BCS commissioners settle on plan for the first major college football playoff

Not feeling it at all.

Should be the 6 BCS conference champions and 2 At-Larges and no special exceptions for Notre Dame.

The SEC favoritism in the polls still lends this to a possible 4 SEC team playoff. One champ from each conference and the 2 highest ranking at Large non BCS teams would be the most fair structure you could make and nobody could disagree with that. Every conference gets it's chance and even the best of the little guys would have a shot.

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

Lol ur such a sec hater. I like it I think they should have a bigger playoff but it's way better than what they have now. So tell me this in a 4 team playoff would u have had a problem with bama and lsu in the 4 teams?

I meant if thy had a 4 team playoff last year. And they won't do more than 4 teams cuz it would fuck up the bowls they not gonna do that.

If I don't like it, I don't like it, that doesn't mean that I'm hatin.

I don't give a fuck if it's 2 teams from ANY conference. I think preseason rankings and the coach's poll is what's really wrong with CFB if you ask me.

But back to the subject, I disagree with 6&2 interfering with bowl games, I'd like to know how it would just wreck the bowl system. I can see it actually being intertwined with the bowl system to make bowlseason even more exciting. But I seriously think all 6 conference champs deserve a seed for handling their conference, just like the nfl. Imagine a team winning two bowl games on the way to a national title. That would be dope. That's just one idea though. You could also just keep it at the universites home fields to generate revenue for the schools and force warm weather teams to have to play in the cold for once if it ever so worked out that way.. That would be interesting to see. Or just play at designated neutral sites in NFL stadiums. I mean I seriously can draw up way better scenarios.


And yeah, I wouldmve had a problem with bama making the playoffs. LSU won the sec west and the division. The tide won nothing. They didn't deserve another shot at LSU. I felt the Ducks and Cowboys were way more deserving even though I kinda felt the cowboys more because USC threw cardinal and gold paint all over that joke of a 1st annual Pac-12 championship game. So I think it should've been Cowboys vs. Tigers but a Ducks vs. Tigers rematch would've been just as, if not more, interesting too. I'll give Bama credit for actually winning the 2nd time but that game bored and alienated 90% of the college football loving world. Only people that were cool with it were sec fans.

We'll see what happens in 2014 but I seriously am not excited about it one bit. I can see it being just as flawed.

Only way it would be fair under a 4 team system: top ranking BCS conference winners.....but even then...what about those Utah's, Boise's and TCU's that come along every few years? Good teams that maybe wouldn't win it all but at least deserve a chance to prove it.


Bottom line: I'm all about parity in college football and that aspect has been seriously phased out under the bcs system so adding a 4 top team playoff, to me, does not appear to be a solution in any form when one conference can potential stack 3 teams in it and 2 of them not even being conference champs. It already got to the point to where I stopped watching games and paying attention to cfb outside of SCFootball. If I see more than 1 team from any given conference in the playoffs, its a fail again to me.

And the only way to get rid of that possibility? Scrap the BCS, preas4ason rankings and the coaches poll.

Unfortunately, that all makes too much sense.







Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

I just want to know how this affects USC. Someone please explain.

Originally Posted by GOGO RIOT

I just want to know how this affects USC. Someone please explain.

It remains to be seen

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

lol man bama and lsu were the ebst 2 teams thats what this is about. so u saying u had a problem with it cuz it was boring ... thts not a valid reason, but neway. I agree with you but im saying the reason they wont do it is the bowls. and yes something could be done to tie in the playoff with the bowls but obivously the NCaa isnt interestedd in it they have never really enteatertained it at all until now. I do disagree with a 6 team sloti tuihnk thats too much weight on conference champ or the conrefernce championship games, i think 8 the 6 conference champs and 2 other derserving teams.

Seriously T? Hasn't it been documented that my main reason for not liking it is that bama does not deserve a 2nd shot if they didn't even win their conference. Being boring just made it worse since the first game was already a certified yawn-a-thon. 2 best teams my ass. Tigers vs cowboys was the best teams or tigers vs. Ducks since SC couldn't play because obviously if we were allowed to play in the Pac 12 championship the 2 best teams would've been LSU and USC. If the ducks would've beat us then I'd have no if ands or buts about UO playing LSU again but they beat up an undeserving ucla team that we smoked 50-0. We lost to stanford but we beat UO who beat Stanford after we lost to them. But that was not the 2 best teams.that was a second rivalry game and nothing more. I would've loved to seen a Pac-12 offense against an SEC defense again, preferably a pro-style like ours or a jumbo power run game like stanford's rather than UO's spread option but whatever...its all in the past now.


And I just said I'd rather have the 6 conference champs and 2 at larges. Are you saying you agree with that or something different?


Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

Originally Posted by ScarlosSantana

Seriously T? Hasn't it been documented that my main reason for not liking it is that bama does not deserve a 2nd shot if they didn't even win their conference. Being boring just made it worse since the first game was already a certified yawn-a-thon. 2 best teams my ass. Tigers vs cowboys was the best teams or tigers vs. Ducks since SC couldn't play because obviously if we were allowed to play in the Pac 12 championship the 2 best teams would've been LSU and USC. If the ducks would've beat us then I'd have no if ands or buts about UO playing LSU again but they beat up an undeserving ucla team that we smoked 50-0. We lost to stanford but we beat UO who beat Stanford after we lost to them. But that was not the 2 best teams.that was a second rivalry game and nothing more. I would've loved to seen a Pac-12 offense against an SEC defense again, preferably a pro-style like ours or a jumbo power run game like stanford's rather than UO's spread option but whatever...its all in the past now.


And I just said I'd rather have the 6 conference champs and 2 at larges. Are you saying you agree with that or something different?


Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

so the best team in college footbal last yearl lost to the 2nd best team last year once, yet you dont think they deserved a shot at the championship cuz they didnt win their conference... well maybe the conference setup of the sec is fucking stupid. the east west conecept is fucking stupid especially right now. if your gonna hold so much weight on the conference champs then maybe the best 2 teams from the conference should have played for that title instead of us playing a bum from the other side of the conference maybe we should have played bama in the conference championship then your arguemnt would hold weight with me.. so once again i dont agree with your reasoning for hating on 2 sec teams in the ship or saying one shouldnt have been there. if the best 2 teams are in the same conference then oh well I'll say this i think its fucking dumb that we went into bama and beat them then they go into the dome and beat us not in death valley the dome and they get the trophy i do thnk thats kinda wack but like i said before if your gonna make LSU play a bum squad instead of bama in the SEC title i cant complain cuz thats were it got it fucked up.

and i must have missed the 2 at large bids i thought you were saying just the 6 conference winners, so yeh i we agree on that point.

I seriously don't think you'd be saying that if it were 2 Pac-12 or Big Ten teams in the championship. Not one bit do I believe that. and the only way around a conference championship game is by dropping teams down to 10 and playing a round robin schedule like the Pac did and got NO respect for. In fact, I remember fans from a certain region kept saying "add a conference championship" so we did. There's no way around it, the SEC West is a stacked half with Auburn LSU and Bama and that is not going to change so there will never be a Bama vs. LSU conference championship and that's where my point comes to fruition: if you weren't allowed to compete for one, you shouldn;t be allowed to compete for another. Winning the SEC is already an automatic seeding in the national championship (even with 2 losses). It's zlready bad enough that preseason ranking ensure that but to get there WITHOUT winning it? That's an outrage and that's why it pissed so many people off. T you HAVE TO be reasonable enough to see and understand that if you don't understand anything else I'm saying. That just made it look like all kinds of fucked up to where now you don't have to win your conference, you don't have to win your division, you can have 2 losses, and all you have to do is show up and say you're from the SEC and you're allowed to play in the bcs game. Well what's the point of having rankings, polls, and a system if it favors one group that much?




Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

Originally Posted by ScarlosSantana

I seriously don't think you'd be saying that if it were 2 Pac-12 or Big Ten teams in the championship. Not one bit do I believe that. and the only way around a conference championship game is by dropping teams down to 10 and playing a round robin schedule like the Pac did and got NO respect for. In fact, I remember fans from a certain region kept saying "add a conference championship" so we did. There's no way around it, the SEC West is a stacked half with Auburn LSU and Bama and that is not going to change so there will never be a Bama vs. LSU conference championship and that's where my point comes to fruition: if you weren't allowed to compete for one, you shouldn;t be allowed to compete for another. Winning the SEC is already an automatic seeding in the national championship (even with 2 losses). It's zlready bad enough that preseason ranking ensure that but to get there WITHOUT winning it? That's an outrage and that's why it pissed so many people off. T you HAVE TO be reasonable enough to see and understand that if you don't understand anything else I'm saying. That just made it look like all kinds of fucked up to where now you don't have to win your conference, you don't have to win your division, you can have 2 losses, and all you have to do is show up and say you're from the SEC and you're allowed to play in the bcs game. Well what's the point of having rankings, polls, and a system if it favors one group that much?




Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

this isnt the first time someone that never won their conference made the championship game and u should know that before anyone since it was oklahoma making it over USC. where was the SEC favoritism when an undefeated auburn was left out the national title game when they were clearly better than oklahoma in 04? also, u act like there were undefeated teams the year LSU got in with 2 losses; there was only 1 1 loss team that was worthy (i think boise was undefeated, but they werent gonna get in no matter what). and quit bitchin about the SEC making it in when they defeat the other team, y dont u bitch about the other team being there since obviously the SEC team proved it deserved to be there. yea, it sucks that bama made it in without doing anything, but they proved they deserved to be there.

Originally Posted by -J-

this isnt the first time someone that never won their conference made the championship game and u should know that before anyone since it was oklahoma making it over USC. where was the SEC favoritism when an undefeated auburn was left out the national title game when they were clearly better than oklahoma in 04? also, u act like there were undefeated teams the year LSU got in with 2 losses; there was only 1 1 loss team that was worthy (i think boise was undefeated, but they werent gonna get in no matter what). and quit bitchin about the SEC making it in when they defeat the other team, y dont u bitch about the other team being there since obviously the SEC team proved it deserved to be there. yea, it sucks that bama made it in without doing anything, but they proved they deserved to be there.

Why are you talking to me?

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

Originally Posted by ScarlosSantana

Why are you talking to me?

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

y cant u ever make a legitimate response to anything?

Originally Posted by ScarlosSantana

I seriously don't think you'd be saying that if it were 2 Pac-12 or Big Ten teams in the championship. Not one bit do I believe that. and the only way around a conference championship game is by dropping teams down to 10 and playing a round robin schedule like the Pac did and got NO respect for. In fact, I remember fans from a certain region kept saying "add a conference championship" so we did. There's no way around it, the SEC West is a stacked half with Auburn LSU and Bama and that is not going to change so there will never be a Bama vs. LSU conference championship and that's where my point comes to fruition: if you weren't allowed to compete for one, you shouldn;t be allowed to compete for another. Winning the SEC is already an automatic seeding in the national championship (even with 2 losses). It's zlready bad enough that preseason ranking ensure that but to get there WITHOUT winning it? That's an outrage and that's why it pissed so many people off. T you HAVE TO be reasonable enough to see and understand that if you don't understand anything else I'm saying. That just made it look like all kinds of fucked up to where now you don't have to win your conference, you don't have to win your division, you can have 2 losses, and all you have to do is show up and say you're from the SEC and you're allowed to play in the bcs game. Well what's the point of having rankings, polls, and a system if it favors one group that much?




Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

i really dont have an sec bias. if it were other conferences i would still say the same thing. I watched a whle lot of college football last year and it was clear who the 2 best teams were.

And i totally agree i ahte the fucking system i hate teh p[reseason rankings, i hate everything about the bcs. and having 2 losses doesnt get u in out the SEC if the other teams in the ncaa are balling out they will get in over the SEC teams. I agree with hating the system but i still think u gpt a strong bias agaisnt the SEC ,

Originally Posted by _T_

i really dont have an sec bias. if it were other conferences i would still say the same thing. I watched a whle lot of college football last year and it was clear who the 2 best teams were.

And i totally agree i ahte the fucking system i hate teh p[reseason rankings, i hate everything about the bcs. and having 2 losses doesnt get u in out the SEC if the other teams in the ncaa are balling out they will get in over the SEC teams. I agree with hating the system but i still think u gpt a strong bias agaisnt the SEC ,

Well, no need to reopen a debate we've gone over a thousand times over the years then. You know me, fuck the Pac-12 long as SC does good even though that gets held against us like it's our fault.

Here's to hoping my Trojans get to play another SEC team again this year and keeping our good name

Here's also to hoping it's for the

I hope like hell this 4 team playoff isn't the failure I'm smelling but who knows. Hopefully it expands to a reasonable 6+2 format then.




Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

Originally Posted by ScarlosSantana

Well, no need to reopen a debate we've gone over a thousand times over the years then. You know me, fuck the Pac-12 long as SC does good even though that gets held against us like it's our fault.

Here's to hoping my Trojans get to play another SEC team again this year and keeping our good name

Here's also to hoping it's for the

I hope like hell this 4 team playoff isn't the failure I'm smelling but who knows. Hopefully it expands to a reasonable 6+2 format then.




Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

ITs just comes down to the respect issue. its like u got no respect whatsoever for the sev and u think we r givin shit. yet we win it thats all it comes down to

Originally Posted by _T_

ITs just comes down to the respect issue. its like u got no respect whatsoever for the sev and u think we r givin shit. yet we win it thats all it comes down to

Vice versa...

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

Originally Posted by ScarlosSantana

Vice versa...

Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2

Originally Posted by _T_

USC Trojans Could Step Forward In New BCS Playoff Format

This week or not long after, USC president Max Nikias and his fellow members of the BCS presidential oversight committee will most likely approve a seeded four-team playoff model, replacing the current BCS system. If the vote goes positive from the 12-man committee in Washington on Tuesday, history will be made at the highest level of college football competition, and the ramifications will filter down through the hallways of Heritage Hall and the new John McKay Center.

Naturally, anything could happen when the BCS POC gets together, but the overall impression after the BCS commissioners and Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick recommended a seeded four-team playoff model was that it would likely be approved.

The Pac-12 and the Big Ten, looking to protect the Rose Bowl tradition, were hoping that the plus-one model would be the choice, but that appears unlikely. Quite frankly, we're happy to hear it. We have already commented that we think a national playoff is of greater importance because we think that New Year's Day in Pasadena will not be that greatly affected when all is said and done.


So, we could be looking at a whole new world of college football in 2014, and the timing couldn't be more perfect for the USC Trojans and coach Lane Kiffin as the Trojans will finish up their NCAA sanctions and will again be on a level recruiting and roster playing field.


In fact, it figures with the new playoff system arriving in 2014, the Trojans could be in a rather unique position, which will likely affect the rest of the Pac-12, especially in recruiting.


Imagine if you will that the Trojans of 2012, led by a potential Heisman Trophy winner in quarterback Matt Barkley, manage to either win the BCS title or get into the championship game after a sterling regular season.


The impact of the Trojans reaching this season's title game will unquestionably make a resounding statement that the Men of Troy are back among the nation's elite. Now just imagine the impact of future high school recruits taking it all in.


Many of the players under Kiffin, once impressionable recruits, have commented that they "grew up watching Trojans winning championships under Pete Carroll." Those indelible impressions are still there with the Class of 2014, which is off to a stupendous start.

If Kiffin can get his team to capture a national title, it would mean a new dominating era under his watch, and the ramifications in the Pac-12 could have a profound effect.

With the probable exception of Oregon, most of the Pac-12 teams will be selling the idea of going to a postseason bowl game, winning the Pac-12, and stressing the dream of someday playing in the Rose Bowl.


The Trojans, however, will be selling a product that reaches the highest level -- the national championship. Win it all in 2012, and the evidence will be branded into the psyche of these schoolboy legends, both nationally and locally.


It isn't hard to imagine a young man saying, "I signed with the Trojans because I thought that was the best chance for me to play in the final four and win a national championship." Not the type of comments Pac-12 rivals want to see and hear in the media.


The mentality that the best way to be part of the new college football semifinals is to play for the Trojans will be a hard argument to refute, especially for high school players on the West Coast.

Future Trojans such out-of-state verbals quarterback Max Brown (Sammamish, Wash./Skyline), defensive lineman Kenny Bigelow (Elkton, Md./Eastern Christian Academy), running back Ty Isaac (Joliet, Il./Joliet Academy) and local safety Su'a Cravens (Murrieta, Calif./Vista Murrieta) know this probable new four-team format will be in the teeth of their cardinal and gold career.

No doubt they, too, will be selling high-level recruits at postseason all-star games and camps on the allure of playing with them and the Trojans and winning it all. Make no mistake about it: Potential college football stars will see the same attraction that their counterparts in prep basketball see in selecting a college that provides the best avenue to playing in the Final Four.


If future recruits are convinced that playing for the Trojans is the best way to play in college football's new ultimate experience, the rich will get richer. Let's face it, considering the Trojans' ability to recruit like they have under NCAA restrictions, what will they be able to do in a new playoff system with those restrictions lifted?


Should the Trojans win the BCS title in 2012 and defeat an SEC team, it could get downright scary to for future Trojans recruiting opponents. With the Trojans still getting blue-chip players nationally, we could be seeing a Pete Carroll-type dominating recruiting era, something that would send a shiver down the spines at the national level.


No question about it, much could be riding on the outcome of this season, which will be the future gateway into a new playoff era. Right in the middle of this enormous historical transition could be the University of Southern California. The groundwork is in place.



Source: Insider