How should teams be ranked?

[burnstuff]

I frequently see the human and computer polls bashed on here, and for good reasons. However, no real alternative is given besides a playoff, which would only diminish the importance of rankings. Rankings would still be necessary to seed teams and determine which teams get in.

I have no idea how to make the rankings better, so my idea is a 16 team playoff where 11 teams get in by winning their conference. Sure, there would be controversy over the 5 slots determined by rankings, but getting those seeds would be more of a second chance for those who didn't win their conference.

[J0nnD0ugh]

You're not coming up w/anything new. We've expressed up here a million times there needs to be a playoff. Rankings don't need to be improved. The system to choose a champion needs to be fixed.

[BoomerSooner11]

With toddlers that have building blocks in front of them. On those building blocks are different teams. They then choose which building blocks, and in the order they choose, that will be the teams ranking.

[burnstuff]

Quote: Originally Posted by J0nnD0ugh

You're not coming up w/anything new. We've expressed up here a million times there needs to be a playoff. Rankings don't need to be improved. The system to choose a champion needs to be fixed.

So you can't think of anything new either?

And it seems like the consensus here is that the rankings are bad.

[J0nnD0ugh]

Quote: Originally Posted by burnstuff

So you can't think of anything new either? And it seems like the consensus here is that the rankings are bad.

No one can think of anything new. There's a reason every other team sport in the world has a tournament/playoff to determine a champion: IT WORKS.

[jts20]

My idea was to keep the BCS and have it seed the playoff teams. It also keeps the bowl games, keeping the money hungry, already millionaires, happy.

The top 4 teams would all get "home" games in round one. Each team gets to pick what BCS bowl they want to host. For examples let's say the rankings are as follows:

1. Florida
2. Bama
3. Texas
4. USC
5. Iowa
6. Boise state

Florida chooses first and decides to host the Orange Bowl. Bama chooses the Sugar, Texas then selects the Fiesta, and USC would have the Rose which works out for them anyway. The top two teams get a first round bye. Texas(3) would play Boise(6) in the Fiesta Bowl and USC(4) would host IOWA(5). Let's say Texas and Iowa win. The lower seed would then take on the 1 seed and the higher seed would play the 2 seed, giving an earned advantage to the 1 seed besides the bye. So Florida(1) would host Iowa in the orange bowl. And Texas would travel to take on Bama in the Sugar Bowl. Then from here the winners would play in the title game which would rotate the four sites like it does now.

The money is still collected and a playoff is in place.

From there you can have the other bowl games played as usual or group them into their own 4 bowl game/6 team tournament. I like the multiple tounament idea because it would limit the amount of teams that get to go to bowl games, making it an earned privelege, not a right.

[olliethebum85]

Eh. This thread and that idea are all years old.

[Maxattax3]

Quote: Originally Posted by BoomerSooner11

With toddlers that have building blocks in front of them. On those building blocks are different teams. They then choose which building blocks, and in the order they choose, that will be the teams ranking.

Can we have blind toddlers do it? ...to be more fair-er.

[burnstuff]

Quote: Originally Posted by olliethebum85

Eh. This thread and that idea are all years old.

It's not supposed to be a playoff thread. It's supposed to be about how the teams are ranked for either a championship or playoff.

[Krioniq]

Alphabetical order by team mascot.