• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

College Playoff

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
My thoughts on the smaller conferences, play better competion if you don't want to get left out.
Click to expand...

It easy to say play better competition, but you need a major conference school to be willing to play against you. Major conference teams don't play McNeese St. because that's the only team they can schedule, it's the only type of team they are willing to play.

Now for my take on playoff system. I don't think a playoff would take away from the regular season. You play the regular season to get seeded in the playoffs. I attended the University of Dayton and lived with football players in the last years that UD was Div. III. From my experience I don't buy the arguement that fans are less likely to go watch their team play because of the where the game will be played in December. I don't see how players can complain. Most players hope to make it to the NFL, are they going to refuse to go play Green Bay, Buffalo, New England, or Denver in late December. I also can't stand it when people start talking about not getting these players out of classes. You're looking at a couple Friday missed classes. Dayton and OSU's basketball team just got back from a trip to Maui where they missed a week of classes.

I would go with eight team playoff. Top eight in BCS. I don't care what conference you play in, if a conference gets more than one team, or a major conference doesn't get any team into the playoff. Top eight, everyone else go play in the I'm Not Good Enough.com Bowl. First round games could be played weekend before Christmas at a bowl that no one usually watches. Second round games could be played on or around New Year's at BCS bowl games. Championship game follows a week later at a National Championship Game, not a bowl, game can move to different location each year like the Super Bowl.
 
Upvote 0
Cincy- What I am trying to say is that if TCU was going to get left out would it have helped from them to go and play a school like UVA or GaTech, not a top flight program but a top conference school. I don't think that they wanted to play tOSU or vice versa but don't take the Kansas St. approach to it. I know that schools like the Buckeyes, Miami, Texas, Fla. St. have trouble finding other schools to play so if possible they might have to meet up in the begining of the season.
The players are not going to be the ones that are complaining about the time out of classes or the weather it is mostly going to be the media and the fans. I don't think that all that many people are going to travel to Columbus to watch a Buckeyes-Gators match up per say. Now if the game was in the Atl then it would be packed.
I think that it is the pagentry of the bowls that nobody wants to get rid of, and I think that is good. But also putting in a play off takes away a little from the regular season. Would people really be pumped if we "clinched" a playoff bearth in the 9th week? The real answer is what Cincy said it is the ALL MIGHTY $$$$ that will decide what is done
 
Upvote 0
im all for a playoff.....but one thing ABSOLUTELY HAS to happen for it to be feasable.....

the teams (however many) need to be seeded and the higher team needs to play on their home field (at least until the final game)...

just like the nfl does it....

there is just no way fans can travel two, three or four straight weekends......having true home games is the only way it could possibly work....

and if the pansy asses from the south coast and west coast cant sit their wimpy asses through a columbus december day....the hell with em....
 
Upvote 0
DiHard: Teams are indeed seeded, 1-16, and play subsequent games based on seeding (no regions). As for having games at home to avoid a bunch of road games, someone will always be a road team...you can't have a game where both teams are at home (except USC/UCLA). Also, YSU played three straight road games in the playoffs twice ('92 and '97) and won the national title both years.
 
Upvote 0
mili...yes the div 1-aa format works well with home teams....

i was referring to those who propose to somehow keep the current bowls and use them as sites for the playoff games.....

the 1-aa method you are alluding to is time-tested and will work.....
 
Upvote 0
Oh8-

I was listening to ESPN radio and one of there announcers made this statement about the argument that a playoff with cheapen the regular season:

He felt that a lot of fans check out after there teams lose 1 to 2 games. At this point in the season (2 weeks ago) all anybody cares about and talks about are 3 teams-OU, USC, Ohio State and maybe LSU. Anybody that has two losses-people rarely pay attention too. Teams with 3 losses-forget about it.

His point was that people would be more interested if the last couple of weeks would be to determine who got higher seeds and who actually made the playoffs.

I don't know if I agree with it in total, but I do think he made some valid points. At some point in the season, if you are not undefeated or have 1 loss- what are you actually playing for?
 
Upvote 0
No Playoffs!!!

Of course it cheapens the season. With all due respect to YSU (I'm from Y-town as well), they don't have a huge, recruit affecting, season ending rivalry game to cheapen, as many D1A teams do. These rivalry games have built college football into what it is today (IMO), not playoffs or even BCS championship games.

BTW, I still would consider Marshall YSU's biggest rival and they only played a few times, but they were big games. They should've beaten them the last time they played when Marshall was already a D1A team dominating the MAC--damn turnovers.

I will give a scenario where a playoff system would certainly cheapen THE GAME. This could also happen in any number of great rivalries across the country.

tOSU or scUM comes into THE GAME undefeated and ranked #1 in the BCS (the system which has been advocated here to choose the playoff teams). The rest of the country has already lost a game or two. Therefore, tOSU/scUM knows they have wrapped up a #1 or #2 seed, win or lose (not unlike this years Sooners' situation), therefore gaining homefield throughout the playoffs until they reach, I assume, a nuetral site championship game. They will absolutely, without a doubt, sit their players in THE GAME. What has this just done to this rivalry? "Ya, you won, but the other team wasn't trying." <--That's what it has done and nothing more. This happens in EVERY sport that has playoffs. It is a byproduct of having playoffs. And if, as suggested, the playoff games are all at nuetral sites, then what's the point of playing for a better seeding? I have heard "Would you rather play a #5 Oklahoma or a #10 TCU? You play for a better matchup." , which I reply, "Would you rather play a #10 Oklahoma or a #5 TCU?" It works both ways. It could actually become advantageous to lose a game for a better matchup!!


Every time I've suggested this scenario, I've been told "There's no way they would sit players against scUM. It's the seniors' last game." Well, guess what. Your wrong. I would (and I bet you would also) be the first one asking for the coaches head on a platter if a star player were to get hurt in a meaningless game. Yes, tOSU/scUM game would be made meaningless in this scenario. You are trying to win championships (make the playoffs), not beat scUM per se, with a playoff system. In the system we have now, you have to beat scUM to win a championship and frankly, we don't deserve a championship if we don't beat scUM (IMO). Does anyone here honestly believe that this years matchup would have had the same importance if both teams were just playing for a certain seeding in the playoffs? No way. It is an absolutely false suggestion to say playoffs don't cheapen the regular season. Why do we call playoffs a "new season"? Because the previous season no longer matters, and therefore, didn't really matter to begin with. This is where the differences in D1A football and all other sports becomes apparent. The NFL plays enough games to weed out pretenders that a #5 TCU surely would be. They also have a system that requires parity over a much smaller amount of participants. College basketball has parity between the conferences that could not be achieved in football and basketball teams can play enough games that TCU being #5 in basketball would be a competition tested ranking. Testing by competition is crucial for any playoff system to make sense. We can't say that the BCS makes sense in one breath when talking about playoff seeding, and then say it doesn't make sense in the next breath when talking about setting Bowl games. (For comparison I only chose sports whose tournaments are one loss and your out)


I understand why there's the pressure to have a playoff system. I'm a college football fan. I understand the fascination of an OSU/Nebraska or an FSU/USC or a Miami/Texas semi final game for example. I just don't see the upside as outweighing the downside and I hope that they never submit to this pressure. I am not saying the BCS is perfect. It's not. The fact that TCU almost blew the system up proves that (thank you S. Miss). A 12-0 TCU/Tulane, etc. proves nothing to me when the majority of the top 25 would've also went 12-0 playing their schedule. So the BCS needs some more tweeks. I accept that, but I think it's better than a playoff and better than it was before.

I am, however, going to the Mount Union DIII playoff game tomorrow. I hope this doesn't make me a hypocrite. :wink2:

And on an amusing sidenote--- Everyone at ESPN seems to want a playoff system for D1A, while at the same time, they market all their D1A games as "Every Game Counts!" At least the marketers understand.
 
Upvote 0
DiHard: I think a system using existing bowls can definitely be implemented. My point was that playing up to four straight games on the road isn't as much of a hindrance as you may think.

Finding a way to utilize existing bowls would make a playoff system a much easier sell to the powers-that-be.
 
Upvote 0
A playoff system

A title game would've been interesting this year again. Winner of the OU vs. LSU against USC in a NCAA final would be a lot of fun to watch. There would be a lot of interest and I imagine a large TV crowd. Too bad it coudn't happen.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Playoff

I caught a little bit of a couple of the shows on 1460 this morning and there was talk about a playoff for NCAA football. I don't remember the name of the guy who replaced Cornheiser but I agree with him that the system in place now isn't perfect but it may be about as good as we can do without a playoff that adds to the number of games that these guys have to play.

I think right now the regular season is limited to 12 games and then bowl teams get one more. 13 in a season is plenty and I wouldn't complain if they went to a max of 12. Football is now an all year commitment for the players and they take an awful lot of punishment in 13 games. I wouldn't want to see the burden on the players increased at all and I'd prefer it was decreased.

Yeah the BCS isn't perfect but maybe the formula of determining who plays in the big game could be improved. It won't ever be to the point where everybody will always be happy with the results but that doesn't bother me. I'm going to be happy with my Buckeyes if they compete well for the conference title and get in a BCS bowl with some regularity. That is what will make me happy on the field, off the field I want to see guys grow and graduate. I'm as concerned about off the field progress as on. Lets not increase the time they spend on football to the detriment of off field progress.
 
Upvote 0
Don't hear them complaining? Hell, I never hear ANYTHING from them. Try playing a 15 game schedule at Div 1 - the team with the fewest injuries would win the championship. Not necessarily the best team just the least injured team.
 
Upvote 0
Ah, a playoff for college football. What a great topic! How come we've never talked about this before?

I have long been a strong opponent of any playoff, but I will admit that I could live with four teams. No more. The argument hinges on why you want a playoff.

If you just want to do something fun at the end of the season like they do in basketball then go for it. Invite as many teams as you like. It will be very exciting. But Syracuse was not the best team in 2003 any more than Villanova was in 80-whatever it was when they beat GTown. They were the best team in that tournament, but not for that season.

OSU finished fourth in the polls last season. Even as a Buckeye fan I can't make a strong argument that we didn't leave our bid to be ranked #1 in Madison and Ann Arbor.

Iowa was 8th with three losses - all by 9 points or more. Can anyone make a case why they should compete for the crystal football in an 8 team playoff?

Boise St and Miami of Ohio were both in the top 16. They had nice runs, but do they really belong with USC, LSU and OU?

More to the point. What if a miracle happens and Boise St wins it all. What does that prove? Look up and down their roster. They play in a weak conference and won 2 or 3 nice games to get them ranked in the top 16. They are not a NC contender and let's not pretend differently.

But teams like Boise St do pull off playoffs during the regular season and they cost teams NCs. That is why the regular season matters. If you put two loss OSU and three loss Iowa in a playoff how does that not discount what happened during the regular season.

Fans of an expanded playoff must not play fantasy NFL football. In those leagues you always have to finish your playoffs one or two weeks before the end of the regular season. Why? Because many of the best players in the NFL are sitting the pine (or some sort of synthetic plastic compound that we will find 20 years from now causes ass canser) those last two games nursing nagging injuries waiting for a playoff that their team has already qualified for.

Of course that wont happen in the OSU-Michigan game. But it sure could happen in USC versus Oregon State. With an 8 team playoff that game didn't matter. But last year USC needed that win to still have a chance. How does that make college football better?

There was a great quote from Schlegel in an article somebody linked (thanks whoever it was - nice read). It talked about why AF went 6-0 and then collapsed. It wasn't because AF was a pretender. It was because in football people get hurt. OSU loses a starting DL and they bring in a raw future NFL player. AF brings in a kid who couldn't wallk on in the Big Ten. Create a playoff where the champions play in 3 or 4 games in as many weeks and it will be decided by kids who were not in the two deep in September.

So if you want to have a fun tournament go for it. But if you want to crown the best team for that particular season - all of that season - weigh the regular season as strongly as you possibly can and let only those teams compete who have a legitimate argument that they have already proven they are the best.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top