Playoff System

StealthEagle84 · January 2, 2008

OK, I've put quite a bit of thought into this and if I had my way, this is how things would work in college football. The first idea will never work becuase there is too much conference re-aligning and too much movement of money for it to work but remember, this is my dream world. It would consist of an eight team playoff system. There is already 3 conferences that currently have a championship game (Big 12, ACC, SEC). This is where the rest gets tricky. The Big 10 actually has 11 teams, so you would need just one more team to get them a championship game. I would prefer Notre Dame but like I said, this will never happen do to money. If Notre Dame doesn't go, you find someone else (ie Cincy, Pitt, etc). Now to the Pac 10 where you could add Boise State and either Hawaii or Fresno State to give them 12 teams and a conference championship game. The Pac-10 would never go for this b/c they already are against a playoff system, but still just a dream world. You would now have 5 conferences with 12 teams and a conference championship game. The winners of each of these conferences gets an automatic bid (apologies to the Big East but they aren't as good as the rest of these conferences). You would still have a ranking system in order to determine the remaining 3 teams. The way it would work is to take the next three highest ranked teams that didn't win one of those conferences. To determine who is 1, 2, 3, etc., you use the ranking system.

Now to something more practical, you leave everything the way is now, except a playoff. The winners of each current BCS conference (ACC, Big 12, Big East, SEC, Big 10, Pac 10) get automatic bids and you would take the next two highest ranked teams that didn't win their conference. It would look something like this.

(1) Ohio State (auto)

(2) LSU (auto)

(3) V-Tech (auto)

(4) Oklahoma (auto)

(5) Georgia (at-large)

(6) Missouri (at-large)

(7) USC (auto)

(8) West Virginia (auto)

Give some thoughts and feedback on what you think.

KingDL1 · January 2, 2008

It is my understanding that the rest of the BCS conferences with less then 12 football teams are currently working out the details and realignments to bring all up to 12 teams with a conference championship with each conference having two divisions such as an East & West, North & South, or whatever.

RETSO · January 2, 2008

My dream world playoff system.......

starts December 8th ends Jan 7th

top 8 get homefield adv in first round only

rounds 2-4 set up as bowl games (Sugar, Fiesta, Orange, Rose, Cotton, Outback, Chick-fil-a, )

Higher seed picks location...ie LSU selects Sugar for round three game vs VT

11 conferences get auto bid then reseeded based on BCS rankings

5 at large teams selected based on BCS rankings...

this would give the powerhouse Conferences an advantage while giving Cinderalla at least a chance!

1 Ohio State (auto)

2 LSU (auto)

3 Virginia Tech (auto)

4 Oklahoma (auto)

5 Georgia (at large)

6 Missouri (at large)

7 USC (auto)

8 Kansas (at large)

9 West Virginia (auto)

10 Hawaii (auto)

11 Arizona State (at large)

12 Florida at large)

13 BYU (auto)

14 UCF (auto)

15 C Mich (auto)

16 FAU (auto)

StealthEagle84 · January 2, 2008

I think you're looking at too many teams with 16. FAU, UCF, BYU, etc don't have a prayer to beat an LSU, USC, or Georgia. That's why, with the way I've proposed it, that you get two (or three, depending on which system) at large bids. If the Boise State's of the world can convince voters they deserve a shot, they will get one. Plus, I think with the at-large situations, voters would tend to give the little guys a shot and up their voting for the "cinderalla" team.

FirefightnRick · January 2, 2008

I think you're looking at too many teams with 16. FAU, UCF, BYU, etc don't have a prayer to beat an LSU, USC, or Georgia.

No one would pray for Boise last year either. If your not going to included giving EVERYONE a chance then drop back to allowing the same 24 teams fight it out for the same 10 to 12 bowl games like it used to be. Oh, and also allow the money programs like Texas to go back and keep 180 kids on scholarship as well so no one else can get to them.

Rick

RETSO · January 2, 2008

I think you're looking at too many teams with 16. FAU, UCF, BYU, etc don't have a prayer to beat an LSU, USC, or Georgia. That's why, with the way I've proposed it, that you get two (or three, depending on which system) at large bids. If the Boise State's of the world can convince voters they deserve a shot, they will get one. Plus, I think with the at-large situations, voters would tend to give the little guys a shot and up their voting for the "cinderalla" team.

I did tip the scales in favor of the big 6 conferences by allowing the top 8 homefield advantage in round one.

At the end you would have the sacred cows battling it out, however the "non-BCS" would at least have shot, and I am sure at least one would pull an upset every other year or so!

UCF came awful close to beating almighty Texas this year 35-32

FirefightnRick · January 2, 2008

UCF came awful close to beating almighty Texas this year 35-32

Not as close as Arkansas State did, and IN Austin I might add with a now admitted blown call by the conference to boot.

Rick

RETSO · January 2, 2008

Not as close as Arkansas State did, and IN Austin I might add with a now admitted blown call by the conference to boot.
Rick

I agree, an upset would happen, not every year, but it would happen from time to time!

Round one happens Dec 8th (week after conference title games) 16 teams 8 games (top 8 homefield advantage)

Round two week of Dec 15th 8 teams 4 games (Cotton, Outback, Chick-fil-a, Fiesta)

Take two weeks off for the holidays Dec 16-31 (Other bowl games have center stage)

Round three Jan 1st 4 teams 2 games ( Rose, Orange)

Championship Jan 7th (Sugar)

StealthEagle84 · January 2, 2008

I did tip the scales in favor of the big 6 conferences by allowing the top 8 homefield advantage in round one.
At the end you would have the sacred cows battling it out, however the "non-BCS" would at least have shot, and I am sure at least one would pull an upset every other year or so!
UCF came awful close to beating almighty Texas this year 35-32

But look how the big schools have been playing since they've had some time off to rest and get healthy. Texas looked damn good vs. ASU, UGA dominated Hawaii, USC kicked the sh!t out of Illinois, etc. Name one non-BCS conference school that could beat either LSU, USC, OU, or UGA, and I will agree with you on letting the "little-guy" in. And the little guy still has a chance to get an at-large bid, just not an automatic bid. UCF lost to Miss. State, who went 7-5 from the SEC. And you think they can hang with USC or Georgia? You gotta be kidding me.

forevereagle · January 2, 2008

But look how the big schools have been playing since they've had some time off to rest and get healthy. Texas looked damn good vs. ASU, UGA dominated Hawaii, USC kicked the sh!t out of Illinois, etc. Name one non-BCS conference school that could beat either LSU, USC, OU, or UGA, and I will agree with you on letting the "little-guy" in. And the little guy still has a chance to get an at-large bid, just not an automatic bid. UCF lost to Miss. State, who went 7-5 from the SEC. And you think they can hang with USC or Georgia? You gotta be kidding me.

The arguement isn't if the teams can consistently compete right now. If the little guy isn't allowed in, then why play? A chance at a meaningless bowl win? If a coach can pitch winning a conference and having a chance to play for the national title, parity is likely to come sooner. If the little guy has to wait for 1 of 2 at large spots, then they are not likely to get in. There are currently 4 at large bids to the Bc$ and in order for a mid-major to get a bid, they have to be undefeated. How can we, as a little guy, expect a shot at 1 of 2 spaces with those kinds of odds in a biased system. A playoff that includes a chance for everyone is the most fair way to determine the national champion.

Besides, it works ok in basketball, and no one is complaining about that.

UNTflyer · January 2, 2008

But look how the big schools have been playing since they've had some time off to rest and get healthy. Texas looked damn good vs. ASU, UGA dominated Hawaii, USC kicked the sh!t out of Illinois, etc. Name one non-BCS conference school that could beat either LSU, USC, OU, or UGA, and I will agree with you on letting the "little-guy" in. And the little guy still has a chance to get an at-large bid, just not an automatic bid.

Under your system the little guy would have NO chance of getting into the playoffs. They would never be ranked high enough by the sprts writers or coaches. You might as well send all the non BCS schools to DIV I-AA, what else would they have to play for?

yyz28 · January 3, 2008

Any playoff scenaio where all of the DI (or whatever we're calling it this year) conferences has little chance of surviving long term.

...and the argument that FAU doesn't have a prayer against USC is totally flawed.

1. a playoff that includes all conferences system creates parity - every team has a legitimate shot at a title - this will effect recruiting over time and make the conferences more balanced.

2. Stanford. Boise State. Need I say more?

Anything that can be done to correct what is wrong with College football needs to be done. Over the VERY long term, a playoff system that includes everyone will create parity across the board. All 120 teams will have a real shot, conferences will be forced to realign into more regional systems and the games you CARE about seeing will happen.

The bowls can survive as an NIT type of scenario for the many schools who have good years but don't make it to the tourney.

Again - ANY system that doesn't include all of the DIA schools will be flawed, and be as short lived as the BCS will end up being.

...if you don't think that minor changes in rules and systems that create parity don't really mean anything, you need to consider how strange this year was, how many upsets you saw this year, and realize that fewer scolarships were allowed to be handed out this year. That one change has spread the talent around more. The results are self evident. Wait until that rule has 4 years to take effect. Now imagine the parity that a Playoff system then creates.

Yeah... the big conferences will lose power and money in the short term, but even they are starting to see the wisdom. The only Conference that is still vocally a pain in the ass about a playoff system is the Big Ten. It is a matter of time.

"Nobody Cares because it doesn't really mean anything matchups" like OSU v. LSU that produce sagging ratings just prove my point.