Making a case for NCAA Football Playoff

[Gene Honda Civic]

I'm going to try and make a case for a plausible Playoff system for NCAA football that would incorporate the Bowls and the current Conference Championship format. Yes I know I'm living in a dream world.

 

First of all here are the bcs standings from before todays/yesterdays games

Current BCS Standings (4AM Sunday)

1 Oklahoma

2 USC

3 LSU

4 Michigan

5 Ohio State

6 Texas

7 Georgia

8 Florida State

9 Tennessee

10 Miami (FLA)

11 Miami (OH)

12 Iowa

13 Purdue

14 Florida

15 Kansas State

16 Washington St.

17 TCU

18 Bowling Green

19 Boise State

Then here is a projected BCS for tomorrow

1  Oklahoma

  2  LSU

  3  Southern Cal

  4  Michigan

  5  Ohio St

  6  Texas

  7  Florida St

  8  Tennessee

  9  Miami FL

10  Kansas St

11  Georgia

12  Miami OH

13  Iowa

14  Purdue

15  Florida 

16  Washington St

17  TCU

18  Boise St

19  Bowling Green

 

First off all we see that not one team has dropped from the top 19 (Bowling Green is likely to drop farther, the projection I'm using is only acurate for the top teams). I propose a 16 team playoff. Seeded exclusively by BCS-type ranking. To limit the emphasis on the "BIG6" conferences, and allow those from "mid-majors" to participate, I propose that only 3 teams from a given conference can compete in the tourney. (the current BCS has a limit of 2).

 

That would eliminate Florida and Purdue from the tourney. Eligible teams would have to have 9 wins(like the BCS) Florida would again be eliminated.

 

The top 16 would match-up like this.

First Round

#1 OU vs. #18 Boise St.................#8 Tennessee vs. #9 Miami(FL)

#2 LSU vs. #17 TCU.....................#7 Florida St vs. #10 Kansas St

#3 USC vs. #13 Iowa....................#6 Texas vs. #11 Georgia

#4 Michigan vs. #16 Washington St......#5 Ohio St vs. #12 Miami(OH)

 

The system would yield 15 games.... 15 bowls would need to buy into this system... The top four(current BCS bowls would get the championship game in rotating years)

 

The current bowl system would still exist... Minus the 15 that are tied in with the playoffs... There are currently 28 bowls... that leaves 13 bowls for those teams that don't qualify for the playoff (NIU, Northwestern, Bowling Green). It is likely, no necsessary to create a few new bowl games to accomodate little travel for the first round games. A Windy-City bowl @ Soldier Field for the Michigan/WSU game for example.. USC plays in Diego or LA.... LSU in Louisaina... etc....

 

Games would start next weekend... 2 on Friday(12/12)... 6 on Saturday(12/13)...

Second round would be more spread out the next week.... 1 game Thursday(12/18)(between the friday winners) 1 game Friday(12/19), and 2 on saturday(12/20).

 

Final Four is where I lose the abilty to really keep bowl traditions. There's 2 options

 

(Option I)Games would be played on Saturday(12/27) with a Championship on (1/3)

 

(Option II)or they could be a little later going with a traditional (1/1) date. I'd prefer the latter. With the rose Bowl always having a new years Day game, Unless it is the Championship game. The Championship would be held on any day from (1/8) to (1/10)

 

In the second scenario this would leave plenty of time, after finals are over and over the Holiday season for those other bowl games to be held between 12/20 and 1/1

 

Even in my scenario the season is only extended by 6 days at the most. The drawbacks would be travel, I'd try to limit that with regional First round games for Higher seeds. Two teams would end up playing 16 games total. IMHO, the drawbacks of this system do not even come close to outweighing the Benifits.

 

the Champ Is truly decided on the field. Everyone has a chance to participate. Bowl sytem is in-tact, ok Modified, but i think traditions and the all-mighty dollar can be satisfied.

 

3 Big Ten

3 SEC

3 Big 12

2 Pac 10

1 ACC

1 Big East

1 MAC

1 Conference USA

1 WAC

 

The 2 main obstacles I see is TV and the Individual bowls. One network, or maybe a partership, ABC & ESPN, is going to have to step up with some BIG $$$ to get this thing at all off the ground.

 

 

Post your Opinions --- any ways that you could make an improvement to my plan--- any major flaws I may have missed --- The current BCS system runs through 2006 so I know this is a ways off, but I couldn't sleep and this seemed like as good of a way as any to harness my insomnia.

[DBAHO]

U've been workin hard Cheat I'll give u props for that. Unfortunately I have no idea about College Football and the Playoff Series etc. but u idea has got some merit to it. I know that heaps of ppl were happy to see Oklahoma lose today though, stupid Sooners.

[doubleM23]

We had a discussion like this earlier at WSI... I'm not going to reitterate the whole shpiel (cwsox could do that better, he wrote a very eloquent piece against the whole concept of a play-off), but it really isn't needed in football. That, and how many games can you expect these kids to play? Most Div-1 teams play about 13 now. Adding 3-4 more for a play-off... You would have to drop some regular season games which would just hurt the smaller schools more, anyway. There is no need for a play-off, nor is there need for the BCS. College football was fine the way it was.

[Spiff]

We had a discussion like this earlier at WSI...  I'm not going to reitterate the whole shpiel (cwsox could do that better, he wrote a very eloquent piece against the whole concept of a play-off), but it really isn't needed in football.  That, and how many games can you expect these kids to play?  Most Div-1 teams play about 13 now.  Adding 3-4 more for a play-off... You would have to drop some regular season games which would just hurt the smaller schools more, anyway.  There is no need for a play-off, nor is there need for the BCS.  College football was fine the way it was.

No, no it wasn't. Because when you had s*** like Michigan and Nebraska sharing the title everyone said OH MAN I wish we could see who the real best team was. That's what the BCS is for, finding the best two teams and matching them up to decide the national champion.

[SuperSteve]

Um, keep in mind these kids are student athletes. They have finals now. They would not even take some of their finals prob if they were worrying about a tourny. I would also say cut the tourny down to eight teams. Sixteen is way too many.

[DonkeyKongerko]

I think the BCS is a noble idea but no mathematical formula is perfect. There's a pretty good chance right now that the #1 AP and ESPN team in the country is not going to play for the national title.

[doubleM23]

I think the BCS is a noble idea but no mathematical formula is perfect.  There's a pretty good chance right now that the #1 AP and ESPN team in the country is not going to play for the national title.

Well, a good justification for that is that the human polls suck because you pretty much can never drop unless you lose. They really don't take much into account how teams played except looking at the W or L. Anyways, what's more a travesty? Oklahoma, the #1 team in the nation for months being denied a Sugar Bowl berth or USC, the #1 team for a week?

[Gene Honda Civic]

here is the a link to the Colgate Football team.. They have played 14 games... they have advanced to the semi-finals.... this means they have 1 or 2 more games... by my math that makes 15 or 16... those last games definately fall during finals..

 

If Div I-AA can handle it why not Div I-A?

[DonkeyKongerko]

The I-AA playoffs have been around for 25 years or so. I'm not saying that playoffs are not the best way to determine a champion, just that this is the way it has always been done and the system is not that flexible to change. There is alot of money from alot of cities, schools, and companies that has gone into bowl games for a long time. It also gives alot of lower ranked I-A schools a shot at a nationally televised game with a prize. Also, just like in the bowl system the playoff system would leave out the bubble teams. At least with bowl games, more teams get to play a postseason game. Playoffs would dramatically reduce that number.

[AssHatSoxFan]

its not a matter of how many games they play its a matter of how much money they would lose by messing with the system... there will never be a perfect answer but like they say it just gets more people talking about college football and that cannot hurt the NCAA

[1549]

I'm going to try and make a case for a plausible Playoff system for NCAA football that would incorporate the Bowls and the current Conference Championship format.  Yes I know I'm living in a dream world.

 

First of all here are the bcs standings from before todays/yesterdays games

 

Then here is a projected BCS for tomorrow

 

 

First off all we see that not one team has dropped from the top 19 (Bowling Green is likely to drop farther, the projection I'm using is only acurate for the top teams).  I propose a 16 team playoff.  Seeded exclusively by BCS-type ranking.  To limit the emphasis on the "BIG6" conferences, and allow those from "mid-majors" to participate, I propose that only 3 teams from a given conference can compete in the tourney.  (the current BCS has a limit of 2).

 

That would eliminate Florida and Purdue from the tourney.  Eligible teams would have to have 9 wins(like the BCS)  Florida would again be eliminated.

 

The top 16 would match-up like this.

First Round

#1 OU vs. #18 Boise St.................#8 Tennessee vs. #9 Miami(FL)

#2 LSU vs. #17 TCU.....................#7 Florida St vs. #10 Kansas St

#3 USC vs. #13 Iowa....................#6 Texas vs. #11 Georgia

#4 Michigan vs. #16 Washington St......#5 Ohio St vs. #12 Miami(OH)

 

The system would yield 15 games.... 15 bowls would need to buy into this system...  The top four(current BCS bowls would get the championship game in rotating years) 

 

The current bowl system would still exist... Minus the 15 that are tied in with the playoffs... There are currently 28 bowls... that leaves 13 bowls for those teams that don't qualify for the playoff (NIU, Northwestern, Bowling Green).  It is likely, no necsessary to create a few new bowl games to accomodate little travel for the first round games.  A Windy-City bowl @ Soldier Field  for the Michigan/WSU game for example..  USC plays in Diego or LA.... LSU in Louisaina... etc....

 

Games would start next weekend... 2 on Friday(12/12)... 6 on Saturday(12/13)...

Second round would be more spread out the next week.... 1 game Thursday(12/18)(between the friday winners) 1 game Friday(12/19), and 2 on saturday(12/20).

 

Final Four is where I lose the abilty to really keep bowl traditions. There's 2 options

 

(Option I)Games would be played on Saturday(12/27) with a Championship on (1/3)

 

(Option II)or they could be a little later going with a traditional (1/1) date. I'd prefer the latter. With the rose Bowl always having a new years Day game, Unless it is the Championship game. The Championship would be held on any day from (1/8) to (1/10)

 

In the second scenario this would leave plenty of time, after finals are over and over the Holiday season for those other bowl games to be held between 12/20 and 1/1

 

Even in my scenario the season is only extended by 6 days at the most.  The drawbacks would be travel, I'd try to limit that with regional First round games for Higher seeds.  Two teams would end up playing 16 games total.  IMHO, the drawbacks of this system do not even come close to outweighing the Benifits.

 

the Champ Is truly decided on the field.  Everyone has a chance to participate. Bowl sytem is in-tact, ok Modified, but i think traditions and the all-mighty dollar can be satisfied.

 

3 Big Ten

3 SEC

3 Big 12

2 Pac 10

1 ACC

1 Big East

1 MAC

1 Conference USA

1 WAC

 

The 2 main obstacles I see is TV and the Individual bowls.  One network, or maybe a partership, ABC & ESPN, is going to have to step up with some BIG $$$ to get this thing at all off the ground.

 

 

Post your Opinions --- any ways that you could make an improvement to my plan--- any major flaws I may have missed --- The current BCS system runs through 2006 so I know this is a ways off, but I couldn't sleep and this seemed like as good of a way as any to harness my insomnia.

Nice research, but I don't see a playoff of more than 4 teams ever being implemented at the Div-1A level. If a playoff was put in place, I would guess three games, with the 4 major bowls rotating in and out.

 

In my opinion, the old way of using the two major polls was the best. In 1997, Michigan and Nebraska split. To this day, I have never heard a Michigan fan complain, and the only two nebraska fans I know had no complaints about the joint national championship.

 

The old system puts more emphasis on winning the conference, which I believe, is how it should be. It also would make bowl games more interesting. Lets say the BCS did not exist, then the 3 teams playing for the championship would be playing in 3 different games, making 3 games very important, and therefore popular draws.

 

Granted it is possible that all 3 teams would win leaving the whole thing up a vote among coaches and the press, but the coaches and press's votes will likely mirror the popular vote. So most people would end up happy.

 

The bowls would get to keep their alliances too, which adds to tradition. I think the college game should stay away from chasing money, leave that to the pros. College football is all about tradition to me, and great rivalries, like a

Big-10/Pac-10 Rose Bowl (which hasn't happened in 3 years now).

 

Another adjustment I would like to see in college football is a merger of the WAC and MC (I know the MC broke off from the wac), and a merger of Conference-USA and the MAC. Then those two large conferences would be each broken down in two to divisions (like the Big 12, SEC, and MAC) and the winners of each division would play for the conference title, then the winners of those two conferences would play eachother in a bowl game played on New Years.

 

That way the better teams in those conferences (Hawaii, Boise St., Bowling Green) could get some real national attention.

 

So no to the BCS, and No to a playoff.

[Spiff]

If you think college football is not about money, just look at how much money you get for winning a BCS game.

[Chisoxfn]

BCS is so much better then the previous system. Their ain't no ties in sports, ties are bulls***. At least the BCS gives a clear cut winner. I don't want to see join national champs. I would like a playoff system, but one with about 8 teams max and you got to still involve the bowls for other teams.

 

I think the best way to do it would be to use the BCS bowls as the playoffs for the national championship and then set up a few more bowls as playoff games. This way those 8 teams still get big bucks and the other teams get bucks and you only force two extra games. I'd probably dump championship games for the leagues to clear it and have the playoffs during the players Holiday break.

[Gene Honda Civic]

If you think college football is not about money, just look at how much money you get for winning a BCS game.

you don't have to win

[greasywheels121]

Um, keep in mind these kids are student athletes. They have finals now. They would not even take some of their finals prob if they were worrying about a tourny. I would also say cut the tourny down to eight teams. Sixteen is way too many.

True, everyone forgets that. Something needs to be done though. Like you said, an 8 team playoff wouldn't be bad. I think that'd be great for the game. It wouldn't cause as much controversy.

[SuperSteve]

The bowls would get to keep their alliances too, which adds to tradition.  I think the college game should stay away from chasing money, leave that to the pros.  College football is all about tradition to me, and great rivalries, like a

Big-10/Pac-10 Rose Bowl (which hasn't happened in 3 years now).

You got your wish. I assume USC and UM will play in the Rose Bowl now.

[CrimsonWeltall]

A 16-team playoff would be way too long.

Cut it down to 4 teams, maybe 6.

 

Well, a good justification for that is that the human polls suck because you pretty much can never drop unless you lose. They really don't take much into account how teams played except looking at the W or L.

 

No, that's what the computers do. None of the computers account for margin of victory, so winning by 1 every game is just as good as winning by 40. Humans can account for teams like OU getting raped but 14 point underdogs.

[Gene Honda Civic]

A 16-team playoff would be way too long.

Cut it down to 4 teams, maybe 6.

 

 

 

No, that's what the computers do. None of the computers account for margin of victory, so winning by 1 every game is just as good as winning by 40. Humans can account for teams like OU getting raped but 14 point underdogs.

Oklahoma -- even with that debacle last night -- should have the largest margin of victory of anyone in the counrty --- because of the way the raped thier opponent the entire season... There is margin of victory factor-- in the two human polls -- which are largely overeactive..

 

USC can't complain -- they lost to CAL --Who was crushed by that same Kansas St team...

[Spiff]

you don't have to win

Well yes but you get considerably more if you do, the fact that you still get a ton just for getting there only furthers the point.

[1549]

BCS is so much better then the previous system.  Their ain't no ties in sports, ties are bulls***.  At least the BCS gives a clear cut winner.  I don't want to see join national champs.  I would like a playoff system, but one with about 8 teams max and you got to still involve the bowls for other teams. 

 

I think the best way to do it would be to use the BCS bowls as the playoffs for the national championship and then set up a few more bowls as playoff games.  This way those 8 teams still get big bucks and the other teams get bucks and you only force two extra games.  I'd probably dump championship games for the leagues to clear it and have the playoffs during the players Holiday break.

There might be a tie for #1 this year.

 

If USC beats Michigan (which they wont ) there will be another tie this year, because the writers poll does not have to agree with the BCS game. Therefore unless the Writers change their minds or if USC loses USC will remain atop of that poll and we will once again have a tie.

[Gene Honda Civic]

Well yes but you get considerably more if you do, the fact that you still get a ton just for getting there only furthers the point.

Sugar bowl teams get 14-17 MIL

 

ESPN explain BCS money situation

 

This coming season, BCS leagues will receive between $11.78 - 14.67 million depending on the conference affiliation of the at-large participants. Should the at-large participants come from outside the original BCS conferences -- ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10 or SEC -- those participants will receive $13.78 million. If one or both at-large selections come from within the original BCS group, the conference shall receive $13.54 million for the first participant and $4.5 million for the second participant from that same league. The remaining dollars (the difference between $13.54 million and $4.5 million) will be split among the BCS conferences.

 

I don't quite know what the difference is between the sugar bowl site and the BCS info... I think that is last years info.... So just increase the Monetary amount...

It doesn't matter if you win or lose...

 

Check out the Outback bowl site... it keeps crashing my computer though... it explains the disparity between BCS as non BCS schools..

[doubleM23]

If you think college football is not about money, just look at how much money you get for winning a BCS game.

Not just that, look how much you get for losing a BCS game.