2008 Playoffs - who wins?

[AMasters]

Okay, so assume we got our playoffs. Based on BCS rankings (yes, I know, but we have to start somewhere), here is your bracket:

Quarterfinals:
A. #1 Ohio State vs. #8 Kansas
B. #4 Oklahoma vs. #5 Georgia
C. #3 Virginia Tech vs. #6 Missouri
D. #2 LSU vs. #7 USC

Semifinals:
E. Winner A vs. Winner B
F. Winner C vs. Winner D

Championship:
Winner E vs. Winner F

Who wins?

Also, note that WV at #9 in the BCS rankings gets shafted in this scenario...

[Die Hard Cards]

A.Kansas
B.Georgia
C.Missouri
D.USC

E.Georgia
F.USC

G.USC (NC)

[Empire Lindy]

I find it hard to believe that, even in a playoff scenario, that the BCS would let three teams from one conference play in the tournament. I bet Kansas gets left out and WVU takes on Ohio State. As long as we're playing make-believe, anyway...

Given your set-up, though...

A Ohio State
B Oklahoma
C Missouri
D LSU

E Oklahoma
F LSU

G LSU

The champion this year was probably correct. The problem is putting Ohio State in there to play them. Made for a far less interesting game. I still think Oklahoma was a very good team. West Virginia was just a REALLY, REALLY good team. West Virginia gives LSU the best game this season, IMO.

[bling49]

Originally Posted by AMasters

note that WV at #9 in the BCS rankings gets shafted in this scenario...

Someone is always going to get shafted, if 64 teams were included like the basketball bracket there would still be a bubble team crying about getting shafted.

WVU was a 16-9 loss to Pittsburgh from being in the title game.
They shafted themselves first, then the rankings & the timing of their one loss shafted them and the playoff scenerio would shaft them again.

[cardfan]

You don't take rankings in a playoff scenario. That makes no sense. You take conference winners or what's the freaking purpose of conferences? In a 8 team playoffs, the 6 BCS conference winners plus two at large conference winners from the others. Can use rankings to do seeds and decide the nonbcs bids.

You don't win your conference, you don't go. Wining the conference should be what the regular season is all about. Not what a poll thinks of you.

[Red Alert]

Yup, if you cant even win your freakin conference, you dont deserve to go.

[jeshelton]

All that winning the conference stuff is crap. Since this thread started as make-believe lets try this make believe:

Say Oklahoma goes undefeated in the regular season, and plays Colorado in the Big XII Championship game then gets beat by CO. If OK was the only one loss team in NCAA does it not deserve to play in the NC? I think they would.

Back to the original topic......

Kansas
Georgia
Mizzou
LSU

Kansas
LSU

LSU

[HarveyGlass]

It's the conferences fault for having a "championship game" to begin with. If they got rid of it, OU would have won the conference. So basically, the Big12 would have screwed OU, not the national tournament. To be 8-0 in your conference, then have to beat a 4 or 5 loss team in the postseason to be the champion is what's screwy.

[Empire Lindy]

I'm with Harv. If you create a conference title game to grab another few million dollars, you have to live with the repercussions of it. You can't be greedy then bitch when your greed costs you even more money in a NATIONAL title game.

[farmdude]

The only way you could/should take two teams from the same conference is if that conference does not have a championship game. It would be ludicrous to select two teams when one just beat the other one. However, a mid-season loss to a top 10 team, say USC to UCLA (hypothetical - in the future) may not disqualify both from being invited to the playoffs. This would be a good way to get rid of those championships, possibly forcing the BCS schools to add a good opponent instead of a cupcake, especially if you make strength of schedule a major part of the criteriat.

The way Hawaii played in their bowl game certainly makes a case that a non-BCS school doesn't have to be selected. Boise's win a couple of years ago was nice but they really didn't look like a NC contender.