College Playoff

[buckeyesin07]

This is a good point. For this year, the reality is that we do not need a playoff, a national championship game, or even a series of bowl games to determine who is the best team and most deserving of a national title. Is there anyone who would argue against LSU being #1 this year as all things stand? Too bad in years like this, we can't just name the champion before the bowl games.

A lot of people thought the same way in December of 2006. Then Glendale happened.

 

[zincfinger]

So, you wouldn't have a problem with it since your post on that page says that if a playoff would occur it would have to be under this situation. Right?

No, what I said was that, in my opinion, the only playoff that would substantively address the alleged problem of post-season unfairness, and allow every team to "prove it on the field" in an equal, direct, and undeniable way, is one similar to yours, but more aggressive in terms of realigning the overall organization of the sport. By kicking out a good number of current BCS programs so that the new conferences could plausibly play round-robin schedules, with no intra-conference divisions and no conference championship games. Further, substantial reorganization of the existing conferences would probably be required to obtain optimal balance between them.

But I also said I do not desire that situation, largely because I like the regional nature of college football, I like the traditions, I like the BigTen Conference, and that scenario would eliminate what's left of all those things. I also don't like it because I believe that arrangement would last about ten years, before it did what all playoffs do: expand. And then you've nationalized, and destroyed the tradition of college football, for no benefit whatsoever, in my opinion.

 

[WyoBuck]

sixteen lets in so much garbage and it ruins the rest of the bowls.

Eight essential keeps the same structure that we have now, or did before the fifth BCS bowl, and keeps the other bowls interesting with good teams.

Four would be fine with super conferences, but would sacrifice too much money since you can't really have two other elite bowls if they're not part of the playoff.


now people will actually watch a boring ACC champ in their fiesta bowl, because they'll probably be playing a higher seeded LSU or OSU in round 1, then they suddenly become compelling if they win, as a David beat Goliath story, instead of a Virginia Tech beat Houston BCS snoozer.

Totally agree with 16 letting in too much trash. I am looking at it strictly from the mindset of silencing the MWC/WAC/MAC/CUSA also rans, and media outlets that bitch from year to year about not getting a fair shake. I, personally, feel that if you want to be considered elite and deserving of a spot at the table, be better at football and if you perceive that you are at a disadvantage due to the handicaps that come with being a mid major i.e. money, recruiting, conference affiliation, etc., be a better university. Realistically, the only way something like that would work would be if it were governed by the NCAA directly and that would relegate all of the bowl games meaningless and then nobody is happy because nobody is making money. Even with an 8 team playoff you are turning CFB into NFL lite and you will end up with the parity in the pro game that you see right now where you have maybe 10% of teams that are really good and everybody else is varying degrees of suck. Its just going to turn into who can spend the most money to attract the best coaches and best recruits. It has already started down that road.

I guess the 4 super conference idea works in theory, but ultimately it will cause another divisional split in CFB, which opens up another can of worms in terms of realignment, I mean, are there even 4 teams that would join the B1G that the B1G would even want without sacrificing their standards? And that's just one conference. Then, what do you do about the independents? The Mid majors and media aren't going to quit bitching about legitimacy until they are either included or locked out. That Pandora's box can't be unopened at this point.

 

[jwinslow]

The B1G could've added Missouri, Notre Dame, Kansas & Rutgers (for the market) and called it a day. Now they have to settle to find a Missouri replacement, either reigning in the crazy Longhorns or lowering their standards elsewhere.

 

[HorseshoeFetish]

Somewhere in that wall of text is a comment about the preseason polls having too much influence on the BCS outcome. .

You should have waited five minutes..I fixed that. I can say that LSU has scheduled a non conference cuppie right after the alabama game since 2007. I think it's funny because alabama scheduled a nc/cuppie between the lsu and auburn game in 2007 seemed to forget in 2008 and and has done it since 2009. Granted they seem to play mississippi st between those 2 as well. I bet they don't go back to playing big games back to back like that. Just for fun...do you want to guess what year Florida started scheduling cuppies between so.carolina and Fla. State? You got it 2006!

Am I saying it's the sole Reason for SEC dominance? No of course not..But it obviously doesn't hurt either. I can say looking back at our schedule it looks like it helped a little when we played san jose state in 2002..And it might have helped if we had done it a few more times as well. Will Urban make sure we get something like that?

 

[WyoBuck]

The B1G could've added Missouri, Notre Dame, Kansas & Rutgers (for the market) and called it a day. Now they have to settle to find a Missouri replacement, either reigning in the crazy Longhorns or lowering their standards elsewhere.

Yes, but, was ND ever going to get on board? It seems like a lost cause at this point. Could we get Kansas without little brother? Rutgers seems like a good fit, and Missouri does too, but i think that bridge has been burned.

 

[BB73]

You should have waited five minutes..I fixed that.

You're right. It's clearly my fault for quoting your post almost 12 hours after you made it, and commenting on it, when I obviously should have realized that you were about to edit your post and address that subject.

My most sincere apologies.

 

[HorseshoeFetish]

You're right. It's clearly my fault for quoting your post almost 12 hours after you made it, and commenting on it, when I obviously should have realized that you were about to edit your post and address that subject.

My most sincere apologies.

Not what I meant at all..but thanks for the bashing.

 

[muffler dragon]

Not what I meant at all..but thanks for the bashing.

Actually, bashing is down the hall on the left just after the office of plastic surgery for thicker skin.

 

[jwinslow]

Take 5 league champs, 2 at-large teams, and have two mid-majors play a +1 game to get in. Either expand Big East & Sun Belt to make two mid major super conferences, or just use the two top ranked teams like we do now.



Seed the teams based on their ranking in the polls, with all conference champ teams ranked above at large foes.


Then have a committee place them in the 4 first round locales based on seeding (stanford gets the Rose, while Wisconsin & Clemson both get relegated to the Fiesta). A year later (if the Chicago bowl is a round 1 locale, Ohio St might get the nod there as a #1 seed).

 

[FCollinsBuckeye]

Not what I meant at all..but thanks for the bashing.

 

[zincfinger]

So, you wouldn't have a problem with it since your post on that page says that if a playoff would occur it would have to be under this situation. Right?

No, what I said was...realigning the overall organization of the sport....do not desire that situation...

Heck, I'd maybe even take that hypothetical scenario a step further, and say that the 4-team postseason should not be a single-elimination playoff, but should instead be a 4-team round robin. The champion being the team with the best 3-game record, ties broken by head-to-head outcome. But again, this is not a system I want, or would "have no problem with". It would probably be the most exacting method for determining the consistently "best team in the country", but I don't want it, for the reasons mentioned above, and because I'm not terribly concerned with developing the most exacting method for identifying the consistently "best team in the country". Particularly given that, most years, you've got at least 2-3 teams at the top who are virtually identical in their overall caliber of play.

 

[BB73]

Not what I meant at all..but thanks for the bashing.

You're not being bashed. And the martyr routine doesn't fly real well on BP (as a couple of other posts already indicate).

Your opinions were being countered by other opinions (supported by facts), and then when you used wording like 'you should have waited 5 minutes' when I commented on a post almost 12 hours old, sarcasm was used to point out the silliness of the suggestion that I should have waited. I know you really just meant to say something like 'too bad you didn't wait 5 minutes, I fixed that wall of text thing'; I was being a wiseass because I thought some might find it funny, but it's also a pet peeve of mine when somebody tells me what to do. So now you know.

 

[FCollinsBuckeye]

I was being a wiseass because I thought some might find it funny, but it's also a pet peeve of mine when somebody tells me what to do. So now you know.

:p

 

[BB73]

You can't make me join the Rainbow Coalition.