Originally Posted by SloverUT
Yes, but do you not think people will be formulating week to week rankings based off a similar system that we use now? AP, etc. People are going to want to know how their teams stack up on a week to week basis.
Also, we are now trading a formulated system for the subjective votes of 13 people with flexibility to choose as they please (within reason of course). It is still going to be a majorly flawed system with similar outcomes as I suggested earlier. Instead of #3 being pissed off it will be the #5 team left out of the playoffs. The only good thing out of all of this is that 4 teams will ultimately get to pair off and duke it out. It is how those four teams got there that will be scrutinized just as it is now.
I could see the arguments now, based on the selection committee.
Archie Manning: That guy favors the SEC.
Mike Tranghese: That guy favors the Big East.
And so on..
As long as subjective people are picking and choosing the system will continuously be perceived as flawed.
Yes, it's a trade-off, but its not a lateral move. The current formula chooses 2 teams and the new formula will choose 4. It cannot be argued that that isn't better - as far as deciding a "truer" national champion, at least. Arguments can certainly be made that its not necessary, but since it seems like the vast majority of people want to know who the true champion is, then a 4-team playoff is better than a 2-team playoff.
Yes, perhaps its not as good as a 6 or 8, or maybe even 16 team playoff**, but just because it can't be "perfect" doesn't mean it can't be improved upon. And slowly but surely it gets improved upon with each revision. Prior to 1992, teams were tied to bowl games and there were situations where there were 2 clear cut teams better than everybody else but they couldn't play each other. So, in came the Bowl Coalition. Then the Bowl Allaince, then the BCS, then a couple of upgrades to the BCS (to allow non AQ schools an opportunity) and now playoffs.
And, yes, if it's subjective it will always be perceived as flawed, but it's entirely IMPOSSIBLE for it not to be subjective. You can't have an NFL style subjective playoff system when you have 208 (or whatever it is) teams who largely do not play each other. Otherwise, people get to play the transitive game and come up with conclusions like: Eastern Washington is better than Oregon and Stanford because they beat Utah, who beat Stanford, who beat Oregon. ;)
And a bunch of people - assuming they are intelligent and reasonable - should be able to equal or better what any computer will come up with anyway. Will there always be controversy? Of course. But controversy over who is 4th is a lot less than controversy of who should be chosen 2nd.
**Just daydreaming about this, and how freaking amazing that would be!! December 14th would be the first round and the matchups would be:
Alabama vs. Fresno State
FSU vs. Wisconsin
OSU vs. Northern Illinois
Auburn vs. Oregon
Missouri vs. Arizona State
Clemson vs. Michigan State
Oklahoma State vs. South Carolina
Stanford vs. Baylor
That would be some pretty amazing stuff, and just assuming all the favorites won (and assuming a March Madness style bracket) would leave the second round (Dec 21) as:
Alabama vs. Stanford
FSU vs. Oklahoma State
Ohio State vs. Clemson
Auburn vs. Missouri
And that's where it starts to get realllllllllllly good. :) The semifinals could be played on Dec 28th, or on New Years Day, and the championship the following week.
Someday, perhaps ... someday.