College Playoff

[billmac91]

Aha. Problem number 1 with the playoff. Everyone's got their own idea. Need to figure out:

- Number of teams
- How to determine eligibility
- Where to play the games
- How, if at all, to incorporate the bowls
- How to determine seeding
- How to split the money (and where it's coming from)
- When to play the games

And so much more.

It's so easy to sit back and say "YAR we need a playoff BCS SUX!!!" It's much harder, isn't it, to devise a system that truly fixes the problem and addresses all concerns? Everyone thinks their own system is so perfect, and won't hear otherwise.

So make a playoff system and I'll approve it, I'm sure. Anything would be better than what is currently used, and there are numerous ways to make it work financially. I suggested one way to make a playoff system. I'd prefer 8 teams, some prefer 16, some even jst want an and 1 system. I don't really give a shit as long as it makes the system overall more fair.

No matter the playoff system used, it would be a HELL OF A LOT BETTER than the current system

 

[schwab]

The Annotated "Throwing Stones"

Lyrics to the Grateful Dead's 'Throwing Stones', and ensuing video. The politicians throwing stones, singing ashes, ashes all fall down. Seems appropriate, 'cause we said so'.


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waDSl2rLAPI"]YouTube - Grateful Dead 10-03-87 ~ Throwing Stones[/ame]

 

[Zurp]

Aha. Problem number 1 with the playoff. Everyone's got their own idea. Need to figure out:

- Number of teams
- How to determine eligibility
- Where to play the games
- How, if at all, to incorporate the bowls
- How to determine seeding
- How to split the money (and where it's coming from)
- When to play the games

And so much more.

It's so easy to sit back and say "YAR we need a playoff BCS SUX!!!" It's much harder, isn't it, to devise a system that truly fixes the problem and addresses all concerns? Everyone thinks their own system is so perfect, and won't hear otherwise.

So make a playoff system and I'll approve it, I'm sure. Anything would be better than what is currently used, and there are numerous ways to make it work financially. I suggested one way to make a playoff system. I'd prefer 8 teams, some prefer 16, some even jst want an and 1 system. I don't really give a shit as long as it makes the system overall more fair.

No matter the playoff system used, it would be a HELL OF A LOT BETTER than the current system

I'm sticking with my "no" vote to a playoff. However, billmac seems to voice the opinions of all pro-playoff fans. The answers aren't as important as the fact that there's a playoff system.

But here's my preferences to answers to your questions (if there were to be a playoff):

- Number of teams - Since I don't want a playoff, I vote for as few as possible. You're always going to get the first guy left out of the playoffs. If it's a 4-team playoff, #5 is pissed. In an 8-team playoff, #9 is pissed. And so on. But, in my mind, in a 4-team playoff, #5's complaining is just the ramblings of a mule: not many people are going to listen.
- How to determine eligibility - I guess I don't understand. If you get selected, you're in.
- Where to play the games - Possibly my favorite part of a playoff system is the first round or two (depending on how many rounds there are) might be played at the stadium of the higher-ranked seeds. Bring some of that "southern speed" to Columbus, Ann Arbor, or Madison.
- How, if at all, to incorporate the bowls - I'd say they should continue as many bowls as possible. Teams not selected into playoffs get to go to bowl games. I don't like the idea of using the bowl games for the first couple of rounds of the playoffs. Bowls and playoffs should be independant of each other, in my opinion.
- How to determine seeding - Make a couple of monkeys mud wrestle to determine seeding. Either that, or use the BCS standings. Or, better yet, have a selection committee (like in basketball).
- How to split the money (and where it's coming from) - The money comes from sponsers. From TV. And some from people buying tickets. For each game your team goes to, you get a share of the profits. Easy as that. If you don't make the playoffs, don't ask for a share of the money. Of course, the conferences will then take your share and split it amongst the conference members. But that's how bowl games work, too, I think.
- When to play the games - Now. Tomorrow. Whenever. I think the national championship game shouldn't change. Keep that January 8, or so. Work backwards from there, each team playing one game a week.

 

[HailToMichigan]

Simple question.

What event draws the largest televised audience every year and charges the most money per 30 seconds for advertising?

63 BBALL games does equate to a College Football playoff.

Think about how huge the NFL is on a global basis. Why does the NCAA fuck itself out of global expansion with a crappy post-season? People over-seas and in Canada don't give a shit about the Rose Bowl. They just want playoff sports. It's amazing over in England they know all about the New England Patriots but are lost when it comes to college football.

I guess the above is a tangent foir another topic, but the facts remain, there is more than enough money to be made on a playoff system for the best sport, hands down, in the world.

That's a laughable assumption. Why would England suddenly care about college football if there were a playoff system? We have a championship game already, and Fox paid 80 million a year to broadcast it plus four other games. Why would they suddenly pay SO MUCH MORE if it were a playoff instead?

Sure, the Super Bowl is an advertising extravaganza. But are the NFL playoffs? Not really. Not any more so than NFL regular season games, actually.

- How to determine eligibility - I guess I don't understand. If you get selected, you're in.

Are conference champions only eligible? What about the independents? Non-BCS schools? Can there be at-large bids? That's what I mean.

 

[billmac91]

Are conference champions only eligible? What about the independents? Non-BCS schools? Can there be at-large bids? That's what I mean.

My system, and again this is just my opinion but I'm all for anything, would be to utilize the BCS formula for seeding and teams 7 and 8.

The 6 BCS conferences each send their conference champion, NON-BCS conferences send the highest rated team (this year would be Hawii, last year would have been Boise St.) and team #8 is the highest team in the BCS that wasn't a conference winner. Independents qualify in the same breadth a Non-BCS school does.

Once Notre Dame got good again it could create a problem, but for the time being it's fair for everyone.

 

[methomps]

Aha. Problem number 1 with the playoff. Everyone's got their own idea. Need to figure out:

- Number of teams
- How to determine eligibility
- Where to play the games
- How, if at all, to incorporate the bowls
- How to determine seeding
- How to split the money (and where it's coming from)
- When to play the games

And so much more.

It's so easy to sit back and say "YAR we need a playoff BCS SUX!!!" It's much harder, isn't it, to devise a system that truly fixes the problem and addresses all concerns? Everyone thinks their own system is so perfect, and won't hear otherwise.

It's also so easy to say "it's too hard to figure out, let's just keep it like it is." All of those questions above had to be answered when forming the BCS. You know what? They were able to sit down and come up with answers. Do you think every person involved in creating the BCS all had the same opinion?

 

[Zurp]

Are conference champions only eligible? What about the independents? Non-BCS schools? Can there be at-large bids? That's what I mean.

If it were up to me, we'd get rid of the whole "BCS Conference" label. Last year, I think Wake Forest won the ACC. Is that right, or did Georgia Tech win it? It doesn't really matter, because my point is that they got an automatic bid for being in the ACC. But there were other teams in "non-BCS conferences" who might have been better. I'm not going to go back to check out the rankings to see if I'm right. Even if I'm wrong, it's possible that this case could arise. An 8-4 conference champion gets an automatic BCS bowl game (or, in this discussion, a playoff spot), and an 11-1 team gets left out. I say, use the BCS standings to come up with the bowl games (or, again, in this discussion, the playoff spots).

It's also so easy to say "it's too hard to figure out, let's just keep it like it is." All of those questions above had to be answered when forming the BCS. You know what? They were able to sit down and come up with answers. Do you think every person involved in creating the BCS all had the same opinion?

I agree. If they wanted a playoff, it won't be hard to answer any of these questions.

 

[kn1f3party]

CBS pays roughly $8.65 million per game, Fox pays $16 million per game. Even at that rate, the 15 games only adds up to about $240 million a year. Obviously, there's only one source of revenue for those TV companies: advertising. And you can only squash so many ad spots into one game, so the going rate is not suddenly going to skyrocket.

Keep in mind that no matter how much of the bowl system is kept, it will be diluted, if not outright destroyed. And how much do ESPN, NBC, Fox, and CBS pay to televise their respective bowls? You have to subtract a great deal of that from any additional revenue from a playoff TV contract.

...

Aha. Problem number 1 with the playoff. Everyone's got their own idea. Need to figure out:

- Number of teams
- How to determine eligibility
- Where to play the games
- How, if at all, to incorporate the bowls
- How to determine seeding
- How to split the money (and where it's coming from)
- When to play the games

Who cares? Change is hard. Momentum continues towards a playoff and that likely isn't going to come to a screeching halt--especially with seasons like this years. Since when do fans care about the greed of sponsors? As a fan of college football, and more important The Ohio State University, I see how beneficial a playoff would be. There is hardly any parity between the top 16 teams. On any given Saturday, during the regular season, one can beat the other. However, when the championship is on the line and they're gutting it all out you'll see what a team is truly made of. I don't care what happens to the other bowls and the charities they support, I don't care how it affects tourism in the host cities. Is any of this going to set back progress of these charities or will the economies of these cities collapse? I'm a fan of college football for a lot of reason, but face it, scholarship limits and exposure to small schools has created a more balanced playing field than our ancient system accommodates. It will hurt to change it, there will be growing pains, but once it is in place think of how incredible it would be to watch The Ohio State University play Tennessee, then Georgia, then Missouri, then Kansas for a National Championship (hypothetical of course). This structure would add some serious games that would draw large amounts of viewers. There would be no whining about whether a team back-doored their way there or who would have beat who on another day. You would have a legitimate National Champion and the media could whine incessantly about other things than parity between rankings. When you get down to it, how much separation is there really in the top 16? Most of the time when a team appears to dominate all season long, they end up playing a tight game or even losing in the National Championship. You just simply can't tell--with human voters or computers--who the top team is when you're talking about the top 13% of the teams in the country.

I have absolutely no authority and I don't claim to be able to piece together a perfect system, but here is how I would do it:

- 16
- BCS-like system establishes top 16 teams by combining computer formulas and human rankings.
- First round is played at highest seed's home stadium, remaining games are played in what is now the BCS stadiums.
- Bowl incorporation in to the playoff will only be relegated to BCS bowls, the other bowls can do whatever they want.
- Top v. bottom and so on is your seeding (1 v. 16, 2 v. 15, 3 v. 14, ...).
- Conferences get payouts just for sending teams, bonus for teams which advance. There are obviously a lot of details here that are for other people to work out.
- Start January 1st and give each team a week between. It would keep them out of February and provide ample time to prepare / heal.

 

[daveeb]

Okay, here is my idea for a playoff system.

-12 teams
-Conference Champions get autobid
-Use the current BCS computer system to evaluate seeding. For instance, assuming LSU and Boston College win, the seeding would be:

#1 Missouri
#2 West Virginia
#3 Ohio State
#4 LSU
#5 USC
#6 Boston College

-Evaluate Top 12 rated teams from conferences such as the WAC and (lol) Notre Dame.

#7 Hawaii

-Evaluate at-large bids. Cannot have more than 2 teams from a conference, including the champion.

#8 Georgia
#9 Kansas
#10 Virginia Tech
#11 Arizona State
#12 Illinois

As you should note, Florida, Tennessee, and Oklahoma do not get in, as their are teams from their conferences already in.

-Teams #1-4 get byes. Teams #5-8 get home field advantage. Teams #9-12 go on the road.

Illinois at USC (Some things never change)
Arizona State at Boston College
Virginia Tech at Hawaii
Kansas at Georgia

-Teams 1-4 get home field advantage.

Kansas/Georgia at Missouri
Virginia Tech/Hawaii at West Virginia
Arizona State/Boston College at Ohio State
Illinois/USC at LSU

-Enter the BCS games. Rotation occurs. We will go with this alignment, for now.

Fiesta Bowl: Kansas/Georgia/Missouri vs. Illinois/USC/LSU
Rose Bowl: Virginia Tech/Hawaii/West Virginia vs. Arizona State/Boston College/Ohio State

-Sugar Bowl is Championship Game. Orange Bowl is the battle for 3rd place.

That is how I have always thought a playoff system should work.

 

[sandgk]

He calls it "The Wetzel Plan," what should we call this thing?

A 16-team field
Just like in what used to be Division I-AA, the tournament would feature four rounds with teams seeded one through 16. Just like the wildly popular and profitable NCAA men's basketball tournament, champions of all the conferences (all 11 of them) earn an automatic bid to the field.
Yes, all 11. Even the lousy conferences. While no one would argue that the winner of the Mid-American Conference is one of the top 16 teams in the country, there are multiple benefits of including champions of low-level leagues.
First is to maintain the integrity and relevancy of the regular season. While the idea that the season is a four-month playoff is both inaccurate and absurd, there should be a significant reward for an exceptional season.

....
Home games for higher seed in first three rounds
The strangest part of the BCS is that outside businesses – the people who own the bowl games – get a cut of the revenue. It would be unfathomable for a league such as the NFL or NBA to allow independent promoters to stage its playoffs.
College football is leaving millions on the table by staging top games in far-off locales. Ohio State, for instance, earns an estimated $5 million-plus for each home game. And that is just direct revenue. Forbes estimates Buckeye football games generated $42 million for the Columbus area in 2005.
The 14 hugely profitable home games from the first three rounds would create a huge revenue stream.
There is simply no need to include the current bowl structure. Obviously no fan base can afford to travel week after week to neutral-site games. But they wouldn't have to. In what used to be Division I-AA, the playoffs are home field until the title game. That's the way it should be.
The competitive value of home-field advantage would also help maintain the importance of the regular season because the higher the seed, the more home games.
This would also be a boon to teams in the Midwest, which build their teams to deal with the predictably harsh weather only to play postseason games in generally warm, calm environs.
So how would say, USC fare if it didn't get a Big Ten opponent in Pasadena each January, but rather had to slip and slide around Ann Arbor or Columbus for a change? And who wouldn't want to see the Trojans invade one of those historic old stadiums, snow falling, and proving they have grit not just skill?

 

[exhawg]

He calls it "The Wetzel Plan," what should we call this thing?

That's brilliant. Make the Gators and LSU play in Cbus in December. Let's see how that southern speed handles 30 and snowy.

 

[EidoloN]

i was just reading that! i think thats awsome!! go playoffs! i dont like the whole BCS money issues, this sport is about the kids, not freakin money!

 

[buckeyegrad]

The only problem I see with Wetzel's plan is that might replace Christmas as the most important event in December.

 

[daveeb]

I like the Wetzel plan. Simple and straight to the point.

 

[kn1f3party]

I don't see how people could argue with that format. It should just be accepted that the conference champion of every conference is just as deserving as another for a shot.