PDA

View Full Version : Final Four in College Football...


Asteinebach
04-27-2012, 07:38 AM
What are people's thoughts?

I'm personally really excited for this. This way they can continue to keep the bowl games in existence, and still have a fair shake at who wins the NC. I think it's a move in the right direction. I wonder if they will have qualifying games, or if it'll just be the BCS #1-#4?

tjsunstein
04-27-2012, 12:23 PM
Should be BCS #1-4.

In 2011:
#1 LSU vs. #4 Stanford
#2 Alabama vs. #3 Oklahoma State

In 2010:
#1 Auburn vs. #4 Stanford
#2 Oregon vs. #3 TCU

Just for an idea how it would have played out in previous years. I would have loved to see those games play out.

Asteinebach
04-27-2012, 02:06 PM
Just for an idea how it would have played out in previous years. I would have loved to see those games play out.

There aren't any football fans alive that wouldn't love to see this. And you also can think of the implications on the Draft that this format would have. Talk about having to show up and play clutch football. These two games in a row for a team would really help scouts gauge how players are under pressure.

jojo
04-27-2012, 03:54 PM
Final 4 games would start in late January, after the bowl games unless they can link those 2 games to the big bowls, maybe on a rotating basis for the big $ involved.

The NC game remains in early February just before the SB.

bearsfan_51
05-04-2012, 07:58 PM
The latest proposal has suggested that the top 4 will consist of conference champions that finish in the top 6 of the BCS (or whatever) standings. If 4 conference champions can't be found out of the top 6, they will pick at-large teams in order.

Here's what would have happened last year under that scenario:

1) LSU (13-0) vs. 4) Alabama (11-1)

2) OK State (11-1) vs. 3) Oregon (11-2)


And in 2010:

1) Auburn (13-0) vs. 4) Wisconsin (11-1)

2) Oregon (12-0) vs. 3) TCU (12-0)

I like it.

JHL6719
05-05-2012, 12:37 AM
Alabama was #2 in the BCS poll prior to the bowl games last year. They would not have played LSU in this scenario.

The only thing that I've always disagreed with is going with conference champions. All conferences aren't equal, nor do all conferences play a championship game.

This is nothing more than an attempt put forth to limit the SEC under the guise of egalitarianism that it's impossible not to see through.

By the way, what conference does Notre Dame belong to again?

bearsfan_51
05-05-2012, 01:07 AM
Yes, they would have. Re-read my post. Conference champs fill the slots first.

Also, if people really wanted to limit the SEC they could just have a fan spelling contest.

TitanHope
05-05-2012, 03:24 AM
Yes, they would have. Re-read my post. Conference champs fill the slots first.

Also, if people really wanted to limit the SEC they could just have a fan spelling contest.

Oh yeah?!

F-A-N

IN YOUR FACE, BF!

jojo
05-05-2012, 09:42 AM
Yes, they would have. Re-read my post. Conference champs fill the slots first.

Also, if people really wanted to limit the SEC they could just have a fan spelling contest.

Um so besser:

N-A-T-I-O-N-A-L C-H-A-M-P-I-O-N-S...... more of them than anyone else. And more tasteful tats than Jim Tressel's probationary Buckeyes.

If we have the bracketology, it would be between the Big 10 & Pac12 to face the winner of the SECCG, or the Big 12 winner (TCU until Texas rediscovers its gonads). If they want to accommodate Notre Dame they can have a private school bracket but BC, TCU, & Stanford are already in conferences. Golden Domers are marooned on their own island, or more likely voted OFF the island

wicket
05-05-2012, 09:51 AM
The latest proposal has suggested that the top 4 will consist of conference champions that finish in the top 6 of the BCS (or whatever) standings. If 4 conference champions can't be found out of the top 6, they will pick at-large teams in order.

Here's what would have happened last year under that scenario:

1) LSU (13-0) vs. 4) Alabama (11-1)

2) OK State (11-1) vs. 3) Oregon (11-2)


And in 2010:

1) Auburn (13-0) vs. 4) Wisconsin (11-1)

2) Oregon (12-0) vs. 3) TCU (12-0)

I like it.

that could theoretically mean that the top 2 teams in the country are left out of the playoffs

bearsfan_51
05-05-2012, 10:28 AM
that could theoretically mean that the top 2 teams in the country are left out of the playoffs
Meh...win your conference.

wicket
05-05-2012, 10:35 AM
Meh...win your conference.

just saying it could happen

JHL6719
05-05-2012, 01:24 PM
Yes, they would have. Re-read my post. Conference champs fill the slots first.

Also, if people really wanted to limit the SEC they could just have a fan spelling contest.


At least the Big-10 has a chance in a spelling contest...

Brent
05-05-2012, 01:26 PM
Meh...win your conference.
Yup, that should be part of the deal.

JHL6719
05-05-2012, 01:34 PM
Yup, that should be part of the deal.


No it shouldn't.


If we've learned anything during the BCS era, it's that most of the teams outside the SEC that do win their conference don't deserve to be playing for a national title.

Are you people actually trying to assert that Clemson was more worthy of being in a playoff last year over Alabama?

bearsfan_51
05-05-2012, 02:20 PM
Are you people actually trying to assert that Clemson was more worthy of being in a playoff last year over Alabama?
No, and under the new rules, they wouldn't have been. Please learn to read. I even gave you a freaking example.

Raiderz4Life
05-05-2012, 05:30 PM
No, and under the new rules, they wouldn't have been. Please learn to read. I even gave you a freaking example.

You should know by know reading comprehension isn't exactly this place's strong suit.