NCAA Football Playoff System

[OGpistolpete]

After this year of college football, it got me thinking about a playoff system, and I know it got everyone else thinking about a playoff system instead of the BCS system. In English, I was recently assigned to write a persuasive essay, convincing the reader that a playoff system for college football would be better than the current BCS system. I have been thinking about how to include every bowl that is currently there, and how incorporate it in with the current standings. I was hoping to have all of you guys voice your opinions on the matter, and perhaps come up with some potiential ideas.

So far, this is my solution to the problem. First, there will be the same amount of teams in the bowls, since I have kept all the bowls. I also tried to incorporate it in with the rankings and standings of this current state. I am basing this off before Missouri and West Virginia lost. So basically, first we have a 16-team playoff, featuring the top 16 teams in the BCS Poll Rankings. So if this were intact this year, it would look like this.

Outback Bowl: #1 Missouri vs. #16 Clemson

Insight Bowl: #5 Kansas vs. #12 Hawaii

International Bowl: #8 USC vs. #9 Oklahoma

Chick-fil-A Bowl: #3 Ohio State vs. #14 Tennessee

Gaylord Hotel’s Music City Bowl: #4 Georgia vs. #13 Arizona State

Brut Sun Bowl: #6 Virginia Tech vs. #11 Boston College

AT&T Cotton Bowl: #7 LSU vs. #10 Florida

GMAC Bowl: #2 West Virginia vs. #15 Illinois

Now, I will just flip a die to decide the winner of each game, and progress them through the playoff system.

Orange Bowl: #1 Missouri vs. #12 Hawaii

Capital One Bowl: #8 USC vs. #3 Ohio State

Gator Bowl: #4 Georgia vs. #6 Virginia Tech

Sugar Bowl:#7 LSU vs. #15 Illinois

Now it is down to 8 teams, and 4 bowls. Of course, the Orange Bowl and Sugar Bowl are making appearances here. Just like it used to be (or still is I can't remember), one year the Fiesta Bowl is the national championship, and then the next it is the Sugar Bowl, and then the Orange Bowl, and then the Rose Bowl, the two bowls that are in the quarter-finals will alternate, so perhaps next year the Orange Bowl will stay, but it will then be the Fiesta Bowl, and then after that it will be the Rose Bowl and Fiesta Bowl, while the Orange and Sugar Bowls are where the semi-final games are played. Get the drift? I hope so. Let's move on to the next round shall we...

Rose Bowl: #12 Hawaii vs. #8 USC

Fiesta Bowl: #4 Georgia vs. #15 Illinois

Hm...odd asortment there hm? all of the higher seeds have fallen, except for #4 Georgia. But it just shows that these teams are toughening it out all the way until the end! But finally, we have our BCS National Championship match up...

BCS National Championship: #8 USC vs. 4 Georgia

Now...even though I did just flip a coin, this isn't a ridecoulus national championship match up now is it? I mean, these are two teams from arguably the two hardest conferences in the NCAA, and they are going to decide who the national champion truly is...not bad at all! Now for the hell of it, let's just find out who won the national championship in this random coin-flipping NCAA FBS Championship Tournament! And the winner is...#4 Georgia!

But moving on, now what happens to the other bowls you ask? Well, it looks a little something like this...

TI = Tournament Ineligible

Brut Sun Bowl: C-USA Winner vs. ACC #1 TI

Bell Helicopter’s Armed Forces Bowl: Pac-10 #1 TI vs. Big Ten #2 TI

PetroSun Independence Bowl: C-USA #2 vs. Big XII #1 TI

Valero Alamo Bowl: SEC #1 TI vs. Big XII #2 TI

Sheraton Hawaii: WAC Winner vs. Pac-10 #2 TI

Pioneer Las Vegas: MWC Winner vs. SEC #2 TI

R+L Carriers New Orleans Bowl: Sun Belt Winner vs. Big East #2 TI

Motor City Bowl: MAC Winner vs. Big 10 #1 TI

AutoZone Liberty Bowl: WAC #2 vs. C-USA #2

Meinke Car Care Bowl: MAC #2 vs. Big XII #3 TI

Emerald Bowl: SEC #3 TI vs. Big 10 #4 TI

Champs Sports Bowl: Pac-10 #3 TI vs. Big East #3 TI

Texas Bowl: WAC #3 vs. SEC #4 TI

Pacific Life Holiday Bowl: C-USA #3 vs. ACC #3 TI

New Mexico Bowl: Pac-10 #4 TI vs. Big XII #4 TI

Papajohns.com Bowl: Big East #3 TI vs. ACC #2 TI

Pionsetta Bowl: Navy/Army vs. MWC #2

Now, I definitely have not found a good way to use the rest of the bowls, so I just came up with that on the spot. I am hoping you guys are give your opinions on my system, and try your best to make it better with your own ideas!

Edited December 2, 2007 by SKA

[buck...]

in my opinion the other bowls aren't needed. too many as is, but since they make money off them, that bout best way to do it. that would be the way to do it. The other teams would be in consolations games more the less, and the schools and stadiums and ncaa still make money. They only problem you run into is mainly the rose bowl. they are the ones that want to give up the current set up the least with the bowls. The thing you would need to figure out is when they play and the dates. including the consolation games.

[Mofoticon]

I feel like anything more than a 8 team playoff would just take far too much away from the regular season and it's due or die mentality in most games. I think a 4 team and 1 system is the best way to go, with 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3, then the winners play each other the next week for the title....this is also the most likely to happen, IMO

[buck...]

only problem is you would have to get as many bowls involve as possible.

[Lowerdeck]

I feel like anything more than a 8 team playoff would just take far too much away from the regular season and it's due or die mentality in most games. I think a 4 team and 1 system is the best way to go, with 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3, then the winners play each other the next week for the title....this is also the most likely to happen, IMO

Why? Because your Ohio State couldn't handle a bigger tournament? They need to get lucky only once to hit a national championship game?

[HailtotheYo]

I feel like anything more than a 8 team playoff would just take far too much away from the regular season and it's due or die mentality in most games.

Right, you know because the do or die mentality really fits in a year like this right ? I mean, when so many teams 'died' and now we're left with a system that allows computers and biased voters to decide who DID, then the system above takes too much away ? PUH-LEASE.

8-12 teams would be great, with the other 'top' finishing teams getting a bowl game or something. That would be great.

[DMN in the House]

As long as the Rose Bowl, the Pac 10, and the Big 10 hold out (and they will, they have no reason to relent), there will not be a playoff. Besides, anything more than 4-8 teams is too much, especially if you aren't willing to give every conference champion an automatic bid. Take the top 8 BCS teams, maybe make a provision for a 'mid major' (you wouldn't need one for Notre Dame, as they'd make it into the top 8 of the BCS if they were deserving anyway), and you might have something. You can't get rid of the other bowls either, because they make too much money, are very important to the cities that host them in terms of revenue, and are important to the institutions in terms of revenue, as well as recruiting and advertising. There's too much at stake, especially for smaller schools and bowl hosting communities, to just get rid of them. You have to find a way to incorporate them.

If you went with the Top 8 BCS teams, I'd like to see something where the top 2 seeds get home games, the other four teams play in two of the current BCS bowls, with the semis in the remaining two BCS bowls (rotate them every year), and the National Championship game in one of the two BCS bowls that hosted first round games (again, rotating). This would keep the importance of the BCS bowls (to a certain degree, but they'd lose no more than having one of the lesser BCS games anyway. This really would only hurt the Rose Bowl, due to the history/prestige. Arguably the Sugar Bowl takes a hit unless it hosts a Semi as well, but that only matters one every four years, when they're the opening round bowl without the title game), give us a playoff, and retain the 'impartiality' of the BCS.

Edited December 2, 2007 by DMN

[HailtotheYo]

Absolutely .... and this is why I hate people saying that it would be 'too hard' to convert. Bullshit, it's so easy it's pathetic. There are SEVERAl models out there that would take into account the 'bowl history' and give us a true champion.

Hell, make it 12 teams. Now, there are 11 conferences .... only SIX of them are "BCS" conferences. That means that OVER HALF of the schools that play football in 1-A ARE NOT 'bcs' caliber as predicated by those that have control. Horse shit ain't it. Anyway, give the six BCS conference schools the automatic bid. Now, we've got six teams left. Use the current "must be 12th in the BCS" for the other five conference champions. Maybe even put a win qualifier in there like 10/11 wins gets you in the playoffs too. This time around we'd get Hawaii by virtue of the BCS rule, and then BYU/UCF by virtue of the win rule I propose. After that, use the BCS rankings to determine the rest of the field. That's THREE non-conference champions, non-division winners that get a chance at the top prize. That's in no way shape or form any different than giving a winnning 'non bcs' school a chance. The BCS allows for the former much more than the latter.

So our playoff field this year would look like this. (before today's releasing of the new BCS standings)

VT, OU, WV, OSU, USC, LSU, UCF, BYU, Hawaii, UGA, Kansas, and either Florida or Mizzou.

In current BCS order that'd be (of course this would change after today)

Mizzou

WV

OSU

UGA

Kansas

VT

LSU

USC

OU

Hawaii

BYU

UCF

The reward for being 1/2 in the BCS standings is the shorter route and week off before the title game.

Pairings would be as such.

Mizzou/UCF

WV/BYU

OSU/Hawaii

UGA/OU

Kansas/USC

VT/LSU

Play it out. That'd be great. Rotate the BCS bowls in a fashion like what DMN said, and you have your BSC PLAYOOF National Title Game. For everyone else you have the 'other bowl games.'

[Hugar Twriker Eats Spam]

As many know, I am a LSU fan. Even before Yesterday's events of #1 and #2 losing, when LSU looked to have no hope to make the National Title game yet had a high enough ranking to make a playoffs I did not want a playoffs. I recently read an article where the BCS chairman(or whatever he is called) cited reasons why there would most likely never be a playoffs. Some of those reasons were...

They only want football to be a one semester sport as in they don't want any more games scheduled after the spring semester begins. This means that the National Title Game could not really be scheduled for any later than it is now. Also, not mentioned in the article but a factor, they don't want the games to be played during final, so bowl games can't begin any earlier. This means you only have about three(if you squeeze it maybe four) weeks for playoff games.

The article also pointed out that they don't want the season to have to many games. Now I know some of ya'll think this does not matter but remember, while several of these kids that would play in the playoffs will make it to the NFL, most won't. NCAA claims to be students first athletes second. This limits the size of the playoff to a size of four maybe eight teams.

Now the article did mention other reasons, but I kind of forgot them as they were ones I heard before while the above ones were ones that aren't mentioned that often. But other reasons for no playoffs.

It would weaken the regular season. Lets take a look at the NFL for a second. While several people wanted to see a game between Dallas and Greenbay who both will likely have a shot at the Superbowl, is there a high demand to watch the Bears-Vikings(two possible wildcard teams). Not really. Also with Greenbay losing was there a huge dent to there chance at the superbowl? I think not, while probably losing home field advantage might be a small dent, they still have a good chance of making the superbowl. Now lets come back to the NCAA, the annual Red River Shootout, a mid season game between Oklahoma and Texas. The winner of this game has a huge shot at the National Title Game while the loser has a long road and needs a lot of luck in order to make it. This is a almost a must watch game. In college football right now there are two or three must watch games a week while in the NFL there is one maybe every other week. With the playoffs in college football a team who faltered during the regular season could still make it, so if we missed the Red River Shootout, who cares as they both still have a decent shot.

This is a little fact that I heard on ESPN. I can't be 100% sure if this is true, but if it is a really good fact. Before this year no two loss team ever played in the bowl game that determined the National Champion. Having playoff, it opens the door to undeserve teams having a chance at the National Title. Let look at the NFL, a few seaons ago(might of even been last season, I just don't remember which) going into the final week of the season it appeared possible for a 7-9 team to make it to the playoffs. Can you imagine a 7-9 team winning the Superbowl? In College Basketball a year or two ago, a team with a losing record made the NCAA tournament. In the MLB this past season(MLB having one of the hardest playoffs to make), a team made the playoffs with a 52.5% win percentage. That is barely winning over half your games. In College football, before this season if you only lost one game, you had to get lucky to play for the National Title. If you had two losses you were just about out of luck.

Also having playoffs take away from bowl games. SKA's 16 game playoff took 14 bowl games away from some 6-6 and 7-5 teams. Imagine for a second that you are Mississippi State. You are your conference cupcake team. Now, you managed to somehow pull seven wins out of your ass. With SKA's format, there is a real good chance that Mississippi State doesn't make a bowl game. Doesn't get the recognition of having a good year. Doesn't get shown on TV to lure recruits to the school and falls back to the cellar of the SEC. With the current format, Mississippi State will probably make a bowl game and be shown on TV. Recruits can watch them and think that the team is on the rise and sign there. Some might be thinking that we could add some games. Yeah, you could do that and take away from the prestige that is the Sugar Bowl, Rose Bowl, and Fiesta Bowl.

Now here is a format that I saw in the article that I found very interesting. At the end of the regular season, instead of #1 playing #2 have them go to the games that they normally would go to before the additional of the National Title game. Then after all the bowl games are played have #1 play #2 for the national title. This would keep the tradition of college football(tradition being the most important thing of college football) and would give everyone that plus one game to hopefully meet a compromise between the pro and anti playoff people.

The things I found interesting about the above format is this. It would keep the tradition of bowl games alive, hell it might even bring back more of the tradition now that the Pac-10 winner would almost be guranteed to play in the Rose Bowl instead of jumping it for the National Title game. It would in fact make the other bowl games more interesting. If you had a playoff and had #1 play #4 and #2 play #3 than #5 has no shot of making the national title therefore not as much demand to watch #5. But if they play in their regular bowls and #5 plays before #1,3,4 you might want to watch this game incase #1,3,4 all lose thier games.

[Lowerdeck]

There was a guy on Yahoo who had a 16 team tournament, where all the conferences had a auto bid and there were 5 at larges.

Me liked that idea. Just incorporate that into the bowl system as is. Those not in the field of 16 can fight it out in the other bowls.

[gunnar hendershow]

A playoff would be easy as hell to do WHILE taking into account the issue of finals and keeping it a one-semester sport. You make an 8-team playoff. Winner of Big 10, Big XII, Pac-10, ACC, SEC, and Big East with 2 at-large bids. First round takes place from December 18th (This is almost everyone's last day of finals) to December 25th. Second round takes place over in the days leading up to New Year's. Then the Championship takes place when it would normally take. You can even keep Bowls in a large capacity in countless, easy-to-implement ways. Make the playoff games bowls, or my personal favorite, select the teams as they get eliminated. It's so easy.

[OGpistolpete]

I don't think all conference winners deserve an automatic bid, because such as the case with Hawaii, winners of the WAC, they will be ranked in the top 16.

[Hugar Twriker Eats Spam]

A playoff would be easy as hell to do WHILE taking into account the issue of finals and keeping it a one-semester sport. You make an 8-team playoff. Winner of Big 10, Big XII, Pac-10, ACC, SEC, and Big East with 2 at-large bids.

[gunnar hendershow]

A playoff would be easy as hell to do WHILE taking into account the issue of finals and keeping it a one-semester sport. You make an 8-team playoff. Winner of Big 10, Big XII, Pac-10, ACC, SEC, and Big East with 2 at-large bids.

Okay so you have Ohio State, Oklahoma, USC, Virgina Tech, LSU, West Virgina, and Georgia and Hawaii as at larges? Thus you leave out 11-1 Kansas?

You would leave out Kansas or Hawaii. Kansas played one good team all year, and lost. This way you keep the importance of the regular season as well, you still can't fuck up. In 99% of years most everyone will agree that the number 8 team, barring luck, has no shot at all. This year is the one exception quite frankly, but even then, with the exception of really the top 5, nobody's got a good a chance anyway. The problem with this year, which due to its crazy nature has naturally given birth to countless playoff discussions -- much more than have ever come up before -- is that nobody knows who really is best. If you put OSU, LSU, Oklahoma, VT, and Georgia all in a tournament of some sort we can all finally understand who truly is best.

First round takes place from December 18th (This is almost everyone's last day of finals) to December 25th. Second round takes place over in the days leading up to New Year's.

I assume you want these to be the Sugar Bowl, Rose Bowl, and the other BCS Bowls here. You can't have that as the BCS bowls have the tradition to play after New Years. Play all of them on Jan 1st. But that is four must watch games in one day. That is a no no.

No, not at all. They aren't even bowl games, just playoff games. I thought this was clearly able to be interpreted in my post. My apologies if I wasn't as clear as I intended to be.

Then the Championship takes place when it would normally take. You can even keep Bowls in a large capacity in countless, easy-to-implement ways. Make the playoff games bowls, or my personal favorite, select the teams as they get eliminated. It's so easy.

Wait, so a team can play in the semi finals on Dec 30th than play a bowl game 2 days later in the Sugar? No no.

Also, you are making them play to many games. This isn't pro ball. Most of these players won't play pro ball. These are students first for in the long run, if you shit on their tradition I belive college football would lose money and viewers and that is a no no.

And as I also mentioned, your system would hurt the tradition of college football. College Football is more about tradition more than any other American Sport. I would love to hear a playoff system that didn't hurt tradition.

No, no, no. A team loses in the semi finals on Dec 30th, and then a week later (Jan 6th, the Championship will take place right before the start of 2nd semester as it usually does -- that date given the calendar with which I am working would be Jan 8th) plays in their respective bowl game. This would maintain the tradition we all like, while also given a playoff format that the future of the sport does need. It is the best of both worlds, and will skyrocket college football to even higher levels of popularity. If changing the format to the BCS only helped the sport, a playoff will only help further. As long as you don't take away the Iron Bowl, Michigan-Ohio State, ND-USC, then tradition is for all eternity safe and secure.

[Hajjhowe]

I'd say at most you could make it the top four team's.

[HailtotheYo]

They only want football to be a one semester sport as in they don't want any more games scheduled after the spring semester begins. This means that the National Title Game could not really be scheduled for any later than it is now. Also, not mentioned in the article but a factor, they don't want the games to be played during final, so bowl games can't begin any earlier. This means you only have about three(if you squeeze it maybe four) weeks for playoff games.

Really ? That's why things like "kickoff classics" were added, or games like Washington/Hawaii were added ? Or why there is already a 12 game season, and a 13-14 game season for those that make Conference Title games and Bowls ? Oh, and the NCAA is full of shit about not wanting to have Bowl Games during finals and about being 'student' oriented. If that were the case, the season would start earlier and finish sooner, and there wouldn't be a 40 day ... FORTY DAY layoff between the end of the season and the National Title Game. Yeah, OSU is waiting that long.

The article also pointed out that they don't want the season to have to many games. Now I know some of ya'll think this does not matter but remember, while several of these kids that would play in the playoffs will make it to the NFL, most won't. NCAA claims to be students first athletes second. This limits the size of the playoff to a size of four maybe eight teams.

That's just it, the NCAA CLAIMS. They claim a lot of shit. They claim the BCS works. I already touched on the more games crap. With a playoff, you take away some of the meaningless chump games at the start of the season. Yeah, they're about being students first and athletes second ... so they whore them out for all the money they can make off of them. Whatever.

It would weaken the regular season. Lets take a look at the NFL for a second. While several people wanted to see a game between Dallas and Greenbay who both will likely have a shot at the Superbowl, is there a high demand to watch the Bears-Vikings(two possible wildcard teams). Not really. Also with Greenbay losing was there a huge dent to there chance at the superbowl? I think not, while probably losing home field advantage might be a small dent, they still have a good chance of making the superbowl.

Um, no. GB/Dallas was hot as all hell. Two 10-1 teams fighting most likely for home field in the NFC playoffs. Winter in Dallas as opposed to Green Bay ? FUCKING HUGE. That's a very big chip off the Green Bay Super Bowl wagon. It wouldn't weaken the regular season at all. None of the other major sports have a sense of 'meaninglessness' in their regular seasons do they ? It takes that long to see who the best teams in the leagues are. Perfect example, take a look at Cal. First 6 games they were as good as anyone in the country. Now take a look. The regular season won't be diminished at all. Hell, it would be even MORE exciting in my opinion. The NFL season gets GREAT when it gets down to the wire and you've got like 6 teams going into the last weekend fighting over those afore mentioned Wild Card slots. Could you imagine rivalry games coming down to who gets in the playoffs or what seed they get ? Holy hell that'd be amazing. Think about it in a playoff atmosphere and what the losses by WV/Texas would have meant to where/who they'd be playing in the playoffs. Instead, WV still wins the Big East and gets a BCS Bowl game despite getting chumped by a piss poor team .... wow, grand.

Now lets come back to the NCAA, the annual Red River Shootout, a mid season game between Oklahoma and Texas. The winner of this game has a huge shot at the National Title Game while the loser has a long road and needs a lot of luck in order to make it. This is a almost a must watch game. In college football right now there are two or three must watch games a week while in the NFL there is one maybe every other week. With the playoffs in college football a team who faltered during the regular season could still make it, so if we missed the Red River Shootout, who cares as they both still have a decent shot.

Somewhat of a point here, I'll grant you that. Then again, when two really good teams and possible championship teams meet in the regular season the atmosphere is just as hot in EVERY OTHER SPORT. When the Red Sox/Yankees play it might as well be the playoffs. So the Red Sox got swept by the Yanks in their first series this year and there were still like 129 games to go. It didn't mean much at the time did it ? I mean, both still had a decent shot at the division and certainly the playoffs right ? It sure as hell didn't take anything away from there series though. Rivalries are HOT, period. It doesn't matter when it's played. The way it's set up now, the Red River Shootout can still be meaningless. What if OKSt had beaten OU ? Then OU stays home and Tex goes to the Big 12 Title game. It's so early, that in all reality it DOESN'T have THAT big of an impact. Sure, it's early season positioning and sets the winner up nicely .... but the system allows for the loser to be in legit position in the end the way it is set up now anyway.

This is a little fact that I heard on ESPN. I can't be 100% sure if this is true, but if it is a really good fact. Before this year no two loss team ever played in the bowl game that determined the National Champion. Having playoff, it opens the door to undeserve teams having a chance at the National Title. Let look at the NFL, a few seaons ago(might of even been last season, I just don't remember which) going into the final week of the season it appeared possible for a 7-9 team to make it to the playoffs. Can you imagine a 7-9 team winning the Superbowl? In College Basketball a year or two ago, a team with a losing record made the NCAA tournament. In the MLB this past season(MLB having one of the hardest playoffs to make), a team made the playoffs with a 52.5% win percentage. That is barely winning over half your games. In College football, before this season if you only lost one game, you had to get lucky to play for the National Title. If you had two losses you were just about out of luck.

Right, so it's ok for the BCS to grant a two loss team a shot, but not a playoff ? That makes no sense. Yes, let's take the NFL example you've got there. A playoff is the only real way to settle the situation we have in college football this year, as with the NFL season you are referencing. Just as in that NFL season, there isn't any clear cut, top teams in the NCAA this year. So instead of allowing those teams that are at least 'a little' better than everyone else play it out and determine who's better by playing the game ..... we get computers and biased voters. Yeah, that's better .... not at all. The whole point of a season is too be in position to make a run as one of the best teams in the league. Is it your fault if NO ONE in your respective sport is all that great in a particular year ? Absolutely not. Sometimes 8-8 is good for the playoffs in the NFL, sometimes it ain't. At least the NCAA Tourney in basketball gives every single team that plays the same opportunity to win its championship. The BCS only includes 6 of the ELEVEN conferences.

Also having playoffs take away from bowl games. SKA's 16 game playoff took 14 bowl games away from some 6-6 and 7-5 teams. Imagine for a second that you are Mississippi State. You are your conference cupcake team. Now, you managed to somehow pull seven wins out of your ass. With SKA's format, there is a real good chance that Mississippi State doesn't make a bowl game. Doesn't get the recognition of having a good year. Doesn't get shown on TV to lure recruits to the school and falls back to the cellar of the SEC. With the current format, Mississippi State will probably make a bowl game and be shown on TV. Recruits can watch them and think that the team is on the rise and sign there. Some might be thinking that we could add some games. Yeah, you could do that and take away from the prestige that is the Sugar Bowl, Rose Bowl, and Fiesta Bowl.

Again, while you might have a decent point here, the BCS has already beaten a playoff system to that. You've already taken way the possibility that (before the title game) three of the four 'major' bowls would decide the title and now (with the title game) that NONE of the four major bowls will. You can't get any more tradition raping than that. Hell, I remember a day when even the Cotton Bowl had a shot at saying something as far as the National Title. The tradition of the Bowl Games as been dead and gone for a while. Those that think differently haven't been alive long enough to know better. The whole bowl games taken from 6-6 and 7-5 teams is a joke, not too mention trying to have your cake and eat it too. So, a 7-5 conference champion deserves in absolutely no way a shot at a playoff, but does deserve the rotatingsponsorwhogivesashitplayedontuesdayat4pm.com bowl ? No, just no. First off, these 6-6 and 7-5 teams don't really deserve this 'reward' according to your standards, BUT since it makes the NCAA money let's "do it for the kids." I promise, if no money was made by the NCAA on them, you'd see about 10 bowl games disappear instantly. Aside from that, the majority of the bowl teams that don't make a major bowl game LOSE MONEY on the deal. With the payout to the conferene and expenses, the actual money they make isn't what they put in. If this exposure and help to recruiting and all of that was so wonderous, then Memphis would be a national power. Please, let's get real. Half the bowl games are shit, a joke, and not worth anything to anybody and in many cases COST these teams. That's why they change sponsors, locations, and dates nearly every year. Congrats on your 7-5 team .... now, come to our bowl game, pay out your ass to get here, take this shitty payoff, split it with your conference, and lose dollars you could spend on facilities and other program upgrades as our way of saying good job !

Now here is a format that I saw in the article that I found very interesting. At the end of the regular season, instead of #1 playing #2 have them go to the games that they normally would go to before the additional of the National Title game. Then after all the bowl games are played have #1 play #2 for the national title. This would keep the tradition of college football(tradition being the most important thing of college football) and would give everyone that plus one game to hopefully meet a compromise between the pro and anti playoff people.

Wow. That of ALL things, is retarded. And if either or both of them LOSE the "traditional" bowl game ? Holy shit I can't stop laughing at this one.

The things I found interesting about the above format is this. It would keep the tradition of bowl games alive, hell it might even bring back more of the tradition now that the Pac-10 winner would almost be guranteed to play in the Rose Bowl instead of jumping it for the National Title game. It would in fact make the other bowl games more interesting. If you had a playoff and had #1 play #4 and #2 play #3 than #5 has no shot of making the national title therefore not as much demand to watch #5. But if they play in their regular bowls and #5 plays before #1,3,4 you might want to watch this game incase #1,3,4 all lose thier games.

Again, the 'tradition' of the bowl games has long gone by the wayside. NOTHING will make the 'other' bowl games more interesting because 6-6 and 7-5 teams that don't even win their conference aren't compelling TV. Give them a chance to knock of a 10-2 team and you've got something. Pit them against a team that is essentially themselves and you've got every teams dark/light colored spring scrimmage. Uh, and where did you get 5 ? Clearly a playoff would have an EVEN number of teams. Come on.

[oldskool]

Rivalry games are RIVALRIES because the schools hate each other's guts. Putting in a playoff system isn't going to mean jack to the rivalries. Do you think Michigan/Ohio State will be a Battle of the Backups because they both locked up playoff spots?

The BCS as is continually rewards schools for being idle (see Ohio State backing into the title game every damn time, see Kansas getting in over Mizzou because of Mizzou's loss in the Big XII title game) and continually rewards teams for dodging competent mid-majors in favor of super-sub-par FBS and FCS opponents.

If you have to keep the BCS, tweak thusly:

1) 0.1 deduction for every FCS team you played

2) 0.05 deduction for every week after your final game that teams are still playing. You should be trying to win your way into the title game, not scheduling all your byes at the end of the year and letting everyone else eliminate each other in conference title games and rivalry matchups.

3) 0.025 deduction for every mid-major you decline the challenge of that ends up with more than 8 wins. It's not fair to the Hawai'is and the Boise States that they challenge the big schools and get denied because they'd rather schedule Youngstown State or something.

[TheSqauredCircleMessiah]

The Big Ten/Pac 10 point is a great one, as they think having a Pac 10/Big Ten Rose Bowl still means something, that's why Illinois is going to get killed on January 1. Miami, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Texas have played in the Rose Bowl in the past 5 years, so they need to realize that the aura is dead.

The whole "one semester sport" is BS as both basketball and hockey cross over terms.

In Division I, you have 119 teams, so everybody having a fair shot just wont happen. My system:

- 8-team playoff (Six BCS conference champions plus the two highest ranked non-conference champions in the BCS. So in this case, Georgia & Missouri. The two at-large teams automatically are seeded 7th & 8th, the six conf. champs are slotted via the final BCS standings.)

- Each conference HAS to play a championship game

- Teams only get 10 regular season games, 8 conference + 2 non-conference. If you start the week before Labor Day, you'd be done by first week of November.

- Make it so conference opponents can't play each other in the 1st round, it could look like this based on this year's teams.

Seeds

1. Ohio State (Big Ten Champions)

2. LSU (SEC Champions)

3. Virginia Tech (ACC Champions)

4. Oklahoma (Big XII Champions)

5. USC (Pac 10 Champions)

6. West Virginia (Big East Champions)

7. Georgia (At-large bid)

8. Missouri (At-large bid)

(You'd flip-flop Georgia & Missouri for the first round because two conference schools would not be able to play in the first round)

Have the first round occur on campus:

Georgia at Ohio State

USC at Oklahoma

West Virginia at Virginia Tech (imagine that atomsphere in Blacksburg)

Missouri at LSU

Then rotate the semifinals & finals between the 4 BCS Bowl sites. Under this scenario (which will never happen), you could have the season done by the first or second week of December. No more cupcake non-conference games, no more pointless bowl games and no 5-7 week wait to play in the Nat'l title game.

[HailtotheYo]

so you'd make it even HARDER for the 54 teams (excluding ND) that virtually have no shot at the national title now ?

[OGpistolpete]

What about Hawaii. They go 12-0, and Georgia gets a bid because "they have been playing good the past 6 games".

Edited December 4, 2007 by SKA