Why are people so into playoffs?

The playing field is much more level during a playoff run. Georgia Southern is a perfect example. They lost 3 regular season games (It'd be over after 1 in FBS) they still almost made it. It was a rebuilding season for them, so their record was not a true representative of what they were capable of doing. In the playoffs, it doesn't matter. You either get the job done or you go home. There's no time for recuperating from injuries, a well thought out game plan, etc etc... It truly reveals the grit and determination of a team more so than it's talent, because everyone knows talent is what got a team to that level anyway.
 
so basically what you're saying is that you prefer for the regular season to not matter?
 
GTDan21 said:
I guess the point of the table was to show bias? I mean why even look at who teams beat, the champion should be the one with the best record. If there are no undefeated 1-A schools then a 1-AA can win the championship if they're undefeated
Click to expand...

The point of the table was to show a consistent and (IMO) unfair bias toward the SEC and Big Ten. I'm not discounting SOS, just the notion that a 2-loss SEC/B10 team is always better than a 2-loss team from another conference. Or that a 2-loss SEC/B10 team is always superior to a 0- or 1-loss team from a lesser conference.

The regular season would matter in that it would secure your conference's entry into the playoff. There is a HUGE incentive to have a great season.
 
GTDan21 said:
so basically what you're saying is that you prefer for the regular season to not matter?
Click to expand...

With a playoff, which I prefer, the regular season matters longer for more teams. The regular season determines who gets in and how they are seeded. We are talking about a 12 game football season, not 30 or more games as in basketball. The regular season would be very important right to the end.

As it is now, yes, every game on the schedule of potential national champions is very important. But, ESPN and the rest of the media covering college football focus so much on the national championship race that they virtually ignore many good teams as the season progresses. Much more of the regular season for more teams is deemed irrelevant under the current system.
 
stinger78 said:
The point of the table was to show a consistent and (IMO) unfair bias toward the SEC and Big Ten. I'm not discounting SOS, just the notion that a 2-loss SEC/B10 team is always better than a 2-loss team from another conference. Or that a 2-loss SEC/B10 team is always superior to a 0- or 1-loss team from a lesser conference.

The regular season would matter in that it would secure your conference's entry into the playoff. There is a HUGE incentive to have a great season.
Click to expand...

You can't really use always for anything though. The best team certainly doesn't even win all the time, (in fact the best team is more likely to be the champion in the BCS as opposed to a 16-team playoff) or that this one-loss is better than that one- or two-loss. At the end of the day there is still the eyeball test and earning your spot. If we played and beat UF, OU, Oregon, etc. and we were their only loss... and we end up losing a game to Clemson or someone... you don't think we would be in the title game?

We really don't play anyone OOC and only have a couple of tough games in conference, so yeah we have no room for error. Meanwhile if you're in the SEC West last year and had to play Auburn and Bama... well yeah losing to them is better than losing to VT and UNC, losing to USF and Cincy (or whoever), losing to Air Force and TCU, losing to Hawaii and BSU, etc. We aren't talking top to bottom strength, but the fact is if you're in the SEC the last 5 years chances are one of your loses is to the national champion... so yeah I have no problem putting a team that's beat nobody behind a team that let's say beats Bama and loses to Auburn.
 
77GTFan said:
With a playoff, which I prefer, the regular season matters longer for more teams. The regular season determines who gets in and how they are seeded. We are talking about a 12 game football season, not 30 or more games as in basketball. The regular season would be very important right to the end.

As it is now, yes, every game on the schedule of potential national champions is very important. But, ESPN and the rest of the media covering college football focus so much on the national championship race that they virtually ignore many good teams as the season progresses. Much more of the regular season for more teams is deemed irrelevant under the current system.
Click to expand...

you kind of made my point... you're saying that you want the seasons of non-contenders to matter longer... but if they aren't a contender than why would they be in a playoff? And do you do only conference champions in a playoff? So you have an 11-team playoff where instead of watching the Rose Bowl we have to watch Auburn or Oregon or whoever beat up on UCF? I'll pass...

And for the regular season will still matter argument... look at college football ratings compared with baseball, basketball, lacrosse... whatever. Either your team is good so you will just watch the playoffs or your team sucks so you didn't miss much. The beauty of college football is anyone can win the national title at the beginning of the year, but if you fall out of that race you still have other goals. Winning your conference, beating your rival, winning your division, going to a bowl (maybe even winning) are all things to shoot for even if you lose a few early. Just look at basketball... our goals are all about a couple games in March.

By the way there is a 2-team playoff in football right now, so the argument is just about the format, number of teams, or people that get their jollies by talking about how bad "the man" is.
 
No, I'd like to see the conferences w/o a playoff play between themselves for a representative. Only conference champions are included.

Teams are determined on playoff weekend (1st Saturday in December).
1) SEC East v. SEC West
2) ACC Coastal v. ACC Atlantic
3) B12 North v. B12 South
4) B10 Whatever v. B10 Whichever
5) P12 Whatever v. P 12 Whichever

6) MWC Champ v. WAC Champ
7) CUSA Champ v. Top Independent
8) Sunbelt Champ v. MAC Champ

Those 8 winners make the playoff and are seeded with the top seed having home field until the NCG.
 
stinger78 said:
No, I'd like to see the conferences w/o a playoff play between themselves for a representative. Only conference champions are included.

Teams are determined on playoff weekend (1st Saturday in December).
1) SEC East v. SEC West
2) ACC Coastal v. ACC Atlantic
3) B12 North v. B12 South
4) B10 Whatever v. B10 Whichever
5) P12 Whatever v. P 12 Whichever

6) MWC Champ v. WAC Champ
7) CUSA Champ v. Top Independent
8) Sunbelt Champ v. MAC Champ

Those 8 winners make the playoff and are seeded with the top seed having home field until the NCG.
Click to expand...

It's the Big Ten Leaders vs. Legends. Trust me, they don't like it up here either.
 
8 team playoff:

First round- BCS Bowls:

Rose: Big 10 champ vs. Pac 12 champ
Fiesta (or not): Big 12 champ vs. at large
Sugar: SEC champ vs. at large
Orange: ACC Champ vs Big East champ

Second round- final four:

Dallas: Rose champ vs. Fiesta champ
Atlanta: Sugar champ vs. Orange champ

National championship:
Dallas champ vs Atlanta champ
Place? You could swap it like the current BCS system

There should be a clause that the conference champ forfeits their bid if they are not ranked in the top 25.

And it only adds two rounds to the system, the catch is the big bowls have to be played earlier. Probably only a week's rest after conference championships.

Or it would probably make the most sense to have two BCS bowls the first weekend after conference championships and then two more the weekend after that.
 
MtownJacket said:
8 team playoff:

First round- BCS Bowls:

Rose: Big 10 champ vs. Pac 12 champ
Fiesta (or not): Big 12 champ vs. at large
Sugar: SEC champ vs. at large
Orange: ACC Champ vs Big East champ

Second round- final four:

Dallas: Rose champ vs. Fiesta champ
Atlanta: Sugar champ vs. Orange champ

National championship:
Dallas champ vs Atlanta champ
Place? You could swap it like the current BCS system

There should be a clause that the conference champ forfeits their bid if they are not ranked in the top 25.

And it only adds two rounds to the system, the catch is the big bowls have to be played earlier. Probably only a week's rest after conference championships.

Or it would probably make the most sense to have two BCS bowls the first weekend after conference championships and then two more the weekend after that.
Click to expand...

This is the best of the ideas, but what happens to new years day? so you have the rose bowl and rose parade in early december? or do you have the bcs bowls on new years and end the playoffs in mid-late january?

If anything, the best solution would be a +1. Go back to the old BCS matchups (basically what you described above) and keep the BCS Championship a week later (like it is now). Yes it has tons of problems (how do you go from 8 teams to 2) but it still would be better than a long playoff.

The ideal solution would be 4 big conferences and there are your 4 reps for a +1. The biggest a conference could be seems like 16 (18 if you don't play any cross-division rivalries) so that would leave out a lot of teams. By my count the BCS teams number 67 so you would have to knock out 3 not counting anyone else (Notre Dame, Boise, BYU, Army, Navy, Air Force, etc.).
 
GTDan21 said:
This is the best of the ideas, but what happens to new years day? so you have the rose bowl and rose parade in early december? or do you have the bcs bowls on new years and end the playoffs in mid-late january?

If anything, the best solution would be a +1. Go back to the old BCS matchups (basically what you described above) and keep the BCS Championship a week later (like it is now). Yes it has tons of problems (how do you go from 8 teams to 2) but it still would be better than a long playoff.

The ideal solution would be 4 big conferences and there are your 4 reps for a +1. The biggest a conference could be seems like 16 (18 if you don't play any cross-division rivalries) so that would leave out a lot of teams. By my count the BCS teams number 67 so you would have to knock out 3 not counting anyone else (Notre Dame, Boise, BYU, Army, Navy, Air Force, etc.).
Click to expand...

Remix:

Elite 8:
Cotton Bowl: Big 10 Champ vs. Big 12 Champ
Fiesta Bowl: Pac 12 Champ vs. at large
Orange Bowl: Big East champ vs at large
Peach Bowl: ACC champ vs. SEC champ

Rose Bowl: Cotton champ vs. Fiesta champ
Sugar bowl: Peach champ vs Orange champ

National champ: Rose champ vs. Sugar champ

This could reasonably postpone the Rose Bowl until new years day, but would not guarantee a Big 10 vs. Pac 12 matchup (not that the current system does 100% of the time). The season wouldn't be any longer than it is now.

Another reasonable way to distribute the teams is to have the Cotton and Fiesta pick from the Big 10, Big 12, Pac 12, and 1 at large and then have the Orange and Peach pick from the SEC, ACC, Big East, and 1 at large. This wouldn't, for example, lock the ACC out of the Peach or Orange every year.

But I like the idea of SEC vs. ACC in the peach because that is how it has always been.
 
Example schedule for 2011:

12/3: Conference championships
12/10: Bye
12/17 (sat): Peach Bowl
12/18 (sun): Cotton Bowl
12/24 (sat): Orange Bowl
12/25 (sun): Fiesta Bowl
12/31 (sat): Sugar Bowl (Peach vs. Orange)
1/1 (sun): Rose Bowl (Fiesta vs. Cotton)
1/8 (or later that week): National Championship

Or you could do two in one day for the big bowls to not have them on Sunday and compete with the NFL.
 
I guess maybe I'm just old-fashioned but I like having all the big matchups around new years in big bowl games as opposed to a march madness style 3 weekend tournament. I like watching the Rose Bowl on new years... same with the cotton, fiesta (for now), sugar, orange, peach, etc. They all have familiar matchups and familiar rivals that make a lot of sense. Could I do without the hunger bowl and all that garbage? Of course. But I would much rather get the tradition and the rivalries on new years day instead of turn it into college basketball. If you are into playoffs you can watch any other sport and any other division of college football... enjoy! FBS just has too many things going for it... how many other sports have parades before their "playoff" games... how many other sports have regional rivalries this harsh... a playoff would sanitize this and detract from 120 years of football tradition.
 
GTDan21 said:
so basically what you're saying is that you prefer for the regular season to not matter?
Click to expand...

I agree. I can't wait for WEEK ONE of college football. And every Saturday (and most Thursdays and some Fridays even) there will be games that I wouldn't dare miss--games featuring teams in conferences and cities that are nowhere near Atlanta. And at the end of the year, there will definitely be a great match up for the MNC.

On the other hand, I don't know or care when college basketball season (or NBA or NFL or NHL etc) starts. I won't pay attention to any team other than GT until late February because the regular season is completely worthless. And then after 3 weeks of some exciting basketball games, I'll get to see Duke/UNC/UK crush Butler. Whoopee.

I like the idea of a very limited playoff in college football--4 teams. And if college basketball would go back to 16 or 24 teams in the NCAA tournament, it might save a dying sport.
 
I say the top 14 teams make the playoffs with the top 2 getting a first round bye.

round 1
12 teams playing for 6 spots
round 2 (quarter finals)
8 teams playing for 4 spots
round 3 (semi finals)
4 teams playing for 2 spots
round 4 (NC game)
2 spots playing for 1 spot

IMO it's not too many teams. There would be a reason to win most all games for playoff positioning. Let's face it, to place in the top 14 is a very high accomplishment.

It would be very intriguing NOT knowing who your favorite school will be playing only several weeks in advance.
 
Last edited:
all of this just makes me miss college football. This is gonna be a looong summer.
 
gtcu17 said:
+1. and what about teams like LSU and Florida (and GT for that matter) who didn't win all their games but still won titles?

it's all about how hyped you can make the voters about your team right now, which is kind of a sh**ty system.
Click to expand...

+oo
 
The major difficulty in using the bowls to run the playoffs through is they require both fan bases to foot the expensive last minute travel multiple weeks IAR if they win. If they don't/can't then the bowl takes a major attendance hit, and can't sustain the game.

The better way, IMO, is to use the same home field advantage that they use in FCS and the NFL. This guarantees a large home crowd at every game, and rewards the higher ranked teams.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top