2015 Playoffs

[irishroo]

I realize it's still super early to be talking about this, but whatever it's fun to talk about. What do you guys think is the likely playoff setup at the end of this year? Also, what are some other scenarios that could really help or hurt ND. Personally, I think the playoffs this shake out like this:

1: Auburn, 13-0
2: Florida St, 13-0
3: Oregon, 12-1
4: Notre Dame, 11-1

I know this seems super biased, but if you think about it it's not far-fetched. If Auburn wins out, like I think they will, then it would be extremely unlikely for anyonese else in the SEC to have less than 2 losses. That would leave a 1 loss Oregon team (I don't think UA can keep this up), a 1 loss B12 champion (dont see Baylor or TCU running the table), a 1 loss Mich St, and a 1 loss ND team to fill the remaining 2 spots not occupied by undefeated Power 5 teams. Oregon would have wins @UCLA, vs. Stanford, and the P12 South champ, with a loss to a maybe very good, maybe very average AZ team. ND would have wins vs. Stanford, @ASU, and @USC, with a loss to #1/2 Florida St. Baylor/TCU/OU would have wins over 1 or 2 of the others in that group along with Oklahoma St and KState, and a loss somewhere along the way. Michigan St would have a loss to a very good Oregon team and wins over Nebraska and OSU. If it were to shake out like that, I don't see any way ND doesn't get in

 

[chicago51]

I think a one loss big 12 champ isn't necessarily out of the debate. ND may get the nod they may not especially if it is OU. I think they should but who knows what will go on in people's brains, the people being the selection committee that ultimately decide this.

Pac 12 champ will have 2 losses. I think Oregon will lose again though just like they did last season once Mariota is gone Oregon drops to 8-9 win team. They will have a hard time sustaining success without Chip Kelly once Mariota is gone. Though I said thing about Standford with Luck post Harbough and was wrong. (although Shaw's poor recruiting may still catch up with them).

I'm not sold on Florida State this year. Not sold on ND as a top 4 team either though so I can't say who wins that game.

I don't see Auburn nor anyone in the SEC West gets through unscratched.

Also the timing of the losses means everything.

 

[Rude-E]

1: Auburn, 13-0
2: Florida St, 13-0
3: Oregon, 12-1
4: Notre Dame, 11-1

I can't see Oregon making it in. I think the committee will put 2 SEC teams in, FSU and that last spot will be the best between us (Notre Dame), the Pac12 champ, or the Big12 champ.

The Big Ten only has a chance if we stumble and Michigan State finishes undefeated for the rest of the season. Even then, Sparty only has a chance.

 

[bkess8]

I don't think I'm by myself in saying that there will not be an undefeated SEC team this year. The SEC will beat each other up and everyone else will benefit, they however will be the top choice for 1 loss teams!

 

[HoosierMP33]

1. ND 12-0
2. FSU 12-1
3. Miss St. 12-1
4. Mich St. 12-1

As for the SEC and remaining big games on each team's schedule....Auburn still has to play Miss St., Ole Miss, Texas A&M, Georgia, and Alabama....I think they'll lose at least 2 of those 5....Miss St. has Auburn, 'Bama, and Ole Miss left....they'll lose 1 of those games...'Bama has Tex A&M, LSU, Miss St., and Auburn left...they'll lose 1 of those games....my point is that the SEC is going to devour each other, but the team with the "easiest" road to escape with 1 loss is probably Miss St....

The Pac-12 is the same way...i don't think one team is dominant in that conf this year and any team on any given day can (and will) beat the other....this year could be the perfect storm for having a conf champ from the SEC and PAC-12 each having 2 losses....

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

SEC West champion, Big 12 champion, Pac-12 champion if there is a team with 1 loss, FSU or ND. I think it will be Bama, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, and Ole Miss because Oregon will lose again, UCLA will lose again, Arizona State will lose again, and Zona will lose twice.

 

[NDRock]

Would like to see an 8 team playoff, five conference winners and three at large.

 

[bkess8]

Would like to see an 8 team playoff, five conference winners and three at large.

IMO winning your conference should guarantee you a spot in the playoff.

 

[ACamp1900]

If they are going to go playoffs they should also go some kind of mega conference route imo... I'm not comfortable with keeping it all like it is, expanding over and over while destroying the bowls...

 

[HoosierMP33]

Would like to see an 8 team playoff, five conference winners and three at large.

I've said this for years....8 team playoff makes things so much easier....5 conf champs, 3 at large spots....you still get the best of the best.... but the b.s. arguement that the reg season wont matter or the bowl game market will be affected is just that; b.s.....it's always about the money and I can see an 8 team playoff making insane amounts of cash.....

 

[ickythump1225]

Pac 12 champ will have 2 losses. I think Oregon will lose again though just like they did last season once Mariota is gone Oregon drops to 8-9 win team. They will have a hard time sustaining success without Chip Kelly once Mariota is gone. Though I said thing about Standford with Luck post Harbough and was wrong. (although Shaw's poor recruiting may still catch up with them).

Stanford is still living on the final fumes of the Harbaugh glory years. Harbaugh left that team in great shape, the cupboards were overflowing for the most part. It will take a while for Shaw's recruiting to undo Harbaugh's work but it will happen eventually. Shaw's not a great recruiter or a great in game coach.

 

[clashmore_jon]

I'm curious how the committee will consider our already having played FSU. If we win that game and a bunch more then we're in. But if we lose to FSU, especially by a lot, they might take a 1 loss big 12 or a 2nd sec team or whoever else over us since we already demonstrated we can't hang.

Why don't we just beat FSU, win out, and not worry?

 

[NDhoosier]

I've said this for years....8 team playoff makes things so much easier....5 conf champs, 3 at large spots....you still get the best of the best.... but the b.s. arguement that the reg season wont matter or the bowl game market will be affected is just that; b.s.....it's always about the money and I can see an 8 team playoff making insane amounts of cash.....

the 8 team playoff should not change that much, the BCS bowl games become the Qtr-finals and semifinals. In fact, you will have to create a new BCS bowl which will make even more money.

There is really no downside to an 8-team playoff. Any more than that would be a problem though.

 

[wizards8507]

There is really no downside to an 8-team playoff.

1. They'd never sell out the stadiums.

2. They'd cut the regular season to 11 games.

3. The sixth, seventh, and eighth teams probably don't deserve it anyways.

4. The NCAA would have to take a heavier hand in conference governance to protect their system.

5. Not all conference champions are created equal.

6. Tournaments do a poor job of identifying the best team as the "true" champion.

 

[NCND]

1. They'd never sell out the stadiums.

2. They'd cut the regular season to 11 games.

3. The sixth, seventh, and eighth teams probably don't deserve it anyways.

4. The NCAA would have to take a heavier hand in conference governance to protect their system.

5. Not all conference champions are created equal.

6. Tournaments do a poor job of identifying the best team as the "true" champion.

TOTALLY agree

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

4 team is perfect and I hope they never change it. There's only been like one or two times where a team ranked 5 to 8 has been able to say "Hey we deserve a shot to prove we are the best team in the country." You can't say that about 3 and 4. The playoff system is excellent right now.

 

[gkIrish]

1. They'd never sell out the stadiums.

2. They'd cut the regular season to 11 games.

3. The sixth, seventh, and eighth teams probably don't deserve it anyways.

4. The NCAA would have to take a heavier hand in conference governance to protect their system.

5. Not all conference champions are created equal.

6. Tournaments do a poor job of identifying the best team as the "true" champion.

On this point, I think the assumption would be that the Quarterfinals would be a home game for the higher seed.

 

[ACamp1900]

TOTALLY agree

Seconded...

 

[irishog77]

4 team is perfect and I hope they never change it. There's only been like one or two times where a team ranked 5 to 8 has been able to say "Hey we deserve a shot to prove we are the best team in the country." You can't say that about 3 and 4. The playoff system is excellent right now.

Something that has not even occurred is excellent right now?

 

[Wild Bill]

1. They'd never sell out the stadiums.

There are empty seats in the first round of the NCAA Bball tourney and they still do just fine. The first week of an 8 team tourney could be the best week of the entire tourney, if not the entire season.

2. They'd cut the regular season to 11 games.

Not necessarily. I believe every other division plays 12 games and then have a sixteen team tourney.

3. The sixth, seventh, and eighth teams probably don't deserve it anyways.

I disagree. Look at the rankings prior to the bowl games in 2012. LSU was ranked 8 and would have played ND. Georgia was a 7 and would have re-played bama. Stanford was a 6 and would have played Florida (the same team bridgewater stuck it in). Those last three teams could have easily walked away winning all of those games.

4. The NCAA would have to take a heavier hand in conference governance to protect their system.

Not quite sure what you mean.

5. Not all conference champions are created equal.

Based on the eye test or something more?

6. Tournaments do a poor job of identifying the best team as the "true" champion.

It may be flawed but it's certainly not "poor". I've always been a fan of figuring it out on the field.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Five conference champs, three at large, strap 'em up, and let's play ball. Last team standing wins.

Cut the regular season down one game, go to nine conference games across the board, the quarters are played at the higher seeded teams stadium, keep the semis and the title game rotating like the current plan. The quarters played second Sat of December due to finals, the semis on Jan 1 and the title game a week later. May the best team win.

 

[IrishLax]

Five conference champs, three at large, strap 'em up, and let's play ball. Last team standing wins.

Cut the regular season down one game, go to nine conference games across the board, the quarters are played at the higher seeded teams stadium, keep the semis and the title game rotating like the current plan. The quarters played second Sat of December due to finals, the semis on Jan 1 and the title game a week later. May the best team win.

It's so obvious... and it would be great because all conference races would be nationally relevant, and SOS would matter tremendously for those 3 at large spots... and best of all, a lot of politicking would be taken out of the equation relative to the current model.

Having 4 spots for 5 conferences is just going to be a nightmare. Big 12 doesn't play a conference championship game. ACC and Big Ten are both incredibly weak. PAC12 and SEC are all going to beat up on each other. So who gets left out?

 

[stlnd01]

.

 

[stlnd01]

I may be old-fashioned, but I'd actually rather no playoff. I kind of thought the BCS got it right just about every year (Auburn may have a beef).
College football has the best regular season in all of sports, because every game matters. I agree the four-team playoff is awkward. But even with four, most of the teams that lost Saturday still get a mulligan. You go to 8 teams, and some will have two mulligans. And then you've basically got regular season college basketball, and who cares about that?

 

[T Town Tommy]

It's so obvious... and it would be great because all conference races would be nationally relevant, and SOS would matter tremendously for those 3 at large spots... and best of all, a lot of politicking would be taken out of the equation relative to the current model.

Having 4 spots for 5 conferences is just going to be a nightmare. Big 12 doesn't play a conference championship game. ACC and Big Ten are both incredibly weak. PAC12 and SEC are all going to beat up on each other. So who gets left out?

I think the fact there is one more conference than available slots will drive the format to eight teams pretty quickly. Your example is the nightmare that may very well come by the end of November. Somebody is gonna be pissed... and may have a legitimate right to be at the end of the day. I predict chaos for the selection committee simply based on the fact that this year there appears to be several teams that could possibly have a solid claim to be "in."

 

[heygipper]

Plus even in the illustration in favor of the 8 team playoff there are rematches everywhere. Almost every bowl rematch I've ever seen has gone the opposite way of the regular reason result (even Notre Dame has this history: beating LSU 24-6 at Baton Rouge in November only to get destroyed 27-9 in the bowl game against the same team.) Throw in the fact that we already have some rematches in Conference Championships, and you could be asking teams to win 3 games over an opponent/go 16-0 if they are good enough to go unbeaten during the regular season.

College football is a different sport than college basketball.

 

[heygipper]

I think the fact there is one more conference than available slots will drive the format to eight teams pretty quickly. Your example is the nightmare that may very well come by the end of November. Somebody is gonna be pissed... and may have a legitimate right to be at the end of the day. I predict chaos for the selection committee simply based on the fact that this year there appears to be several teams that could possibly have a solid claim to be "in."

Beat all of the teams on your schedule once and you get in. In a lot of cases you can get in even you don't do that. People are just going to get that much more upset when the SEC gets three bids (or 4?!) every year.

 

[T Town Tommy]

Beat all of the teams on your schedule once and you get in. In a lot of cases you can get in even you don't do that. People are just going to get that much more upset when the SEC gets three bids (or 4?!) every year.

Conference championships should mean something however. So what if the B1G is perceived to be weaker at the moment. Their conference should be represented by the team that wins the conference. If they lose by 30 in a playoff game then that's what they do. Go to eight, protect each Power Five conference, and give three at large bids to the best three teams left. Determining those three may be difficult, but the committee needs something to do.

 

[heygipper]

Conference championships should mean something however. So what if the B1G is perceived to be weaker at the moment. Their conference should be represented by the team that wins the conference. If they lose by 30 in a playoff game then that's what they do. Go to eight, protect each Power Five conference, and give three at large bids to the best three teams left. Determining those three may be difficult, but the committee needs something to do.

This will work until an 8-5 team sneaks into the playoffs by winning their division, winning a rematch in the conference championship game against a team they already lost to, and then catches fire in the playoffs a month later (See Wisconsin 2012 perhaps?)

 

[stlnd01]

This will work until an 8-5 team sneaks into the playoffs by winning their division, winning a rematch in the conference championship game against a team they already lost to, and then catches fire in the playoffs a month later (See Wisconsin 2012 perhaps?)

Yeah. Tying a playoff spot to winning your conference title places way too much importance on the conference championship game, which, let's face it, in most conferences is an artificial creation designed to generate a TV payday.
Many times, the winner of one of the divisions is the fourth or fifth or sixth best team in the conference. But maybe on that day they knock off a far better team. Meanwhile a strong divisional runner-up gets a week off and a trip to the playoff (see: Alabama, 2011). Are they more deserving? Or do all three get in?
There's too much variance between, and within, conferences, to place that much import on a conference title. Says the fan of the lone major independent, of course.