BCS or playoffs? (merged)
- Thread starter ihatefulmer
- Start date
BamaFan in Germantown said:
How many teams complain when they don't make the NCAA basketball tournament? One or two and those are usually "bubble" teams. In other words an undefeated basketball team is going to at least have a fair shot ON THE COURT at winning the title.
There is no good reason not to have a playoff
I have yet to hear one good reason Div. I college football should not have a playoff. I would like to see a system where you have to win the conference championship in order to get into the playoffs. Then the playoffs would consist of conference champions and then a team would not have to depend on the media and politics of college football to get in. It all would be settled on the field. If a team cannot win their conference they should not be given a chance to win a NC. The difficult part is deciding which conferences to include but it can be decided.
I have yet to hear one good reason Div. I college football should not have a playoff. I would like to see a system where you have to win the conference championship in order to get into the playoffs. Then the playoffs would consist of conference champions and then a team would not have to depend on the media and politics of college football to get in. It all would be settled on the field. If a team cannot win their conference they should not be given a chance to win a NC. The difficult part is deciding which conferences to include but it can be decided.
One good reason not to have a playoff is...
...the whole season is a playoff. In most cases, one loss kills a chance at the title. Plus a large playoff significantly reduces the significance of the regular season, which I definitely do not want.
However, with that being said, your system actually is a good one, talisitider, if we are going to have a playoff. You only allow conference champs into the playoff. No "at-large" bids means no arguing over who deserves them. Basically, go win your conference, then let's talk about national titles.
A large playoff like you described has always been my "other" preference. It would involve changes so significant that I do not think we will ever see it.
In fact, I worked up a sample of what I might look like. There are 8 conferences with 8 teams each. Every team plays all 7 conference opponents each year. Each team gets 4 non-conference games in which they can preserve the rivalries which inadvertently get disrupted by my new conference affiliations. There are no polls (or if there are, they mean nothing in the postseaon). Everyone plays 11 regular season games. There are no conference championship games. Everyone plays everyone, so conference titles are won on the field, all season long. The 8-team playoff takes 3 weeks. The 4 games played the first week are called quarterfinals, NOT BOWL GAMES. The 2 games the next week are called semifinals, or the final 4, NOT BOWL GAMES. The last game the next week is called the finals, or the national championship game, NOT A BOWL GAME. The two teams that play in the finals only play 14 games.
Here are the conferences:
ACC - FSU, Miami, Georgia, Georgia Tech, S. Carolina, Clemson, NCState, UNC
BIG 12 - Oklahoma, OSU, UT, TAMU, TTU, Missouri, Arkansas, LSU
Big East - Virginia, VT, West Virginia, Marshall, Maryland, B.C., Pitt, Syracuse
BIG TEN - Mich, MSU, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, ISU, Purdue, Northwestern
MAC - Miami, Toledo, B.G., NIU, Louisville, Notre Dame, Ohio St. Penn. St.
SEC - Alabama, Auburn, Ole Miss, Miss. St., USM, Memphis, UT, Florida
PAC 10 - USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Washington, ASU, Oregon, OSU
WAC - Boise St., UTEP, Fresno St., Utah, BYU, Colorado, Kansas St., Nebraska
In general, my conferences are very geometrically centered - much more so than what we currently have. Some rivalries are separated, but they can still schedule each other as OCC opponents, if they choose to. The only conference I think would be really upset is the BIG TEN. They went from a powerhouse conference to a very average conference. Michigan would win it most every season.
Anyway, it ain't gonna happen. You cannot break up the power conferences like that.
Also, what happens to the other teams? This only includes 64 teams that I hand-picked. I actually have a system to handle that too, but again, it could not be implemented. Too many schools would be ticked-off for it too ever work.
-Sully
...the whole season is a playoff. In most cases, one loss kills a chance at the title. Plus a large playoff significantly reduces the significance of the regular season, which I definitely do not want.
However, with that being said, your system actually is a good one, talisitider, if we are going to have a playoff. You only allow conference champs into the playoff. No "at-large" bids means no arguing over who deserves them. Basically, go win your conference, then let's talk about national titles.
A large playoff like you described has always been my "other" preference. It would involve changes so significant that I do not think we will ever see it.
In fact, I worked up a sample of what I might look like. There are 8 conferences with 8 teams each. Every team plays all 7 conference opponents each year. Each team gets 4 non-conference games in which they can preserve the rivalries which inadvertently get disrupted by my new conference affiliations. There are no polls (or if there are, they mean nothing in the postseaon). Everyone plays 11 regular season games. There are no conference championship games. Everyone plays everyone, so conference titles are won on the field, all season long. The 8-team playoff takes 3 weeks. The 4 games played the first week are called quarterfinals, NOT BOWL GAMES. The 2 games the next week are called semifinals, or the final 4, NOT BOWL GAMES. The last game the next week is called the finals, or the national championship game, NOT A BOWL GAME. The two teams that play in the finals only play 14 games.
Here are the conferences:
ACC - FSU, Miami, Georgia, Georgia Tech, S. Carolina, Clemson, NCState, UNC
BIG 12 - Oklahoma, OSU, UT, TAMU, TTU, Missouri, Arkansas, LSU
Big East - Virginia, VT, West Virginia, Marshall, Maryland, B.C., Pitt, Syracuse
BIG TEN - Mich, MSU, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, ISU, Purdue, Northwestern
MAC - Miami, Toledo, B.G., NIU, Louisville, Notre Dame, Ohio St. Penn. St.
SEC - Alabama, Auburn, Ole Miss, Miss. St., USM, Memphis, UT, Florida
PAC 10 - USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Washington, ASU, Oregon, OSU
WAC - Boise St., UTEP, Fresno St., Utah, BYU, Colorado, Kansas St., Nebraska
In general, my conferences are very geometrically centered - much more so than what we currently have. Some rivalries are separated, but they can still schedule each other as OCC opponents, if they choose to. The only conference I think would be really upset is the BIG TEN. They went from a powerhouse conference to a very average conference. Michigan would win it most every season.
Anyway, it ain't gonna happen. You cannot break up the power conferences like that.
Also, what happens to the other teams? This only includes 64 teams that I hand-picked. I actually have a system to handle that too, but again, it could not be implemented. Too many schools would be ticked-off for it too ever work.
-Sully
Last edited:
Bowls every time
The people that want a playoff always want one because they believe someone deserving is being left out. Well guess what, someone will be left out in any playoff system that can be devised, so it really doesn’t accomplish anything. It gets down to whose interest you are going serve with whatever system you decide to have. I’m surprised that so many Bama fans have chimed in wanting a playoff, because usually a playoff benefits teams that don’t have the long term assets that other teams may have. Using the basketball example the teams with the most to gain are the “Mid Majorsâ€Â. As a Bama fan I look around our facilities and realize the capital investment that’s been made in Alabama Football, I don’t really think it’s fair to put a college like Southern Miss (they have a large High School Stadium) on an equal footing with programs like Alabama that have such a large investment. :smile:
The people that want a playoff always want one because they believe someone deserving is being left out. Well guess what, someone will be left out in any playoff system that can be devised, so it really doesn’t accomplish anything. It gets down to whose interest you are going serve with whatever system you decide to have. I’m surprised that so many Bama fans have chimed in wanting a playoff, because usually a playoff benefits teams that don’t have the long term assets that other teams may have. Using the basketball example the teams with the most to gain are the “Mid Majorsâ€Â. As a Bama fan I look around our facilities and realize the capital investment that’s been made in Alabama Football, I don’t really think it’s fair to put a college like Southern Miss (they have a large High School Stadium) on an equal footing with programs like Alabama that have such a large investment. :smile:
Your argument about the outside-looking in team whining doesn't hold water. The BCS has not solved this issue either. Neither system solves the whining. You will always have that. In fact, I think the CURRENT BCS format will always have MORE whining than a playoff system.BamaFan in Germantown said:
Use the BCS to seed the top 4 with no conference tie-ins. Have #1 play #4 & #2 play #3. Winner of each game gets to play in the championship game.
bama_jam, I see your point.
The problem you proposed is inherent to the large playoff systems, with 16 or more teams. My original idea of a "BCS playoff" involves very little change from where we are today, and I think it would make some of the playoff mongers happy (2 or 4 team playoff), but it really would not create the problem you are talking about.
My "other" system, with an 8-team payoff would not have this problem either. USM would have to win the SEC over Bama, Auburn, UT, Florida, etc., in order to make the playoffs. In my system, there are no "Mid-Majors".
-Sully
The problem you proposed is inherent to the large playoff systems, with 16 or more teams. My original idea of a "BCS playoff" involves very little change from where we are today, and I think it would make some of the playoff mongers happy (2 or 4 team playoff), but it really would not create the problem you are talking about.
My "other" system, with an 8-team payoff would not have this problem either. USM would have to win the SEC over Bama, Auburn, UT, Florida, etc., in order to make the playoffs. In my system, there are no "Mid-Majors".
-Sully
Not without reform
I might agree with some sort of playoff system if the divisions in college football were returned to some sort of sane arrangement. Just wanting to play in division 1 would not be good enough; they would have to prove that they had the capital investment necessary to truly be on the same level as other division 1 programs. It can be done, look at Miami in the 1980’s they went from being nothing to the top. All because they had people that would put their money where their mouths were.
I might agree with some sort of playoff system if the divisions in college football were returned to some sort of sane arrangement. Just wanting to play in division 1 would not be good enough; they would have to prove that they had the capital investment necessary to truly be on the same level as other division 1 programs. It can be done, look at Miami in the 1980’s they went from being nothing to the top. All because they had people that would put their money where their mouths were.
Last edited:
Actually a 24 team playoff like Div II and Div III have would work better. Everything in college football we have grown to know as important is the Top-25 poll. Right?
Anyway you take the 10 confernces in Div 1A. The Conference champiosn get automatic invites into the playoffs. The final 14 teams are from the remainder of the AP Top 25 that are not conference champs. If you win and play in Round 1 & 2, the Quarter and Semi finals and then the Championship game it adds 6 games to your season. Same as Div II and Div III. If they can do it why cant Div 1A?
One word. Money. Too much money in bowls, alliances, confernece championship games, etc. Even though 3 of the 4 divisions of college football use a 16 or 24 team playoff, Div 1A (which has less teams) doesnt because of money they make now.
I actually made a bracket that shows how it would work for this season. Makes alot of sense. Some skeptics I work with were rather impressed.
Anyway you take the 10 confernces in Div 1A. The Conference champiosn get automatic invites into the playoffs. The final 14 teams are from the remainder of the AP Top 25 that are not conference champs. If you win and play in Round 1 & 2, the Quarter and Semi finals and then the Championship game it adds 6 games to your season. Same as Div II and Div III. If they can do it why cant Div 1A?
One word. Money. Too much money in bowls, alliances, confernece championship games, etc. Even though 3 of the 4 divisions of college football use a 16 or 24 team playoff, Div 1A (which has less teams) doesnt because of money they make now.
I actually made a bracket that shows how it would work for this season. Makes alot of sense. Some skeptics I work with were rather impressed.
Last edited:
bama_jam said:
I am actually against a playoff for the reasons you have listed. I stated in another thread that I would hate to think that Alabama would go 11-0, win the SEC then go on to lose to a 3 loss team that had caught fire at the end of the year.
Why should a team like the 1992 Alabama team have to win 3 or 4 more games to prove they're the champions? What about the 1979 team? They shouldn't have to, and that's why I've always been against a playoff.
However, the pressure is getting so great that eventually there will be a major change, not just "tweaking." That's where I came up with the 4 team playoff as a compromise. Some say its only fair to let the players play it out on the field. In reality, that's not fair to the players. Its suiting the wishes of the fans. I don't want to see college football become more like the NFL. We're getting awful close with all these firings.
Anyway, Roll Tide.
4 or 8 team playoff would be perfect..
Use BCS rankings. 4 plays 1 and 2 plays 3 then we would have one extra game called the National Championship bowl.. This would rock and keep more people interested at the end of the season...
If we did the 8 team, which is what I prefer, we would have 8 teams in a battle to get in the top eight.. How cool would that be.. Stupid that we are not using some sort of playoff system.. If I didnt like College football so much I would stop watching until there was a playoff.. :biga:
Use BCS rankings. 4 plays 1 and 2 plays 3 then we would have one extra game called the National Championship bowl.. This would rock and keep more people interested at the end of the season...
If we did the 8 team, which is what I prefer, we would have 8 teams in a battle to get in the top eight.. How cool would that be.. Stupid that we are not using some sort of playoff system.. If I didnt like College football so much I would stop watching until there was a playoff.. :biga:
rtrcam said:
Whoever wins a playoff system is the best team.. No question.. they did it on the field... Schedule would not mean as much... I do not buy you 11-0 and then lose theory.. The best team will win it on the field... Period.. Just like the NFL.. Who is the best at the end of the season is the only time that matters.. :biga:
Trending content
Latest threads
-
-
ESPN: Heupel confident in Vols' quarterback options- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
ESPN: Stein says Kentucky will win big 'because of me'
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
ESPN: OU's Mateer back at full strength from hand injury...
- Started by TideFans Reporter
- Replies: 0