Would an NCAA playoff system lead to starters being rested in the season?

[DiamondDust]

No playoffs. Period. The present system isn't perfect. Nor was the pre-BCS situation. Nor would a playoff system be a panacea. Somewhere I saw a proposed scenario for what a 16-team playoff would look like this year. Alabama has already beaten three of the teams in the proposed playoff... LSU, VaTech, and Florida. Schools like TCU haven't played any of the teams in the proposed playoff structure. So Bama might have to play teams it's already beaten? Solid teams could play cupcake schedules and waltz into the playoff?

Goal for the season would be to get into the playoff structure. Definitely rest players. Definitely schedule more cupcakes. Drop the conference title games. In fact, the best strategy might be to go the ND route... no conference affiliation; just play a string of cupcakes and maybe one or two legitimate powers.

Playoffs are a very bad idea IMO.

Not that I have strong feelings on this topic...

Agreed with this. A winner of a play-off isn't necessarily the best team in that sport... it's just the team that got hot at the right time and caught the right breaks.

 

[KrAzY3]

I think the playoff is desperately needed, but should be intricately crafted (no more than 6 teams..no North Idaho A&T Mechanical Colleges getting in alah NCAA tourney).

I say the winners of the top 6 bowl games form the brackets, and sort by wins/points scored/SOS (gotta keep some elements of hogwash in it...this IS the NCAA we're talking about)

That's part of the push for a playoff and part of what is likely to happen. Teams like Boise State want in and if they don't get in they'll continue to litigate and complain and we basically have the same situation as we have now.

I'd support a +1 if it was done by my criteria (conditional, based on certain criteria), just like I'm sure most people would relative to what they have in mind. The problem if what we'd get is not likely to meet our ideals.

Agreed with this. A winner of a play-off isn't necessarily the best team in that sport... it's just the team that got hot at the right time and caught the right breaks.

Agreed... take the BCS championship this year for example. Does anyone seriously think the winner of a playoff would be a more deserving champion than the winner of the BCS championship game?

 

[rizolltizide]

Depends on how the seedings would be done. If it involved conference champions, then no. but that wouldn't be a fair way to do it anyway. Actually, there isn't a fair way to do it.

 

[Dallas4Bama]

but that wouldn't be a fair way to do it anyway. Actually, there isn't a fair way to do it.

My daddy always told me, "fair is where pigs go to win ribbons".

As Fossil pointed out BAMA has already beaten 3 teams in the playoff scenario that would be predicted this year. What's "fair" about having to beat them again. Given that same scenario as above if the playoffs were implemented BAMA could face FL 3 times next year. Is it really fair to have to beat a team like FLA 3 times in one season to win a national championship?

Rizoll I am not directing this at you really at all, but the "fair" argument is what most of the Boise State, Utah, TCU, etc... crowd use to say they should be playing for the championship.

 

[Orangechipper]

When one loss typically drops you about 5-6 spots. You can't afford to lose unless you are #1 in the country and its the last week of the season.

EVEN THEN... you would certainly lose out to a better matchup.

I like the 12 team format. Top 4 teams would get a bye week AND host the second round game. If you are in the top 4 at the end of the year, a loss likely moves you OUT of the top 4 and you lose your bye.

seeds 5-8 host first round. Seeds 1-4 host second round. Third round and then the final round would be at your Big Bowls.

Basically, who would sit their starters and risk going from a #4 seed with a bye to being the 10 seed and having to travel for a playoff road game?? Nobody. Only reason you see it in the NFL is because you can lose and still have that first round bye. 12 out of 32 teams versus 12 or fewer out of 120 teams is a huge difference.

 

[Dallas4Bama]

Top 4 teams would get a bye week AND host the second round game.

I get all that, but it still would not eliminate the possibility of teams like Alabama and Florida playing three times in one year.

I guess it could be manipulated each year to avoid that, but if you do that you have human manipulation again and someone starts crying foul. "We were seeded unfairly!"

 

[Orangechipper]

in my 12 team format...

6 conference champs are in. 2 champs from the non 6 majors are in and then 4 wild-cards are in. However... unlike NFL... seeding is NOT based on conference championships per se.

For example this year, Florida could be seeded #4 ahead of the Big 10 champ Ohio State even though Florida didn't win their conference.

 

[Orangechipper]

I get all that, but it still would not eliminate the possibility of teams like Alabama and Florida playing three times in one year.

I guess it could be manipulated each year to avoid that, but it you do that you have human manipulation again and someone starts crying foul.

Yeah... you'd have to eliminate conference champ games. I agree that 3 games with one opponent would stink.

 

[bamanut_aj]

I heard another good argument, and I think I'm jumping off the playoff bandwagon.. not that I wouldn't like to see it, but I see one of the legitimate reasons NOT to have one.

I think one reason I've been for one is because the Presidents keep lying to us and saying it's about the kids and their studies.....hogwash. Ratings. That's right....ratings. And ratings equal money. Look at college basketball. The ratings get worse every year because it's on ALL THE TIME, and you really don't have to watch until tourney time. Now, CFB isn't going to start playing during the week, but if there is a playoff, and you have a team that is probably going to make the tourney, what makes their last few games a 'must see'? And why do we need 8 teams in the football tournament? Is the BCS that bad? Has anyone ever made a legitimate argument that the #5 team deserves a chance to play for the NC? Not that I can recall. We've pretty much got it right the way it is.

 

[KrAzY3]

Yeah... you'd have to eliminate conference champ games. I agree that 3 games with one opponent would stink.

The more I see the discussion progress, the more I see people try to make up their own ideal scenarios. I used to support a playoff, but I couldn't continue to do so once I looked into things deeper. I also came up with a conditional +1 but I couldn't even argue for that because I know full well that it would never become a reality.

At first glance it appears as though support for a playoff is overwhelming:
http://www.tidefans.com/forums/football/97688-how-should-national-championship-decided.html

However, once I tried adding in more realistic options the numbers changed dramatically:
http://www.tidefans.com/forums/football/98459-how-should-national-championship-decided-part-ii.html

Support for the BCS went up, support for playoffs went down and the BCS was the only option that actually rose in popularity. As people look into the issue, support for playoffs seems to diminish and the BCS becomes a more tolerable option.

The one thing I did see was a general willingness to settle on a +1 but the concern I have (and others) is that it won't end there and it won't end the litigation, congressional action, etc... because you'd still have teams like Boise State and Utah on the outside.

Ultimately this is the question one has to ask themselves. Do you want to dramatically alter college football? Are you willing to let the NCAA or some other entity step in and make a +1 or playoff format? As good as some of our ideas are, we do not have a cohesive argument but rather a series of different suggestions.

Either we support any playoff or any +1 (with a very realistic possibility it grows into a playoff) or, we throw our support behind the BCS. What is likely to happen as things stand now is in our myriad of suggestions for playoffs we will end up inadvertently supporting a post season plan that we dislike more than the BCS.