Started By
Message
The Best Playoff Setup
Posted on 12/10/08 at 5:56 pm
Posted on 12/10/08 at 5:56 pm
I know this time of year everyone starts to get all giddy about dropping the BCS for a playoff and then the argument starts 4!, 8!, 16! etc. Use the bowls! Don't use the bowls!
I'm bored so I'll propose what the system SHOULD BE.
I'm convinced there isn't a better system out there period.
16 teams obviously if you aren't a top 16 team you don't deserve to be in the conversation.
6 Automatic Bids to the 6 BCS conferences (ACC, Big East, Big 12, Big 10, SEC, Pac 10) all BCS conferences must have a conf. championship.
Shorten the season to 11 games again (the 12th game is meaningless).
All undefeated teams in a Non-BCS conference get an Automatic Bid. (This way you don't have to give auto bids to smaller conferences so your 9-3 MAC champ doesn't get in).
The first 3 rounds are played in the higher seeds home stadium. I've never understood the purpose of the bowls when one of the best aspects of College Football is home field advantage, and the energy of those stadiums.
The National Championship can rotate between whoever wants to host it.
16 Teams Selection- Selection committee like in NCAA Basketball. That way your strength of schedule is taken into account along with number of wins. They base it on your body of work, not how bad you beat certain teams or who just got injured you get your ranking based on how you played at the time. I don't like the 11 conferences getting automatic bids because of how weak certain conferences can be that's why I added the undefeated clause. If a team hasn't been beaten they automatically are going to get their shot.
Having 1-3 more home games will easily generate enough revenue for the University along with Television contracts (lets assume it's 2013) to more than compensate any Corporate money lost by getting rid of the bowls. The bowls are a terrible curse on College Football. Look at the NFL if it ended after 12 weeks and went to bowls.
Super Bowl would be Titans vs. Giants
Other BCS teams:
Panthers
Steelers
Colts
Ravens
Cowboys?
Buccs?
Dolphins?
.. starts to get muddied.
It's insane that we end our season after 12 weeks right when things heat up and then pat ourselves on the backs for getting 2 or 3 "playoff" type matches (UF vs. OU), (Bama vs. Utah), (USC vs Penn State), but they don't carry any weight since only one of those matters.
The first round of the playoffs would easily have 4 games that would equal the BCS ratings and that still leaves the 2nd round, 2 semi-finals, and one championship.
In one year of a playoff you would get as many quality college football games as you get in 3-4 years of the BCS.
No it wouldn't truly muddy down the regular season. Do you think a playoff takes any heat off the Bama vs. LSU rivalry? or the USC vs. UCLA (laugh) game? Truth be told there's already so many meaningless football games (OU vs. Texas), (Bama vs. LSU), that were probably some of the highest rated games of the year but wouldn't or didn't affect the national championship matchup.
This has gone on long enough I don't even have to throw out some of the sick matchups we'd get from an 08 playoff.
Just remember if the NFL used a BCS system the Patriots would have been 12-0 against the Chargers and the colts would have been left out at like 11-1. What a convoluded system we support.
I'm bored so I'll propose what the system SHOULD BE.
I'm convinced there isn't a better system out there period.
16 teams obviously if you aren't a top 16 team you don't deserve to be in the conversation.
6 Automatic Bids to the 6 BCS conferences (ACC, Big East, Big 12, Big 10, SEC, Pac 10) all BCS conferences must have a conf. championship.
Shorten the season to 11 games again (the 12th game is meaningless).
All undefeated teams in a Non-BCS conference get an Automatic Bid. (This way you don't have to give auto bids to smaller conferences so your 9-3 MAC champ doesn't get in).
The first 3 rounds are played in the higher seeds home stadium. I've never understood the purpose of the bowls when one of the best aspects of College Football is home field advantage, and the energy of those stadiums.
The National Championship can rotate between whoever wants to host it.
16 Teams Selection- Selection committee like in NCAA Basketball. That way your strength of schedule is taken into account along with number of wins. They base it on your body of work, not how bad you beat certain teams or who just got injured you get your ranking based on how you played at the time. I don't like the 11 conferences getting automatic bids because of how weak certain conferences can be that's why I added the undefeated clause. If a team hasn't been beaten they automatically are going to get their shot.
Having 1-3 more home games will easily generate enough revenue for the University along with Television contracts (lets assume it's 2013) to more than compensate any Corporate money lost by getting rid of the bowls. The bowls are a terrible curse on College Football. Look at the NFL if it ended after 12 weeks and went to bowls.
Super Bowl would be Titans vs. Giants
Other BCS teams:
Panthers
Steelers
Colts
Ravens
Cowboys?
Buccs?
Dolphins?
.. starts to get muddied.
It's insane that we end our season after 12 weeks right when things heat up and then pat ourselves on the backs for getting 2 or 3 "playoff" type matches (UF vs. OU), (Bama vs. Utah), (USC vs Penn State), but they don't carry any weight since only one of those matters.
The first round of the playoffs would easily have 4 games that would equal the BCS ratings and that still leaves the 2nd round, 2 semi-finals, and one championship.
In one year of a playoff you would get as many quality college football games as you get in 3-4 years of the BCS.
No it wouldn't truly muddy down the regular season. Do you think a playoff takes any heat off the Bama vs. LSU rivalry? or the USC vs. UCLA (laugh) game? Truth be told there's already so many meaningless football games (OU vs. Texas), (Bama vs. LSU), that were probably some of the highest rated games of the year but wouldn't or didn't affect the national championship matchup.
This has gone on long enough I don't even have to throw out some of the sick matchups we'd get from an 08 playoff.
Just remember if the NFL used a BCS system the Patriots would have been 12-0 against the Chargers and the colts would have been left out at like 11-1. What a convoluded system we support.
5
Posted on 12/10/08 at 7:45 pm to JB Bama
that was a lot to type just to say that you're pissed that you are stuck playing Utah.
Posted on 12/10/08 at 7:48 pm to Tiger Attorney
Posted on 12/10/08 at 7:50 pm to JB Bama
Posted on 12/10/08 at 7:53 pm to JB Bama
Are you really that angry you are going home with no trophy? Do you really think Bama would have survived a 16 team playoff 
Posted on 12/10/08 at 7:55 pm to JB Bama
quote:
16 teams
would be awful. 6 team playoff AT MOST.
Posted on 12/10/08 at 8:00 pm to Buckeye Fan 19
quote:
would be awful. 6 team playoff AT MOST.
I think the top 16 in the BCS should have a playoff regardless of conference. That's only 4 games to a national title. Every other division of football does it with very little problems.
Posted on 12/10/08 at 8:20 pm to neweuquol
The Bucknutter does not like it because he knows his boys will never sniff NC again.
Posted on 12/10/08 at 8:41 pm to caribG8R
I agree with a 16 team playoff. It wouldn't extend any team's season more than 1-2 games, depending on which conference you play in.
Some university presidents argue it would affect finals, but cutting the season back to 11 games, and doing away with conf. championship games would make easy to fit in before finals. The championship game could still be played after the 1st, giving the top 2 teams time off, and time for the hype to be built up.
Some university presidents argue it would affect finals, but cutting the season back to 11 games, and doing away with conf. championship games would make easy to fit in before finals. The championship game could still be played after the 1st, giving the top 2 teams time off, and time for the hype to be built up.
Posted on 12/10/08 at 9:09 pm to Tiger Attorney
quote:
that was a lot to type just to say that you're pissed that you are stuck playing Utah.
Pre-BCS, Bama would likely be playing Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl and Texas would play Florida in the Sugar Bowl.
This is what happens when you try to fix something that isn't broken.
quote:
The Best Playoff Setup
Now people want to screw it up further with a traditional playoff.
Posted on 12/10/08 at 9:30 pm to TX Tiger
I would continue to use to BCS. Have a 6-team playoff using the BCS standings. 1 and 2 get byes. No. 6 @ No. 3 and No. 5 @ No. 4.
5/4 Winners play @ No 1 and 6/3 winners play A No. 2.
Winners of that play on neutral field for NC.
I am anti-playoff, though. If I HAD to, this is what I would like to start with.
5/4 Winners play @ No 1 and 6/3 winners play A No. 2.
Winners of that play on neutral field for NC.
I am anti-playoff, though. If I HAD to, this is what I would like to start with.
Posted on 12/10/08 at 10:22 pm to rpg37
This has nothing to do with Bama. I'm an SEC homer and I think you'll understand this system favors the teams who actually can win the games. You won't see an OSU slide through this system. 6 doesn't get us there it's an improvement but we don't want an improvement we want a legit national title like EVERY OTHER SUCCESSFUL sport has. No Co-National Champions, which 6 would you take this year?
You gonna cut Boise State or Utah out just because of SOS? Or are you going to cut down the 1 loss teams anymore?
Do you think a 1 vs. 16 matchup isn't competitive enough to draw in ratings? What logical reason can you give AGAINST 16 teams having a shot at the title at season's end.
My opinion USC, Florida, Texas would be best built this year for such a playoff. Bama wasn't built to win 4 tough games in a row against good offenses. At the same time a playoff completely exposes the teams that play weak schedules during the year and get blown out by the teams that have better athletes.
With a 1 game playoff you can have your Boise State, and UWV moments but overall those teams can't survive 3-4 tough games even though they can pull an upset. Not to mention you'd be giving a lot more opportunities for "the little guy" to pull the upset and for smaller schools to be able to offer the prospect of national exposure and a shot at an NC at a school like Boise State which is simply Impossible under the current system.
You gonna cut Boise State or Utah out just because of SOS? Or are you going to cut down the 1 loss teams anymore?
Do you think a 1 vs. 16 matchup isn't competitive enough to draw in ratings? What logical reason can you give AGAINST 16 teams having a shot at the title at season's end.
My opinion USC, Florida, Texas would be best built this year for such a playoff. Bama wasn't built to win 4 tough games in a row against good offenses. At the same time a playoff completely exposes the teams that play weak schedules during the year and get blown out by the teams that have better athletes.
With a 1 game playoff you can have your Boise State, and UWV moments but overall those teams can't survive 3-4 tough games even though they can pull an upset. Not to mention you'd be giving a lot more opportunities for "the little guy" to pull the upset and for smaller schools to be able to offer the prospect of national exposure and a shot at an NC at a school like Boise State which is simply Impossible under the current system.
This post was edited on 12/10/08 at 10:25 pm
Posted on 12/10/08 at 10:24 pm to rpg37
First thing is the 12th game allows for an extra home game. That can equal a ton of money.
They should have an 8 team playoff. The current 6 BCS conference champions would get automatic bids. The top two Mid Major conference champions according to BCS rankings would get a bid. The conferences will then be left alone to decide their own champion(round robins(Pac 10) and conference CG(Big 12,SEC,ACC) would be encouraged by the NCAA). It would of course be in their best interest to be fair and get it right so there should be no complaining to the BCS process anymore. Instead of being a national issue it is a conference issue. I would say most people care more about their conference teams' involvement in the NC process. Well the conference has a whole regular season to figure out who their best team is. Conference issues are way easier to resolve than national BCS issues. We want a system that is fair, promotes the growth of NCAA football(like Mid Majors), and gives us a more reputable NC. The seeding of the playoff would be based off of BCS ranking.
The Playoff for 2008 would be:
1.Oklahoma
8.Virginia Tech
5.Penn State
4.Utah
3.Southern Cal
6.Boise State
7.Cincinnati
2.Florida
*The Big 12 decided that OU eliminated UT and TT in some way. I don't necessarily agree with the selection of OU, but I don't think we need to be deciding their conference champion for them. There are better tie breakers systems(like the SEC) and no team can really complain if they didn't go undefeated. The losses leave everything up to opinion.
*UF eliminated Alabama in a tournament style regular season.
*Penn St. eliminated OSU in conference play. I really thing they should add a team so they can play a more reputable regular season. They can technically have two teams go undefeated which is dumb and should definitely be fixed for the current BCS and any type of playoff system.
*Utah and Boise St. win out in the mid major race. Since SOS are usually suspect cutting it off at two seems pretty reasonable. I feel confident in the BCS getting us the top two Mid Major champions. I think the inclusion of two mid majors every year would only strengthen those conferences. It gives a chance for most all teams to participate in a chance for the NC.
The rankings would then vote the playoff champion #1 and the rest of the NCAA is eligible to be voted for #2-25. I would be open to bowls outside of the playoffs. It would be just as popular as the other bowls outside the BCS. You could still see match ups involving teams like OSU, Bama, Texas, UT, UGA, MSU, LSU, Ole Miss, and GT. I see a lot of interesting games.
Any opinions or logical flaws?
They should have an 8 team playoff. The current 6 BCS conference champions would get automatic bids. The top two Mid Major conference champions according to BCS rankings would get a bid. The conferences will then be left alone to decide their own champion(round robins(Pac 10) and conference CG(Big 12,SEC,ACC) would be encouraged by the NCAA). It would of course be in their best interest to be fair and get it right so there should be no complaining to the BCS process anymore. Instead of being a national issue it is a conference issue. I would say most people care more about their conference teams' involvement in the NC process. Well the conference has a whole regular season to figure out who their best team is. Conference issues are way easier to resolve than national BCS issues. We want a system that is fair, promotes the growth of NCAA football(like Mid Majors), and gives us a more reputable NC. The seeding of the playoff would be based off of BCS ranking.
The Playoff for 2008 would be:
1.Oklahoma
8.Virginia Tech
5.Penn State
4.Utah
3.Southern Cal
6.Boise State
7.Cincinnati
2.Florida
*The Big 12 decided that OU eliminated UT and TT in some way. I don't necessarily agree with the selection of OU, but I don't think we need to be deciding their conference champion for them. There are better tie breakers systems(like the SEC) and no team can really complain if they didn't go undefeated. The losses leave everything up to opinion.
*UF eliminated Alabama in a tournament style regular season.
*Penn St. eliminated OSU in conference play. I really thing they should add a team so they can play a more reputable regular season. They can technically have two teams go undefeated which is dumb and should definitely be fixed for the current BCS and any type of playoff system.
*Utah and Boise St. win out in the mid major race. Since SOS are usually suspect cutting it off at two seems pretty reasonable. I feel confident in the BCS getting us the top two Mid Major champions. I think the inclusion of two mid majors every year would only strengthen those conferences. It gives a chance for most all teams to participate in a chance for the NC.
The rankings would then vote the playoff champion #1 and the rest of the NCAA is eligible to be voted for #2-25. I would be open to bowls outside of the playoffs. It would be just as popular as the other bowls outside the BCS. You could still see match ups involving teams like OSU, Bama, Texas, UT, UGA, MSU, LSU, Ole Miss, and GT. I see a lot of interesting games.
Any opinions or logical flaws?
This post was edited on 12/10/08 at 10:29 pm
Posted on 12/10/08 at 10:33 pm to lsutiger2486
Your system doesn't even fix this year. Your system doesn't leave room to take in both Oklahoma AND Texas which is what is sorely needed.
Why would you have an 8 team playoff that doesn't have room for 2 teams from the same conference?
You MUST consider the 2 best teams in the country could simply be in the same division in the same conference. 8 doesn't get us there once again. It still leaves to much subjectivity involved. Do you not include undefeated Non-BCS teams? Does a 3 loss Va. Tech deserve one of only 8 spots? Over 11-1 Texas?
16 gets us there.
1. Florida
2. Texas (IMO)
3. Oklahoma
4. USC
5. Alabama
6. Texas Tech
7. Utah
8. Penn State.
9. Boiste St.
10. Ohio State.
11. Cincinatti
12. TCU
13. Oklahoma State
14. Georgia Tech
15. Oregon
16. Georgia
Oregon @ Florida (No inner conf. in 1st round)
Georgia @ Texas
Ga. Tech @ Oklahoma
Oklahoma St. @ USC
TCU @ Alabama
Cincinatti @ Texas Tech
Ohio State @ Utah (imagine Utah inviting a big program in for a playoff game)
Boise State @ Penn State
A variation of this system works in the NFL, Div AA, and Div AAA why not use it?
If we stopped the NFL after 12 games last year and took the top 2 teams the Giants wouldn't have even been in the discussion for the Super Bowl.
I think most people hold onto the idea if we can keep it to 6-8 teams we don't muddy down the regular season. Well right now the regular season is irrelevant once you either go undefeated or you play into the hands of the media. The problem is with only 12 games and many many good teams only playing 1-4 meaningful games a year it is too difficult to split everyone up into who is elite and who isn't. You need a more meaningful body of work. Take the SEC for example even though this was a down year, and even though Bama played a fairly weak schedule you saw every SEC team in enough tough games to feel fairly comfortable placing them 1-12 in the SEC rankings, but in the Big 10 and Pac 10 where there is such a disparity between the top and the bottom you really can't make a judgement call on their body of work whether to rule them in or out.
Why would you have an 8 team playoff that doesn't have room for 2 teams from the same conference?
You MUST consider the 2 best teams in the country could simply be in the same division in the same conference. 8 doesn't get us there once again. It still leaves to much subjectivity involved. Do you not include undefeated Non-BCS teams? Does a 3 loss Va. Tech deserve one of only 8 spots? Over 11-1 Texas?
16 gets us there.
1. Florida
2. Texas (IMO)
3. Oklahoma
4. USC
5. Alabama
6. Texas Tech
7. Utah
8. Penn State.
9. Boiste St.
10. Ohio State.
11. Cincinatti
12. TCU
13. Oklahoma State
14. Georgia Tech
15. Oregon
16. Georgia
Oregon @ Florida (No inner conf. in 1st round)
Georgia @ Texas
Ga. Tech @ Oklahoma
Oklahoma St. @ USC
TCU @ Alabama
Cincinatti @ Texas Tech
Ohio State @ Utah (imagine Utah inviting a big program in for a playoff game)
Boise State @ Penn State
A variation of this system works in the NFL, Div AA, and Div AAA why not use it?
If we stopped the NFL after 12 games last year and took the top 2 teams the Giants wouldn't have even been in the discussion for the Super Bowl.
I think most people hold onto the idea if we can keep it to 6-8 teams we don't muddy down the regular season. Well right now the regular season is irrelevant once you either go undefeated or you play into the hands of the media. The problem is with only 12 games and many many good teams only playing 1-4 meaningful games a year it is too difficult to split everyone up into who is elite and who isn't. You need a more meaningful body of work. Take the SEC for example even though this was a down year, and even though Bama played a fairly weak schedule you saw every SEC team in enough tough games to feel fairly comfortable placing them 1-12 in the SEC rankings, but in the Big 10 and Pac 10 where there is such a disparity between the top and the bottom you really can't make a judgement call on their body of work whether to rule them in or out.
This post was edited on 12/10/08 at 10:38 pm
Posted on 12/10/08 at 10:34 pm to JB Bama
When FBS division football is the only sport in the U.S. and maybe even in the world, whether it be pro or amateur, that it's champion is chosen basically by polls instead of the playing of the game to settle any disputes, any title will always be somewhat tarnished until it is decided entirely on the field.
We don't bitch about playoffs for basketball, baseball, soccer, or the Super Bowl so how can we not bitch on how the champion is determined in the BCS?
We don't bitch about playoffs for basketball, baseball, soccer, or the Super Bowl so how can we not bitch on how the champion is determined in the BCS?
Posted on 12/10/08 at 10:39 pm to caribG8R
quote:
The Bucknutter does not like it because he knows his boys will never sniff NC again.
Lol. There have been plenty of years recently where OSU would have had a great shot at the NC in a playoff. We could have won it in 95, 96, 98, and 05 (in addition to 02). But in all those years, we lost a game or two we shouldn't have in the reg season, so why give us the reward of entering the playoff?
Posted on 12/10/08 at 10:50 pm to Buckeye Fan 19
Yeah with an 8 there are too many quality 1-2 loss teams that would get excluded. In any other sport you can have a mistake and still play for the championship why should Div 1 be any different? Especially in a sport plagued by injuries, if you lose your QB to a concussion for one game why should that eliminate you from a national title, and on the flip side why should a team in a conferece like the Big 10 or Pac 10 be able to avoid a conference championship and be considered to play for the NC after possibly playing only one top 10-15 team in their entire season (and a 50% of it being a home game).
Posted on 12/10/08 at 10:56 pm to JB Bama
quote:
Your system doesn't even fix this year. Your system doesn't leave room to take in both Oklahoma AND Texas which is what is sorely needed.
Why would you have an 8 team playoff that doesn't have room for 2 teams from the same conference?
Conferences play a series of 12-13 games during the regular season to distinguish them over their own conference. Unless the two teams are both undefeated we can should make a decision on the conference level. Do you realize Texas lost a tournament to OU during the regular season? Do I agree with the outcome? Not necessarily, but you have to draw the line somewhere. I think most people will be more than content with the idea of you win your conference you are in. What does being conference champion mean anyways if you don't respect that team as the tournament champion?
So say UT would have been the Big 12 champ and you included OU in the playoff. Say they end up playing each other and OU squeaks out a win and goes on to the NC. The whole winning your conference didn't mean anything. Conference Championships and the regular season need to matter.
Posted on 12/10/08 at 10:56 pm to JB Bama
Your plan sucks - it would destroy the intense exciting regular season make or break games college football is famous for.
Posted on 12/10/08 at 11:05 pm to Tidetoit
Conference championships don't have to be tied to National championships THEY NEVER HAVE BEEN.
How can you possibly defend a system that literally lets the media decide who should advance out of 3 1 loss teams?
It would not destroy the intensity of the regular season you only have a 12 game resume to get into the top 16, and the only way to guarantee you are in is to win your conference or go undefeated. You could easily get left out as a 2 loss team.
Once again look at this year's Red River Rivalry that was supposedly a "playoff" the loser is in the Title game, the winner faltered down the stretch on the road and gets left with nothing.
There are no make or break college football games it is all dependent on what everyone else does IN ACCORDANCE with how you do. There is a reason it is the only sport without ANY post season. The reason College Football has the ratings it does is because of the intensity, pagentry, loyalty of the fan base, and entertainment it offers to fans. That won't change with a playoff it just makes more games MORE relevant. The only conference championship game that mattered were Bama vs. UF. No matter what happened in the OU vs. Mizzou game there was controversy whether OU won or lost. Out of all the rivalries you were simply watching to see if Bama, OU, Texas, Florida would slip up and eliminate themselves from the picture not play their way in.
How can you possibly defend a system that literally lets the media decide who should advance out of 3 1 loss teams?
It would not destroy the intensity of the regular season you only have a 12 game resume to get into the top 16, and the only way to guarantee you are in is to win your conference or go undefeated. You could easily get left out as a 2 loss team.
Once again look at this year's Red River Rivalry that was supposedly a "playoff" the loser is in the Title game, the winner faltered down the stretch on the road and gets left with nothing.
There are no make or break college football games it is all dependent on what everyone else does IN ACCORDANCE with how you do. There is a reason it is the only sport without ANY post season. The reason College Football has the ratings it does is because of the intensity, pagentry, loyalty of the fan base, and entertainment it offers to fans. That won't change with a playoff it just makes more games MORE relevant. The only conference championship game that mattered were Bama vs. UF. No matter what happened in the OU vs. Mizzou game there was controversy whether OU won or lost. Out of all the rivalries you were simply watching to see if Bama, OU, Texas, Florida would slip up and eliminate themselves from the picture not play their way in.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News