New playoff doesn't solve the problem

Fluff, fluff, and more fluff here. The math remains pretty solid on the fact that 4 is better than 2.

QUOTE(#1):

Originally posted 08:29 AM ET  06.27 by Armpit

Fluff, fluff, and more fluff here. The math remains pretty solid on the fact that 4 is better than 2.

Agree. It may not be perfect, but they have a lot better chance of getting it right with four than two. My hope is the selection criteria eliminates some of the crappy OOC games. Oh, and

CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT SUCKS

QUOTE(#2):

Originally posted 08:32 AM ET  06.27 by colonel

It will NEVER solve it, why bother. They will keep adjusting it every couple of years till they have it ruined like the BB is. Wait and see.Go back to the old bowl system!!!!!!

Agree there. Prefer the old system to the BCS. Will wait and see how a 4 team playoff ends up in reality before judging it. Hard to see how it could possibly be worse than the BCS, but it could still be less fun than the old bowls.

QUOTE(#2):

Originally posted 08:32 AM ET  06.27 by colonel

It will NEVER solve it, why bother. They will keep adjusting it every couple of years till they have it ruined like the BB is. Wait and see.Go back to the old bowl system!!!!!!

Some of the bowls better look at their hole cards. The new SEC/Big 12 bowl (whatever it will be called) will allow the two conferences to keep a lot more of the bowl $$$$. That is a new dynamic at work.

QUOTE(#2):

Originally posted 08:32 AM ET  06.27 by colonel

It will NEVER solve it, why bother.

Because improvement was needed.

People gotta understand that there's no "solution", no system that's perfect, and none that will suit all parties. Whining will continue no matter what, so be happy there's progress in a direction most people can at least support.

QUOTE(#5):

Originally posted 08:37 AM ET  06.27 by Deep Creek

Some of the bowls better look at their hole cards. The new SEC/Big 12 bowl (whatever it will be called) will allow the two conferences to keep a lot more of the bowl $$$$. That is a new dynamic at work.

The good ol' boy system at some of these bowls got flushed with the new bowl announcement. Thank goodness. Those terrds were running wild and loose with tons o' money, and it needed to stop.

QUOTE(#3):

Originally posted 08:34 AM ET  06.27 by Deep Creek

CONFERENCE REALIGNMENT SUCKS

I think you will see more...especially if they make CC one of the criteria. Already seeing it in a different way since BSU has opted, apparently, to NOT go to the Big Least (or ACC, can't remember). You are going to see mid-level schools trying to position themselves in a smaller conference to try to gt a better record and win the CC...

Think an Auburn/Miss State/Baylor/TTU moving to the WAC/C-USA/Sun Belt....

QUOTE(#8):

Originally posted 08:41 AM ET  06.27 by BackRoads

I think you will see more...especially if they make CC one of the criteria. Already seeing it in a different way since BSU has opted, apparently, to NOT go to the Big Least (or ACC, can't remember). You are going to see mid-level schools trying to position themselves in a smaller conference to try to gt a better record and win the CC...Think an Auburn/Miss State/Baylor/TTU moving to the WAC/C-USA/Sun Belt....

Winning the CC will be way down on the criteria list. Hell, they might as well make it one big arse conference since winning the conference won't be that important.

If SOS is a priority, the Boise's of the world should punish them if many of their conferences members are weak and it should punish the biggies from scheduling cream puffs.

Note the SHOULD part.

QUOTE(#9):

Originally posted 08:48 AM ET  06.27 by Deep Creek

Winning the CC will be way down on the criteria list. Hell, they might as well make it one big arse conference since winning the conference won't be that important. If SOS is a priority, the Boise's of the world should punish them if many of their conferences members are weak and it should punish the biggies from scheduling cream puffs. Note the SHOULD part.

According to reports, they are leaning toward CC's being as important as SOS...just whut I rud someres...

QUOTE(#10):

Originally posted 08:48 AM ET  06.27 by colonel

BUT, this is NOT improvement!

LOL! It's all opinions, sir. Nothing more, nor less. Yours is as good as any, and better than many.



Just not in this case... ;-P

QUOTE(#11):

Originally posted 08:51 AM ET  06.27 by BackRoads

According to reports, they are leaning toward CC's being as important as SOS...just whut I rud someres...

It'll depend on the conference. One such as a C-USA conference champ won't have a chance versus a B1G/SEC/Big 12/Pac 12 one loss runner up...even if that runner up had a favorable conference draw (like UGA last year) and/or a weak OOC schedule. Don't think a committee will have the cajones to shun such a runner up.

QUOTE(#8):

Originally posted 08:41 AM ET  06.27 by BackRoads

I think you will see more...especially if they make CC one of the criteria. Already seeing it in a different way since BSU has opted, apparently, to NOT go to the Big Least (or ACC, can't remember). You are going to see mid-level schools trying to position themselves in a smaller conference to try to gt a better record and win the CC...Think an Auburn/Miss State/Baylor/TTU moving to the WAC/C-USA/Sun Belt....

Waiting to see how this plays out. I do hope BSU and SDSU both stay in the MWC. If they do the MWC should be a better overall CFB than the BE.

QUOTE(#9):

Originally posted 08:48 AM ET  06.27 by Deep Creek

Winning the CC will be way down on the criteria list. Hell, they might as well make it one big arse conference since winning the conference won't be that important. If SOS is a priority, the Boise's of the world should punish them if many of their conferences members are weak and it should punish the biggies from scheduling cream puffs. Note the SHOULD part.

Everything I read has said they will some up with some RPI equivalent that SOS will play a huge part. It was mentioned that away wins will have a component and then pob the CC.

QUOTE(#1):

Originally posted 08:29 AM ET  06.27 by Armpit

Fluff, fluff, and more fluff here. The math remains pretty solid on the fact that 4 is better than 2.

Yes indeed, I agree. IMO it's not a perfect playoff system, but it sure in the hell is going to be better than the current one.