FBS Playoff
by SCKSChief on Jan 9, 2012 12:46 PM CST
Email
PrintAs reported here on everyone's favorite sports network, the leaders of the BCS will meet to discuss the future of the tool that is supposed to decide the NCAA football national champion. Like many of you, I fully understand that this "meeting" is just a bunch of harrumphing and guffawing and slapping each other on the back for another season complete and another season keeping the highly faulty BCS system intact.
The fearless leaders of the enigma officially labeled the "BCS" claim that any and all ideas will be discussed and on the table...whatever that means. I bet it means the same thing as when the President claims that any and all ideas are on the table to fix the economy. We all know the actual translation...of which I shall spare you my rendition. Who buys that? Not this guy.
What this division needs (like every other division of football, college or otherwise has) is a playoff. More of my playoff thoughts after the jump.
I am not an advocate of a plus one. I think that's the coward's way out (you want a playoff? Have a PLAYOFF!). It always reminds me of the scene in Talladega Nights where Ricky Bobby refuses to say "I love crepes" even when the alternative is "I love really thin pancakes".
via richyrocks.files.wordpress.com
It might seem like a stretch, but that's all the plus one is, loosely translating "I love crepes" into "I love really thin pancakes". It doesn't change a whole lot. Currently, the plus one would likely be Oklahoma State versus the winner of tonight's FG competition game.
My plan is this. I would like to see the NCAA grant the FBS a 14 team playoff. I would propose that the games begin in the second week of December, with the top two seeds (determined by the BCS top 14) getting byes. I would have the games be home and home games, where the lower seed travels to the higher seed. There would be an exception to this rule for the Final Four; if you are the lower seed, but won your conference championship where the higher seed did not, you get the home game. An example of this is if Oklahoma State were to play Alabama, OSU would get the home game by virtue of their Big XII title trumping Alabama's higher seed.
This would be the best of both worlds, really. The BCS wouldn't have to admit they've failed, as their system could still determine who gets IN the playoffs, and by default the eventual champion. Then the teams have their shot to prove their worth. This, to me, really emphasizes the importance of the regular season. Now playing for the top 14 is more important than ever. Not only that, can you imagine the advertising cash cow this would be? Who wouldn't be excited to buy second or third round playoff tickets for their favorite school's next game?
Think about the first round match-ups we'd have had this season; Michigan State (13) at Stanford (4), Kansas State (10) at Wisconsin (8), Virginia Tech (12) at Boise State (5) on one side of the bracket and Clemson (14) at Oklahoma State (3), South Carolina (9) at Arkansas (7) and Michigan (11) at Oregon (5) on the other side. Those are AMAZING games...much better than the majority of the bowl games. Frankly, I don't care about conference titles in this scenario. Great, you won the ACC or the Big East...so what? You want in? Win enough games to get into the top 14 (which, the ACC did this year). *Note about the brackets, I'm not a bracket pro but I think that's how it would look.
I just think the excitement for every game would be way more than some meaningless bowl that only excites the schools, the teams and their fans (if that). I think the television ratings would be very high as would the amount of money created.
The timeline (using this calendar year as an example) would have been Round 1 on December 10, Round 2 on December 17, Round 3 on December 23 (unless they want to play on Christmas Eve) and then the Championship game on the 1st. Now, there will undoubtedly be resistance to this so that the kids can have a holiday of some kind. If that's the case, give them a few days around Christmas, play the third round on the 1st and the Championship the following week. If one week isn't enough rest add another and give them two prep weeks for the title game...it really doesn't make it much later than what we currently have.
I don't know. Call me crazy, it won't be the first time. I just wanted to get something out there because this fan is sick to death of the BCS and all the chaos it causes every single year. Let me know what you think. I think it would be a great idea that would make lots of people lots of money and would finally determine a true champion. Hey, if a 3-loss team finds a way to win in that field...God bless them!
**Editing note - post publishing I was made aware that a 10 team field was possible with a play-in game scenario. I much prefer the 10 team model, but was too moronic to figure out how to make the bracket work! Thanks for the heads up, soonercowboy14!!
FanPost are for the voice of the fan and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Crimson and Cream Machine administrators.
17 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
My idea is simple
Do an 8 team playoff system the big 6 conferences, (ACC, B1G,Big 12, SEC, Big East, Pac 12) and the 2 highest ranked non aq teams in the bcs poll. The main rule would be in order for a team to be in the playoff a team MUST win their division and their conference. So pretty much all the conference champions would play each other in order to win a national championship.
Yeah
But Im not so sure they arent going to lose their automatic bid in 2013 so that problem could be taken care of
I like a 10 team playoff
with the Cotton and one other bowl (Capital One?) as play in games and the winners face the 1 and 2 seeds in the BCS bowls. Then, it is just like a normal 8 team playoff, the BCS keeps its bowls and we get a true champion. Everybody wins.
The play-in game I like
I was trying to figure out how to make it a 10 team playoff and that option eluded me. I think I like the 10 teams more than the 14. Regardless, getting away from this broken bowl system has to happen.
I am more a fan of the plus one.
Say what you will about the BCS Championship game (and believe me, I’ve said plenty), but it was as physical a game as there was in college football this year. In your scenario, teams may play as many as 17 games in a season. I think that’s just too much of a physical demand for a lot of these 18, 19 and 20 year old kids, maybe even too much for some of the 21 and 22 year olds. For a lot of the players on the more successful teams, this might almost add one additional season over the course of their college career. I think it’s just too much for a lot of these kids and we’re not even considering at this point how emotionally taxing it would be to pull this off along with all of the other demands, academic and otherwise, that they face as student athletes.
Furthermore, I would hate to do anything to take away from the excitement of the regular season. A full blown playoff would do exactly that. I can’t think of any sport where each week the sense of urgency to win is as great as it is in college football. Go back and look at some of the stories on CCM and the comments posted below them. We’re all living on the edge because it’s practically do or die every week! The college football regular season is unparalleled in any sport, anywhere, and I would hate to jeopardize that. Once the change is made there’s no going back.
My solution would be a +1. Take the top four teams in the final BCS and pit them against each other within the normal BCS bowl structure. This year we would have seen (4) Stanford vs. (1) LSU and (3) OSU vs. (2) Alabama. The two winners could face off in the fifth and final BCS bowl for all the marbles. This would eliminate ALL complaints, as whoever could not make it in to the top 4 of the BCS would not have a legitimate complaint that they are worthy of the national championship. We are seeing smaller schools make runs in to the top four on a semi-regular basis now, so goodbye Congress and goodbye Mr. President, we don’t need you to dictate every facet of our lives.
Also, it’s time to add a fifth site for the BCS bowls. No more double dipping for the national championship game. It’s time Dallas, TX received a BCS Bowl. The Cotton Bowl, Jerryworld (the Cowboys don’t use it in January anyway), or wherever. Our league makes up a very large and successful piece of the college football world, yet we don’t have a bowl of any significance in this region. Why?
And since I’m rambling, I’ll say this. OSU should have been playing last night. Lord knows I would have hated to see it, but right is right and wrong is wrong. Reverse the schedules and outcomes between OU and OSU and the Sooners would have been playing LSU last night. Anyone who denies this is not being intellectually honest. The difference is plain and simple, OSU does not have a football pedigree. Now we have to listen to ‘bama nation and how they have won 52 national championships, or whatever it is they claim.
by SoonerGoneEast on Jan 10, 2012 10:33 AM CST reply actions
Lost me at "take away the excitement of the regular season"
Let me preface with the fact that I’m not trying to sound offended or like a prick. I am just sick, to death, of the BCS.
Now, to the subject line…
How does a playoff do that? If anything games become more important to EVERYONE, not just the creme de la creme. I simply cannot buy into the argument that the regular season is that important anyway because of the two teams that were in the “game” last night. Alabama didn’t even win their own division, let alone their conference.
As to the plus one scenario, the top four is so perverted in the BCS, it isn’t even funny. Tell me how, after getting EMBARRASSED on National Television, LSU did NOT drop below Oklahoma State. It is inconceivable. How far did OU drop when USC embarrassed them? Much farther than two. With all the posturing and angling that takes place in the current system, the plus one doesn’t really alleviate these issues…it simply passes the buck from “who is 1 and who is 2?” and moves it down two notches. When you get to a 10 team model, with a play-in game (like I have stated I actually prefer but was too dumb to figure out the bracket) it becomes increasingly difficult to jockey schools around at that point. At four teams, you get all the politics and jockeying and all that other nonsense that makes the BCS suck…but you get it in a double dose.
I didn't say it takes away the excitement of the regular season,
I said it takes away FROM the excitement of the regular season. Big difference. The season will still be exciting I’m sure, but the sense of urgency will not be the same, much like the NFL where if they have the number one seed locked up a lot of their starters will not see the field in the final regular season game. Same thing in the NBA. That’s when games start to not matter.
I also understand what you’re saying about the posturing and angleing that will continue to take place. Sure we’re STILL going to have it in a +1 system, but expanding to ten teams will not eliminate the politics of this sport either. Just ask the March Madness selection committee.
As far as Alabama being in the game last night, I wholeheartedly agree with you. It was a 1000 times wrong. That was politics, money, whatever. The media was more to blame than the system IMO.
by SoonerGoneEast on Jan 10, 2012 5:24 PM CST up reply actions
And BTW
I failed to mention that I think you make some great points, I just worry if they keep making changes here and there and continue to tweak the system that one day we’ll wake up and won’t recognize our sport any longer! That’s kinda how I feel about the NBA and the NFL. the younger crowd may not understand that concern.
by SoonerGoneEast on Jan 10, 2012 8:05 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
Good Article
I had almost this exact same idea a year or so ago. They could still give the bowl games out to the teams that didn’t make it, or they could use some of the larger bowl games as playoff games.
"I feel sorry for peple who don't drink, when they wake up in the morning thats as good as they are gonna feel all day long." Frank Sinatra
heres a thought
an idea would be to take out the non confrence games to provide a stable conference schedual and then extend the season to provide a week of prep for the 16 yes 16 teams to play using the size of the confrence to determine the number of entries they recive to qualify for the playoff. 3 teams qualify to confrences with more than 12 teams making the confrences with the three qualifiers being the SEC, ACC, B1G, and Pac-12. already making 12 teams with 4 slots left,2 for the BIG-12 and 1 for the Big East and the last for the top team (not in one of the previous confrences) creating a playoff month of 4 weeks. (the month of eather Dec or Jan) and using the other teams with quality records to have the former bowl system.
I want ESpin the whore out of College Football!
The one thing being a lot older has going for it, most of us older have seen more CFB than most younger people have seen web pages.
To get buy in
you will have to include the bowls, which I think would be pretty easy to do in some fashion. Maybe after the first round you start going to Bowl Games, maybe those not invited to the playoff go to Bowls, include the 4 major bowls in the semi finals. It could be worked out. The sticking point I think you have with your plan is the conference champs, I don’t think conference commish’s will buy into this without some assurance that they get some consideration for the winner of their conference regular season or champ game getting an invite, whether their conference sucks or not.
"Nonsense. By all means, move." Doc Holliday, the movie Tombstone.
I say this
because of the almighty dollar…
"Nonsense. By all means, move." Doc Holliday, the movie Tombstone.
I do think
That is will diminish the regular season for those around the country that would have otherwise tuned in to teams like Oklahoma. college football is regional and that would constrict even more with a playoff.
Does anyone watch college B-ball until march madness?
Forget AQ...
Letting AQ status control who makes it to the playoffs is a joke. I like an 8 team playoff but only take the top 8 teams. And if conferences like the Big 10 or Big East have a problem with this then tough luck. Win more games to put your teams into the bracket. I’m tired of hearing how a playoff wouldn’t work unless the AQ status is upheld because conferences like the Big 10 can’t guarantee they will have a team in the Top 8. I’m sorry…I thought the point was to win games and prove you deserve to be there. And teams like Boise State and KSU (and even Arkansas) wouldn’t get snubbed for the likes of “who can travel better but play a crappier game”.
Amen
I whole-heartedly agree that just because you’re a league/conference champ, you shouldn’t get preference over a top team…unless they hold the same records. In an instance where there are a pile of 1-loss teams and there would be 1 or 2 champs sitting just outside the top 8-10, I’d have to say they should get the nod over the like-record, non-champ team.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
