Playoff coming to college football? Matt Hayes says so.

Thamel mentioned this in the NYT piece, but the Pac-12 and Big 10 would happily keep their teams out of a proposed playoff if they had to choose between that and the Rose Bowl.

I understand the trandtion and I completely respect that, but they need to be able to step back and figure out a way where the highest-ranked team from the two conferences goes to the Rose against an opponent to be determined and some years it might not be a Pac-12/Big-10 game and some years it won't. They've already experienced that a few times under the current system.

 

If the winner of those games is guaranteed a spot in one of the Big Four bowls then it could be a disaster if a 7-4 teams upsets a top-rated team in those games. You eliminate the conference championship game and the top team goes to the bowl. That's not to say conference champions are always going to have 10-11 wins going into the bowl game, but when you have 7-4 or 6-5 (cough, UCLA...) teams playing in conference championship games, it would have the potential to fuck this whole system up...

 

The Rose Bowl thinking its shit doesn't stink and the unholy alliance with the Big Tweleven and Pac-x is at the root of many problems in this sport.

 

I still don't get the argument that any playoff would destroy the sacred bowls. The Capital One Bowl has never played a role in deciding a MNC. Nor has the Las Vegas Bowl. Those were exhibitions then. They'll be exhibitions now. Nothing changes.

 

Can we stop with the whole Alabama-LSU-was-kinda-boring-therefore-PLAYOFFS! argument?

Did we just up and forget the horrific abortion that was Butler/UCONN, nevertheless certified by the sanctity of March Madness?

So in this agreement, you'd have LSU, Oregon, West Virginia, and Oklahoma State.

But no Alabama, because heaven forbid we have a rematch. EXCEPT YOU'D HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR TWO, WITH LSU PLAYING OREGON AND/OR WVU. And again, no Alabama, but you'd have a team that got trucked by honkin' Syracuse in your championship thingy.

 

Either way, someone's gonna bitch about being left out. There's always going to be someone next in line who got shafted.

That said, I'd rather hear someone bitch about being left out of a four-team thing than a two-team thing.

 

I really can't live in a world where...

LSU/Alabama: A disgrace!

Anything including Clemson/West Virginia: Fair!

 

I'm either an advocate of a 16-teamer with all conference champions + 5 at-large (not going to happen) or a four teamer with the top four in the BCS standings. No need for an eight-team playoff.

 

Coming in 2014: Five AQ unbeatens! Oh, and an unbeaten Boise!

 

However they set this up I hope it's done in a way where they put eight teams into the four major bowls and then the winners play a round robin after the regular bowls are done. It's technically an 8-team playoff, even if they make it sound like it's only a 4-team playoff.

There will always be bitching about who is left out, but as long as it's not as ridiculous as it has been in most years then I'm fine with it.

 

OK - so if you have a plus one game, who would be the most deserving two teams based on their body of work....

Alabama and LSU.

So we'd have it for the third time.

And before you scream - LSU was 13-1 had the most wins over ranked teams, beat the No. 1 team on their home field, has the best SOS, beat more top five teams,

Had LSU won, the OSU would be the team to play them.

But OSU's resume is not better than LSU's.

Which is why it needs to be two semifinals and championship - take the guesswork out of it.

 

Does anybody trust this group of jackanapes to get anything right?