so i guess jwb wants it like hockey and all 117 teams make the postseason. i'll take the plus one system over what we have currently.
Why are they touting this like it's a new idea? Myself and plenty of others have been saying this for years. In fact, when I heard about the '+1' system they're starting next year, I thought this was what they were doing. But they really just meant that they were adding an additional BCS bowl for two more teams to play in. :nope:
I know what you're saying, but let me explain this. Take this year as an example. Let's say USC and Texas finish the regular season undefeated, while VaTech loses to Miami this weekend and Bama loses to LSU on the 12th. LSU, Miami, and Penn St. win out, while UCLA only loses to USC and Bama only loses to LSU. CFN's system would have USC #1, Texas #2, and could have any of a number of one-loss teams as their #3 and #4: LSU, Miami, UCLA, Alabama, Texas Tech, or Penn St. Let's just say they pick LSU #3 and Miami #4. So you have #1 USC vs. #4 Miami playing the winner of #2 Texas vs. #3 LSU. Say Miami beats USC and LSU beats Texas. Miami beats LSU for the national championship....but wait! UCLA says it should've been them, not Miami, in as the #4 seed.. after all, their only loss was in overtime to USC. Bama claims they should've been the #4 seed because their only loss was due to a bad 4th qtr. call against LSU. Texas Tech says wait a second guys we should've been the #4 seed because our only loss was to a red hot Texas team. Penn St. says we're the true #4 seed, because our only loss was on the last play of the game against Michigan. And get this! Texas is now saying they have as much a claim as anyone to the national title, because their only loss of the season was to LSU.. and USC rears their ugly head and proclaims themselves the true national champ because their only loss is to Miami, the team who eventually won out in the playoff. Sounds like a bigger mess than the one we have now. The system sounds good until a #4 seed wins the national title.. then the #5 has the same gripe as today's #3.
Redo that entire scenario, except without the plus one...only USC and Texas get a shot. Then calculate the complaints heh.
Right on. In some years the CFN plus-one would help eliminate complaints, in other years it would create more complaints. In the end it doesn't really solve anything.
That is going to happen no matter what. If you have 64 teams number 65 will bitch and complain. The plus one is exactly what we need in my opinion. How can you guys think that ANY system that decides the champ on the field is flawed ? If you match up 1 vs 3 and 2 vs 4 in the bowls and the winners play each other, how is that not 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times better than what we have now ?
How? Read post #15 of this thread. Or the short version: Because plus-one doesn't decide it on the field any more than the current system does.
That's just not true. Sure, it isn't all-inclusive by any means, nor should it be. But no way can you say it isn't 'any' better than the current system. Insinuating that the controversy will be just as rampant with a #5 getting excluded as it is with a #3 getting excluded is preposterous.
