College Football Playoff

I think they will not want to damage the bowls and the regular season, so they will not go to a larger playoff but a +1 is a real possibility using the BCS or whatever rankings they want to use. You still play the bowls and have a national championship game as we do now, except the NC is decided by two of the BCS bowls that put #1 vs #4 and #2 vs #3. In most seasons there wouldnt be as much complaining on this other than maybe a couple of teams for the fourth spot. This year (just for BOR) it would look like this:

#1 OU vs #4 USC
#2 Florida vs #3 Texas

Remember these two games would be in traditional bowls and the winner of each plays in the NC
 
In an effort to get a make up grade:

1. Florida (SEC) vs 16. Troy (SunBelt)
2. Oklahoma (B12) vs Buffalo (MAC)
3. Texas (AtLarge) vs vs ECU (CUSA)
4. USC (PAC10) vs Georgia f'n Tech (AtLarge)
5. Alabama (AtLarge) vs Ohio State (AtLarge)
6. Penn State (B10) vs Virginia Tech (ACC)
7. Texas Tech (AtLarge) vs Utah (MVC)
8. Boise State (WAC) vs Cincinnati (Big East)

There.
 
BarrelORum said:
gmlane, you make the strongest case yet.
Click to expand...

Thanks. It's a system that I really like and that I think fixes just about all of the problems and would be a blast to watch.

A hypothetical bracket:

bracket.jpg
 
Yellow Fever said:
Ok here is my try.
(we don't know the BCS Rankings yet but based on the AP as if it were the bcs...)


#1 Florida vs. #8 Texas Tech
#2 OU vs. #7 Utah
#3 Texas vs. #6 Penn State
#4 Bama vs. #5 USC
Click to expand...

So the second round will likely be Texas-OU and UF-Bama, two games that have already been played?

This is the big danger of a playoff with at-large teams. If you want a better example, look at the other extreme: the NBA and the NHL. The last NBA regular-season games have consequence for only a handful of teams and most regular season games have little interest outside of diehard fans.

If I were potentate of college football, I would move along with mover's suggestion. 8 12-team super-conferences. Get rid of the most of the sun belt and MAC schools and put a gun to ND's head to join the Big 10. Have Utah and BYU move to the PAC-10 and combine the rest of the mid-majors. Have a premiership-style relegation system in case FIU develops an amazing program somehow. This system, or something similar to it, would keep the do-or-die nature of regular season in-conference games and get rid of the politics/computers BS of the BCS. Future college football news reports should only include what happens on the field.
 
It should be a 4 team playoff using the top 4 BCS ranked schools. That wouldn't hurt the regular season at all.

The NFL still does well with their system but just look at the Falcons today. They didn't "have" to win to make the playoffs.

If you lose more than once, you're officially screwed in college football and that's the way it should remain.
 
wesleyd21 said:
It should be a 4 team playoff using the top 4 BCS ranked schools. That wouldn't hurt the regular season at all.

The NFL still does well with their system but just look at the Falcons today. They didn't "have" to win to make the playoffs.

If you lose more than once, you're officially screwed in college football and that's the way it should remain.
Click to expand...

Wes, you get an F-. First, you didn't bother to even run a hypothetical situation of your proposal based on the current rankings. Second, had you done so you would find out really quickly, that a 4 team playoff would cause infinitely more problems than the current system.
You failed to do the assignment, and in the process of failing, you proposed the absolute worst situation as a remedy to our current situation. Congrats. You are hereby ordered to repeat the class next semester. :thumbdn:

What you thought is the easiest answer, is in fact the absolute worst. Nice work.
 
BOR, you fail for perpetuating the myths of college football.

The idea that a playoff system would ruin the regular season is a myth, that people throw out there because it's the easy answer. Explain exactly how the regular season would be diminished. Would teams be resting starters? Simple.

Make everyone play a conference championship game (They should, because there shouldn't be different standards for winning a conference.) As far as Notre Dame is concerned, they can kiss everyone's ass like they've forced everyone to kiss theirs by staying independent. Either join a conference, or be subject to a special clause like they have in the current BCS which forces them to have a certain ranking to get in. That means they have no room to drop a game, lest they put their ranking at serious risk.

You can also make seeds to further raise the importance of winning your games during the regular season. These seeds will determine matchups, home-field advantage if the earlier rounds are hosted at the higher ranked schools, or both. What people who foolishly cling to that mantra need to hammer into thier thick skulls is that while college football may have the best regular season, it has the WORST post-season. (Please save yourself the trouble of trying to pull out some BCS games television rankings. That doesn't prove a damn thing other than the fact that people have nothing better to watch.)

The simple fact of the matter is that people want a sport with a great regular AND post-season. That's why people love the NFL, becuase they get to see the best seperated from the rest (not to mention, tons of parity), and then see those best teams play each other. Do I think the NFL is better than college football? The post-seasons of each push me towards the professional ranks, but the atmosphere of college football can't be matched. If college football got its head out of its ass, and actually came up with a playoff system, the NFL wouldn't be able to hold a candle to it.

For the sake of the thread, I'll follow BOR's directions, and come up with a mock playoff system for this year:

Idea 1: 8 teams (conf. champions + highest ranked Non-BCS of at least 12 + at large bid)

#1: Florida (beat #1, so they are #1) vs. #8 Texas Tech
#2: Oklahoma vs. #7: Utah
#3: USC vs. #6: Virginia Tech
#4: Penn State vs. #5: Cincinnatti

Outside looking in:
Bama: (best win was over uga, which isn't nearly as good as TT's win over Texas)

Texas: (has a legit beef with almost any system you could think of. Unfortunately, since they got screwed out of the Big 12 Conf. Championship, they are comparted to Texas Tech, who wins head to head. Realistically, you could easily switch UT and TT.)

Boise State: (Only true fallibility of this system: How do you compare non-BCS teams? I've always been stedfast in the idea that they just haven't played anyone. However, Boise State demolished their conference, unlike Hawa'ii, who squeaked by. They have almost as big a beef as Texas)

Idea 2: 16 teams (All 11 Conf. Champions + 5 At Large)

#1. Florida vs. #16. GT (We get in due to me being a homer, being a hot team, having aruguably a better win than TCU, Ok St, and Oregon)

#2. Oklahoma vs. #15. Ohio State
#3. USC vs. #14. Alabama
#4. Penn State vs. #13. Texas Tech
#5. Cincinnatti vs. #12. Texas
#6. Virginia Tech vs. #11. Troy
#7. Utah vs. #10. East Carolina
#8. Boise State vs. #9. Buffalo (see how important winning your conf. is?)

* order 6-8 is truly debatable *

I did both of the scenarios based on automatically seeding conference champions over at-larges just to further emphasize the regular season/winning your conf. However, I wouldn't be fully opposed to just ranking everyone 1-16 because in the above scenario, the higher ranked teams have a hell of an opening round game, and the mid-ranked teams don't.

And as far as length of schedule goes, man up. You're aiming towards playing in a league where you're playing 16 games MINIMUM every year. Plus, as others have mentioned, they seem to get along just fine in the lower divisions/sub-divisions.
 
stinger78 you fail solely based on your attempt to give a seed to the highest rated independent, which could be one of 4 schools and more than likely give Notre Dame an automatic appearance.
F-
 
Saxophone, you get a B. I like the effort and the thought process. But you failed miserably by suggesting that Troy, Buffalo and ECU deserve a spot in the playoff solely because they play in a weakass conference and taking the place of teams like Oregon, Oregon St. BC, TCU, Oklahoma St., Mizzu, etc. etc.
 
I'm fairly sure there's an ncaa rule about conferences getting autobids to playoffs if they are above a certain size.
 
First off:
If you are worried by the legal system, then start a new 'College Football Association' to include whoever you want. Otherwise, I believe the BCS type format (whatever you choose in other words) will be protected.

Secondly: Assume 10 conferences:
1) You include every conference champion. Every conference must have a championship game OR be moved into Tier 2.
2) You may include at large teams in Tier 2 (2) but they shall only come from Tier 1 conferences.
3) Seedings in Tier 1 are based on Sagarin Conference Strength Rating. ACC gets #1 seed this year, Big 12 #2, SEC #3... (The reason is simple. With only a few games, it is statistically impossible to tell if Oklahoma is any better than Virginia Tech. And in my system, you take away most human voting.)
4) If your conference does not have a minimum of 15 OOC victories against this year's Top 5 Sagarin Ranked Conferences, then your champion is subject to moving to Tier 2. (obviously a certain number has to remain in Tier 1). (The reason for par. 3 and par. 4 is to make sure the season actually matters.)
5) If your conference has one school on probation per the NCAA then your conference automatically moves to Tier 2.

Tier 2:
Teams '5-12' as per the following: Tier 2 teams as per those conferences lacking credentials during the season. Tier 1 teams Top 2 Runners Up per system described below.

Seeding and Tier 1 Runners Up (2, must not be same conference) based on updated BCS system. Updated system is based on every team getting a vote instead of sportswriters or old coaches or whatever plus computers. Any collusion on voting equals disqualification for affiliated conference for ten years.

This year, Runners Up: Texas, Alabama
Tier 2 Seeding:

Game 1: #5 (Texas) v. # 12 (Buffalo)
Game 2: #6 (USC) v. #11 (ECU or whoever it is)
Game 3: #7 (Alabama) v # 10 (Cin)
Game 4: #8 (Utah) v #9 (Boise State)

Tier 1:
Game 5: #1 (VPI) v Game 4 winner (Utah?)
Game 6: #2 (OU) v Game 3 winner (Alabama?)
Game 7: #3 (UF) v Game 2 winner (USC?)
Game 8: #4 (PSU) v Game 1 winner (Texas?)

Play at highest ranked venue until final game. (The reason is for filling up the stands AND to give cold weather conferences equal footing, for example.)

All else, go to meaningless bowls, like usual.

Note that a school may drop into Tier 1 for seeding purposes only. If there are not enough qualified Tier 1 conferences, then at large teams may come from the same qualified conference.
 
BarrelORum said:
Saxophone, you get a B. I like the effort and the thought process. But you failed miserably by suggesting that Troy, Buffalo and ECU deserve a spot in the playoff solely because they play in a weakass conference and taking the place of teams like Oregon, Oregon St. BC, TCU, Oklahoma St., Mizzu, etc. etc.
Click to expand...

Please don't confuse me for thinking they deserve it. However, any playoff system would have to fight through hell and back to keep the non-BCS teams out. Bascially, you're stuck with either trying to come up with some convoluted method for determining how good a non-BCS team is as far as allowing them in the playoffs, or you can just allow every conference in. THAT is pretty much the only true fallibility of a potential playoff system.
 
midatlantech, I like the system, but no offense, any system that excludes teams like Texas Tech, Ohio St., TCU, Oklahoma St. Not to mention my personal bias of GT, for teams like Buffalo and ECU is flawed and does not promote playing the best competition.

Now if you expanded it to 16 teams, and apply your same logic, I think you may have a winner.
 
Re: crappy teams getting autobids to a potential playoff. Basketball has the same issue. If we go to full-blown 16-team playoff with the current conferences all getting autobids, we would get December madness with strange outcomes like Cincinnati beating Penn State or similar upsets. I don't think that's a bad thing, necessarily, just very different from the bowl system.
 
floridajacket said:
Re: crappy teams getting autobids to a potential playoff. Basketball has the same issue. If we go to full-blown 16-team playoff with the current conferences all getting autobids, we would get December madness with strange outcomes like Cincinnati beating Penn State or similar upsets. I don't think that's a bad thing, necessarily, just very different from the bowl system.
Click to expand...

I don't care in the least about the Cinderellas of the world. I think it's overrated in basketball. The teams who do that usually are actually solid teams, and not some flukes. I'm with BOR that teams like Troy, ECU, and Buffalo don't deserve to even sniff the playoffs, especially over teams like us, OK State, Oregon, etc. The only reason I included them in mine was because I envision the non-BCS teams raising a huge fuss over being included in any potential playoff format.
 
ramblinwreck24 said:
I think they will not want to damage the bowls and the regular season, so they will not go to a larger playoff but a +1 is a real possibility using the BCS or whatever rankings they want to use. You still play the bowls and have a national championship game as we do now, except the NC is decided by two of the BCS bowls that put #1 vs #4 and #2 vs #3. In most seasons there wouldnt be as much complaining on this other than maybe a couple of teams for the fourth spot. This year (just for BOR) it would look like this:

#1 OU vs #4 USC
#2 Florida vs #3 Texas

Remember these two games would be in traditional bowls and the winner of each plays in the NC
Click to expand...

F for not thinking through the problem. So what you are saying are these one loss teams are more deserving? Gimme a break. Bama frankly, has a right to bitch. Not to mention Texas Tech and Penn St. How about undefeated Utah and Boise State? 4 team playoffs cause more problems than the current system, you cannot make a case that a 4 team playoff works. You would have more teams on the outside looking in.
 
Here's my playoff.

About a dozen current bowls are canceled.

SEC champ goes to Sugar Bowl
PAC-10 and Big-10 champs play in Rose Bowl
Big 12 loses 4 teams, champ of resulting Big 8 goes to Orange Bowl

Other teams go to other bowls. A bunch of people vote. At least one champion is declared in the polls after the bowls are over.
 
chilidogking said:
Here's my playoff.

About a dozen current bowls are canceled.

SEC champ goes to Sugar Bowl
PAC-10 and Big-10 champs play in Rose Bowl
Big 12 loses 4 teams, champ of resulting Big 8 goes to Orange Bowl

Other teams go to other bowls. A bunch of people vote. At least one champion is declared in the polls after the bowls are over.
Click to expand...

Scenario: some team from the Big 8 wins the conference by erroneously winning a game by virtue of an extra down. This team has one loss, but still gets enough votes to split the title with a team from the ACC that has no losses, only a tie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top