Who really should have been #3 and #4?

After seeing mich st and oklahoma get their clocks cleaned by bama and clemson, respectively... any thoughts who maybe rightfilly should have been in the mix besides state and oklahoma?

Or was there really such a gap between #2 and the rest of the world this year?

 

Should have just been Clemson and Bama.

 

Based on resume, you really couldn't have put anyone else in over those two.

 

Vawls

 

I agree with this and with kpt. The point is to find the best team, anyway. Is there any doubt that it is one of Clemson or Alabama this year? Casting the wider net helps eliminate any griping by OU or Michigan State about "SEC Bias" if they won some lesser bowl and didn't get into the championship game. Now the two other outstanding conference champions can't say shit.

 

3. Vols
4. Volunteers

 

Approve.

 

Nah. Should move to a 32 team double elimination tourney, that way it doesn't matter who was 3 and 4. More tourney is better, right? Isn't that why we have this?

 

The perfect system would require only P-5 conference championship for entry, with 2 spots for non P-5 conference champions of the highest coach's poll rank and 1 at-large bid decided by the highest ranked coach's poll non-conference champion.

No more, no less. That would be the most equitable, accurate, and entertaining way of determining the national champion. Reduce to the regular season games total back to 11 to accommodate this. Also, every conference has to have a conference championship game in order to have an eligible champion. Otherwise, they can only get in as the 1 at-large spot.

 

That blows. Well thought out, but still.

I still appreciate you as a poster.

 

Great argument. Unassailable. I especially liked the counterpoints.

 

64 and we've got a deal.

 

I edited it to be nicer, but I hate it. Four is the absolute limit. We've been at it a long time and there is seldom more than two. Not sure there's ever been more than three. Don't need some Big East level fluff in there.

 

I kinda like the idea of reranking them after the traditional bowls and doing a 1 2 then

 

Any conference champ in top 12 gets in. Remaining get in at large. That's been my thought. Don't like automatic for anyone given so few teams.

 

Completely agree. Only really once in the past 20 years was there even a legit argument for 3. Let alone 4 or 8. If you can't make a 4 team playoff that's a you problem.

 

I think IP's system is as goo as any if there were a problem of 6 or more teams being deserving at the end of the season.

 

Make it two at-large spots and one bid for the top non p-5 and I would agree.

 

Do not like 6 team playoff, gives too much advantage to bye teams, Keep it four or make it eight.

 

This would also work, but that means bowl matchups would need to be more carefully crafted in respect to rankings.