That's solid logic, Joe. About the only flaw I can see is Alabama's ranking. Like it or not, the committee that determines the top 4 teams for the playoff obviously takes a school's program history into consideration. I personally don't - but they do. Their initial ranking didn't come out until, what, 4 weeks ago? At that point in time Bama's performance (and opponents) were clearly known and yet, if I recall, they still had them in the top 4. The same could said for Clemson. Neither of those two teams played as competitive of a schedule as the teams ranked immediately below them. Realistically, the only spots that count are the top 4. My top 4 would be: Ohio State LSU Georgia Oklahoma, Utah or Wisconsin (tough call)
My school of thought is that you get the benefit of the eye test when you are undefeated. Clemson gets that. But once you drop one you turn course to focusing on the resume. I had Alabama at #2 for a while until they lost. When they did they dropped hard.
Again, I see your logic. But, if we're ranking teams on this year's performance, Neither Alabama or Clemson should have been ranked highly to begin with.
I wasn't ranking Clemson (or Bama) based off last year. Outside the UNC game where everyone seems stuck on because they almost lost, Clemson has looked very good. Maybe not as good as Ohio State and LSU but I'd say it was close to LSU. It's probably going to be LSU vs Clemson in the first round and I'd love to see that. I absolutely hate that we get these weekly rankings that influence bias. Some people still think that Alabama has a ranked win because A&M was ranked at kickoff. That may be the single most ignorant school of thought I've ever heard. An opponent could go 0-12 but if they were ranked week 1 people would call it a ranked win at the end of the season.
bc they're not that good anymore. Most of the teams haven't been good in years. Now perennial good teams like USC and Stanford stink too. The whole conference is down.
USC isn't elite but they don't stink. They are ranked. Utah is good although I do believe that they haven't truly beaten anyone. They lost to their best opponent. Oregon will have 3 losses if they beat them. Utah is good but Oklahoma, with their sloppier games, has done much more and deserves it more IMO. Possibly Baylor too but I don't think they make the bump as they have looked worse and their better wins/losses aren't much better.
1. Ohio State (12-0) 2. LSU (12-0) 3. Clemson (12-0) 4. Georgia (11-1) 5. Utah (11-1) 6. Oklahoma (11-1) 7. Baylor (11-1) 8. Wisconsin (10-2) 9. Florida (10-2) 10. Penn State (10-2) 11. Auburn (9-3) 12. Alabama (10-2) 13. Oregon (10-2) 14. Michigan (9-3) 15. Notre Dame (10-2) 16. Iowa (9-3) 17. Memphis (11-1) 18. Minnesota (10-2) 19. Boise State (11-1) 20. Cincinnati (10-2) 21. Appalachian State (11-1) 22. Southern California (8-4) 23. Virginia (9-3) 24. Navy (9-2) 25. Oklahoma State (8-4)
This could be a wild weekend of Conference Championships. #1 vs #8 #2 vs #4 #3 vs unranked team #5 vs #13 #6 vs #7 Lots of variables out there to determine who's in.
I think an 8 team playoff for the Title could work. Make the bigger bowl sites-Rose, Orange, Sugar, Fiesta the home location. Have it as 1-8, 2-7, 3-6, 4-5. Could be a revenue juggernaut. How do the 8 get determine would be Major Conference Champion and then the highest ranked teams after that. There's the 8. I'm sure plenty of teams will be left out and ranked 9-26 but don't lose and get into the top 8 or win your major conference. That's my plan anyways.
While I agree in principle with the 8 team playoff format, I suspect that most years would end up just like this year and the top 8 teams going into the conference championship weekend will have almost half of them playing each other. IMHO, that would take too much away from winning a conference championship on the field of play as, win or lose, both teams would probably end up in the 8 team playoff anyway. If they don't, then do you really want a 3rd or 4th place team from a conference playing for a chance at the National Championship?
How many conferences are there? Each conference champ gets in. Then how many at large teams it takes to get to 16 teams. Use the coaches ranking to determine who gets to play who by lowest seed against highest seed rankings. Problem solved.
There are 10 conference championship games this weekend. (Of those, only 5 are considered as a "power 5 conference ".) Beyond that, the only at large independent I can think of that could be consistently considered is Notre Dame and even they have a scheduling alliance with the ACC. Next, you need to figure out how to format a 10 (or 11) team playoff schedule that doesn't extend into February. That's certainly doable by using bye weeks for the top ranked teams and a couple of the lower tier bowl games in mid-December for the 1st round. You would, no doubt, eventually get a "Cinderella" team similar to the NCAA basketball championship tournament.
The Cinderella team thing would really make for a great feel good story. It will never happen with the 4 team format now.
You also have to consider that these are {cough} student athletes {cough} and, in some cases, would be extending their season by at least 3 weeks.
