BCS/Playoff

[gsu_paintballer]

Due to what was discussed in another thread, I thought I would see what everyone has to say about the options.

Personally, I think a playoff system is the best idea. Take each conference winner, seed them randomly, and do business.

If we are gonna keep something like the BCS, quit whining about SoS (mainly media). Obviously an undefeated team should be at the top. If there are more than 2 undefeated teams, then look at SoS to determine who belongs where.

 

[GTKyle]

So essentially you could have a 4 loss team win the NC. That just makes CFB suck.

 

[rambleON]

Yeah the conference winner idea, IMO, is terrible. I think we should go with the "plus one" system, where you take the top four teams, pit 1 vs. 4 and 2. vs. 3, and have the winners play for it all.

This way we maintain the importance of each game (the "every game is a playoff" theory) while not locking out teams that may get screwed by the BCS, like Auburn and USC a few years ago. Also, it only adds one game to the schedule and keeps the bowls happy. They could rotate it like they do now...

 

[lonestarjacket]

So essentially you could have a 4 loss team win the NC. That just makes CFB suck.

Yeah, that's exactly what would happen. A really bad four loss team would somehow get in the playoffs (must be a bad conference too) and then sweep all the undefeated and one loss teams.

If a four loss team DID do that then they must have come from a pretty tough conference to collect all those losses and manage a sweep of the top teams from the other conferences. But, it has as much chance of actually happening as an 8-8 team has of winning the Super Bowl.

 

[midatlantech]

I am not against a playoff (if there is one can we send UM, BC and VPI back?) but I prefer the Plus 1 ONLY when there are multiple undefeated teams.

In other words, in years of recent where there were three deserving teams, undefeated, then do the regular bowl and if the #3 team loses, drop the extra game. If they win, have a playoff at the home stadium of the #1v#2 winner.

All the bitching goes away and of recent memory only one extra game would have been played.

 

[RamblinPeck]

No no no, and again hell no. The bowl system is what makes big time college football special. College football isn't a game thats measured in individual years anyways, its measured in decades, dynasties, and rivalries. Its about teams getting off to a rough start, finishing out strong in a bowl win and being able to beat their chest and prepare for next year. With only 12 games in the regular season, and potentially 2 more in post season play there are simply not enough games to determine a true "National Champion" anyways, unless we wants to seed all 119 teams and go to a 7 game season (at best). But then you can flush traditional rivalries and such becasue everything should be randomly seeded to make it fair.

Whats wrong with being the only major sport with something different, something that gives the fans a reason to argue about for who "really" should be #2, and how well that freshman played in the upset bowl win last year, etc.

College football is different, let it stay different. This need for a "definite" answer is just falling into the trap that ESPN and the rest of the media has setup to build some sort of a ridiculous frenzy and ruin what sport is really about.

 

[gsu_paintballer]

Yeah the conference winner idea, IMO, is terrible. I think we should go with the "plus one" system, where you take the top four teams, pit 1 vs. 4 and 2. vs. 3, and have the winners play for it all.

That works too

College football is different, let it stay different. This need for a "definite" answer is just falling into the trap that ESPN and the rest of the media has setup to build some sort of a ridiculous frenzy and ruin what sport is really about.

From what I can tell.....the media wants to keep the BCS, even though they dont like the results :hsugh:

 

[ContactBuzz]

From what I can tell.....the media wants to keep the BCS, even though they dont like the results :hsugh:

The university presidents want to keep the BCS (and current bowl system). And they are the ultimate decision makers.

 

[rambleON]

yeah the media is calling for a change to the BCS or a playoff, mostly because they like to stir things up and bring attention to the failings of the system, not because they have a single ethos driving their commentary...

RamblinPeck... I actually sympathize with your point, which is certainly not how I felt when I was younger and labelled the system as unfair to smaller teams with less tradition. Still, there is too much on the line (BCS $$$) and teams are rewarded simply for being ranked highly at the beginning of the year and having a big-time name.

BCS conferences, particularly the power-weilding SEC, obviously want the system in place because they're more likely to be ranked higher in the first poll, stay ranked given similar records, and be selected by BCS bowls (you can't blame them either b/c they need the $$$). With the changes to recruiting and technology that have made it easier for smaller schools to compete, I think we need to recognize that the system is unfair to programs who don't have the prestige but still perform at an equal level.

This is why, I believe, something needs to be done to equalize these biases while maintaining the "every game counts" feeling unique to College FB. I think the PLUS ONE system is the best compromise, along with delaying the first AP poll...

 

[gsu_paintballer]

Still, there is too much on the line (BCS $$$) and teams are rewarded simply for being ranked highly at the beginning of the year and having a big-time name.

BCS conferences, particularly the power-weilding SEC, obviously want the system in place because they're more likely to be ranked higher in the first poll, stay ranked given similar records, and be selected by BCS bowls

This is why, I believe, something needs to be done to equalize these biases while maintaining the "every game counts" feeling unique to College FB.

QFT....specific parts of course :P

 

[ASimPerson]

The current system, in any other sport, would be considered ludicrous. It's only tolerable in DI-A college football because the old system was so terrible and unfair.

DI-AA and Div II have 8-team playoffs. Div III has a 16 team playoff. If they can handle it, so can DI-A.

 

[gth816f]

I think 8 team playoff would be ideal. The NFL has a playoff system...I hear it works out pretty well for them. Something about your season not being effectively over after one or two losses.

 

[nedleeds]

The BCS has finished without controversy 3 of 9 years. 6 times there has been an undefeated team or equally qualified one loss team "locked out" of the game. So as it stands the current system probably isn't the best system. A straight division winner -> seeding -> tourney is a neat idea from a football watching perspective as tourneys are just plain fun to watch unfold. There are some issues with this though, most notably that it diminishes the importance of OOC games to near ZERO.

Big 12
Big 10
ACC
Big East
SEC
PAC-10
At Large
At Large

Then don't do random seeding but instead seed according to the final "BCS" rankings (2 polls + computer).

First round games are played at HOME. If you give home field advantage based on seeding then non-conference schedule (and hence ranking) really matters.

As it stands today this would look something like:

#1 - Ohio State (Big 10 Champ - #1 poll)

#2 - Boston College (ACC Champ - #2 poll)

#3 - LSU (SEC Champ - #3 poll)

#4 - Arizona State (PAC-10 Champ - #4 poll)

#5 - Oregon (PAC-10 Runner Up - #5 poll)

#6 - Oklahoma (Big 12 Champ - #6 poll)

#7 - West Virginia (Big East Champ - #7 poll)

#8 - Kansas (Big 12 Runner up - #8 poll)

Now of course certain teams play each other on this list and will get knocked up and down.

Round One (Home games for higher seeds)

Kansas at tOSU
WV at BC
Oklahoma at LSU
Oregon at ASU

Second Round you filter into the bowls

Sugar = tOSU vs. Oregon
Fiesta = BC vs. LSU

NCG = Oregon vs. LSU

I guess that sucks also now that I wrote it all out ... hahahah ... oh well.