In a college football playoff, I think it is a safe assumption that the 2 team per conference maximum would continue.

 

So this year it would be a GREAT, GREAT chance that both Wisconsin and LSU would have NOT been invited to a playoff.

 

For Wisconsin, no doubt they don't as OSU and Michigan go.

 

For LSU, would they have been invited OVER Arkansas who they finished BEHIND in the regular season? How do you invite the 2nd place team and exclude the first-place Arkansas.

 

So for some who feel LSU was the best team in the nation at the end of the season, they may have been playing in the Peach Bowl instead of the playoffs.

Why not use the BCS standing to help determine who gets in the playoff? That way LSU gets in for sure.

I have no pity for either.

 

When you have two losses (LSU's case) you don't have a lot of room to complain. Sure I think they're great, but you seem to argue a playoff takes importance away from regular season games, so LSU being left out should be right up your ally.

 

In Wisconsin's case, there's this crazy idea that you could play every team in your conference or have divisions and a championship game. Sure its a mess, but its the Big11's mess, not the NCAA's.

You and I discussed this topic in depth a long time ago. I can't find the thread, but I still say you can find an undisputed champ using an 8-12 team format that can incorporate all the major bowls.

Why not use the BCS standing to help determine who gets in the playoff? That way LSU gets in for sure.

And what will the uproar be for the 3rd place team of the SEC getting in and the team that beat them out being excluded. Uproar on the unfairness of the playoff system excluding teams like an Arkansas. Not much different than the present uproar.

You and I discussed this topic in depth a long time ago. I can't find the thread, but I still say you can find an undisputed champ using an 8-12 team format that can incorporate all the major bowls.

What about my point of good chance LSU and Wisconsin being excluded. Can you agree that the mindset has rationale on why you exclude LSU and Wisconsin?

But LSU thumped Arkansas late in the year, which could have easily justified their inclusion in a tournament over the Razorbacks.

 

There is no reason to have such a limit ... if four of the best 16 teams in the country are in the same league, so what?

But LSU thumped Arkansas late in the year, which could have easily justified their inclusion in a tournament over the Razorbacks.

 

There is no reason to have such a limit ... if four of the best 16 teams in the country are in the same league, so what?

 

 

Well said. I still think a 16 team playoff is the best route.

Not much different than the present uproar.

The "present uproar" is that, in spite of a BCS system that is designed to give us a definitive national champion, there are still plenty of doubts as to which is the best team in the country. It's another reason that the system stinks.

But LSU thumped Arkansas late in the year, which could have easily justified their inclusion in a tournament over the Razorbacks.

 

There is no reason to have such a limit ... if four of the best 16 teams in the country are in the same league, so what?

The last point is a good one but the powers-to-be that decided the format of the BCS says it is and have included a 2-team per conference max. NO reason to think they wouldn't continue that onto a playoff.

The "present uproar" is that, in spite of a BCS system that is designed to give us a definitive national champion, there are still plenty of doubts as to which is the best team in the country. It's another reason that the system stinks.

Not sure I agree with this assessment.

 

I think many, many people feel better about the Florida football team being the best in the nation.

I think LSU has a decent argument ... and Auburn certainly did a few years ago.

There is no reason to have such a limit ... if four of the best 16 teams in the country are in the same league, so what?

 

So not only do Michigan and Ohio State get exposed, but we should let Wisconsin in also?

 

Thats the whole point of the playoff. To me, the point of a playoff is to determine the #1 team, not the #9 or #13 team. If you're 3rd in your conference you don't have much footing to complain about being left out.

 

This year is a perfect example. Everybody and their mom said Michigan and OSU were head and shoulders above everyone else. Well it turns out that the Pac10 and SEC champs were better.

 

With the limited games played between big teams from opposing conferences, its impossible to accurately judge which conference (and therefore which teams) are better. Therefore, its only fair to limit each conferences entries.

LSU finished in a tie for 3rd place with Auburn in the SEC and lost their heads up meeting with the other 3rd place team Auburn, that's 4th place.

 

A 16 team playoff is what we need and if we have to laeve out teams that are 3rd or worse in their leagues, big deal.

32 top BCS teams seeded. Week 1 (Thursday, Friday, Saturday games) 16 "bowl" games.

Week, 2 8 "bowl" games.

Week 3, 4 "Bowl" games.

Week 4, 2 "bowl" games.

And week 5 the National Title game. We still have a month of bowl games, but they matter. The team that's 33rd in the country doesn't have much chance anyway so the bubble teams will be bubble teams not contenders who had a few bad weeks. Teams out of weaker confernces actually have a chance. The BCS bowls will be the final 7(or 3) games and other playoff games will rotate among the other bowls. The bowls being left out of the playoff games can invite during years where they aren't involved. The 33rd and 34th best teams from the country will still get bowls. Teams like ND won't play in the BCS just to raise money.

 

Does this make perfect since to anyone else or is it just me? People say, "It isn't that easy," but IT IS THAT EASY!!!