College Playoff

[methomps]

Not a valid comparison. If the crappy third-tier bowls get to stick around even in a playoff system, the Poinsettia Bowl will still be the Poinsettia Bowl featuring Navy and New Mexico. If we're talking a 16-game playoff, the first-round equivalent is more like the Gator Bowl. A playoff game wouldn't have any of the pomp and circumstance that surrounds every bowl game and rakes in the cash besides. Nobody sponsors it when some 16 seed from the MEAC gets stomped by UNC in March, nor even do they sponsor the Sweet Sixteen, why would anyone sponsor an uninteresting first-round football matchup?

There would be no problem finding sponsors.

 

[Best Buckeye]

So just how would all of you who want a play off to happen get the powers that be to agree to one ?

 

[schwab]

So just how would all of you who want a play off to happen get the powers that be to agree to one ?

I won't sit here and tell you that I know the answer to that question. It probably involves a lot of politics that I tend to disagree with, but it is my fault that I don't know more about it. I just haven't done much research on the matter.

I do know that I have the Pittsburgh-Miami MNF game on right now. And as I sit here, watching it, I wonder how many people out there think it is a meaningless game. I mean, you know, they have playoffs in January, which means that all these regular season games must mean jack. Am I right? I don't want to watch a meaningless game.

 

[WaitingforKickoff]

Three college football myths to stay away from

Gene Wojciechowski

The only people who love college football more than me are Bebes Maisel, Joe Paterno and the Auburn fans who TP'd Toomer's Corner after a sixth consecutive Iron Bowl win against Bama.
And yet, I still have issues with the game. I'm not talking about the dumbest rule in sports (penalizing a team for what an uptight official deems "excessive" celebration after a touchdown), or that Reggie Bush still hasn't come clean about his relationship with sports agents at USC, or that recruiting rankings are really interesting, but should be taken with a shovel-full of salt. I'm talking about misconceptions.

So, because I care, the Three Myths of College Football:

The BCS Works

cont...

So Gene took the more controversial position that the BCS doesn't work instead of merely pointing out that the BCS is a playoff system. IMO, the biggest myth about the BCS is that it is a playoff system, or even a semi-playoff system.

A playoff system is a system of elimination, where only the winner advances and the loser goes home. The BCS is clearly not that. IMO, the fundamental problem with the current system that only a playoff can provide a solution to is this: Losses are not objectively evaluated by the voters.

Voters currently evaluated losses not by circumstance, such as the quality of the loss or the score differential, but by how fresh the loss is on their minds. This system really hurts a lot of teams that play tougher schedules toward the end of the year, either because of a rivalry game or a conference championship. A playoff system would provide an objective standard for losing, mainly that the loser gets eliminated.

 

[BB73]

Personally, I think there's another way of looking at whether or not there should be a college playoff system. And that is the basis for virtually all of my rooting interests related to college football: What will be better for Ohio State?

I love college football, but when it comes down to it, the only thing I really care about is the success of the Buckeyes.

And, since during the prior 5 seasons, tOSU has made it to the Championship Game twice, and has a better than 50-50 chance this weekend of making a third game in 6 years, I think that it's difficult to believe that a 4-team, 6-team, 8-team, 12-team, or 16-team playoff would increase tOSU's chances of winning NC's in the near future.

As Jax has pointed out, it appears that tOSU has entered a period of dominance in the Big Ten similar to those enjoyed by FSU (ACC) and Miami (Big East) a few years ago. If that's the case, I believe that the BCS format gives tOSU the best chances of winning another NC or two in the next few years.

And since I believe that the BCS is good for tOSU's NC chances, I am not bothered by any of the perceived problems in the system, or swayed by any arguments against it.

:osu4:

 

[Best Buckeye]

Personally, I think there's another way of looking at whether or not there should be a college playoff system. And that is the basis for virtually all of my rooting interests related to college football: What will be better for Ohio State?

I love college football, but when it comes down to it, the only thing I really care about is the success of the Buckeyes.

And, since during the prior 5 seasons, tOSU has made it to the Championship Game twice, and has a better than 50-50 chance this weekend of making a third game in 6 years, I think that it's difficult to believe that a 4-team, 6-team, 8-team, 12-team, or 16-team playoff would increase tOSU's chances of winning NC's in the near future.

As Jax has pointed out, it appears that tOSU has entered a period of dominance in the Big Ten similar to those enjoyed by FSU (ACC) and Miami (Big East) a few years ago. If that's the case, I believe that the BCS format gives tOSU the best chances of winning another NC or two in the next few years.

And since I believe that the BCS is good for tOSU's NC chances, I am not bothered by any of the perceived problems in the system, or swayed by any arguments against it.

:osu4:

Amen!

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Not a valid comparison. If the crappy third-tier bowls get to stick around even in a playoff system, the Poinsettia Bowl will still be the Poinsettia Bowl featuring Navy and New Mexico. If we're talking a 16-game playoff, the first-round equivalent is more like the Gator Bowl. A playoff game wouldn't have any of the pomp and circumstance that surrounds every bowl game and rakes in the cash besides. Nobody sponsors it when some 16 seed from the MEAC gets stomped by UNC in March, nor even do they sponsor the Sweet Sixteen, why would anyone sponsor an uninteresting first-round football matchup?

You on crack...really? Are you really that brain-dead that you actually equate a March Madness #1 Duke vs. #16 Southeast Poly Tech game with a #1 USC vs. #16 Texas? Teams that are seeded 16th in the NCAAs are actually the 61st thru 64th seeds, and they're almost always not even the 61st through 64th best teams in the country, whereas the #16 seed in the I-A playoff would be the #16 team in the country according to the BCS rankings. And since when did the fucking Poinsettia Bowl have "pomp and circumstance"?

How many times have we seen teams with near .500 or even losing records get to the "Big Dance" because they got hot for 3-4 games in their conference tournament? Lots of teams have no business being there. But now look at the current top 16 in the BCS rankings...tell me which of those teams would have no business being in a playoff. I'll humor some of the folks who think that it should be an 8-team playoff instead of 16. Let's look at the top 8 in the current BCS rankings:

1. Missouri
2. West Virginia
3. Ohio State
4. Georgia
5. LSU
6. Virginia Tech
7. Kansas
8. USC

How many of these teams were either #1 or #2 during the season? I count 6 of these 8 (USC, LSU, Ohio State, and Missouri at #1, and Kansas and West Virginia at #2). If these eight met in a playoff, I would have no problem recognizing any of them as national champion if they won the three games they had to play. Even with the 16-team format I propose, if the #15 seed (9-3 Illinois) or #16 seed (9-3 Clemson) won their four games, finishing 13-3 with wins over four team ranked above them (including the #2 team as the #15 seed or #1 team as the #16 seed) I'd have no problem acknowledging them as national champs.

 

[OHSportsFan]

Personally, I think there's another way of looking at whether or not there should be a college playoff system. And that is the basis for virtually all of my rooting interests related to college football: What will be better for Ohio State?

I love college football, but when it comes down to it, the only thing I really care about is the success of the Buckeyes.

And, since during the prior 5 seasons, tOSU has made it to the Championship Game twice, and has a better than 50-50 chance this weekend of making a third game in 6 years, I think that it's difficult to believe that a 4-team, 6-team, 8-team, 12-team, or 16-team playoff would increase tOSU's chances of winning NC's in the near future.

As Jax has pointed out, it appears that tOSU has entered a period of dominance in the Big Ten similar to those enjoyed by FSU (ACC) and Miami (Big East) a few years ago. If that's the case, I believe that the BCS format gives tOSU the best chances of winning another NC or two in the next few years.

And since I believe that the BCS is good for tOSU's NC chances, I am not bothered by any of the perceived problems in the system, or swayed by any arguments against it.

:osu4:

OTOH that Tressel guy has had some decent success with playoffs.

 

[Jaxbuck]

Personally, I think there's another way of looking at whether or not there should be a college playoff system. And that is the basis for virtually all of my rooting interests related to college football: What will be better for Ohio State?

I love college football, but when it comes down to it, the only thing I really care about is the success of the Buckeyes.

And, since during the prior 5 seasons, tOSU has made it to the Championship Game twice, and has a better than 50-50 chance this weekend of making a third game in 6 years, I think that it's difficult to believe that a 4-team, 6-team, 8-team, 12-team, or 16-team playoff would increase tOSU's chances of winning NC's in the near future.

As Jax has pointed out, it appears that tOSU has entered a period of dominance in the Big Ten similar to those enjoyed by FSU (ACC) and Miami (Big East) a few years ago. If that's the case, I believe that the BCS format gives tOSU the best chances of winning another NC or two in the next few years.

And since I believe that the BCS is good for tOSU's NC chances, I am not bothered by any of the perceived problems in the system, or swayed by any arguments against it.

:osu4:

GPA

 

[Buckeye86]

I have two things against a playoff system.

#1 A playoff system would have rendered the best game I have ever attended in my life (The Game 2006) completely irrelevant since both teams would have gone to the playoff regardless of the outcome, and the electricity of that night would have been completely gone, as it will be in the future when highly ranked teams meet at the end of the season (if there is a playoff system).

#2 People would be bitching about teams getting left off just like they do now only on a larger scale.

In my opinion a playoff system would create just as many problems as it would solve, but as they say, the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.

 

[sandgk]

I have two things against a playoff system.

#1 A playoff system would have rendered the best game I have ever attended in my life (The Game 2006) completely irrelevant since both teams would have gone to the playoff regardless of the outcome, and the electricity of that night would have been completely gone, as it will be in the future when highly ranked teams meet at the end of the season (if there is a playoff system).

It wouldn't have been irrelevant, more like diminished in the importance it was accorded - outside of the two respective fanbases, that is, by the media.

#2 People would be bitching about teams getting left off just like they do now only on a larger scale.

Larger, perhaps in numbers, muted in consequence.

In my opinion a playoff system would create just as many problems as it would solve, but as they say, the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.

One retort being that the BCS system - though it certainly favors the heavy hitters these days - has plenty of insoluble problems of it's own. Largely because of the convoluted structure of the beast.

 

[methomps]

I have two things against a playoff system.

#1 A playoff system would have rendered the best game I have ever attended in my life (The Game 2006) completely irrelevant since both teams would have gone to the playoff regardless of the outcome, and the electricity of that night would have been completely gone, as it will be in the future when highly ranked teams meet at the end of the season (if there is a playoff system).

If you went to a 6-team playoff, The Game 2006 meant Ohio State got a 1st-round bye and Michigan lost its first round bye.

#2 People would be bitching about teams getting left off just like they do now only on a larger scale.

Better to have the #7 or #9 or #17 team left out than the undefeated #3 team (Auburn 2004).

 

[schwab]

I have two things against a playoff system.

#1 A playoff system would have rendered the best game I have ever attended in my life (The Game 2006) completely irrelevant since both teams would have gone to the playoff regardless of the outcome, and the electricity of that night would have been completely gone, as it will be in the future when highly ranked teams meet at the end of the season (if there is a playoff system).

You really believe that #1 Ohio State vs. #2 Michigan could ever be completely irrelevant? I must be crazy because I can't believe I am hearing another Buckeye fan say that.

#2 People would be bitching about teams getting left off just like they do now only on a larger scale.

In my opinion a playoff system would create just as many problems as it would solve, but as they say, the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.

People are going to bitch any way you cut the pie. It happens in every facet of life, and life isn't fair. It's not supposed to be. Consider the 'playoff format' the little handout you get the day you start your new job about company policies and guidelines. Let the teams play their games, and when one or more of them bitch about not making the cut, just remind them that we all play by the same rules, and if you aren't top 16, you have nothing to bitch about.

 

[jwinslow]

You really believe that #1 Ohio State vs. #2 Michigan could ever be completely irrelevant? I must be crazy because I can't believe I am hearing another Buckeye fan say that.

What is the significance of winning that game? In 06, UM would still make the CCG. What use would that victory be if Hart's boasting came true a week or two later in the rematch?

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

What is the significance of winning that game? In 06, UM would still make the CCG. What use would that victory be if Hart's boasting came true a week or two later in the rematch?

I puts us as the #1 seed with home-field advantage until the title game. By the way, that victory was of no use to us on January 8th, now was it?