College Playoff

[Lockup]

I guess I would be in the minority on this. I hate that thing.

1. I have never been a fan of a 16 team playoff. This is football not March Madness. 8 teams tops I like 4 to be honest

2. I don't need to see Mizzou playing a 7-5 MAC team. Again this is football not bball. Yeah every once and a while some mid major may pop up and knock off a big boy. Not going to happen all that often to give everyone of them a shot at doing it. Let the ones in that actually deserve a shot.

3. This is football. If I am a major college coach that last thing I want is my star players being forced to play some scrub 7-5 MAC to prove I should play next week again. God forbid somebody important gets hurt in that mess and my NC hopes are squashed because we needed to play Central Florida.

 

[Dryden]

My issue would be with the inclusions of Florida and Kansas. They very well may be two of the Top16 teams in the country, or among the five best teams that didn't win their conference, or whatever ... but 3 teams from one conference is a problem, most glaringly with the positioning of Georgia and LSU, which could hypothetically both play all home games until playing each other for the title.

I understand the idea, but the execution here needs some work. Regardless of how inferior anyone "thinks" a conference is, you probably need to give the 6 BCS conference winners, plus the winners of the MWC and WAC, the 1-8 seeds. Let one of the BCS 'at large' seeds travel to Boise or Hawaii for the first round -- make 'em earn it.

Whatever, though. It has a snowball's chance in hell of ever being realized, so arguing over it is much ado about nothing.

Besides, how fair would it be for Ohio State to have to play Florida, LSU and Georgia all in a row for the national title. I mean, we're not in the SEC for crying out loud! We wouldn't have a prayer!

 

[mross34]

You guys are acting like this is something new. That idea has been tossed around for the past 5 years. It's a great idea but the only problem with it is it's never gonna happen. The current system would be great if instead of having a plus-1 format like they do now, they use two of the other bowls as feeder semi-finals to the plus-1 game. If you don't finish in the top 4 in the country, you probably lost somewhere along the way, and really have no argument against not being a national champ.

 

[lvbuckeye]

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:

the flip side, of course, is that Tressel's teams at YSU tended to do quite well in the playoffs... we'd win either way, if you ask me...

of course, i do have one question regarding how a playoff system would encourage more high profile OOC games. if you lose those games, wouldn't it greatly hurt your chances of picking up an at-large berth? seems to me that BOTH systems discourage tough OOC competition...

 

[Dryden]

1. I have never been a fan of a 16 team playoff. This is football not March Madness. 8 teams tops I like 4 to be honest

Agree. I think if you set the field at 8, it'll give teams an incentive to play opponents with a pulse as part of their OOC schedule. If the field is 16, teams won't need quality wins to advance, they'd just need to be no worse than 10-2 or 9-3. Why risk it?

 

[AKAK]

I like the Wetzel plan.

Wetzel plan?

Get Gretel a new diaper.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

The big problem I have with the Wetzel plan is the automatic inclusion of the champions of all conferences. Bullshit. Just take the top 16 teams in the BCS rankings and then plug those into his system and you're golden.

 

[buckeyegrad]

If you use Wetzle's plan last year it would have meant three more games in Columbus:

Round 1: Troy
Round 2: Winner of Boise State/Auburn
Round 3: Most likely winner of USC/LSU

I have to admit that first round game does not excite me at all, but those other two would have been fantastic. Under Mililani's suggestion of just taking the top 16 teams, Troy is replaced by Rutgers in the first round. How could anyone be opposed to that possibility?

 

[Tonyank]

The big problem I have with the Wetzel plan is the automatic inclusion of the champions of all conferences. Bullshit. Just take the top 16 teams in the BCS rankings and then plug those into his system and you're golden.

10-4, if you win a crappy conf, F you!!!!

 

[Tonyank]

more like mizz with the at-large bid and Okl with the Big 12

 

[lvbuckeye]

The big problem I have with the Wetzel plan is the automatic inclusion of the champions of all conferences. Bullshit. Just take the top 16 teams in the BCS rankings and then plug those into his system and you're golden.

honestly, the only problem that i have with that is that the rankings are still subjective... which is why i said it would take such a radical shakeup. everyone thinks that the SEC walks on water, so SEC teams are ranked higher, whether that plays out on the field be damned. do you REALLY think that a 3-loss Florida is more deserving of a shot than an undefeated Hawaii? if you just go by the rankings, then the participants are not chosen strictly on the merits of wins and losses, and losing late would still cost you a higher seed. if you're going to do a playoff, you need all the conference champs.

 

[Gatorubet]

honestly, the only problem that i have with that is that the rankings are still subjective... which is why i said it would take such a radical shakeup. everyone thinks that the SEC walks on water, so SEC teams are ranked higher, whether that plays out on the field be damned. do you REALLY think that a 3-loss Florida is more deserving of a shot than an undefeated Hawaii? if you just go by the rankings, then the participants are not chosen strictly on the merits of wins and losses, and losing late would still cost you a higher seed. if you're going to do a playoff, you need all the conference champs.

If you go with 16 teams, then they are both in. If you go with 8 teams, then neither are. So I fail to see the problem, unless being undefeated is the end all, in which case the BYUs of the world will have another shot at a title like 1984.

You do not need all the conference champs. If they go OOC and knock off some big boys, then they will have a higher BCS ranking. If they play nobody, then they will be left behind. Up to them and their ADs how to approach it.

 

[buckeyesin07]

IMO, if you don't win your conference, you're out. Otherwise, the college football regular season becomes as pointless as the college basketball regular season. Besides, if you can't even win your own conference, you certainly aren't the best team in the nation.

 

[Gatorubet]

IMO, if you don't win your conference, you're out. Otherwise, the college football regular season becomes as pointless as the college basketball regular season. Besides, if you can't even win your own conference, you certainly aren't the best team in the nation.

Suppose TOSU had only lost one game and came in 2nd in the Big 10.

A one loss TOSU is still much better than - say - an undefeated Hawaii, IMO.

What to do about that?

 

[jwinslow]

You do not need all the conference champs. If they go OOC and knock off some big boys, then they will have a higher BCS ranking. If they play nobody, then they will be left behind. Up to them and their ADs how to approach it.

If a bcs team has 0-1 losses, they will probably still be in the top-8 regardless of their OOC schedule.