Playoff consensus reached for college football

[MattUM2]

CHICAGO -- The BCS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick on Wednesday endorsed a seeded four-team playoff model for college football that would begin for the 2014 season.

The commissioners' consensus must be approved by the BCS presidential oversight committee, which meets June 26 in Washington D.C. If approved, the four-team playoff would replace the BCS system, which has been in place since 1998.

"We're very unified," Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said. "There are issues that have yet to be finalized. There's always devil in the detail, from the model to the selection process, but clearly we've made a lot of progress."

Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott said the discussion centers on a four-team playoff inside the existing bowl structure with the championship game up for bid nationally.

Sources told ESPN that under the recommended model, the four teams would be selected by a committee that would consider certain criteria such as conference championships and strength of schedule.

The BCS commissioners have met five times since the national title game in New Orleans, including a four-hour session Wednesday. SEC commissioner Mike Slive, who likened the process to a marathon, said, "My hope is we've done 26 (miles). My hope is we have .2 to go."

The presidential oversight committee still is expected to discuss multiple models next week, including a plus-one format proposed by presidents from the Big Ten and Pac 12.

"The fact that there will be a full and complete discussion is totally appropriate," Slive said. "Obviously, we have put forth a consensus four-team playoff model, and we wouldn't do that if we didn't feel it was appropriate."

- According to CBS, the plan is for a selection committee. Way to screw it up, college football. Why would you use a system so subjective that can easily be influenced by conference ties and biased affiliations over a modified BCS ranking?

- Say goodbye to ACC

[Giantsfan1080]

I can't stand that ND has a seat at this with the conference commishes. Pisses me off to no end.

[Brent]

Originally Posted by Giantsfan1080

I can't stand that ND has a seat at this with the conference commishes. Pisses me off to no end.

$$$$$$$$$$$

the school has it and the alumni have it.

[Shane P. Hallam]

Originally Posted by MattUM2

- According to CBS, the plan is for a selection committee. Way to screw it up, college football. Why would you use a system so subjective that can easily be influenced by conference ties and biased affiliations over a modified BCS ranking?

- Say goodbye to ACC

Yes because BCS Rankings, not subjective!

[Borat]

Originally Posted by MattUM2

Why would you use a system so subjective that can easily be influenced by conference ties and biased affiliations over a modified BCS ranking?

Because the chief fundraisers school presidents still want to control where all the money will go while simultaneously giving the public a faux playoff.

[Bert Macklin]

[JHL6719]

Originally Posted by Shane P. Hallam

Yes because BCS Rankings, not subjective!

The coach's poll is perhaps subjective, however, the computers were put in the formula as the tiebreaker to consider strength of schedule.

A "selections committee" is much easier to corrupt than even the current BCS system.

The committee approach might work in a format where you have 60+ teams in a playoff (such as college basketball, etc.) but everybody in the country usually knows who the top 4 teams are anyway... with the 4th best team rarely ever having a legitimate case for playing for a national title to begin with... much less "conference champions" from weak conferences.

Welcome to "football by committee" and an "all inclusive" brand of football under the guise of egalitarianism that in reality is designed to keep the best conference from having more than one participant.

[JHL6719]

If there absolutely must be playoffs, nothing makes sense except for the 4 best teams, period.

[tjsunstein]

Originally Posted by JHL6719

If there absolutely must be playoffs, nothing makes sense except for the 4 best teams, period.

Best teams according to what, who?

[JHL6719]

Originally Posted by tjsunstein

Best teams according to what, who?

Exactly.

Whether it's according to the coach's poll, media poll, computers, etc. as is currently in the BCS formula... or according to a new "selection committee" which they're pushing for under a new format, it still just boils down to someone's opinion doesn't it?

In other words, it's hard to have your cake and eat it too. If you're going to have a playoff under the guise of egalitarianism and an all inclusive format where everyone supposedly has a shot, then you have to do away with polls, committees, and votes all together. You have to leave the opinions (and/or bias) out of it.... otherwise you're trying to reinvent the wheel.

You're doing the same thing you were doing just under a different set of rules.


For example, strength of schedule determined by a computer seems a fine and unbiased perspective, at least in theory. The problem with that is, a team's strength of schedule is based on who they played. Well, how strong their opponents were goes right to how they're ranked by subjective human votes to begin with.

It's a continuous cycle of nonsense, they just keep trying to find a different way to disguise it. Only now it's done with the intent of keeping a powerful conference from having more than one participant with a legitimate chance to play for a national title.

The only way a playoff makes sense is for the 4 best teams to be in it, period. Conference championships are irrelevant. Just because you won your conference doesn't mean you're one of the 4 best teams in the country, or even close to it.

The next best sensible thing would be to have an 8 team playoff, but if you go that route you're again allowing a powerful conference like the SEC to have more teams participating again, which the Big-10, etc. isn't going to go for... and defeats the entire purpose of the current proposal put on the table to begin with.

[Brothgar]

[Smooth Criminal]

It's not perfect, but I think it's better than nothing. I won't feel bad for any team that falls outside of the top 4 and gets left out. If you run the table you won't be outside the top 4 unless you have absolutely no credibility to their schedule.

Not perfect at all, but better and I'm excited for it to start.

[G Mobile]

Originally Posted by Smooth Criminal

It's not perfect, but I think it's better than nothing. I won't feel bad for any team that falls outside of the top 4 and gets left out. If you run the table you won't be outside the top 4 unless you have absolutely no credibility to their schedule.

Not perfect at all, but better and I'm excited for it to start.

I completely agree. Its not a perfect solution but its a step in the right direction. I'd much rather argue over the 4th best team to get in than the 2nd best.

I still want a 8 team playoff, not too big but still possible. Have a 4 game weekend like the NFL playoffs, then a 2 game Saturday the next week, a week off and then the championship. Its not like there isn't a huge amount of time between the end of the season and the bowl games.

[Brothgar]

[gpngc]

You guys got it.

So next year's Stanford gets a chance at a title even though it didn't deserve it.

[hawkeye123]

So what happens to the teams outside the top 4 who have good seasons?

[Mufasa]

Originally Posted by hawkeye123

So what happens to the teams outside the top 4 who have good seasons?

Bowl games.

[brat316]

hey playoffs. Lol Big East gets less money than being in BCS.

[OSUGiants17]

Glad we got playoffs, but 4 teams is too little. I can't wait for it to turn into 8 with the 6 division winners from the Big East, 10, 12, Pac 12, SEC and ACC and then 2 at Large teams with the seeds based on record. Bowl games for remaining teams. To me, that's the best way to do it.