Playoffs

[NAHSTE]

Gun to my head I go with this model.

Although, I will and always will advocate a playoff system that has every conference champion in it.

Even the Sun Belt, C-USA and Mac? I'm sorry but even those schools will tell you they have no business in this discussion.

For the record, I advocate a 6 conference champions, plus 2 at large system. I'd also like them to realign the conferences into 6 "Power Regions" and have relegation similar to that of European soccer.

 

[FirstTimer]

Even the Sun Belt, C-USA and Mac? I'm sorry but even those schools will tell you they have no business in this discussion.

Yes. People were saying the same thing about the Mountain West and WAC years ago and the college landscape has changed. Scholarship limits etc. You can't ignore the impact that this system would have on recruiting, TV deals, etc.

But I've had this discussion about 17 times...

 

[trojan49er]

Using conference champs is bs...do you really want to tell me that the ACC winner or the Big-Ten winner is a better team than the #2 team in the SEC? (Right now thats Alabama, the #2 ranked team in the country). Lets say either Florida or Bama loses, gun to your head, who wins head-to-head, Florida or Iowa? Florida or Georgia Tech? Bama or Iowa? Bama or GT? I'd take the SEC school in all of those matchups. Hell, I'd take USC over Iowa and probably GT.

I think most of us can agree that the BCS is screwy. But, at least IMO, I think that extends only to picking the top few teams...like putting Ohio State in the Title game years and years in a row. However, I think the BCS is pretty good at separating the top 8 or so teams. Like I said before, I dont think you can make an argument that a team outside the top 8 deserved a shot at the title. Its a crap system for picking out #1 and #2 from the rest of the top tier teams, but I think it does a good job of identifying what teams belong in the top tier.

 

[FedEx227]

Gun to my head I go with this model.

Although, I will and always will advocate a playoff system that has every conference champion in it.

I think that would be alright, that does though eliminate a lot of the big time marketing that comes with the regular season college football season.

They love saying #3 USC vs. #7 Oregon as opposed to just USC vs. Oregon in a PAC-10 Conference game. Granted the late games that make or break conferences would be ramped up but it would be hard to market a lot of the early season games.

 

[shag773]

Using conference champs is bs...do you really want to tell me that the ACC winner or the Big-Ten winner is a better team than the #2 team in the SEC? (Right now thats Alabama, the #2 ranked team in the country). Lets say either Florida or Bama loses, gun to your head, who wins head-to-head, Florida or Iowa? Florida or Georgia Tech? Bama or Iowa? Bama or GT? I'd take the SEC school in all of those matchups. Hell, I'd take USC over Iowa and probably GT.

I think most of us can agree that the BCS is screwy. But, at least IMO, I think that extends only to picking the top few teams...like putting Ohio State in the Title game years and years in a row. However, I think the BCS is pretty good at separating the top 8 or so teams. Like I said before, I dont think you can make an argument that a team outside the top 8 deserved a shot at the title. Its a crap system for picking out #1 and #2 from the rest of the top tier teams, but I think it does a good job of identifying what teams belong in the top tier.

Really? I like my national championship game set up on the field, not in some dipshit computer. Can Florida or Alabama beat Iowa, Boise St.,Cincy, and Georgia Tech? You can have an opinion, but you'll really never know will you? Like in College Basketball, everyone "thought" Louisville was better than Michigan State. Didn't turn out that way did it? Being the best team in your conference should not be an automatic bid into the national championship game. I don't care how good your conference is.

 

[JeremyHight]

I don't see how people can claim to be college football fans than saying that teams who aren't even the best teams in their conference or division should get a shot at the championship. If you think the BCS is shit, fine, but don't replace a piece of shit with a bowl of diarrhea.

 

[shag773]

IMO you're looking at it from the wrong perspective. Obviously if you compare college football to the other sports it does seem ridiculous, but more so than any other sport college football is heavily rooted in tradition, and the polls and bowl games are as much a part of the tradition as anything else. The polls and bowl system are as much college football as the brackets are a part of college basketball. The BCS certainly has its flaws, but it generally rewards teams over a 12 game schedule, where as a playoff may reward teams based on bracketing, matchups and/or who ever is playing the best at the time.

They pissed all over tradition once they started playing traditional new year's day bowl games the week after. So that argument is out the window. The Division 1AA schools do it every year. There is no reason why u can not have a 16 team tournament, incorporating conference champions and at large bids. This will happen once college football can find a way to make more money doing that vs. the current set up.

 

[shag773]

I don't see how people can claim to be college football fans than saying that teams who aren't even the best teams in their conference or division should get a shot at the championship. If you think the BCS is shit, fine, but don't replace a piece of shit with a bowl of diarrhea.

With a 8, 12, or 16 team tournament, your not going to be stuck watching Northwestern or Duke unless they win their conference.

 

[JeremyHight]

With a 8, 12, or 16 team tournament, your not going to be stuck watching Northwestern or Duke unless they win their conference.

With an 8, 12, or 16 team tournament, you wouldn't have to worry about me watching that sad excuse for what you call "college football". That big of a playoffs would shit all over what college football is all about.

 

[shag773]

With an 8, 12, or 16 team tournament, you wouldn't have to worry about me watching that sad excuse for what you call "college football". That big of a playoffs would shit all over what college football is all about.

Ok..so what is college football all about?

 

[JeremyHight]

Ok..so what is college football all about?

Any solution for the championship has to have the keep the following aspects sacred and yes, I do mean sacred:

1. Rivalries - Any solution that makes rivalries less important immediately is ruled out. "But rivalries will always be important, right?" Wrong! Look at Ohio State-Michigan. People bash the Big Ten now, but that single game has had probably the biggest impact on the national championship of any rivalry ever. If all of a sudden, both teams were still going to the playoffs and this only determined seeding, this game could not possibly be as important.

2. Conference Championships - Winning a conference is an age old tradition and has always been rewarded throughout the history of the sport. Teams that don't win their conference have never won a national championship (not counting independents). Teams who don't win their conference have only recently been given shots at national titles and all have ended disastrously for the entire system.

3. The regular season is a playoff - The playoff cannot trump the importance of getting there. If all of a sudden, you start just taking more teams, you are only going to make those regular season games less important. When a team can lose twice or three times and still have a shot at the title (without major help from teams losing), that only tarnishes the regular season's importance.

Like I said, a very simply solution to me is a 6 team playoff made of the top 6 conference champions in the BCS Rankings. This keeps rivalries as being important, makes it so winning your conference is a neccesity for winning the championship, and losing late could knock you out of contention. Not only that, but the limited amount of teams accepted makes it so that the regular season remains important.

To me, anything more than 6 (4 is ideal to me) just hurts college football.

 

[SHOGUN]

I don't see how people can claim to be college football fans than saying that teams who aren't even the best teams in their conference or division should get a shot at the championship. If you think the BCS is shit, fine, but don't replace a piece of shit with a bowl of diarrhea.

This.

Everyone hollers 'playoff' for college football, but every playoff idea that's thrown around is garbage and ultimately some quality teams are going to be left out, which only raises the question to add more teams.

A playoff solves nothing in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Vinsane]

I don't understand this line of thinking and never have....

"The BCS sucks!"

"Yeah we need a playoff system!"

"Ok let's do it!"

"Alright, how do we choose the teams?"

"Uhhhhh"

*crickets*

"Let's use the BCS rankings!"

"I thought we agreed the BCS sucks"

"Shut up! It's playoff!"

"Uhh what?"

The BCS is flawed, but what other system is there? You fix the flaws and viola you have a ranking system that works. You can't leave it in the hands of the media, or your looking at an SEC conference tournament. I'm saying use the BCS as the system BUT fix the flaws.

 

[Cryolemon]

Take the top four teams in the BCS standings that are conference champions and have a playoff.

I think that's what will eventually happen. Whether it's the best idea is of course open to debate, as this thread has proved. The only issue I have with that is what about ND, Army and Navy? Even if ND were unbeaten and ranked #4 they aren't technically a conference champion.

 

[shag773]

Any solution for the championship has to have the keep the following aspects sacred and yes, I do mean sacred:

1. Rivalries - Any solution that makes rivalries less important immediately is ruled out. "But rivalries will always be important, right?" Wrong! Look at Ohio State-Michigan. People bash the Big Ten now, but that single game has had probably the biggest impact on the national championship of any rivalry ever. If all of a sudden, both teams were still going to the playoffs and this only determined seeding, this game could not possibly be as important.

2. Conference Championships - Winning a conference is an age old tradition and has always been rewarded throughout the history of the sport. Teams that don't win their conference have never won a national championship (not counting independents). Teams who don't win their conference have only recently been given shots at national titles and all have ended disastrously for the entire system.

3. The regular season is a playoff - The playoff cannot trump the importance of getting there. If all of a sudden, you start just taking more teams, you are only going to make those regular season games less important. When a team can lose twice or three times and still have a shot at the title (without major help from teams losing), that only tarnishes the regular season's importance.

Like I said, a very simply solution to me is a 6 team playoff made of the top 6 conference champions in the BCS Rankings. This keeps rivalries as being important, makes it so winning your conference is a neccesity for winning the championship, and losing late could knock you out of contention. Not only that, but the limited amount of teams accepted makes it so that the regular season remains important.

To me, anything more than 6 (4 is ideal to me) just hurts college football.

I think your reaching a little bit just to make a point.

1. Ohio State - Michigan has always been about 3 things, in the following order. Big 10 Championship, beating each other, national championship implications. What's the difference if there playing for seeding or a spot in your 6 team tournament? Every rivalry has a unique aspect that will never be taken away, no matter what kind of playoff system you have.

2. In the current system there are teams that are given BCS bowl games that are not conference winners. As long as you have Notre Dame in the picture, you need at least 2 at large bids.

3. This is part of the reason why there has been no movement. Let me say this to you and the NCAA. The regular season is not a playoff. A playoff is a playoff. You treat the regular season like a playoff, then you introduce outside sources to determine who wins a national championship, instead of deciding it on the field as it should be.

I know I've said this before, but I'm it's worth repeating. The NCAA pissed all over tradition by playing New Year's Day bowl games the week after. You're so worried about rivalries, how about that tradition? I went years without missing a major bowl game. Now, I can't tell you the last time I watched the Orange Bowl. If we can let go of these traditions, we certainly can make a couple more concessions to get this thing right.

 

[NAHSTE]

People are throwing out retarded numbers just for the hell of it now. 6 teams? 7 teams? What is the point of either of those, other than to sound like you have a different idea?

4 or 8.

 

[FedEx227]

Exactly. 4 or 8 is all you can really do.

 

[JeremyHight]

People are throwing out retarded numbers just for the hell of it now. 6 teams? 7 teams? What is the point of either of those, other than to sound like you have a different idea?

4 or 8.

I always liked 4. 8 is too many and 6 makes it so that the top 2 teams get rewarded with a bye week.

 

[Cryolemon]

4 or 8 are the obvious numbers, but because of the conference structure lead to questions of how they are chosen.

 

[FirstTimer]

Using conference champs is bs...do you really want to tell me that the ACC winner or the Big-Ten winner is a better team than the #2 team in the SEC?

Are you going to tell me Utah has a chance against the 2nd place SEC team....


Who knows until they actually play............

Oh wait...

I do know one thing for sure..

A team that doesn't win it's conference deserves to be nowhere near the National Championship discussion

Really? I like my national championship game set up on the field, not in some dipshit computer. Can Florida or Alabama beat Iowa, Boise St.,Cincy, and Georgia Tech? You can have an opinion, but you'll really never know will you? Like in College Basketball, everyone "thought" Louisville was better than Michigan State. Didn't turn out that way did it? Being the best team in your conference should not be an automatic bid into the national championship game. I don't care how good your conference is.

Thank you....Hell even as odd at the NCAA Basketball tourney is set up..(auto bids for conference tourney champs but no auto bids for the regular season champs...uhh what),,at least it's decided on the court by actual players.

I don't see how people can claim to be college football fans than saying that teams who aren't even the best teams in their conference or division should get a shot at the championship. If you think the BCS is shit, fine, but don't replace a piece of shit with a bowl of diarrhea.

Agreed.

The BCS is flawed, but what other system is there? You fix the flaws and viola you have a ranking system that works. You can't leave it in the hands of the media, or your looking at an SEC conference tournament. I'm saying use the BCS as the system BUT fix the flaws.

Every "ranking" system will always be flawed because HUMANS CREATED IT. That's the point. The inherent flaw of any ranking system is human subjectivity or the subjectivity that humans dictate to the computers making the rankings. The point of a playoff and everyone's goal for having one is the creation of an objective and fair way to determine a national champion or the way to at least say who plays for the National Championship. A playoff with the teams being only the champions of their conference is the only way college football can do it. It can't have wild cards like the NFL as the NFL determines it's wild card births by strictly on the field results. The NCAA is too big and would have to use "ranking" to determine any wild cards and as soon as you put any rankings back into the fold the system becomes flawed again....which is what the people creating a playoff were trying to avoid in the first place.

You want a playoff? Take conference champs only and put them in a tournament. The other teams that don't qualify can still go to bowls. There's your playoff. It may piss some people off but at the end of the day it's the only objective way to do it.