The Problem with a Playoff

[King Crimson]

in Cicero's Ars Rhetorica, this is what is called a "false dilemma" strategy:

"Just try to create an eight-team playoff based on latest rankings (November 23rd). Should a one-loss Georgia Tech (10-1, #7) get in but not a one-loss Pittsburgh (9-1 #9)? Should a two-loss Oregon (9-2, #8) get in but not one-loss Pittsburgh or any of the SEVEN teams with two losses: Ohio State (10-2, #10), Iowa (10-2, #11), Oklahoma State (9-2, #12), Penn State (10-2, #13), BYU (9-2, #19), Utah, (9-2, #19), or Houston (9-2, #23)? If you think the BCS is controversial, try sorting that out. A playoff would guarantee bigger problems, more controversy, more disappointed teams and more frustrated fans."

any moron can see that arguing about who's in at #8 or 9 in a bracket is qualitatively different than who is in or not #2 or 3 in a one game 1 vs. 2 deal is done situation....that is, unless you are defending something that is irrational to begin with.

[Dinsdale]

While I agree with KC (and am always a sucker for a Cicero(the real one) "false dilemma" reference), it boils down to what I've been saying for a loooong time...

wanna settle these details?

Fucking play somebody. Yes, I'm talking toy YOU, SEC, Texas, et al.

And if they actually gave poll votes to ethical people with brains, it wouldn't be a problem, since an ethical pollster would punish the cupcakers.


Sin,
Dude whose team has Portland State on next year's schedule (but a trip to Neyland to offset it... but go ahead and cast that first cupcake-stone, SECBSH)

[Dinsdale]

Dude -- Tennessee can't handle UCLFuckingA.

[War Stoops]

I normally don't do stupid shit like this but I left a message on the site...

If I may, I'd like to totally obliterate your premise from the home page that implies there are seven problems with a playoff that "playoff advocates can't agree on". As if total harmony is the real goal. The perfect is the enemy of the good my friends...but I digress. Back to your list.

You: Who would participate?

Me: I guess we'd come up with some sort of ranking system to determine who participates. You know, kind of like the BCS Rankings.

You: How many automatic qualifiers?

Me: More than two. (What's up, Auburn 2004!)

You: What would be the criteria to qualify?

Me: My toddler noticed that this "problem" looks like nothing more than a restatement of the first "problem" above. Nice try. Oh, and same answer by the way.

You: What would be the criteria for seedings?

Me: Gee, if only we had other sports that used playoff systems so we could make an informed decision here. What the heck, I'll give it a try. How about we give automatic bids to the six major conferences, two bids to the highest ranked non-major conferences and four at-large bids. Then we use the BCS rankings to seed. With a fair system like this, you might even get the AP to start returning your phone calls.

You: Where would the games be played?

Me: First two rounds at the home of the higher seed. Semis and finals at neutral sites. That was hard.

You: When would the games be played?

Me: Semis on January 1st, work forwards and backwards from there. Don't even start with the travel and finals talk. There are basketball players who spend more time in buses than in class rooms.

You: If you could resolve all that would everyone be satisfied? NO!!

Me: Correct for once. But even the dumbest plankton in the arctic ocean can see that an argument between 12 & 13 is less controversial than an argument between 2 & 3.

This whole site is just laughable. You don't want a playoff because of money, plain and simple. You control the pie and you like to decide how it's split. A playoff may not be perfect but it would take the sport to new heights. Each and every one of your arguments is rubbish and can be easily refuted. This kind of propaganda would make Tokyo Rose proud.

Now I will cease beating my head against a corrupt, lying, greedy brick wall.

[Dinsdale]

Fucking play somebody. Yes, I'm talking to YOU, SEC, Texas, et al everybody.

Fixed that for you. I don't know...maybe I'm wrong. Why don't you point out the courageous programs that lay it all out on the line and play the toughest possible teams they can wrastle into their stadiums.

Why don't you do a search of this forum, since Vannar has laid this out quite succinctly in multiple threads, Mr Texas Is Undefeated So I'll Post.

Fucking A, the OOC Pansies vs. OOC Badasses has been discussed at great lengths here, on at least a weekly basis.


Sorry bro, but that was a motherfucking stupid post.

I'll help you out, since you're a driveby gravytrainer:

Tough scheduling:

USC, Oregon, UDub, Miami, several others


Fucking Pansies:

Let's see...

Texas had the fucking gall to put Louisiana Monroe, UTEP, and Central fucking Florida on their schedule.


Any other really fucking stupid motherfucking questions, or are you done acting the tard?

[King Crimson]

Texas has always played a weak OOC. I've been posting about this for years. back in the day, they always had OU in Dallas to buoy it (which is respectable).....but no one cared that big roadie to Rice or TCU was a stadium half-full of UT fans. because the SWC was a regional conference. outside the Ohio State series and meatgrinder Arkansas, UT don't play anyone since UCLA put 66 on them at DKR.

queue UT fan telling us about all the new hot shot teams on their OOC (same riff as last year and the one before), that weren't on the schedule this season and aren't next year....

[Terry in Crapchester]

I still like the idea of a 16-team format, modified version of the Wetzel Plan. Automatic bids to every conference champion finishing in the Top 25, at-large bids to the remaining teams. This year (right now, anyway) it would look like:

#1 Florida vs.
#16 Houston

#8 Oregon vs.
#9 Pittsburgh

#4 TCU vs.
#13 Penn State

#5 Cincinnati vs.
#12 Oklahoma State

#6 Boise State vs.
#11 Iowa

#3 Alabama vs.
#14 Virginia Tech

#7 Georgia Tech vs.
#10 Ohio State

#2 Texas vs.
#15 LSU

(I switched rankings for Texas and Alabama to avoid a first-round Alabama-LSU matchup, but other than that left everything as it is.)

[Left Seater]

If there are any more teams involved than 4 in a playoff then count me out. 4 teams or a plus 1 then where can I sign the petition?

The more teams you add to the playoff the worse the schedules get. Does anyone really think a two loss team should be in the hunt for a title?

[H4ever]

I still like the idea of a 16-team format, modified version of the Wetzel Plan. Automatic bids to every conference champion finishing in the Top 25, at-large bids to the remaining teams. This year (right now, anyway) it would look like:

#1 Florida vs.
#16 Houston

#8 Oregon vs.
#9 Pittsburgh

#4 TCU vs.
#13 Penn State

#5 Cincinnati vs.
#12 Oklahoma State

#6 Boise State vs.
#11 Iowa

#3 Alabama vs.
#14 Virginia Tech

#7 Georgia Tech vs.
#10 Ohio State

#2 Texas vs.
#15 LSU

(I switched rankings for Texas and Alabama to avoid a first-round Alabama-LSU matchup, but other than that left everything as it is.)

First off, Rack W.Stoops! Well done, Sir.

Secondly, what could be more exciting than a month of college football for all the marbles like the bracket scenario above suggested by Terry?

Shit....can you imagine all the drama and suspense watching things unfold? It would be time for teams like Boise State to put up or STFU. Say Boise squeaks by Iowa by a point and then runs into a hot Georgia Tech team who bitchslaps them all the back to that God-awful blue turf they play on at home?

Maybe Cincy gets run out of the stadium by a lower-seeded, good Big 12 team like Okie-State? Every now and then you would your cinderella teams like say a TCU who proves they are for real by making it to the championship and losing by a point?

I am frothing at the mouth for something like this. Any real fan would be, too. FUCK!!!!!

[Dinsdale]

Shit....can you imagine all the drama and suspense watching things unfold? It would be time for teams like Boise State to put up or STFU. Say Boise squeaks by Iowa by a point and then runs into a hot Georgia Tech team who bitchslaps them all the back to that God-awful blue turf they play on at home?

The larger formet also has another bonus -- it would remove the incentive to cupcake it.

If a loss or two by a good team didn't automatically knock a team out of contention, we might actually get to see Texas and Florida play someone decent... which would be kinda nice to see from the perceived "elite" teams.

I don't really have a huge problem with the current "every game is a playoff game" setup, but I'm not averse to getting a few more teams in the mix either.