Quote:
Originally Posted by moon
But that happens already.
USC lost to Washington and that hasn't stopped them from being in the running for the National Championship.
In 2007 LSU had two bad losses and they still won the NC.
|
USC has no hope for a National Championship unless two of Florida, Texas, Alabama, Iowa, Kansas, Cincy, and all other BCS undefeated lose. They still have a chance, but losing one game takes their destiny out of their control.
LSU winning the NC with 2 losses was a complete fluke and likely doesn't happen anytime soon. Either way, the same scenario could easily happen in a playoff where there's a handful of unbeatens and one-loss teams and a crapload of 3-loss teams.
Quote:
|
If you are a two lose #9 or #10 team you have a lot less claim to be in the running for a NC then a 1 loss #3 or #4 team. You may have some whining but it would be from teams that have a lot less to whine about.
|
Well, for one the whining from mid-majors would go up about tenfold since they have zero shot of making the playoffs in an 8-team playoff.
An 8-team playoff will NEVER work. The universally agreed upon way to do it is have your 6 conference winners and 2 at-large bids in it. Those 2 at-large bids are always going to be the 1-loss teams from the latest two power conferences (right now, Big 12 and SEC). So what you get is no chance for a mid-major to play in the playoff, and a ton of teams from power conferences whining not about being at-large bids and/or the fact that a 3 or 4 loss ACC or Big East (for example, they're the most logical candidates lately) got in and they didn't.
A 12-team playoff would never happen (byes) so that leaves either a 4 or 16 team playoff. A 4 team playoff would be better replaced with a plus one. For one thing, the logistics of it are a lot simpler. You can still have all your bowl games and there's just a Championship game played a week later.
A 16-team playoff would absolutely destroy college football's regular season. The vast majority of the field would consist of 2 and 3 loss teams. Do they really deserve a second chance? And, again, those early season games lose all their luster as big time programs can still lose twice (!!) more and still have a shot at the playoffs. Go back and look at the final BCS standings for the last couple seasons and look at how many 9-3 teams there are. There's about 10 every year and maybe 3-4 spots in the playoffs for those teams. You can say that it's 3-loss teams whining instead of 1-loss teams now, but there's also plenty more of those teams. The outcry would be hilarious.
The real key is that if you can afford 3 losses and still get into the playoffs what's the point in scheduling any decent non-conference opposition? All that would happen in that the major football powers would schedule nothing OOC and still get in the playoffs even if they have a average 5-3 conference record since they went 4-0 against four cupcakes.