Re: The way the college football post season should look
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

so, you don't think head-to-head play is the best way to find out who the better team is?

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhhh... no.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, I think if you want to find out who's better, Team A or Team B, the best way to find out is to have them play each other.

you would rather look at the #'s and try to infer who's better?

Re: The way the college football post season should look
 

Limiting yourself to just a head to head match is idiotic. You have to consider all the data.

Re: The way the college football post season should look
 

[ QUOTE ]
Limiting yourself to just a head to head match is idiotic. You have to consider all the data.

[/ QUOTE ]

why do I need to consider all the data? why do I need to consider any data?

maybe we have a philosophical difference on the point of the playoffs.

the 01 Rams dominated the 01 Pats in various stats that year. if they played that Super Bowl 10 times, the Rams probably win 7. but none of that really matters to me. did the Rams have a better season? Yep. Were they more talented? yep.

but could they step up, make key adjustments in the heat of the moment, and play their best when they needed to, on the one day of the year that really mattered?

No. so they were not deserving champions.

Re: The way the college football post season should look
 

jstnrgrs,

What you must consider is that the machine that is the College Football bowl season is a cash cow. No one will watch USC vs. Ark State. Sure, it might be nice to have some of those conference champions of the weaker conferences in there to make them feel like D1A teams, when in reality, they aren't. Big Matchups between Big teams are what people want to see. Sure, it's nice to throw in an underdog in there, but they sure as hell better be undefeated (see 2004 Utes).

Re: The way the college football post season should look
 

[ QUOTE ]
It makes no sense to give the sun belt champ an automatic bid.

[/ QUOTE ]

If there were a 16 team playoff, I think it would make sense to give EVERY conference champ an automatic bid. Otherwise you REALLY are marginalizing the regular season.

Re: The way the college football post season should look
 

[ QUOTE ]
jstnrgrs,

What you must consider is that the machine that is the College Football bowl season is a cash cow. No one will watch USC vs. Ark State. Sure, it might be nice to have some of those conference champions of the weaker conferences in there to make them feel like D1A teams, when in reality, they aren't. Big Matchups between Big teams are what people want to see. Sure, it's nice to throw in an underdog in there, but they sure as hell better be undefeated (see 2004 Utes).

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, of course the 1 vs 16 game isn't likely to get much interest, but that will always be the case. It gives a team (who did win their conference) a chance. There would be planty of great matchups in the first round, and in the later rounds, the match-ups would be fantastic.

Re: The way the college football post season should look
 

arkansas state isn't even one of the 100 best teams in the nation!

Re: The way the college football post season should look
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It makes no sense to give the sun belt champ an automatic bid.

[/ QUOTE ]

If there were a 16 team playoff, I think it would make sense to give EVERY conference champ an automatic bid. Otherwise you REALLY are marginalizing the regular season.

[/ QUOTE ]

if there were a 16 team playoff, it should include the 16 best teams in the country, regardless of conference.

peronnally, I think an 8 team, or even 4 game playoff is ideal. no more than 4 or 8 teams can ever lay claim to having a great season.

Re: The way the college football post season should look
 

You're overglorifying the head to head matchup. It's not all adjustments and desire, etc. It's also the way an oblong ball bounces, how well a ref sees a play, and plenty of other things. There's plenty of variance involved in football, too. <insert poker metaphor>

Re: The way the college football post season should look
 

[ QUOTE ]
arkansas state isn't even one of the 100 best teams in the nation!

[/ QUOTE ]

Peter Wolfe (my favorite of the computer rankings) has them at 97.

Their low ranking is the reason that they would be matched up against USC.

If everyone really prefer's a system in which only the best teams get in, then I think that the system we have, or one of my many other (much more radical) suggestions would be the way to go.