Postseason Constraint #12: Prevent Unworthy Teams from Having a Chance to Win the National Title
[Editor's note: This is part of a series examining the real world constraints on any proposed postseason design. For the previous entries is is best to start at the introduction of the series. This is derived from pages 88 through 90 of my plan to fix the BCS]
The opposite side of the good teams are getting left out coin is that a wider field will allow teams to participate that really didn't earn an elite spot in the postseason.
Many people feel that teams with two or more losses do not deserve to be in championship consideration. Some believe that teams that don't win their conference should not be in the national championship discussion.
The larger the field the lower the standards become for entry into the tournament. Lower standards mean that the reward of entry into the tournament is diminished.
Expanding the field to 96 is not an option for football.
Old Bowl System
Only the top teams would have a chance to earn the top spot after the bowls. Two loss teams rarely climbed to the top or high enough to threaten an undefeated or one loss team.
Strength of schedule was not considered as strongly twenty years ago as it is today in the polls.
BCS
The BCS errs on the side of limiting the field so this is not an issue for it.
A Tier Based Plus-One
This design would restrict the field to a point that this would not be an issue. A two loss participant would be rare.
A Flexible Championship System
A fixed cutoff allows an arbitrarily large gap between the last two teams selected. This could be interpreted to represent a large consensus that the last team did not really earn the right to participate and would generally be accompanied with a large number of teams claiming they should have been selected instead of that
team.
Using gaps in the standings minimizes the risk of selecting unworthy teams for the last spots filled.
MWC Proposal
Two or even three loss teams would begin to participate regularly in an eight team field and wins over undefeated teams would reinforce the ideas that one game in the postseason is worth two or three in the regular season.
Enhanced Bowl Season
This design would allow teams with three or four losses to participate and success of these teams would demean the value of the regular season games.
The Wetzel Plan
Including all conference champions allows teams with three or four losses to regularly participate. In 2001 North Texas won the Sun Belt with a losing record of 5-6 and would have been in Wetzel's tournament.
0 recs |
1 comment
|
Comments
I should clarify my poll vote here...
When I say “Just enough to allow all teams a path to the title every year.”, I mean a path that’s not dependent on impressing poll voters or secret mathematical formulae. That means a playoff that allows every conference champion in plus some number of at large spots (and since I hate byes in football playoffs, Wetzel’s five works).








