College Playoff

[zincfinger]

...What do I win? :)

Congratulations! Here's your You-just-created-another-shitty-playoff-proposal Trophy.

 

[Muck]

Wetzel wrote another scathing "I hate the BCS" article yesterday.

 

[Nicknam4]

 

[Onebuckfan]

Getting a playoff is as impossible as having Urban Meyer coach tOS ......Nevermind

 

[Bucky32]

I know it would ruffle some feathers (particularly in the Big Ten and Pac-12) but I say drop the bowl affiliations. All 4 of those teams on the left are better than VT or WVU. If you want a real good system, we're going to have to forget the traditional matchups.

 

[Bucky32]

Also, what I would do is have an 8 team playoff, but also keep the bowls. The losers of the first round would meet in bowl games, and the losers of the second round would also meet in a bowl game.


So basically you take 8 teams. Big Ten, SEC, ACC, Big 12, Pac-12 are the AQ conferences. Then you add the top ranked 3 other teams. Preferably these teams would be chosen by a selection committee.

This makes the conference season incredibly important, but also keeps the regular season very important for the top teams this year as there are those at large bids.

Then you have 4 losers of the first round. Each year the Rose, Sugar, Fiesta, and Orange will rotate. Say the Rose and Sugar are up this year. They will pick the losers of the first round to play in the bowl games. Then the losers of the second round will get picked by the Fiesta bowl. The winners will go to the Orange bowl to play for the National Championship.

All other bowls will stay intact.

This does the best job of keeping everyone happy.

 

[OHSportsFan]

That- I wouldn't mind too much.

If 4 Superconferences ever get developed, you could have 4 conference winners and 2 at-large teams participate in a 6 team bracket. #1 and #2 get Byes. Use the 4 BCS games plus a Championship.

IF there is a playoff, I wouldn't want that many teams.

 

[Buckeye513]

AQ: Big Ten, SEC, ACC, Pac-12, Big 12

Two highest ranked AQ conference champs get a bye
Third highest ranked AQ champ vs Lowest ranked AQ champ or highest ranked non-AQ champ (lower ranked)
Fourth highest ranked AQ champ vs Lowest ranked AQ champ or highest ranked non-AQ champ (higher ranked)

Highest ranked AQ champ vs Fourth highest ranked/other
Second highest ranked AQ champ vs Third highest ranked/other

Boom. No guaranteed spot for the Big East, no match-ups determined by conference affiliation, no non-conference winners, fewer non-AQ teams bitching.

 

[Jake]

If 4 Superconferences ever get developed, you could have 4 conference winners and 2 at-large teams participate in a 6 team bracket. #1 and #2 get Byes. Use the 4 BCS games plus a Championship.

IF there is a playoff, I wouldn't want that many teams.

You lost me with the byes. That, like the current system, assumes subjective analysis can accurately pick the 2 "best" teams. They would have a hard enough time narrowing it down to 8 most years.

I've favored an 8 team field for years. Everyone has to win 3 games to win it.

 

[zincfinger]

I know it would ruffle some feathers (particularly in the Big Ten and Pac-12) but I say drop the bowl affiliations. All 4 of those teams on the left are better than VT or WVU. If you want a real good system, we're going to have to forget the traditional matchups.

Another way to solve this artificially created problem is to ditch the proto-playoff system we have already in the BCS, and go back to the old bowl system, with any national championships being determined by the electorate.

 

[Zurp]

I have been, historically, the one of the biggest BCS supporters. I really don't like the idea of a playoff. It only fixes some of the issues that the BCS has, and, in my opinion, creates new issues.

And I'm not changing my mind and coming out in favor of a playoff now.

But this BCS schedule is laughable. It is TERRIBLE!! Of course, opinions are like assholes - everyone has them. And this is just my opinion. But for many reasons, this year's BCS is making me sad.
1. Alabama in the national championship game. There's a whole thread on this somewhere. I won't bring that discussion here. But really, my opinion is that no one except LSU deserves to be in the BCS national championship game. Yeah - watching LSU line up on the field and perform their pre-game stretches, followed by their NC celebration isn't going to get good ratings. But I'd probably be more willing to watch that than the re-match.
2. This spot is reserved for allowing the Big East to continue to have an automatic bid. I will withdraw this point if I can be convinced that they would have received an at-large bid.
3. Speaking of at-large bids - Michigan? 10-2 might be good enough, but did the Sugar Bowl see them play? They beat Notre Dame due to Notre Dame's defenders' inability to turn around and see the ball. They looked silly against Michigan State. They didn't look impressive against Ohio State. I don't think they are a BCS Bowl-caliber team, yet.
4. Originally, I was going to complain about the ACC teams. But I really don't know enough about them. So I withdraw this for now.
5. So matching up some good teams (Wisconsin-Oregon and Stanford-Oklahoma State) seems OK. But then they have some bad match-ups. Bleh.
6. Outside of the BCS, I didn't look at the bowl games much. I guess I shouldn't be complaining about the Gator Bowl, but do 6-6 teams REALLY deserve New Year's Day bowl games? (I know it's on the 2nd, but I hear 2 is the new 1.) Blah.

By far, the least interested I've been in the bowl season I've been in a long time. And that probably isn't because of Ohio State's 6 losses this year.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

I would say playoff proponents should not be the least bit upset about Alabama v. LSU. Playoffs would increase the number of re-matches (at least that's what my research into the issues a few years ago revealed) and while I was in favor of the BCS on this particular point (discouraging re-matches) I am no longer able to argue the point in support of the BCS.

Moreover - to those who are crying about Bama getting another shot at LSU - in a playoff system, non-conference champions like Bama will routinely be given a shot. Hey, I'm not saying you have to like the rematch, but I am saying you shouldn't bitch about it if you're in favor of playoffs.

Finally - the truth behind the "Settle it on the field" bullshit. Suppose Bama wins the BCS Championship game. Because they win in January they get a crystal football? I thought the outcome of Bama - LSU had already been settled on the field.

The BCS has gone from having a fairly competent "formula" (even if not perfect) in differentiating 2 otherwise like teams to being nothing more than an affirmation that the human pollsters "got it right." The whole point in bringing the computers into it in the first place was to limit human bias. The BCS has failed in this regard.

Michigan, and not Michigan State, made the BCS because they haven't played a meaningful bowl game in.. what... 4 years? They travel well generally, and will no doubt put butts in the seat this year considering. While this probably doesn't come as a surprise to anyone, it is an open acknowledgement from the boys in charge of the BCS that MONEY, not on the field skill, is what matters.

 

[zincfinger]

I have been, historically, the one of the biggest BCS supporters. I really don't like the idea of a playoff. It only fixes some of the issues that the BCS has, and, in my opinion, creates new issues.

And I'm not changing my mind and coming out in favor of a playoff now.

But this BCS schedule is laughable. It is TERRIBLE!! Of course, opinions are like assholes - everyone has them. And this is just my opinion. But for many reasons, this year's BCS is making me sad.
1. Alabama in the national championship game. There's a whole thread on this somewhere. I won't bring that discussion here. But really, my opinion is that no one except LSU deserves to be in the BCS national championship game. Yeah - watching LSU line up on the field and perform their pre-game stretches, followed by their NC celebration isn't going to get good ratings. But I'd probably be more willing to watch that than the re-match.
2. This spot is reserved for allowing the Big East to continue to have an automatic bid. I will withdraw this point if I can be convinced that they would have received an at-large bid.
3. Speaking of at-large bids - Michigan? 10-2 might be good enough, but did the Sugar Bowl see them play? They beat Notre Dame due to Notre Dame's defenders' inability to turn around and see the ball. They looked silly against Michigan State. They didn't look impressive against Ohio State. I don't think they are a BCS Bowl-caliber team, yet.
4. Originally, I was going to complain about the ACC teams. But I really don't know enough about them. So I withdraw this for now.
5. So matching up some good teams (Wisconsin-Oregon and Stanford-Oklahoma State) seems OK. But then they have some bad match-ups. Bleh.
6. Outside of the BCS, I didn't look at the bowl games much. I guess I shouldn't be complaining about the Gator Bowl, but do 6-6 teams REALLY deserve New Year's Day bowl games? (I know it's on the 2nd, but I hear 2 is the new 1.) Blah.

By far, the least interested I've been in the bowl season I've been in a long time. And that probably isn't because of Ohio State's 6 losses this year.

I've been a fairly outspoken opponent on this board of a college football playoff, not because I like the BCS, but because I think attaching a playoff to the current system would create more problems than it would correct. Frankly, I'd prefer returning to the pre-BCS system, where you win your conference, go to your conference's premiere bowl, and then people subjectively select a "national champion" from among the premiere bowl winners.

But if there's to be a college football playoff, which actually crowns a "national champion" with some reasonable degree of objectivity and fairness, I think it would require wholesale changes in the structure of college football, from top-to-bottom. First, discard the traditional and historical notion that college football is a largely regional affair. Second, restrict the number of programs that are eligible to contend for a D-1A national championship to, probably, something like forty. Third, create maybe four reasonably balanced conferences from those forty, and have a regular season schedule in which every team plays each of its conference opponents once, and only once. No "conference championship games"; the conference champion is the team with the best record, tie-breakers decided exclusively by the sole head-to-head outcome. Fourth, have a playoff consisting exclusively of the conference champions, and the winner of that playoff is your national champion.

My opinion is that such a system would wreak more havoc with the tradition of the game than it's worth, and, as I said, I prefer the old system. But if you're going to go national playoff, go all the way and do it right. Otherwise, you're just further contributing to the jamming of the gears that the BCS started.

 

[ScriptOhio]

I guess I shouldn't be complaining about the Gator Bowl, but do 6-6 teams REALLY deserve New Year's Day bowl games? (I know it's on the 2nd, but I hear 2 is the new 1.) Blah.

By far, the least interested I've been in the bowl season I've been in a long time. And that probably isn't because of Ohio State's 6 losses this year.

Yeah, Ohio State is lucky to get a bowl game this good. However, it is and always has been about "the money"; and Ohio State has a large following and "travels extremely well". This year due to the Urban Meyer hire it makes Ohio State vs Florida even more attractive.

It has been a long and fairly disappointing season; let's hope they can end it with a big win over Florida.

On Jan 3 we can start the chant "can't wait till next year".

 

[buckeyegrad]

If 4 Superconferences ever get developed, you could have 4 conference winners and 2 at-large teams participate in a 6 team bracket. #1 and #2 get Byes. Use the 4 BCS games plus a Championship.

Why even bother with 2 at-large teams? Seems like the perfect answer to the entire mess is simply have 4 Super-Conferences and let the 4 Champions play each other in a playoff.

Why even entertain the bizzaro world possibility of having a national champion who is not their conference champion?