-
xxmgobluexx said...
The #8 seeds first game will be against the #1 seed. They win that, then they would be playing the winner of the #4/#5 game, and then the winnner of the bracket that holds the #2, #3, #6, and #7 seeds. Any team that runs the table under that scenerio, deserves to be call the champions, imo.
On mobile so bear with me, but the first round matchups would be like this.
A. #1 vs #8
B. #4 vs #5
C. #3 vs #6
D. #2 vs #7Round 2 (semi-finals) matchips would be the winners from the previous round,
E. Game A vs Game B
F. Game C vs Game DChampionship matchup would be the winners from the previous round,
G, Game E vs Game F
When a team runs that table, they deserve it.
xxmgobluexx ●
- 4 stars Rating: 79
8594 votes total - (16833)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Awink2 said...
I agree....4 teams is the best approach. When you open it up to 8 teams, teams with 3 losses are on that threshold to make the playoff. When you start having 3, and possibly 4 loss teams in a playoff, the regular season become diluted. I say just keep the BCS for rankings sake (I think most can agree the BCS has atleast gotten the top 4 teams correct in every year, if not every year please let us know), and that gives you the top 4 teams in the playoff. Then the only potential controversy would be is the #5 team more worthy then the #4 team, a situation that is infinitely better then the current one, and one that I wont lose sleep over, because under the current system, team #4 would be on the outside looking in.
xxmgobluexx ●
- 4 stars Rating: 79
8594 votes total - (16833)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
xxmgobluexx said...
Hell, we are on the opposite end of the sprectrum then. I want a 16 team playoff. I look at March Madness, and then apply it to football, and I love the idea. Was the #8 seeded Viilanova the best team in 1985? How about George Mason being one of the best a couple years ago? Or Butler?
Your scenerio, as a comparison to March Madness, only allows the #1 seeds to play in the tourney. An 8 team playoff allows the #1 and #2 seeds in. An 16 team playoff allows the #1-#4 seeds in...
This post was edited by buttesnake on 6/22/2012 at 4:59 AM
buttesnake
- 5 stars Rating: 90
18088 votes total - (27071)
- 25 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
xxmgobluexx ●
- 4 stars Rating: 79
8594 votes total - (16833)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
buttesnake
- 5 stars Rating: 90
18088 votes total - (27071)
- 25 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
xxmgobluexx ●
- 4 stars Rating: 79
8594 votes total - (16833)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
buttesnake
- 5 stars Rating: 90
18088 votes total - (27071)
- 25 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
xxmgobluexx ●
- 4 stars Rating: 79
8594 votes total - (16833)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
xxmgobluexx said...
The #8 seeds first game will be against the #1 seed. They win that, then they would be playing the winner of the #4/#5 game, and then the winnner of the bracket that holds the #2, #3, #6, and #7 seeds. Any team that runs the table under that scenerio, deserves to be call the champions, imo.
On mobile so bear with me, but the first round matchups would be like this.
A. #1 vs #8 B. #4 vs #5 C. #3 vs #6 D. #2 vs #7
Round 2 (semi-finals) matchips would be the winners from the previous round,
E. Game A vs Game B F. Game C vs Game D
Championship matchup would be the winners from the previous round,
G, Game E vs Game F
When a team runs that table, they deserve it.
This is Michigan, fergodsakes.
Never Lose Hoke ●
- 5 stars Rating: 82
1433 votes total - (3515)
- 23 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Scout.com: Ask CFN - Your Playoff Questions Answered
Will Notre Dame have to join a league? Who's the big loser in the new playoff system? Your playoff questions get answered.
cfn.scout.com kylebennett7127
- 5 stars Rating: 90
1327 votes total - (3695)
- 13 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Never Lose Hoke said...
Fine, yes they deserve it. But what I'm trying to say is that a 2 or 3 loss team doesn't deserve the chance.
Why not? I mean, if a team could lose twice and still be in the hunt for a national title, maybe we would see teams actually schedule OOC games vs good programs instead of just loading up on cupcakes from the MAC or FCS or whatever. And besides, isn't half the fun of playoffs watching lesser teams try to rise to the occasion and take on the big dogs, and watching the big dogs prove their worth on the field? No one would have called the Giants one of the NFL's best teams after the regular season, but here we are now and they're the defending Super Bowl champs (much to my chagrin, I'm a Patriots fan
). -
inuyesta said...
Why not? I mean, if a team could lose twice and still be in the hunt for a national title, maybe we would see teams actually schedule OOC games vs good programs instead of just loading up on cupcakes from the MAC or FCS or whatever. And besides, isn't half the fun of playoffs watching lesser teams try to rise to the occasion and take on the big dogs, and watching the big dogs prove their worth on the field? No one would have called the Giants one of the NFL's best teams after the regular season, but here we are now and they're the defending Super Bowl champs (much to my chagrin, I'm a Patriots fan
).
This is Michigan, fergodsakes.
Never Lose Hoke ●
- 5 stars Rating: 82
1433 votes total - (3515)
- 23 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine ●
- 5 stars Rating: 96
3812 votes total - (9056)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
inuyesta said...
Why not? I mean, if a team could lose twice and still be in the hunt for a national title, maybe we would see teams actually schedule OOC games vs good programs instead of just loading up on cupcakes from the MAC or FCS or whatever. And besides, isn't half the fun of playoffs watching lesser teams try to rise to the occasion and take on the big dogs, and watching the big dogs prove their worth on the field? No one would have called the Giants one of the NFL's best teams after the regular season, but here we are now and they're the defending Super Bowl champs (much to my chagrin, I'm a Patriots fan
).
-
WillyWolverine ●
- 5 stars Rating: 96
3812 votes total - (9056)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Never Lose Hoke ●
- 5 stars Rating: 82
1433 votes total - (3515)
- 23 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine ●
- 5 stars Rating: 96
3812 votes total - (9056)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine said...
I'm not arguing that the number 5 team was the best team. I am saying they have a case for being the number 2 team. Take last year for example. Which team would you include in the playoff, Stanford or Oregon? Oregon won the Pac 12, beat Stanford but Stanford only had 1 loss going into the bowl season and Oregon had 2. Then you throw in the fact that Boise State only had 1 loss as well.
This is Michigan, fergodsakes.
Never Lose Hoke ●
- 5 stars Rating: 82
1433 votes total - (3515)
- 23 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine said...
I'm not arguing that the number 5 team was the best team. I am saying they have a case for being the number 2 team. Take last year for example. Which team would you include in the playoff, Stanford or Oregon? Oregon won the Pac 12, beat Stanford but Stanford only had 1 loss going into the bowl season and Oregon had 2. Then you throw in the fact that Boise State only had 1 loss as well.
Yea I can see why Oregon might be more deserving then Stanford, and Stanford would have probably lost to LSU also....maybe play-in game for the #4 seed under certain scenarios?
Or have a six team playoff with the #1 and #2 seeds getting a first round bye? (I've got a bracket for that model which is an awesome concept, but dont think the picture is uploading).
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Awink2 on 6/22/2012 at 1:40 PM
-
Never Lose Hoke said...
Well, I see your point. But last year is a bad example. Neither Oregon nor Stanford had any case as one of the top 2. Also, you get that debate no matter how many teams are included. If it's an 8 team then the 9 team got snubbed. And Boise State had no case as a top 5 team whatsoever.
WillyWolverine ●
- 5 stars Rating: 96
3812 votes total - (9056)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine said...
Stanford sure does. They only lost 1 game last year. Why don't they? Because they play in the pac 12 and Bama plays in the SEC?
The difference I am seeing is that the #9 team has zero case for being just as good as the #2 team. Stanford could of easily been in the championship game if people felt the Pac 12 was stronger than the SEC. The #9 team last year had no chance of being in that championship game.
This is Michigan, fergodsakes.
Never Lose Hoke ●
- 5 stars Rating: 82
1433 votes total - (3515)
- 23 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine ●
- 5 stars Rating: 96
3812 votes total - (9056)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- Post a New Topic
- Back to Topics
- « Previous Topic
- Next Topic »
- Pages: 1 | 2 | 3
playoffs are here