Another reason for the rest of the country to hate the SEC

There's a difference between a contrary position and trolling. FWIW I've seen you post enough to know you're not a troll. Particularly compared to the obvious ones.

 

If Georgia beat LSU in the SEC championship game, they would be the representative in the playoff from the SEC and vice versa in the scenario I posted.

 

You're right. I don't care what happens. It's all good one way or the other. Logical or Not. Shitty bowl system, playoff, no playoff, conference champions, six win teams, whatever. No matter what happens it'll all be peachy.

 

I'm not suggesting a steamroll from these two conferences. I don't think there's reason for it to go that far. Back in 2008 when Slive first suggested the playoff John Swofford was the only other commissioner to side with him. Based on that, I don't see the ACC as a major stumbling block.

While there are six BCS conferences, I don't think you'll disagree with the idea that four are controlling the destiny with the ACC and Big East on the outside looking in: the later most definitely so.

While I expect Delany to voice his opinions—as SEC weary as they may be—he said a few years ago that one of his three main concerns was "how to do it fairly." I don't see him disagreeing with taking the top four teams. I do see a hiccups in the selection process.

I haven't taken the time to look over the past few years and see how one proposal would work; that being conference champs as long as they are in the top six. I want to say that would have had USC in before Alabama in 2008 when Bama only lost to UF in the SECCG and USC had dropped a regular season game.

That's off the top of my head so I could be wrong. I want to say the top teams—after the CCG weekend—were UF, OU, Texas, Bama, USC, and then Utah without a loss.

A selection committee, or a conference only champ would have created a mess there. In fact, it wouldn't be unlike this past year if you think about it. USC lost to Oregon State who ended up with three or four losses on the season. Is a one loss USC team a better choice than a one loss Bama team in this case since they are the conference champ? That's a Bama loss to the #1 team in the nation vs a USC loss to an unranked team.

Does an undefeated Utah team deserve a shot considering who they played that season?

I think we can agree on this: the controversy isn't going to stop even with a playoff.

 

Winner of Big 10 conf. goes onto the play off Wisconsin vs. Michigan State....loser goes to the Rose Bowl. LSU vs. Georiga loser to the Sugar bowl. Oklahoma State vs. Oklahoma loser goes onto the Cotton Bowl and so on.. You would have had LSU #1 seed last year along with Alabama #2 seed out of the SEC. Oklahoma State #3 seed with Standford being the #4 seed. LSU plays stanford in baton rouge.. Alabama plays Okie State in Tuscaloosa. Thats' who you could have had a 4 team playoff. National Championship would have been in New Orleans.

 

You're right, I do have a tendancy to want to try to explain. Sometimes overly. Not trying to berate anyone, and I apologize if that is the way it came off.

 

Restating the premise of the question isn't answering the question.

If the idea of a playoff is to find the best team in college football, does that one win make Georgia better than LSU or Bama last year?

No, it doesn't. The Bulldogs were not, and still are not, in the same league as either of those two teams. And, the notion of putting a weaker, less talented team in a playoff to determine who is best and leave better teams at home?

That is what you are suggesting.

 

Right teams, wrong locations. Logistically, from a cursory view, it seems like it would work.

Financially, it won't. Okie State and Stanford would have lost money.

 

It won't, and it can't, since it's not possible to include a large enough field of teams in a playoff to eliminate controversy regarding bubble teams. It's much harder to argue that the #66 team has a chance of winning it all than it is for #5. Like I said above, it's about incremental improvements to a broken system. The initial format won't be perfect. It's going to take time, and trial and error to make a playoff system as fair as possible. Meanwhile, a playoff is overwhelmingly preferred by the fans, and it will likely prove to be a bigger moneymaker than the current BCS bowl system. College football wins all the way around.