College Playoff (How teams will be chosen)

[AU-24 3,175]

Notice below how the playoff teams will be chosen. Also, notice how they will look at "Most Compelling Matchups"

How about they simply choose the 4 best teams in the country for the playoff, and that will be very compelling in it's own right. Also, why avoid a rematch of regular season games? If AU and UAT are two of the best 4 teams in the country what is wrong with a rematch. Of course same could be said for Fla State vs Miami or Ohio St vs Michigan etc...

According to the College Football Playoff, the committee will assign teams to nonplayoff bowls in a way that creates the most compelling matchups possible while also considering factors such as geographic proximity and avoiding rematches of regular-season and recent bowl games.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10856218/college-football-playoff-officials-discuss-how-select-teams

So here it goes....

[AUcivE09 582]

They are talking about the teams not in the playoff. Personally - I am for this as long as 1 of the 4 teams in the playoffs isnt there because of a "compelling match-up". The rest of the games I want to see the most interesting matchups. Seems like it would be good for both teams involved.

[Auburn4Winners 0]

I've been saying for a long time that the bowls need to be mandated in some way that makes them more interesting. At least for the fans of the teams in them if not all college football fans. Apparently there will be 39 bowl games this year and if I'm going to watch them all then they better be worth it.

[quietfan 233]

I've been saying for a long time that the bowls need to be mandated in some way that makes them more interesting. At least for the fans of the teams in them if not all college football fans. Apparently there will be 39 bowl games this year and if I'm going to watch them all then they better be worth it.

I honestly don't know if they can find 78 teams (2 X 39) that are bowl-eligible (with 6-6 or better records). I mean, for every winner there's a loser, so seems like you'd have about as many teams under 50% as over it. How many teams are there in the FBS division these days, anyway?

[AUTUmike 79]

I've been saying for a long time that the bowls need to be mandated in some way that makes them more interesting. At least for the fans of the teams in them if not all college football fans. Apparently there will be 39 bowl games this year and if I'm going to watch them all then they better be worth it.

I honestly don't know if they can find 78 teams (2 X 39) that are bowl-eligible (with 6-6 or better records). I mean, for every winner there's a loser, so seems like you'd have about as many teams under 50% as over it. How many teams are there in the FBS division these days, anyway?

FBS teams can poach an extra win from an FCS opponent as well (maximum of 1 will count for bowl eligibility) so that will add to the overall win totals too. However, if a crappy bowl is forced to choose between 5-7 Kentucky or 6-6 Georgia State, I'm sure they will get a waiver to the 6-win rule.

[cptau 169]

I've been saying for a long time that the bowls need to be mandated in some way that makes them more interesting. At least for the fans of the teams in them if not all college football fans. Apparently there will be 39 bowl games this year and if I'm going to watch them all then they better be worth it.

I honestly don't know if they can find 78 teams (2 X 39) that are bowl-eligible (with 6-6 or better records). I mean, for every winner there's a loser, so seems like you'd have about as many teams under 50% as over it. How many teams are there in the FBS division these days, anyway?

There are 128 Division I FBS teams.

9 Divsion I FBS teams with 6 wins or more wins didn't get into a bowl game.

Western Kentucky was 8-4 and did not get a bowl. Toledo was 7-5 and did not, The other 7 teams had six wins.

Usually they get left out when their conference tie ins with bowl games are filled up.

That's what happened to WKU in the SunBelt. They are moving to Conference USA this fall.

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/90958/all-dressed-up-no-place-to-bowl

[CJBas 4]

I've been saying for a long time that the bowls need to be mandated in some way that makes them more interesting. At least for the fans of the teams in them if not all college football fans. Apparently there will be 39 bowl games this year and if I'm going to watch them all then they better be worth it.

I honestly don't know if they can find 78 teams (2 X 39) that are bowl-eligible (with 6-6 or better records). I mean, for every winner there's a loser, so seems like you'd have about as many teams under 50% as over it. How many teams are there in the FBS division these days, anyway?

I thought there are 118, which would make it impossible to field 78 teams with 6 wins or more. So there'd have to be some other way of declaring sub 6-win teams to be eligible.

[CircleDrill 180]

"Most compelling" = most $$$

[aucanucktiger 1,989]

This is just the newest, flawed phase of the unattainable search for a single, objectively fair champion in a college football division of 18 -22 year olds on over 100 teams. These rules consider "hunches" as legit factors for such "qualified" selectors as Condoleeza Rice to use in choosing the 4 best teams. But than hunches have never been absent from the overall polls. Longer basketball (less physically brutal) and NFL (fewer teams, older guys) playoffs aren't applicable models...but at least we got our playoffs.

[Auctoritas 2,969]

I'm just throwing this out there: The bowl season is the last gasp of football. That alone makes it "worth it" to watch, even if it pitted Toledo against the Indian National Cricket Team.

[AU64 10,122]

I'm just throwing this out there: The bowl season is the last gasp of football. That alone makes it "worth it" to watch, even if it pitted Toledo against the Indian National Cricket Team.

Can't disagree...if someone is teeing it up...FBS, FCS or sometimes even Div III...I will usually check it out.

[Auburn4Winners 0]

This is just the newest, flawed phase of the unattainable search for a single, objectively fair champion in a college football division of 18 -22 year olds on over 100 teams. These rules consider "hunches" as legit factors for such "qualified" selectors as Condoleeza Rice to use in choosing the 4 best teams. But than hunches have never been absent from the overall polls. Longer basketball (less physically brutal) and NFL (fewer teams, older guys) playoffs aren't applicable models...but at least we got our playoffs.

The system won't be fixed until it's made clear to the NCAA that there just aren't 128 teams that are actually competitive at the same level. I feel stupid even having to type that sentence. The fact is there need to be 4 conferences that make up college football and there needs to be an 8 team playoff starting with conference championship games.

[Auctoritas 2,969]

Honest question: I keep hearing 8 team playoff thrown out there. Why? What benefit is it? Honestly, the difference between 8 and 1 makes that game nothing more than either a warmup or an opportunity for someone to get injured. I could see an NFL model 6 team, but I think the 4 team gets it as right as it needs to be.

[WarEagle84 0]

Honest question: I keep hearing 8 team playoff thrown out there. Why? What benefit is it? Honestly, the difference between 8 and 1 makes that game nothing more than either a warmup or an opportunity for someone to get injured. I could see an NFL model 6 team, but I think the 4 team gets it as right as it needs to be.

I think the current contract term is 12 years, so we're stuck with 4 for a while. I think the reason 8 seems attractive is it allows for the champions of the 5 power conferences and 3 wild cards. That opens it up to the mid-majors to play the "BCS buster" role.

[WarEagle84 0]

There must be lawyers involved....

The official College Football Playoff Selection Committee Voting Protocol:

1. Each committee member will create a list of the 25 teams he or she believes to be the best in the country, in no particular order. Teams listed by more than three members will remain under consideration.

2. Each member will list the best six teams, in no particular order. The six teams receiving the most votes will comprise the pool for the first seeding ballot.

3. In the first seeding ballot, each member will rank those six teams, one through six, with one being the best. The three teams receiving the fewest points will become the top three seeds. The three teams that were not seeded will be held over for the next seeding ballot.

4. Each member will list the six best remaining teams, in no particular order. The three teams receiving the most votes will be added to the three teams held over to comprise the next seeding ballot.

5. Steps No. 3 and 4 will be repeated until 25 teams have been seeded.

Notes:

A. Any "recused" member can participate in Step No. 1, but cannot list the team for which he or she is recused. "Recused" teams (i.e., teams for whom a member has been recused) receiving at least three votes in Step No. 1 will remain under consideration.

B. A recused member can participate in Step No. 2, but cannot list the recused team. If a recused team is within one vote of advancing to the pool, that team will be pooled with the team (or teams) receiving the fewest votes. A "tie-breaker" ranking vote will be conducted among those teams to identify the team or teams that would be added to the pool.

C. A recused member cannot participate in Step No. 3 if the recused team is in the pool.

D. Between each step, the committee members will conduct a thorough evaluation of the teams before conducting the vote.

E. After the rankings are completed, any group of three or more teams can be reconsidered if more than three members vote to do so. Step No. 3 would be repeated to determine if adjustments should be made.

F. After the first nine teams are seeded, the number of teams for Steps No. 2, 3 and 4 will be increased to eight and four, respectively.

G. At any time in the process, the number of teams to be included in a pool may be increased or decreased with approval of more than eight members of the committee.

H. All votes will be by secret ballot.

The official College Football Playoff Selection Committee Recusal Policy:

-- If a committee member or an immediate family member, e.g., spouse, sibling or child, ( a ) is compensated by a school, ( b ) provides professional services for a school, or ( c ) is on the coaching staff or administrative staff at a school or is a football student-athlete at a school, that member will be recused. Such compensation shall include not only direct employment, but also current paid consulting arrangements, deferred compensation (e.g., contract payments continuing after employment has ended) or other benefits.

-- The committee will have the option to add other recusals if special circumstances arise.

-- A recused member shall not participate in any votes involving the team from which the individual is recused.

-- A recused member is permitted to answer only factual questions about the institution from which the member is recused, but shall not be present during any deliberations regarding that team's selection or seeding.

via USA Today

[AU64 10,122]

The recusal policy is almost beyond my comprehension but then again, nobody asked all those folks voting in the various BCS related polls to recuse themselves each week so why does this group have to be so pure?

But if you insist on an absolutely neutral jury pool then the best bet is to select a dozen or so people at random off the streets of New York in front of Columbia University. Then hire them to make the decisions...haul them off to some hidden location and immerse them in videos of NCAA games.

Otherwise, can anyone tell me why you would think anyone in the United States would pay really serious attention to college football throughout the country....unless they had a rooting interest in one or more teams? Fans are asking for a committee that understands football, have put their hands in the dirt or whatever....and then expect to find people that are totally unbiased when comparing teams. JMO but that's Easter Bunny stuff.

[CircleDrill 180]

Otherwise, can anyone tell me why you would think anyone in the United States would pay really serious attention to college football throughout the country....unless they had a rooting interest in one or more teams? Fans are asking for a committee that understands football, have put their hands in the dirt or whatever....and then expect to find people that are totally unbiased when comparing teams. JMO but that's Easter Bunny stuff.

FINALLY somebody gets it!!

This whole thing is about the four best brand names that can be paired up to make the most money on TV. Don't believe it?

Who gets in?

2 loss Alabama or 1 loss Boise State?

Undefeated Washington State or 1 loss USC?

Conference Champ Stanford or 2 loss Florida State?

Matchup Auburn vs. LSU? Oh wait, that would be a rematch...let's put 2 loss Ohio State in there instead.

Do you REALLY think ESPN is going to have no influence (see 2004 Auburn Tigers)?