Started By
Message
BCS vs the Playoff National Title: Stats on Parity
Posted on 5/8/20 at 4:04 pm
Posted on 5/8/20 at 4:04 pm
BCS Championship (16 seasons)
Most Title Appearances: 4 (Florida State, Oklahoma)
Most Championships: 3 (Alabama)
Most Consecutive Title Appearances: 3 (Florida State '98-'00)
Repeat Title Matchups: 0
Undefeated Power Conference Seasons before Bowls: 20 (1.25 per season)
Seasons with 3 Power Conference Undefeated before Bowls: 1
Playoff Title Game (6 seasons)
Most Title Appearances: 4 (Alabama, Clemson)
Most Championships: 2 (Alabama, Clemson)
Most Consecutive Title Appearances: 4 (Alabama '15-'18)
Repeat Title Matchups: 3 (Clemson vs Alabama)
Undefeated Power Conference Seasons before Bowls: 9 (1.5 per season)
Seasons with 3 Power Conference Undefeated before Bowls: 2
Looking at these numbers, it's clear that the BCS era had far more parity than the playoff era has had so far. This past year's great LSU team really saved the playoff from having a terrible narrative.
So what is the reason for this difference because I don't believe the playoff system inherently creates less parity?
Is the media's singular focus on the playoff driving players to only choose a few schools? Are the coaches just worse and less innovative now than in the past?
Most Title Appearances: 4 (Florida State, Oklahoma)
Most Championships: 3 (Alabama)
Most Consecutive Title Appearances: 3 (Florida State '98-'00)
Repeat Title Matchups: 0
Undefeated Power Conference Seasons before Bowls: 20 (1.25 per season)
Seasons with 3 Power Conference Undefeated before Bowls: 1
Playoff Title Game (6 seasons)
Most Title Appearances: 4 (Alabama, Clemson)
Most Championships: 2 (Alabama, Clemson)
Most Consecutive Title Appearances: 4 (Alabama '15-'18)
Repeat Title Matchups: 3 (Clemson vs Alabama)
Undefeated Power Conference Seasons before Bowls: 9 (1.5 per season)
Seasons with 3 Power Conference Undefeated before Bowls: 2
Looking at these numbers, it's clear that the BCS era had far more parity than the playoff era has had so far. This past year's great LSU team really saved the playoff from having a terrible narrative.
So what is the reason for this difference because I don't believe the playoff system inherently creates less parity?
Is the media's singular focus on the playoff driving players to only choose a few schools? Are the coaches just worse and less innovative now than in the past?
9
Posted on 5/8/20 at 4:13 pm to TomRollTideRitter
One more, in the playoff era the Big XII, ACC, and SEC all had a team win the conference title game five straight years for the first time ever
Posted on 5/8/20 at 7:06 pm to TomRollTideRitter
BCS was far more exciting and dramatic and even more controversial for some years.
The CFP has had plenty of drama but we’ve yet to see any drama such as 2001, 2003, 2007, 2008.
CFP needs a 2007 again where there were several teams to be #2, especially non-traditional programs like Boston College, Kansas, California, South Florida, West Virginia and a #1 like Missouri.
The first year of the CFP had some intrigue early with Mississippi State and Mississippi.
The CFP has had plenty of drama but we’ve yet to see any drama such as 2001, 2003, 2007, 2008.
CFP needs a 2007 again where there were several teams to be #2, especially non-traditional programs like Boston College, Kansas, California, South Florida, West Virginia and a #1 like Missouri.
The first year of the CFP had some intrigue early with Mississippi State and Mississippi.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 7:26 pm to Oklahomey
I think the playoff eliminates much of the drama that surrounded the BCS by simply adding two more teams to the mix.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 7:45 pm to Oklahomey
quote:
The first year of the CFP had some intrigue early with Mississippi State and Mississippi.
I thought the first year of the CFP was awesome. The last two years have been two of the least interesting years of college football I can remember though which is why I wonder if recruiting has become more skewed under the playoff.
The same teams are still dominating recruiting, but they may be even more dominant now.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 8:28 pm to TomRollTideRitter
quote:
great LSU team really saved the playoff
Preach!
Posted on 5/8/20 at 8:42 pm to TomRollTideRitter
There wasn’t parity. This has been discussed previously at nauseam. You had a constantly overrated team from the big 12 or Ohio State from the big 10 blow through shite conferences and get embarrassed in the title game. The only legit teams 05 Texas team and the USC Trojans. Don’t forget that in 2004 Auburn was left out of the title game undefeated after only losing to eventual champion USC 17-0 in the regular season the year before. USC destroyed Oklahoma 55-19 in the title game the same year Auburn was left out. Once again Oklahoma was put in another title game against LSU, a game they kept the score closer, but still dominated, but everyone knows USC should have been there. Oklahoma is the most overrated team in all the BCS era.
This post was edited on 5/8/20 at 8:43 pm
Posted on 5/8/20 at 9:25 pm to JCdawg
Oklahoma was one of the most successful programs in the BCS era. Big XII was a great conference until it went to 10 teams.
Did you know Georgia was the only SEC champion of the BCS era to not even play for a national title? Both of UGA’s SEC titles were down years for the SEC.
Did you know Georgia was the only SEC champion of the BCS era to not even play for a national title? Both of UGA’s SEC titles were down years for the SEC.
Posted on 5/8/20 at 9:58 pm to JCdawg
quote:
There wasn’t parity. This has been discussed previously at nauseam.
College football has never had a lot of parity and never will, but I think these stats show that during the CFP era so far there is even less.
In 6 years of the playoff, we’ve seen the same title game 3 times. We never saw the same title game under the BCS.
Two teams already have as many CFP title appearances as the most appearances a team had in the BCS.
Posted on 5/9/20 at 7:55 am to JCdawg
quote:
Don’t forget that in 2004 Auburn was left out of the title game undefeated
Posted on 5/9/20 at 8:53 am to TomRollTideRitter
Under the BCS if a great team lost even one game, they were likely out of the title picture unless a lot of things really fell their way. With the playoffs, even by expanding the field by only two teams, you give great teams a lifeline to still be there at the end despite a trip-up. Take FSU in the late 80's and 90's. They finished in the top 5 something like 15 years in a row. Think about how many shots they would have had if the CFP had existed back then. But most years they didn't get to play for the title because one loss kept them out.
Posted on 5/9/20 at 8:56 am to TomRollTideRitter
Pretty small sample size to make comparisons. Plus I think the results would have been very similar had the BCS continued.
Posted on 5/9/20 at 9:24 am to JCdawg
quote:
You had a constantly overrated team from the big 12 or Ohio State from the big 10 blow through shite conferences and get embarrassed in the title game.
It happened to Clemson last year, but that was to the best team in college football history.
Posted on 5/9/20 at 10:45 am to dkreller
quote:
Plus I think the results would have been very similar had the BCS continued.
So what is your reasoning for why the past five years have had so little parity?
To have six power conference teams run the table through their conference championship in only 2 seasons would’ve been unthinkable at the start of the decade. Heck not that long ago it was a common take that going undefeated was hardly possible in the modern game.
Posted on 5/9/20 at 10:52 am to JCdawg
quote:
Don’t forget that in 2004 Auburn was left out of the title game undefeated after only losing to eventual champion USC 17-0 in the regular season the year before
They lost that game 23-0 at home and never came remotely close to scoring. That game was an arse kicking.
Those USC teams played up and down to their competition more than any college football team I've ever seen.
Posted on 5/9/20 at 10:57 am to TheTideMustRoll
quote:
Under the BCS if a great team lost even one game, they were likely out of the title picture unless a lot of things really fell their way. With the playoffs, even by expanding the field by only two teams, you give great teams a lifeline to still be there at the end despite a trip-up
This is true but I don’t think it explains the lack of parity within conferences. In the BCS, I don’t believe we ever saw a repeat SEC champion. Under the playoff, Alabama has won the SEC 4/6 years, and it’s a similar story in every other power conference except the PAC12.
Florida State, as you mentioned, is the only program I can remember dominating their conference before the playoff era like Ohio State, Clemson, and Oklahoma have dominated their conference during the playoff era.
Posted on 5/9/20 at 11:56 am to TomRollTideRitter
2015 and 2018 are the only outliers where 1 or 2 didn’t win it all.
All of the teams that have won the CFP were all powerhouses prior to it’s inception except for Clempson.
There’s not a lot of parity because it’s only been 6 years.
All of the teams that have won the CFP were all powerhouses prior to it’s inception except for Clempson.
There’s not a lot of parity because it’s only been 6 years.
Posted on 5/9/20 at 12:59 pm to JCdawg
quote:
Don’t forget that in 2004 Auburn was left out of the title game undefeated after only losing to eventual champion USC 17-0 in the regular season the year before.
The year before Auburn lost to USC, Georgia Tech, LSU, Ole Miss, and Georgia. Auburn finished 8-5 in 2003.
Posted on 5/9/20 at 1:11 pm to dkreller
quote:
There’s not a lot of parity because it’s only been 6 years.
It’s only been 6 years and we’ve already seen the same title matchup three times (never happened under the BCS), a team win the SEC 3 straight years (no team even won 2 in a row under the BCS), and 2 seasons with 3 undefeated power conference programs (only happened once under the BCS)
You can make an argument that maybe other factors have caused this, but there’s little doubt something has changed. No one ever used to call CFB boring. Now, you hear it all the time, and to be fair, it’s kind of true.
What odds would someone have to give you to NOT have Clemson or Ohio State in the playoff this coming season?
Posted on 5/9/20 at 1:32 pm to TomRollTideRitter
The BCS created artificial parity because teams were left out. You can't tell me that 04 Auburn team wouldn't have had a chance if there had been a playoff.
The current system is better by far.
The current system is better by far.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News