Rankings are just an invitational, not a playoff. Everybody knows the whole thing is just about money, not competition and fair play. It's the bowl system on steroids instead of a fix for the stupidity of the bowl system.

(11-24-2018 08:45 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-24-2018 08:42 PM)toddjnsn Wrote:  

Quote:A playoff should be purely about ranking, nothing else. When you start talking auto-bid etc. you’re mixing and matching concepts and ultimately going to cause more trouble than you will settle.

It can, but I disagree it always will if it's pretty clean cut. Rankings are not going to be exact with 130 teams mostly playing within their conference, so you're already in some trouble there. And even in the Pros, where playoffs don't get argued so much, winning your conference/division championship > record.

Putting that into play, giving leeway on raw rankings if you win your conference championship, should be allowed.

The year that Ohio State was nixed from going to ANY post-season game, Wisconsin won the division in the B10 and then upset in the B10 Championship game. But they weren't Top 16, so no, they wouldn't have gone to an 8-team playoff.

Like I said, it's not a battle for #8, it's a battle for #1 -- most of which is during the season but inexact (rankings).

Any playoff without the Top G5 -- which almost always is going to be ranked #10 or lower, and not #8 -- especially undefeated, is not going to cut the mustard when rankings are knowingly inexact.

My proposal -- All P5 Conf Winners if within Top 16, and the Top G5 Conf Winner if within Top 16 covers all this. Then you let the remaining 2 or 3 teams usually go by the ranking after.

Oh, you're ranked #7 Michigan? Whining why undefeated UCF got in and not you, even though most bettors would put money on you in a matchup? You didn't even win your conference division, dude. You have to Earn something first to be a lock.

The plan just sets up a year where a team played their way in and instead have to give them spot to an undeserving G5 team.

You either have a playoff picked by conference champs etc. or based on rankings.

The top 4 teams, as picked by the BCS computers, as opposed to a committee, makes a lot more sense.

Thats part of the problem---that undeserving G5 team keeps showing they are better than thier ranking when they actually play in the CFP access bowl. By going to 8 the number of P5 teams that get into the playoff would increase by 75% and the top G5---which has proven to be more than match to top 10 P5s--will get a single slot. Hardly the unfair arrangement you are making it out to be.

How about this--lets make it top 8---but the G5 gets 9 slots on the Selection Committee and the P5 gets 4 slots---thats fair, right?

Look, Ive said before--even if everyone was being totally above board, fair, and ethical---there is just not a real good way to measure the quality of the top of the G5 with respect to the top of the P5. There is no denying they play different quality schedules and there is no denying that there is nothing anyone can really do to change that. By giving the top champ of the G5 a single slot--you effectively eliminate the issue. From what Ive seen, treating the 65 G5's as a single P5 is probably the best way to deal with the issue in an 8 team playoff.