenders. In other years, there can be four or even more.

Agreed, but that's the point. To try and argue that the BCS "got it right more often than not" is ignorant & unprovable. And to have a system that gets it right only when there r two "legitimate" contenders is a dumb way to settle a nat'l championship, don't you think?

 

[NDSMC78]

Agreed, but that's the point. To try and argue that the BCS "got it right more often than not" is ignorant & unprovable. And to have a system that gets it right only when there r two "legitimate" contenders is a dumb way to settle a nat'l championship, don't you think?

No, I don't. I don't think that having more and more teams in a playoff is necessarily the best way to select a champion. The NCAA basketball tournament has 68 teams and we end up with nine seeds winning championships.

 

[francade]

No, I don't. I don't think that having more and more teams in a playoff is necessarily the best way to select a champion. The NCAA basketball tournament has 68 teams and we end up with nine seeds winning championships.

I'm not sure where the 68 teams analogy comes into play. No one is talking about 68 teams, at least I'm not. I was simply saying that having two teams, the way the BCS did it, is less likely to "get it right" than a four or eight team playoff. That's mathematically undeniable. The BCS was blown up for a reason & I, for one, am happy they came to their senses. Is this system great? Absolutely not, & I agree that having 12 people decide is flawed, but it's better than the polls picking two teams at the end of the season and the rest of the just as worthy contenders end up getting snubbed.