GET RID OF THE RANKINGS!!!!!

Playoff the conference champions (and maybe the runner-ups and maybe even a wild card) through the bowls.

Just like every other league does it (high school, NFL, NBA, MLB, etc)

comeback route?

comeback route has been said for years. it is simple!

The NBA does not do this…

…the comeback route is the most difficult to defend

Quote:

---

GET RID OF THE RANKINGS!!!!!

Playoff the conference champions (and maybe the runner-ups and maybe even a wild card) through the bowls.

---

all runner ups?

And get rid of Billions of website clicks from fans constantly checking their school's "ranking"?

Sure thing, buddy.

It's about time this was brought up. I'm not sure they should totally abandon rankings, but they should absolutely not have preseason rankings. I'm not sure when they should begin...maybe when the playoff rankings come out now. And rankings should be seriously re-evaluated every week.
One reason the sips have benefited from SOS is because teams like Kansas and Kansas State, etc., have been ridiculously ranked in the Top 20 based on their record against other scrubs.
Preseason rankings give unfair advantages to same blue bloods every year. And it is a lot harder for them to be dropped out of the top 20 once they are in there-- just as it's a lot harder for teams that start slow to ever climb the rankings ladder.

saw em off said:

---

GET RID OF THE RANKINGS!!!!!

Playoff the conference champions (and maybe the runner-ups and maybe even a wild card) through the bowls.

Just like every other league does it (high school, NFL, NBA, MLB, etc)

---

Didn't realize the NFL, NBA, MLB etc. had 100+ teams and only played 12 games......

College football is completely different from professional league sports in number of teams, games played against common opponents, and discrepancy in talent of all divisions/conferences.

NFL has 32 teams, 14 teams make the playoffs, no? So should college have 50+ teams make the playoffs?

htxag09 said:

---

saw em off said:

---

GET RID OF THE RANKINGS!!!!!

Playoff the conference champions (and maybe the runner-ups and maybe even a wild card) through the bowls.

Just like every other league does it (high school, NFL, NBA, MLB, etc)

---

Didn't realize the NFL, NBA, MLB etc. had 100+ teams and only played 12 games......

College football is completely different from professional league sports in number of teams, games played against common opponents, and discrepancy in talent of all divisions/conferences.

NFL has 32 teams, 14 teams make the playoffs, no? So should college have 50+ teams make the playoffs?

---

You have 11 conferences...read again.

saw em off said:

---

GET RID OF THE RANKINGS!!!!!

Playoff the conference champions (and maybe the runner-ups and maybe even a wild card) through the bowls.

Just like every other league does it (high school, NFL, NBA, MLB, etc)

---

The human element was always to control things for the power brokers.


It would be great if they could come up with something to get rid of it.

I was in favor of playoff format of the conference champs plus 2 at large bids with a bye for whoever is #1 and #2

Get rid of all of the stupid bowl games, get rid of the stupid buy games. Have lots of playoff games on college campuses instead

Gyles Marrett said:

---

I was in favor of playoff format of the conference champs plus 2 at large bids with a bye for whoever is #1 and #2

---

I utterly oppose auto bids for conference champions in conferences that cannot play a round robin schedule. But I'm fine with best five conference champions since there are seven at large teams.

The key question is how to fairly select the at large invitees. I'd argue the current system serves the conferences and media partner but is a disservice to the fans since it prefers a limited set of better known teams.

Not a terrible idea, but had Okie State beat Texas, would they "deserve" to be in? The teams that beat them in the regular season pretty much prove that they weren't a championship-caliber team this year.

Get rid of all pre-season rankings, and don't release any rankings until the first playoff ranking, which should not come until the first weekend in November at the earliest. As it is and has always been, it's a popularity contest that doesn't allow for upstart teams or known programs a tier or two down from the "blue bloods" to break in.

There should be a competitive path available to every team in the division. No team should be able to win every single game and not have the possibility of advancing.

If a conference is not considered good enough to have at least an automatic bid for its champion then that conference needs to be cut out of competing in the division altogether.

The playoffs as they exist now are not playoffs at all. Its an invitational tournament thats marketing itself as a playoff championship but it really isnt. There is no way to qualify for it through actual on field competition, only through being invited

JJxvi said:

---

There should be a competitive path available to every team in the division. No team should be able to win every single game and not have the possibility of advancing.

If a conference is not considered good enough to have at least an automatic bid for its champion then that conference needs to be cut out of competing in the division altogether.

---

Been sayig this for years.

Cap tier 1 at 128 schools.
Conferences of 16 teams and 2 divisions in each.
Division winners play for conference championship
Conference champions play in a 16 team tourney.

Done.

How exactly does the NCAA tell the Associated Press not to do the ranking?

Auto bids in college are dumb. Last year the highest ranked ACC team at this point of the year was 13th. They don't deserve to be in just because they won in a down year of a 2nd tier conference.

evestor1 said:

---

comeback route?

comeback route has been said for years. it is simple!

---

It's time we started using this a bit more.

So wildcards are just teams picked from a hat?

saw em off said:

---

GET RID OF THE RANKINGS!!!!!

Playoff the conference champions (and maybe the runner-ups and maybe even a wild card) through the bowls.

Just like every other league does it (high school, NFL, NBA, MLB, etc)

---

If you have been saying this you were wrong. Iowa played in the B10 champ game and they absolutely suck. Louisville played in the ACC champ game and they suck. Ditto for OSU. The conference's are not equal so auto bids are problematic.

Aggie_Boomin 21 said:

---

Auto bids in college are dumb. Last year the highest ranked ACC team at this point of the year was 13th. They don't deserve to be in just because they won in a down year of a 2nd tier conference.

---

deserve?

The problem with college football is the all-pervading idea that fans, newspaper writers, tv media, paper-pushers working for athletic departments, etc are all who decides what teams "deserve" to play rather than have the games played on the field determine it.

I dont think college football will ever not have "wild cards" that will obviously need some sort of judgement call, but the purest form of a competition would not require this AT ALL. The NFL does not need to pick teams for its playoffs, they just set rules beforehand and the playoffs fill themselves in through the results of the games. UIL does not need to pick high school football teams. Again, the games get played and the bracket fills itself in. That is the purest form of a competitive sport. The teams who "deserve it" are manifest simply from the results.

Having people watch a bunch of games (maybe, I highly doubt they watch even a statistically significant sample of the entire season) and then get together and choose which ones will be in the bracket (and dont fool yourself, this is still how all 12 spots will be decided next year) is not really a competitive process and therefore I dont think you can really even say that what a team "deserves" has anything to do with it.

Tree Hugger said:

---

Not a terrible idea, but had Okie State beat Texas, would they "deserve" to be in? The teams that beat them in the regular season pretty much prove that they weren't a championship-caliber team this year.

---

The 12 team playoff will solve most of the problems...In any given year, are there really 12 teams good enough to be National Champs? Most years they have hard enough time getting 4 that are dominant enough. This year was an outlier with 8 teams that look really good and could be very competitive in a playoff game..

The flawed rankings system is what makes college football interesting.

Done7 said:

---

The flawed rankings system is what makes college football interesting.

---

Interesting how?

Take a look at a couple of examples from just this year. A&M was ranked when they lost to Miami. They fell roughly 10 spots after that lost, deservedly so IMO. They were out of the rankings soon thereafter. Then you get the case of our bowl opponent, Oklahoma State. I don't know where they were ranked early on, when they had their heads handed to them by some nobody (South Alabama?). Later they lost big to UCF. Yet they were ranked 18th when the sips bashed their heads in last Saturday.

If A&M deserved to be booted from the rankings, I'd say OSU did as well. Yet they remain ranked and we remain unranked.

Ramdiesel said:

---

Tree Hugger said:

---

Not a terrible idea, but had Okie State beat Texas, would they "deserve" to be in? The teams that beat them in the regular season pretty much prove that they weren't a championship-caliber team this year.

---

The 12 team playoff will solve most of the problems...In any given year, are there really 12 teams good enough to be National Champs? Most years they have hard enough time getting 4 that are dominant enough. This year was an outlier with 8 teams that look really good and could be very competitive in a playoff game..

---

You (and many others) are missing the point entirely. Asking if a team is good enough is how we got in this mess in the first place. Put as many teams in as possible and let the teams decide who is good enough. The bonus is we get very exciting games. Who knew that having the best teams play each other would be a controversial thing.

Done7 said:

---

The flawed rankings system is what makes college football interesting.

---

This is absolutely the dumbest argument. It's like saying we love all these talk shows where people argue about who got left out is somehow more exciting than letting the teams actually play each other.

saw em off said:

---

GET RID OF THE RANKINGS!!!!!

Playoff the conference champions (and maybe the runner-ups and maybe even a wild card) through the bowls.

---

I'd go one step more general & say the key is having a set of rules codified & ratified. That will at least keep things accountable and reconciliable in case of surprising selections.

e.g. this year. Does selection hinge on predictive competitiveness? That needs to be a hard rule.

if yes, then, sure, fsu is out. But also you'd have to admit bama AND uga over sip (early-season pre-recto-cranial-inversion results have little bearing on predicted postseason competitiveness)

If no, then, fsu is in, and you have to pick between 1-loss conf champs bama and sip, and sip wins the head-to-head.

But this year, within the same selection session, they didn't apply this rule consistently across teams. And that's kind of the most important part of competitive fairness [/seinfeld]. So, you end up with them answering "yes" to justify excluding fsu, and answering "no" to pull in sip. If you don't have consistency, you end up giving the committee free reign to do whatever their hearts desire.

Forcing the CFB world to write down a set of hard rules that will govern CFP selection -- an the OP here is an example of that -- is not only the simple way but also the only way.

rootube said:

---

saw em off said:

---

GET RID OF THE RANKINGS!!!!!

Playoff the conference champions (and maybe the runner-ups and maybe even a wild card) through the bowls.

Just like every other league does it (high school, NFL, NBA, MLB, etc)

---

If you have been saying this you were wrong. Iowa played in the B10 champ game and they absolutely suck. Louisville played in the ACC champ game and they suck. Ditto for OSU. The conference's are not equal so auto bids are problematic.

---

Doesn't matter. I believe, as I think a lot do, that any team can beat any team at any given time. If Louisville and Iowa had won, then they would be in and their respective runner-up opponents would get a lower seed in the playoffs and possible meet again to settle the score where it counts more.

Aggie_Boomin 21 said:

---

Auto bids in college are dumb. Last year the highest ranked ACC team at this point of the year was 13th. They don't deserve to be in just because they won in a down year of a 2nd tier conference.

---

Agreed but it was the only way they were going to get all the conferences to approve it since the vote needed to be 100%. Fortunately the G5s were happy with 1 guaranteed spot and didn't want 2-3.

Are we a Power School (Blue Blood) or not? IMO we are. Then, why in God's green earth would we want to give up a potential advantage? That makes no sense to me. Improve. Get better. Win. Winning and having clout is a better solution, no?

rootube said:

---

Ramdiesel said:

---

Tree Hugger said:

---

Not a terrible idea, but had Okie State beat Texas, would they "deserve" to be in? The teams that beat them in the regular season pretty much prove that they weren't a championship-caliber team this year.

---

The 12 team playoff will solve most of the problems...In any given year, are there really 12 teams good enough to be National Champs? Most years they have hard enough time getting 4 that are dominant enough. This year was an outlier with 8 teams that look really good and could be very competitive in a playoff game..

---

You (and many others) are missing the point entirely. Asking if a team is good enough is how we got in this mess in the first place. Put as many teams in as possible and let the teams decide who is good enough. The bonus is we get very exciting games. Who knew that having the best teams play each other would be a controversial thing.

---

A 12 team playoff is a lot of teams playing each other...You have to cut it off at some point. There's never going to be 12 super dominant teams in college, in my opinion, 12 teams gives some 2 loss Cinderella type team that has improved throughout a year a chance to knock off an undefeated big dog type team in the playoffs... Plenty of excitement in that...If you go more than 12, you might be watering it down too much...