I don't agree with this. But then we get in to my opinion vs yours. Playoffs work well for baseball, basketball, and division 2 football why wouldn't it work at division 1? I think the "sport we dont recognize" argument is weak. It's not going to turn football in soccer or ballroom dance so I'm ok with it.
Again I don't agree with this. I believe tcu and bayol are better than tosu, hell I would go out on a limb and say moo u is better than tosu. We will never find out though.
Apples and oranges comparison here if you're going to use baseball or basketball as support for more teams in football. A basketball game, with the players getting 48 hours or so rest, in the tourney isn't even comparable to playing a football game with seven days rest. DII comparisons don't work either. It would change DI play from the onset to adopt that model. In LSU's case, that would mean rescheduling both the A&M and Arkansas games. It would also mean playing the entire season without an off week. This notion that DII and DIII do it so DI could as well just doesn't hold water. It's not even the same game in terms of athletes. You've hinted around one of the issues in this inaugural season. There are some that believe the most deserving teams should be in, those that believe the best four should be in, and those on the outside looking in don't know what they were looking for in these four teams.
What difference does it make that the D1 athletes are better that the lower divisions? Since they are better athletes they should be even better equipped to play the extra playoff games. Even in high school in every state I know about there are true playoffs. In Louisiana a high school team can play up to 5 extra games. In Texas its up to 6 extra games. All expanding the playoffs would mean is that 2 teams would play one extra game than the present setup. The best teams ARE the most deserving teams.
The point seems to be missed here. DII playoffs started November 22nd this season. Slippery Rock lost in round one this season and that was their 12th game of the season. That's an 11 game season with no off weeks. You know as well as anyone here the toll it takes on a team when they run through the SEC schedule. I suspect LSU's season went the same way as UA's when it came to the toll it takes on players—hence the reason you see both schools taking off-weeks before they meet. I've seen people mention the difficulty the Tigers had recovering from the Bama game and suggest it was one of the reasons the season ended with losses. I know how difficult it's been for the Tide to put that game behind them in recent years: both emotionally and the time needed to recuperate physically. To adopt a system like DII the season would have to be reduced to 10 games—all played back to back with no off week. Do your high school teams play that type of schedule? No. You're suggesting all it does is add one extra game. No, it doesn't. It's mean losing two games, losing off weeks, and then we can get into the financial impact losing two home game per year does to schools in DI. (And that's not even mentioning the impact these home game make on local communities. Based on revenue in 2013 that would have meant @ a 55 million dollar loss in Tuscaloosa.) What I do find a bit puzzling is the suggestion that moving to what would be 16 games as no big deal. Now we're talking about a schedule similar to the NFL. Who, by the way, sits players for the playoff games...have several weeks off during the season... How you and I choose to define this isn't the same as others. On a bit of a different note: Do you think teams in the Big12 played the same type of schedule that teams in the B1G did this season? The answer is no if we choose just to look at weeks off.
Your math is a bit fuzzy. Right now they are scheduled to play the first round on January 1 and the finals on January 12th. Expanding to 8 teams they could still play the first round on the 1st, play the semifinals a week later and then have a bye week leading to Super Saturday or whatever they want to call it. 2 teams play one more game than the losers in the semis and 2 more than the first round losers. The regular season stays the same. The Big 12 should play a CG but the fact that they didn't doesn't mean that Baylor and TCU aren't better teams than OSU based on the strength of schedule. TCU beat the only common opponent, Minnesota, much more easily than TOSU did. Baylor beat TCU. Both are better teams than OSU and therefore more deserving of being in the playoffs.
That's not the model's suggested in this thread: using DII and DIII as examples. That's been my point all along. It's mixed with no love for the playoffs. No problems here admitting that. But, those that suggest "it'll work, look at DIII" aren't making a point that carries any truth when they also say "it doesn't change anything..." Using your scenario...isn't that playing a more stringent schedule than the NFL? A league that has age restrictions due to physical development, right? I can't leave all of that without asking this: Do you honestly think Michigan State deserves a place in a playoff? There's a brown stain in their bed to be even IN the discussion. Miss State? Ole Miss? Claim your "look at TCU" and my reply is "there's two stains on that sheet. On of them is more burnt orange in color." With one more off week. It's not comparing apples to apples right off the bat. I suspect you were just typing when you said Baylor is better on SOS. Setting that aside... We've known for what, three weeks, who those final three teams up for position four were...right? Who stood up and made a statement? It certainly wasn't TCU. It wasn't the Big12. Baylor's back to back Big12 titles, WITHOUT a championship game, proved only to get them away from the kiddie table.
Slippery Rock started Sept 6th, many D1 teams start in August. In addition when you can practically drive every where you play it's not any worse than high school. I would say Texas HS playoffs are far tougher or players (students). The day has come when the BS games go away, keep a rivalry OOC, either all conf play title game or none do. This year, the bottom line is TCU never deserved to be ranked 3rd then 5 days later go to 6th based on the ESPN Big 10 hysteria. ANYONE that has watched them play knows they are far better than OSU. I would say Baylor is too. Vegas thinks the same. The Big 12 put 2 bye weeks in Sept for TCU around games like Samford.....they played 8 weeks in a row with a couple of games in temps between 15-30 degrees, winds at 30 mph, and rain, sleet and snow..........their schedule was no cake walk. They also had 1 home Big 12 game at night, all the rest were in rediculous heat with 1430 kickoffs.
everything above is completely false. the coldest temp they played in was 31 with no precipitation and a 10mph wind. every other game as 45 or above. 1st game of the year was 94. every other game was mid-80s or below. However, if playing in 15 degrees and snow is what you're looking for, Ohio State did play a game in those conditions this year.
