The reason why NCAA College Football is a joke

[Warner2BruceTD]

Real talk...I always hated guys who proposed a playoff system involving all conference champions, saying that was fair. Oh yeah, it's fair to give the fuckin 4-loss Sun Belt champion a spot over a one-loss team in the SEC or Big XII because their competition was stacked.

All FBS college football teams are not created equal...and for that reason, those lower level teams will never compete.

I just have a serious problem with teams going unbeaten, and winning nothing. Utah twice, Boise a few years ago, etc.

Create a fair playoff for everybody, or split them up.

 

[NAHSTE]

I usually stay out of these threads. I don't think there is any reason you can say that makes College Football a joke. It's deeply flawed in some ways but in other ways it gives you more than any other sport on the planet. At it's core, college football is a beautiful thing. I understand the constant clamoring for change, but if it never changes, I'll still live for CFB Saturdays, and will attend every LSU game I can get my tickets for, and there's millions of people just like me in ~30 other states. You can bet your ass the powers that be know this. If they never change, they'll still make a shit ton of money because nobody can turn their back on such a wonderful game.

 

[St. Francisco]

And how exactly would a 4 team playoff work if you do it by conference champions?

Pac-10
SEC
ACC
Big 10
Big 12
WAC
...

He's saying take the top four conference champions as according to the BCS...we've had many arguments over this point back at MM. I'm personally for taking the top eight teams in the BCS standings.

 

[Senser81]

He's saying take the top four conference champions as according to the BCS...we've had many arguments over this point back at MM. I'm personally for taking the top eight teams in the BCS standings.

I'm personally for letting every college football team into the tournament. Start it at the beginning of the year...you lose and your season is done. The play-in game can be Appalachian State vs. Michigan.

Oh wait...thats kinda how it already is.

 

[ram29jackson]

Only one team has lost their first game and won the national championship in the last 25 years.

its going to happen a little more often. national champs-so called- dont go undefeated anymore- credit to the teams who bother to schedule good non conference competition.

 

[Cryolemon]

it really is a useless argument......its never going to change.....at not any time soon.

That's a very defeatist attitude lol.

I think a 4 or 8 team playoff would be the fairest way. Where to get the teams from is a different argument.

 

[Senser81]

Dude, in 100% seriousness...what do you find in Avril Lavernge to be attractive?

 

[Fox1994]

I hate when people say this.

College Football is the sport where the least amount of games "count".

-Every team in all of the non BCS conf. are playing entire schedules of games that don't "count" for anything, because even if they go unbeaten, they can't win a national title.

-Essentially, as soon as any of the BCS teams lose once, there is a good chance no more of their games will "count".

-Once they lose twice, the remaining schedule is a virtual lock to be meaningless.

-With each week that passes, you have diminishing returns in terms of games that "count", with less and less each week, and by the last few weeks, you are lucky if you get more than two or three games that "count".

College Football is the only sport where you can win every game you play, and win nothing.

College Fooball, "A few games count!"

^FTMFW!

And every year I scream for a four team playoff involving conference champions, which would allow those powerhouse mid-majors a shot at the National Title...but nobody seems to listen. They are too hard up for 8 and 16 team playoffs.

Thing is, much as I love SC, a 2-loss SC would get into your playoff with an undefeated Utah on the outside looking in. I don't quite understand the "+1" idea, but I think my idea is similar:

Twelve-team playoff with top six BCS teams playing in the Rose Bowl, the Sugar Bowl, the Orange Bowl, and the Fiesta Bowl depending on conference allegiance. Of course, the bowl left out will be reserved for the NC.

A second-tier bowl (probably Gator or Cotton, but maybe also Capital One, etc.) gets use later. Also, HB/S Ernie "The Elmira Express" Davis won a NC at the Cotton. Y'all should see that movie. "The Express" It's exceptional. . . Or atleast I thought so.

But I digress.

Anyway. Seeding/games:

# 1 team vs # 12 team
# 2 team vs # 11 team
# 3 team vs # 10 team
# 4 team vs # 9 team
# 5 team vs # 8 team
# 6 team vs # 7 team

Top six teams are at home, obviously. Using 2005-2006 final rankings.

# 1 Texas vs # 12 Florida
# 2 USC vs # 11 Notre Dame
# 3 Penn State vs # 10 Alabama
# 4 Ohio State vs # 9 UCLA
# 5 West Virginia # 8 TCU
# 6 LSU vs # 7 Virginia Tech

Let's say the winners are 1 Texas, 4 OSU, 8 TCU, 7 VT, 11 Notre Dame, and 10 Alabama are the winners. (These teams won their bowl games that year and it means we have some conference variety. . . Some of the teams picked as losers also won their games, but we're letting that go for the conference variety angle.)

The top teams' conference allegiances determine the bowls, as aforementioned.

# 1 Texas vs # 11 Notre Dame in the Fiesta Bowl
# 4 Ohio State vs # 10 Alabama in the Rose Bowl
# 7 Virginia Tech vs # 8 TCU in the Orange Bowl

This is where things get hairy. Let's say # 1 Texas, # 10 'Bama, and # 8 TCU move on, because Texas won the NC in real life and for the sake of variety and the underdog.

Texas gets a bye. In another system, maybe they'd have gotten it earlier. . . say the NFL's system.

Moving right along. . .
# 8 TCU vs # 10 'Bama in the Cotton Bowl

TCU wins for sake of the story. They have homefield advantage, kinda.

# 1 Texas vs # 8 TCU in the National Championship at the Sugar Bowl. Who wins at this point is semantics, I'm just using this to demonstrate my system. It's not perfect, but in defense of the NC being played at the Sugar, besides the fact that the NCAA rotates the championship at each BCS Bowl, it gives us a neutral field in this run-through.

What do you guys think? As aforementioned, it's not perfect, but I think it's unique. I haven't seen anything like it. Perhaps a sixteen-team one would be more realistic, but this leaves-in the incentive of a high ranking :tocktock:, as well as allowing some measure of variety.

 

[Fox1994]

I'd say do it like this, to make things more equal:

#1 vs #6
#2 vs #5
#3 vs #4
#7 vs #12
#8 vs #11
#9 vs #10.

But that's just my opinion.

Ya, I just went with how I usually see that stuff scheduled. Not that it's fair, but that's how it is. They could do it like the NFL does it - give a BYE to the top four teams and let the other eight play with the higher-seeded at home. Then their winners play the BYE week teams. . .

 

[Woy]

I found this on an old site I posted on, covering my area's local sports and such. This is a year old.

Wow, what a year in college football. I picked a Florida-Oklahoma national championship, and although unfairly to Texas, it looks like I have a great chance at being right.

People always ask about when we're going to get a playoff and what not, and I thought about the subject of a playoff. I created a sort of complex playoff, but if you read through it, it's really easy to follow along. I doubt that the NCAA would consider this, but I believe this could challenge "March Madness" in excitement. So here it is; my proposed playoff system.

At first glance after the season, what do you see? You usually pay attention to the top ten teams ranked, while 11-25 don't get as much love. In fact, no one really seems to remember the bottom of the AP Top 25 anymore. My proposed system will change all that. As soon as the regular season ends in the first weekend in December, the final AP Top 25 will come out. The teams ranked in this poll will advance to the FBS playoffs. That's right, no more controversial conference championships. After the final regular season game, the #24 and #25 ranked teams will play in a Wednesday night game to determine who makes the official bracket; kind of like a NCAA tournament play-in game, perhaps? Once that game's over, the real fun begins.

The winner of that game will take on the #9 team in the Top 25. The matchups will be played on the Saturday of the same week of the play-in game and the games will go as follows: #9 vs. #24/25 | #10 vs. #23 | #11 vs. #22 | #12 vs. #21 | #13 vs. #20 | #14 vs. #19 | #15 vs. #18 | #16 vs. #17 | All of these games will be held at current bowl site such as the New Orleans Bowl, Ponsettia Bowl, MPC Computers Bowl, etc. The winners will advance to the next part of the bracket and the losers kiss their championship dreams goodbye.

What happened to the #1 through #8 ranked teams? They all got first round byes. Once the first round ends, the following Saturday the #1 team will take on the winner of the #16/17 matchup; #2 will take on the winner of the #15/18 matchup, and so on. You might be asking, why wouldn't you just re-rank the teams after the first round? Hey, the NCAA basketball tournament doesn't say, "hey we had a 5/12 upset. Why don't we give the #1 seed the #12 team to face instead of the #8?" That would take out the potential bracket games that the NCAA basketball tournament has.

After that, there would be only eight teams. You should know the drill now; the games in this round will be played on the following Saturday and be played at bowl game sites such as the Cotton, Outback, Sugar, and Fiesta Bowls. Then you are at your Final Four teams. These games would be held at the Rose Bowl and the Orange Bowl; as I believe they have the most tradition out of all the BCS bowls.

Finally you have your championship game. Instead of doing what the BCS does now; with two games being held at the site of the Fiesta Bowl or any other BCS bowl, find a neutral site like the Super Bowl does. I believe this system would determine a true national champion.

Definitely a different idea, just wanna hear some thoughts.

 

[Cryolemon]

Dude, in 100% seriousness...what do you find in Avril Lavernge to be attractive?

Because I do

To me, anything over 8 teams would be overkil.

I agree, anything over 8 teams adds too many games for one thing. Where those 8 teams would come from is an entirely different argument. All I will say on that is that I think any unbeaten team with a strength of schedule above a certain amount should get a playoff place.

 

[St. Francisco]

I found this on an old site I posted on, covering my area's local sports and such. This is a year old.



Definitely a different idea, just wanna hear some thoughts.

Hmm...an interesting idea for sure. On one hand, it does devalue the regular season, but on the other hand, it makes for a very exciting postseason NCAA basketball style where more than just a handful of teams would be involved.

 

[Fox1994]

I liked it.

 

[Bear Pand]

I gotta ask, why does the topic of the BCS (which has always been criticized as flawed because another one-loss team should have an equal chance at the NC [we all remember Miami, Oregon, Texas last year] or due to an undefeated small school not getting a chance [Boise St, Utah, possiby BYU this year]) ALWAYS have some wackjobs who want to implement a 12, 16, 24, 32, some other stupid number playoff?

I always thought the college football season was great, but marred by the fact that teams that actually deserve the right to play for the NC got it taken away by computers and polls. I never heard the argument that say the 18th ranked team last year needed an opportunity to face Florida, or that the winner of the weak ACC conference last year deserved a shot at a title.

To me, anything over 8 teams would be overkill just because people want CFB to be like March Madness or the NFL.....when it isn't. The NFL doesn't have 119 teams. And college basketball's season is so meaningless that trying to make the college football season, quite possibly the best regular season in all of sports, more like that is downright retarded. I'd even be happy with a 4 team playoff.

I agree and to take it even further I think anything over 4 teams would be overkill. I can't remember a time when there was 5+ teams who deserved a shot. People just have this weird fantasy with seeing huge playoff fields. I don't see how a 16 team playoff is better than the system we have now.