College Playoff

[zincfinger]

I don't think a playoff would ruin the regular season as much as you guys think it will.

Did you follow OSU's 2002 season? If so, do you remember how intense it was in the final stretch? Holy Buckeye in W. Lafayette. Overtime endzone dive in Urbana-Champaign. Final seconds endzone pick at home against Michigan to seal it. Back-to-back-to-back. Those games were all good-to-great games on their own merits. But it was the certain knowledge that a single loss in that stretch immediately destroyed the dream season, which made them epic games. If a loss in that stretch had instead meant dropping a couple of seeds in the playoff, those games would not have been remotely as exciting as they were.

And it's not just the last few games of the season. One of the great things about it is that games of that intensity can occur anytime during the season. '05 vs. Texas. The thing that made that last minute defeat so brutal was the knowledge that a great Buckeye team was very likely out of the national title race, in only week 2. But this is also what made the game as exciting and intense as it was. And you knew they absolutely had to pull one out at Penn State a few weeks later to keep any national championship hopes alive. If there'd been a playoff that year, OSU would have been in it; they may have even won it (I personally think they were better than Penn St., and just as good as Texas). But then those early season clashes wouldn't have had nearly the intensity, excitement, and entertainment value (even if some of it was painful) that they did have, because far less would have been on the line. And I don't think the Buckeyes deserved to get into a playoff and possibly win a national championship, despite the fact that, as I said, I think they were as good as anyone in the country. Maybe better. But they didn't deserve it because they did have their chance to "prove it on the field", and they didn't get it done. The same thing can be said in some measure of every single "shoulda been in the championship game" team, with the sole exception of 2004 Auburn, for the entire tenure of the BCS.

'98 Buckeyes. Best team in the country, not a doubt in my mind. Arguably "shoulda been in the championship game", but too bad, they didn't get it done against MSU. I was at the MSU game - completely devastating. But for as painful as it was, it was also a legendary game, because of what it meant. And I like the fact that the possibility exists, in conference play, of having games as brutally crushing as that. Because it also means the possibility, in conference play, of having games as incredibly great as '02 Purdue or '02 UM. If you insert a playoff at the end of the regular season, when will there ever be a legendary BigTen game like this again? When MSU stuns OSU to knock them from the 1-seed to the 3-seed? When OSU beats borderline 8-seed UM to definitively knock them out of the playoffs? These things just can't compare.

There's no question that implementation of a full-scale playoff will markedly alter the regular season, and will make a hell of a lot of regular season games a hell of a lot less important and interesting than they currently are. Before you decide it's worthwhile to mess with that, you should make sure you're extremely confident that a playoff will produce a bonanza of incredible football games, and crown an unquestionably correct, beauty queen of a champion damn near every year.

 

[AuburnBuckeye]

Before you decide it's worthwhile to mess with that, you should make sure you're extremely confident that a playoff will produce a bonanza of incredible football games, and crown an unquestionably correct, beauty queen of a champion damn near every year.

I honestly think it would do that. Look at CBB, the team that wins the title may not have been the best. But they went out there, played hard and outperformed everyone else and earned the title. And there always seems to be a plethora of great games along the way. And I think a CFB playoff could rival that in entertainment value.

But its just a matter of opinion, you all are content with the current system. And I am hoping for something a little more.

I feel like, in this current system regular season is being used as a shoddy replacement for a playoff. Imagine the intensity of the regular season, only the teams playing are the 8 best battling it out to decide whos the champ. You have to admit that would be a very entertaining scenario. But I see your guys side of the argument, i'm not really sure if it would be worth it. But I guess time will tell how this situation plays out.

 

[IronBuckI]

Using the CBB example is exactly why I can't get behind a playoff. The season is absolutely meaningless. It cracks me up when Dukie V says that UNC-Duke is the greatest rivalry in sports, when none of their games mean anything, unless the 3rd or 4th game of the season is played in the NCAA tournament. Sure, you get good matchups throughout the season, but those games ultimately mean nothing. Both teams will get into the playoff, and there's nothing on the line during the regular season, except for seeding.

I wouldn't be opposed to a playoff in college football if I thought that they could keep it to 4 or even 8 teams, but it will ultimately grow to the stupid proportion that the NCAA tournament has become.

 

[AuburnBuckeye]

Using the CBB example is exactly why I can't get behind a playoff. The season is absolutely meaningless. It cracks me up when Dukie V says that UNC-Duke is the greatest rivalry in sports, when none of their games mean anything, unless the 3rd or 4th game of the season is played in the NCAA tournament. Sure, you get good matchups throughout the season, but those games ultimately mean nothing. Both teams will get into the playoff, and there's nothing on the line during the regular season, except for seeding.

I wouldn't be opposed to a playoff in college football if I thought that they could keep it to 4 or even 8 teams, but it will ultimately grow to the stupid proportion that the NCAA tournament has become.

Well, I agree that March Madness has grown to ridculous proportions. But I sincerely doubt they would allow a football playoff to get THAT huge. Bball isn't as taxing on your body as football, so it's possible to play that many games in a short time, but it couldn't be pulled off in Football. I imagine the NCAA would find some amazing way to muck it up beyond repair though.

And sure, the rivalries aren't as intense as CFB, but there is still plenty of school pride on the line.

 

[osubartender23]

I honestly think it would do that. Look at CBB, the team that wins the title may not have been the best. But they went out there, played hard and outperformed everyone else and earned the title. .

My question is that playoff proponents argue that a playoff is the best way to determine who the BEST team in college football is; but as stated the best team doesnt always win in a playoff so wouldnt that still leave room for an arguement over who deserves the national championship? No system is going to ever truly crown a national champion. But with the current system we have it at least takes into account the whole body of work, and not just the last couple of games. The whole body of work is what makes college football so great, every game matters .

 

[AuburnBuckeye]

My question is that playoff proponents argue that a playoff is the best way to determine who the BEST team in college football is; but as stated the best team doesnt always win in a playoff so wouldnt that still leave room for an arguement over who deserves the national championship? No system is going to ever truely crown a national champion. But with the current system we have it at least takes into account the whole body of work, and not just the last couple of games. The whole body of work is what makes college football so great, every game matters .

The current system makes it one big popularity contest. Every year there are about 2-3 teams that can make legitimate cases that they deserved a shot at the national title and they are left out because ESPN says this other team is better, and sways peoples opinions. With this system everyone who deserves it gets a fair shot. A teams whole body of work isn't left useless because it decides who gets the shot at the title. You can't sit here and tell me that the BCS doesn't screw teams over whose body of work is just as good as the teams that are in the NC game.

"But with the current system we have it at least takes into account the whole body of work, and not just the last couple of games."

That's just the thing, it could be argued that some teams whose body of work is just as good as a team in the NC game gets left out because there simply aren't enough spots.

Another thing.Take 2007 OSU and U of F for example. It could easily be argued that over the WHOLE season OSU's body of work was more impressive, but they weren't crowned National Champs were they? So how in the Hell is the BCS better than a playoff system in that regard? This is the same as a playoff except instead of taking in the last couple of games, it takes in the last game only. I ask you once again how is that any better? At least with a playoff any team with an argument to be in the NC gets a chance.

In essence, the body of work argument can be used against the BCS just as well as it can against the playoff system. So can you please quit shoving that bs down my throat?

 

[zincfinger]

But its just a matter of opinion, you all are content with the current system. And I am hoping for something a little more.

Yep, it's just because I don't dare to dream. That's also why I haven't called that "make internet millions" number that's advertised on t.v. at 2 in the morning. Because I'm content not being a millionaire.

 

[AuburnBuckeye]

Yep, it's just because I don't dare to dream. That's also why I haven't called that "make internet millions" number that's advertised on t.v. at 2 in the morning. Because I'm content not being a millionaire.

Well, I'm now a self-made billionaire thanks to those "Get free money from the government commercials". Matthew Lesko is my hero. :p

 

[osubartender23]

The current system makes it one big popularity contest. Every year there are about 2-3 teams that can make legitimate cases that they deserved a shot at the national title and they are left out because ESPN says this other team is better, and sways peoples opinions. With this system everyone who deserves it gets a fair shot. A teams whole body of work isn't left useless because it decides who gets the shot at the title. You can't sit here and tell me that the BCS doesn't screw teams over whose body of work is just as good as the teams that are in the NC game.

So you are telling me that in 2002 that TOSU got into the National Championship game because it was a popularity contest? ESPIN was pretty much doing everything that they could to knock TOSU's body of work that year, and the team was still able to get in in spite of that.

That's just the thing, it could be argued that some teams whose body of work is just as good as a team in the NC game gets left out because there simply aren't enough spots.

Couldnt the same thing be said about a playoff system though? You are inevitably going to have teams that qualify for at large bids that get left out using that same premise because there arent enough bids to go around.

Another thing.Take 2007 OSU and U of F for example. It could easily be argued that over the WHOLE season OSU's body of work was more impressive, but they weren't crowned National Champs were they? So how in the Hell is the BCS better than a playoff system in that regard? This is the same as a playoff except instead of taking in the last couple of games, it takes in the last game only. I ask you once again how is that any better? At least with a playoff any team with an argument to be in the NC gets a chance..

Doesnt a playoff essentially take into account the last game only too? In essence the arguements that are being made on both sides, can also be used against the other one. There is no guarantee that a team with an arguement to be in the NC gets a chance to play for it. Hypothetically last year Ball St goes undefeated, but would they make the playoffs since they wouldnt be part of a major conference? If you expand the playoffs to include the mid majors, the same arguement could be made that they didnt deserve to be playing for the NC because the body of work didnt support it. The BCS does have its flaws, but a playoff system not only would keep the same flaws in place, but would also create additional gripes from teams just on the outside of qualifying that would deserve to be in.

In essence, the body of work argument can be used against the BCS just as well as it can against the playoff system. So can you please quit shoving that bs down my throat?

Likewise. You are trying to convince people that the BCS is such a terrible system and that a playoff system would somehow make everything perfect. My opinion is that it wouldnt work any differently, yours is the opposite so I think we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Jaxbuck]

The current system makes it one big popularity contest. Every year there are about 2-3 teams that can make legitimate cases that they deserved a shot at the national title and they are left out because ESPN says this other team is better, and sways peoples opinions. With this system everyone who deserves it gets a fair shot. A teams whole body of work isn't left useless because it decides who gets the shot at the title. You can't sit here and tell me that the BCS doesn't screw teams over whose body of work is just as good as the teams that are in the NC game.

"But with the current system we have it at least takes into account the whole body of work, and not just the last couple of games."

That's just the thing, it could be argued that some teams whose body of work is just as good as a team in the NC game gets left out because there simply aren't enough spots.

Another thing.Take 2007 OSU and U of F for example. It could easily be argued that over the WHOLE season OSU's body of work was more impressive, but they weren't crowned National Champs were they? So how in the Hell is the BCS better than a playoff system in that regard? This is the same as a playoff except instead of taking in the last couple of games, it takes in the last game only. I ask you once again how is that any better? At least with a playoff any team with an argument to be in the NC gets a chance.

In essence, the body of work argument can be used against the BCS just as well as it can against the playoff system. So can you please quit shoving that bs down my throat?

You are exactly right.

The current system is a playoff albeit with a flawed tie breaking system. Pre season polls are the single biggest culprit. Clean up the tie breaking procedures first then see if we still need to to anything but keep in mind you are NEVER going to remove the controversy of some teams feeling they deserve to be there that aren't. Never.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

... With this system everyone who deserves it gets a fair shot. ...

I am just quoting this one line because I don't think you're being honest. Let me outline what I mean.

When you talk about "deserves" and "fair shot" I have to wonder exactly who you are talking about. Does that MAC champion "deserve" a fair shot? Does the Sun Belt Champ? MWC Champ? Why or why not?

I bring this up because it always strikes me that Playoff proponents couch their arguments in terms of "fairness" but I never see them approach "real" fairness. If you're trying to base it on what's fair then you have to invite teams that probably don't "Deserve" it.

Take a look at last year, using a system that is "fair" (by inviting conference champs)
Conference.Team...........BCS...Rec...SOS...AP..Sa garin
ACC........Virginia Tech...19...10-4...26...15....18
Big XII....Oklahoma.........1...12-2....7....5.....3
Big East...Cincinnati......12...11-3...60...17....34
Big Ten....Penn State.......8...11-2...55....8.....8 *
C-USA......East Carolina...NR....9-5...67...NR....54
MAC........Buffalo.........NR....8-6...92...NR....76
MWC........Utah.............6...13-0...56....2.....5
Pac 10.....USC..............5...12-1...16....3.....2
SEC........Florida..........2...13-1....4....1.....1
Sun Belt...Troy............NR....8-5..117...NR....70
WAC........Boise State......9...12-1...94...11....12

* Penn State split the Big Ten title with Ohio State (10-3 BCS 10)

The Brackets (Used the Big Ten basketball Tournament bracket as the model for an 11 team tournament) as before, seeds precede the team name, actual BCS ranks in parens:

8 Virginia Tech (19) v. 9 East Carolina (NR) winner to play 1 Oklahoma (1)
7 Cincinnati (12) v. 10 Troy (NR) winner to play 2 Florida (2)
6 Boise State (9) v. 11 Buffalo (NR) winner to play 3 USC (5)
4 Utah (6) v. 5 Penn State (8) winner to play winner of Oklahoma v. 8/9 game winner.

Notice who's missing? Texas. See a bunch of "great games?" I don't

Now, let's look at who "deserves" something

Conference.Team...........BCS...Rec...SOS...AP..Sa garin
Big XII....Oklahoma.........1...12-2....7....5.....3
SEC........Florida..........2...13-1....4....1.....1
Big XII....Texas............3...12-1...14....4.....4
SEC........Alabama..........4...12-2...28....6.....6
Pac 10.....USC..............5...12-1...16....3.....2
MWC........Utah.............6...13-0...56....2.....5
Big XII....Texas Tech.......7...11-2...27...12.....9
Big Ten....Penn State.......8...11-2...55....8.....8

There is no question in my mind that this is what playoff proponents "see" when they talk about Playoffs. But, don't tell me it's "fair" If it were, WAC Champ Boise State (rated #9 by the way) would be involved. I mean, what else are they supposed to have done? Does #11 TCU deserve a look? What about #10 Ohio State? Is it fair that they get left out, or are we still looking at a "popularity contest" to see who "deserves" it?

 

[BB73]

The current system makes it one big popularity contest. Every year there are about 2-3 teams that can make legitimate cases that they deserved a shot at the national title and they are left out because ESPN says this other team is better, and sways peoples opinions. With this system everyone who deserves it gets a fair shot. A teams whole body of work isn't left useless because it decides who gets the shot at the title. You can't sit here and tell me that the BCS doesn't screw teams over whose body of work is just as good as the teams that are in the NC game.

"But with the current system we have it at least takes into account the whole body of work, and not just the last couple of games."

That's just the thing, it could be argued that some teams whose body of work is just as good as a team in the NC game gets left out because there simply aren't enough spots.

Another thing.Take 2007 OSU and U of F for example. It could easily be argued that over the WHOLE season OSU's body of work was more impressive, but they weren't crowned National Champs were they? So how in the Hell is the BCS better than a playoff system in that regard? This is the same as a playoff except instead of taking in the last couple of games, it takes in the last game only. I ask you once again how is that any better? At least with a playoff any team with an argument to be in the NC gets a chance.

In essence, the body of work argument can be used against the BCS just as well as it can against the playoff system. So can you please quit shoving that bs down my throat?

So, those with a differing opinion are 'shoving BS down your throat?' You've repeatedly argued in favor of a playoff system; should those who disagree with that stance accuse you of doing the same thing?

That type of attitude is what is BS, and it won't serve you well on this site.

Support your position. Express your opinion. But don't denigrate those who have a different view on things.

 

[BB73]

The guys at CFN take on the issue. They were told to write against a playoff, and some of them are speaking from the heart, some are weakly supporting the premise, and some are ignoring the task they were assigned.

CFN.No.Playoff

Q: Why shouldn't there be a playoff?

A: (Fiutak)...
Forget all the naive love-of-the-game crap; big-time sports are a business, and those who don't think that way are the ones who aren't good enough to compete for anything real. The only reason playoffs, in all their forms, exist is to make more money for the sports leagues. If it was about anything else, like finding out who the best team really is, other sports would get it right.

If a sport wants to come up with a true champion then there's no real reason for a playoff. Baseball used to have it right when the team with the best record in one league played the team with the best record in the national league in the World Series. Owners of mediocre teams got sick of their teams being out of it in late June and changed things to add more playoff teams and a wild-card.

The NCAA men's basketball tournament used to have it right when it only allowed in conference champions, and then the whole thing got all gwonked up by expanding the field and adding every team that could dribble and chew gum at the same time. While the tournament is fantastic, there's a huge fluke factor involved and it has completely and totally ruined the significance of the regular season. No one really cares about college basketball anymore, but the tournament is every bit as big as the Super Bowl.

The other sports have screwed it up, too, all in the name of money. The NFL has the wild-card, meaning a team like the 2007 New York Giants can get second chances in a playoff format, after proving to be inferior to the Patriots, Cowboys, and Packers in the regular season (losing to the Cowboys twice and getting blasted by the Packers), and can win the Super Bowl. Hockey and basketball play seven game series, and why? Money. If it's about figuring out who the best team is, then one game would suffice, even thought the No. 1 teams in each conference should play for the title and the entire playoff format should scrapped.

College football, as messed up as it is to get to the final solution, gets it right more often than any other sport. There's absolutely no flukiness involved, and while you might have a beef with a team like Utah last year or USC at times over the last few seasons not getting a shot to play for it all, it's tough to argue with the team that went through the wars of the regular season and won a BCS Championship. There's no 1985 Villanova in the NCAA Tournament , 2006 St. Louis Cardinals, and no Pittsburgh Steelers of 2005.

My concern with a college football playoff is a slippery slope. It can be done right (six BCS league champions, the top non-BCS conference champion, and one wild-card), but eventually, college football would go for the money, devalue the regular season, and screw it all up with more wild card, and expanded tournament, and a Cinderella here and there.

Cont'd ...

 

[Jaxbuck]

Sounds an awful lot like what people here have been saying.

 

[Oh8ch]

My question is that playoff proponents argue that a playoff is the best way to determine who the BEST team in college football is; but as stated the best team doesnt always win in a playoff so wouldnt that still leave room for an arguement over who deserves the national championship?

You are forgetting that unlike regular season games, playoff games are "magic".