Almost all the semifinal games are blowouts. Only three of the now 15 semifinal games have been within single digits and the average margin of victory is more than 21 points. The top two teams are almost always head and shoulders above everyone else.
What the CFP has shown us is the BCS was all we needed.
- Thread starter FlotownDawg
- Start date
Disagree. The #4 team has won the whole damn thing twice in 8 years. But more often than not (including this year), there are 3 deserving teams and they have to scramble and just throw a 4th in there who probably isn’t up to snuff. Rarely have there been only 2 deserving teams. How would you have figured out who to kick out between UGA and Michigan this year?
Would be a bigger blowout if that holding on the Michigan DB would have have been called. Ended up forcing a Georgia FG. “They” don’t want blowouts, but this looks inevitable.
My biggest crusade in life is to dispel the notion that the BCS calculation was in any way good. The 6 computer formulas included were not mathematically valid (for example, they were forbidden to use margin of victory in the formula!), and more importantly, only 1 of the 6 even made their formula public, so who even knows if they ever had a mistake.
The 1 public formula did have a mistake one time, which caused the BCS to have to amend their "final" rankings the next day. We'll never know if ever happened with the other 5.
BCS got it right all but one year. I just think it was better than 13 people getting in a closed room making the decision. They have their favorites.
Doesn't the fact that #3 is kicking #2's *** right now directly disprove your point?
This is the 5th time in 8 years that the championship game will include either either the #3 or #4 team. You have to assume it would have happened some during the BCS Era too, but those teams never got the chance to prove it.
This is the 5th time in 8 years that the championship game will include either either the #3 or #4 team. You have to assume it would have happened some during the BCS Era too, but those teams never got the chance to prove it.
We would have said the same thing in 2014 and 2017 if the BCS had been in place that year.
You would’ve kicked out Georgia because Bama already kicked their *** this year. Bama vs Michigan for the Natty. Why should Georgia get a second chance?
1) Because they are a lot better football team than Michigan, as anyone who saw both teams play all year could obviously see. And that is being proven tonight.
2) Because the SEC Championship game isn’t a playoff game….it’s not a win or go home scenario in any official sense. The goal of any championship system is to pick the best however many teams….if those teams are in the same conference, then so be it.
People act like rematches for the national title are some novel phenomena that just started happening recently. Happened way back in 1996 with FSU and Florida State before the CFP or the BCS. The possibility is always going to be there under any system.
Last edited:
Had the BCS been in effect from 2014 through 2021, it would have failed to pick the 2 best teams in 5 of the 8 years, but we never would have known.
It's silly to think that it went 15/16 in 1998-2013 when it went 3/8 in 2014-2021.
The OP has a point. Bama and Georgia have been the only 2 good teams all year. Anyone that has watched football already knew that. Tonight just proves what we all knew already. Michigan and Cincy are no better than 20 other teams.
I’m not so sure the BCS would have put Michigan in over Georgia. With 4 teams it’s easier not to worry about that but when there’s only two it could have come out correct with bama and Georgia
The BCS would have matched up Alabama and Michigan (assuming no mistakes in the Five Secret Polls), it would have been an Alabama blowout, and everyone would say "The BCS got it right again!!!"
If it was expanded to four teams Michigan, GA and Bama would have gotten in. Possibly not Cincinnati but ND.
It’s not a secret formula. It would have been Bama and Michigan. In fact, the Top 7 between CFP committee and the BCS would have been the exact same this year. See link below:
https://fansided.com/2021/12/05/cfp-rankings-2021-bcs-comparison/amp/
Those are only projections because the Harris Poll doesn't exist anymore, but it's still probably correct.
The "secret formula" refers to 5 of the 6 computer polls that go into the formula don't have public, auditable formulas.
I’m serious. Almost all the semifinals are blowouts! That it fact. BCS was the best. Let’s go back to it. And yes, I’m drunk.
But they're not always blowouts by the #1 and #2 teams. Tonight we had a blowout by a #3 team that wouldn't have been in the BCS conversation, and a few years ago the #4 seed blew out the #1 team.
But Bama already blew out Georgia. They should be the champs if they beat Michigan. Georgia shouldn’t get a second chance.
Why shouldn't they? Alabama gets a second chance after their [much worse] loss to Texas A&M.
But they’re not playing A&M again. They’re playing Georgia. Who they already blew out. And I hate Bama. But it’s true.
Go back and look at all the BCS controversies…. The bcs was a flawed system. The 98,01,04, and 11 seasons especially.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowl_Championship_Series_controversies
The more teams competing for championships, the better the sport. I don’t understand why college football is the only sport that can’t figure out an effective way to decide a champion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowl_Championship_Series_controversies
The more teams competing for championships, the better the sport. I don’t understand why college football is the only sport that can’t figure out an effective way to decide a champion
Last edited:
I’ll just add to this conversation that reducing the playoffs is the worst idea. The NFL doesn’t choose the best team based on regular season for the superbowl.
Why is it that for years the FCS has had the right system? I watch more of their playoffs than i do any of the bowl games. Much more entertaining.
Why is it that for years the FCS has had the right system? I watch more of their playoffs than i do any of the bowl games. Much more entertaining.
If I recall, and I could easily be wrong, either or both the AP and Coach’s poll were included in the formula. My point is when it’s only two teams the actual voters could go with the logical, or eyeball test and put Georgia in and likely would have. This was one of the only times I’ve ever pulled for a non SEC team. I wanted Michigan to go all the way because I like Harbaugh. But if I had to bet on it, I would have 100% said bama and Georgia, and that’s the way the BCS worked also.
Every NCAA basketball champion in history has come from the top 32 teams by seed (seeds 1-8 ). Since expansion to 64+ teams, 89% of champions were top 12 teams by seed (seeds 1-3). There are 68 teams in the tournament. What’s the problem?
the regular season with almost no stakes beyond in or out of the tournament that no one cares about is the problem.
College football had by far the most meaningful regular season of any sport. It’s already been diluted in the playoff. And apparently a majority of people wish to dilute it further. I guess in their ideal world they can tune in Nov1 and start caring about games, similar to the college basketball season for the vast majority of the people watching the tourney.
Last edited:
You'll see less semi-final blowouts with an expanded playoff.
By going to 12 & giving the top 4 byes, the Cincinnatis & Michigan's would've been weeded out in the quarterfinals.
The predicament that the playoff currently has is: do they take the 4 best teams or 4 most deserving teams?
By going to 12, you get both. The most deserving Cincy & Michigan, get in while the other teams that are likely better than those two teams also get in.
Expanding the playoff is the right things to do.
1. Creates more meaningful regulars season games in Oct & Nov
2. Gets more teams & fan bases involved in the race, which is good for college football.
3. Creates more good playoff matchups when 12 travels to 5, 11 travels to 6, etc in the 1st round
4. Weeds out the deserving but not good teams that typically create these bad semi-final games while still giving those teams a chance.
By going to 12 & giving the top 4 byes, the Cincinnatis & Michigan's would've been weeded out in the quarterfinals.
The predicament that the playoff currently has is: do they take the 4 best teams or 4 most deserving teams?
By going to 12, you get both. The most deserving Cincy & Michigan, get in while the other teams that are likely better than those two teams also get in.
Expanding the playoff is the right things to do.
1. Creates more meaningful regulars season games in Oct & Nov
2. Gets more teams & fan bases involved in the race, which is good for college football.
3. Creates more good playoff matchups when 12 travels to 5, 11 travels to 6, etc in the 1st round
4. Weeds out the deserving but not good teams that typically create these bad semi-final games while still giving those teams a chance.
Excitement, engagement from fans, great entertainment, more opportunities for heroism, local economies, etc.
Latest posts
Get unlimited access today.