Fightintxag03 said:

---

Being saying it since BcS days, have Vegas determine the top 12 teams.

---

Just have the AI model use some Vegas odds as a metric then Vegas and human selection are part of the calculation

Not happening. The point of sports is entertainment.

The committee has created massive engagement this year

The conferences would be realigned with the blue bloods spread across them equally. If done with some actual thought, there should be any crappy conferences.

This idea would keep us from having to hear disgusting whiners like Stark.

Or, we could just keep acting like using algorithms or committees has anything to do with athletic competition.

I certainly agree with you on the last point. The committee is corrupt as hell and shouldn't exist. The trash media shouldn't decide either.

czar_iv said:

---

AgSnacks16 said:

---

The idea of a committee is fine. Filling it with ADs and College coaches who are biased towards their own conferences and don't know what they are talking about is the problem. There is a reason no one uses the coaches poll.

---

Committee of people is by for the worse solution unless you want corruption and incompetence

---

Yep.

It's just plain dumb.

The conferences are currently too big. Conferences need to be small enough for all teams to play each other. Each conf has a blue blood or two. If you finish 3rd in you're conf, how in the hell would you deserve a shot at a NC. You already have made it clear you're not worthy

FDT 1999 said:

---

I certainly agree with you on the last point. The committee is corrupt as hell and shouldn't exist. The trash media shouldn't decide either.

---

Yeah, having rankings before conf play has started is corrupt and only done to create discussion and draw eyeballs.

FDT 1999 said:

---

He is Ass My Dude said:

---

No algorithm
No committee

Top two teams from each conference. New and more conferences that balanced with "blue bloods" spread across

If you can't finish top 2 in your conf, too dame bad.

---

F*** that! Many conferences don't deserve any slots much less 2 of them. This method would give too much representation to sh*tty conferences. If the SEC or Big 10 get 5-6 slots, too f***ing bad. Try sucking less.

---

Y'all could always come back to the Big12.

There used to be computer rankings and everyone hated them.

Expand the playoffs. Then, we don't need to talk about who the best team is, we'll play the games and see.

Problem solved

He is Ass My Dude said:

---

No algorithm
No committee

Top two teams from each conference. New and more conferences that balanced with "blue bloods" spread across

If you can't finish top 2 in your conf, too dame bad.

---

So we'd have:

OSU
Indiana
UGA
Bama
Tech
BYU
UVA
Duke

Congratulations. You just created the worst possible playoff slate possible.

Bluecat_Aggie94 said:

---

Even if uo go with all computers, you have to have humans tell it what matters. Can't get rid of human bias.

---

No, but it would be applied evenly.

Humans move the goal posts according to what their favorite teams are doing ..

TexAg2019 said:

---

He is Ass My Dude said:

---

No algorithm
No committee

Top two teams from each conference. New and more conferences that balanced with "blue bloods" spread across

If you can't finish top 2 in your conf, too dame bad.

---

So we'd have:

OSU
Indiana
UGA
Bama
Tech
BYU
UVA
Duke

Congratulations. You just created the worst possible playoff slate possible.

---

Congrats to you. you can't read.

4 said:

---

Bluecat_Aggie94 said:

---

Even if uo go with all computers, you have to have humans tell it what matters. Can't get rid of human bias.

---

No, but it would be applied evenly.

Humans move the goal posts according to what their favorite teams are doing ..

---

Just this off-season it was stated that strength of schedule was going to carry more weight I see zero proof of thar.

They didn't say how or how much more weight. It's all BS when they open their corrupt pie holes.

He is Ass My Dude said:

---

TexAg2019 said:

---

He is Ass My Dude said:

---

No algorithm
No committee

Top two teams from each conference. New and more conferences that balanced with "blue bloods" spread across

If you can't finish top 2 in your conf, too dame bad.

---

So we'd have:

OSU
Indiana
UGA
Bama
Tech
BYU
UVA
Duke

Congratulations. You just created the worst possible playoff slate possible.

---

Congrats to you. you can't read.

---

What exactly did I get wrong? Leaving out the top two from each G5 conference? Is that supposed to make the slate better?

Or, and as a suggestion, dont lose to an 8-3 team and its all moot.

TTUArmy said:

---

FDT 1999 said:

---

He is Ass My Dude said:

---

No algorithm
No committee

Top two teams from each conference. New and more conferences that balanced with "blue bloods" spread across

If you can't finish top 2 in your conf, too dame bad.

---

F*** that! Many conferences don't deserve any slots much less 2 of them. This method would give too much representation to sh*tty conferences. If the SEC or Big 10 get 5-6 slots, too f***ing bad. Try sucking less.

---

Y'all could always come back to the Big12.

---

I'd rather A&M shut the athletic department down.

What ever happens, just make sure to do away with the AP Pole. It's turned into a popularity contest. it shouldn't even be mentioned.

Sid Farkas said:

---

OHAg82 said:

---

Replace with an algorithm that takes into account all metrics. ***kin rediculous.

---

They have too much invested in blue blood programs. Those are the programs that draw in casual fans and dewschbag fans who can't see thru the bs.

---

Considering Texas A&M is one of the 10 most watched programs in all of college football-even higher TV ratings than Notre Dame, that would be us.

MSCAg said:

---

There used to be computer rankings and everyone hated them.

---

Previously, that ranking was for picking the best 2 not picking the best 12. Computer rankings will be a fairer solution but of course humans will screwed it up and keep the freaking committee system.

I agree disband the committee and no computers!

Indiana vs. Georgia

It's that simple.

Old BCS was just as fair.
Committees suck.

I like the idea of a playoff a bunch but would prefer for it to just be the best 12 teams. Strength of schedule should be a big factor. Going 11-1 in a garbage conference like BYU should not get you ranked higher than a UT or Vandy that played much tougher schedules and actually beat good teams.

I also don't think being the champ of a garbage conference should count for anything.

Right now it would be great to be the 5 seed. You get to play a team that doesn't deserve to be there instead of the 12th best team in the first round and then when you win you get to play 4 seed Tech that should not be ranked that high. After that, you get Indiana which seems to be the most beatable of the top 3 ranked teams.

They deserve their scotch, hookers and grift.

FDT 1999 said:

---

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

6 team playoff. Top 4 conference champs. Committee relegated to ranking champs and then selecting 2 (to cover odd-man-out scenarios.

---

F*** conference champs. Top 6 teams. Period!

---

Conferences send their best teams for non-conference playoff. It's not an SEC-Big rematch bracket. It's a national playoff.

We don't want to see Bama-Ga for the 3rd time. What are we going to have best of 3 games now to decide the championship?

Debate all you want. TV always wins (and pays all the bills)

If you want to pick 12 teams, why not the best 12?

Bring back the BCS and have Georgia play Indiana for the title.

- Make conference Championships matter
- Make the bowl games matter

The current system is designed to make sure the top 7 or 8 teams get in and the other 4 are just in to fill the gaps. Also making sure one non major conference gets in is so they can spread some of the money around and avoid getting sued for antitrust.

The old systems where the bubble was at #3 or #5 were worse than what we have today. Now it's like who cares if a #11 gets bumped, they werent going to win the title anyway.

pirmag said:

---

If you want to pick 12 teams, why not the best 12?

---

While that should be the way it is, it never will be. Every conference had to and will continue to have to, agree to the format of how teams are selected. It has to be unanimous.

The G5 knows their chances of having a team ranked in the top 12 are slim to none. Hence they'll never vote for that selection format. The ACC and Big12 also want to ensure inclusion, hence the 5 highest ranked conference champions. Unless the SEC and Big10 are willing to break away and do their own thing, they're going to have to let those conferences have their spots. That means the 10-2 Vandys of the world that are better teams than some included will continue to be left out.

bmks270 said:

---

FDT 1999 said:

---

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

6 team playoff. Top 4 conference champs. Committee relegated to ranking champs and then selecting 2 (to cover odd-man-out scenarios.

---

F*** conference champs. Top 6 teams. Period!

---

Conferences send their best teams for non-conference playoff. It's not an SEC-Big rematch bracket. It's a national playoff.

We don't want to see Bama-Ga for the 3rd time. What are we going to have best of 3 games now to decide the championship?

---

If those are the two best teams, then so be it. Under your model, we get to watch James Madison and Tulane play football. Talk about an absolute snooze fest. Those teams are here because of a dumbass rule. Not because they are one of the 12 best. I expect to see those teams in the non-conference play…not cluttering up the playoffs.