Don't be so sure of that. I could see Alabama getting in with an 11-1 record over a 2 loss SEC champion Ole Miss. Wouldn't be fair but it could happen
If that scenario plays out, I think you will see no SEC teams in the playoff before you would see an SEC West runner up in the playoff. The committee last year clearly stated that weight is given to conference champions. I'm not saying it's impossible because anything is possible, but until I see evidence that it happens, I don't believe it. That very scenario happened multiple times in the BCS era, BTW, so once again, I don't get the love for the BCS.
The formula for picking the teams under the BCS system was OK. The problem was that it only picked 2 teams instead of 4 or 8
I don't like the subjective quality the BCS provided. Once you get to 8 teams, it should be 5 power conference champions, then committee picks 3 at large and seeds them. Like the basketball tournament. Everybody has a change at an automatic bid, but if you don't get one of those, you can get a spot based upon the season you had. If you don't win your conference, you have no argument.
Unless you include every team someone will always be left out. There will always be a team crying they should have been in, it happens with the basketball tournament every year even with the absurd number of teams that get in.
lol probably a little bit. Can't deny that. My point is still valid, though. I would like to see voting with less basis on names and past accomplishments. Probably the only reason Bama would not get in this year if they don't win the SEC is bc they would have at least 2 losses. They, along with Ohio State and others get the benefit of the doubt based on previous season's results. It's not suppose to be about that.
You and I agree of that. I would like to see no voting or polls. 5 power conference champions. Committee picks 3 at large then seed them. There is no other way to really do it.
Sounds like divison champs and wild cards from the NFL. Really the closer you have it to the system the NFL has, the better, imo. You would probably have more champs like last year's Ohio State, who didn't have the undefeated season but got hot and played the best ball at the end. That's the best way to settle it "on the field". 2011 Giants are a perfect example. Some don't like that a 9-7 team won the SB. They did beat the 15-1 Packers in Lambeau in the playoffs and beat NE at NE and again in the SB. 9-7 or not, they were the best team that year.
LSU lost 3 games in 2001 but they rallied and ended up as SEC champions. With an NFL style playoff system they would have been in it, at least as a wild card. That year the only team that might have been better at the end of the season was Miami. Would have been fun to see LSU and the U in the title game.
I actually agree 100%. I think trying to set up a system where you determine "the best team" or "which teams deserve it" is nonsense. The best you can hope for is to crown a champion and you have to live with whomever end up being that team. Yeah, the Saints BOMBED that Giants team in Superdome that season. Do I think the Saints were better than the Giants that year?? Yes, but it doesn't matter. You have an opportunity to prove it and if you can't beat Alex Friggin' Smith you don't deserve to win the Super Bowl. The Giants beat every team in front of them and as much as I hate to say it, hats off to them. They deserved it.
