NCAA Football Playoff possibilities

[joedekock]

If they want to be big time collegiate athletes, than they better suck it up and play, or go back to mommy.

This is spoken from someone who has never played the game on any organized level I am assuming.

 

[cybok0]

This is spoken from someone who has never played the game on any organized level I am assuming.

Wrong, plus military background where you don't say "I to tired".

 

[joedekock]

Wrong, plus military background where you don't say "I to tired".

Same here! Football, basketball, and baseball all through High school, plus the marines!

Just a difference of opinion I guess!

 

[Jimbo]

Which makes it easy.
Go to 16 teams, 1 slot for each conference champion, and 5 at larges. Use a selection committee like in basketball to determine the at large bids and seeding.

Good idea !

Jimbo

 

[Jimbo]

There you go. Now we just got to convince the NCAA, and all those bowl commitees. Although they can still play all those Mickey Mouse bowls if they want, unless you're team is playing in one, or you're in some kind of bowl pool, who cares.

Actually it's the University Presidents that are against it.

Jimbo

 

[Jimbo]

Taken a few hit over the years huh Joe?

Every other football division has a playoff system. Every other sport in the NCAA has a playoff system.

Whey not the big boys. Because of money. The bowl games pour in money for something like 70 teams. Is your team 6-5 ..here you go have some money. Does your team not suck so much? Here you go have some money.

Outside of the top twenty schools who would be for it?(besides the fans we dont count)

So you take a vote and lets say you are a solid team like BC ( I hate them though) Anyway every year BC has a solid squad and they never get any money...While the likes of lets say Ohio State get the revenue from all of those extra games. Not just one extra game but 3 or 4 extra games.

"I know but Boston DTV guy BC can play in the pepto bowl in Boise", you will say and "make money. "

But to that I say those bowls will be even more worthless than they are now. Worse then the NIT tourney.

I got $7.95 and a some land maybe I could host a game? Maybe we should have the satguys Bowl?!?!?!

If all 80 thousand members donated 200 bucks we could give a way 1.6 million to the teams!

Who's in?

Boston,
The teams outside of the top 20 still make plenty of money, even the ones that are NOT in a bowl game...
You mentioned the big teams (Ohio State ect.) make all the money, eacj conference divides up the payout from the bowl games the conference teams are in, so in a bowl or not they still take home a share of the money.
Thats the way it has been for quite awhile.
I would also keep it that way with the playoff system I'm proposing.

Jimbo

 

[Jimbo]

Here is my take on this subject: If you are going to go with a playoff, EVERY team must have a shot at the title. The second you move away from a BCS title game or a plus one format and move towards a I-AA or march madness atmosphere, then you've got to be sure to guarentee a spot for the underdog.

Not saying that a non bcs school should be automatic period, but if they meet certain criteria, they should.

Thats why taking the top 16 period would not work. Look at the rankings above. 3 pac 10, 3 big ten, 3 big 12, 3 big east, 3 sec, 1 ACC. Granted, the rankings would be different at the end, but what does it say about a reg season when a 3rd place conf team gets a title shot? hell, the SEC could have 4-5 teams in the top 16 at season end.

So here is my proposal:

12 team playoff: top 4 teams gets bye into the next round (reward for reg season). 5v12, 6v11, 7v10, 8v9. 1st rd at home of high seed.

2nd rd: reseed! (like NHL playoffs). Top team gets the lowest remaining team (i.e if 12 beats 5 the week before, they have to play the top seed). Games are played at the higher seeds (which means that the games are at the top 4 schools whom would have weeks to prepare for). Once again, it rewards the reg season. Plus, if your the 12 seed and run the table, you would have the hardest path.
Semi and finals in existing BCS bowl sites, with two week gap between. Since there are 4 BCS sites, you could do a runner up game (like the WC)or fill it with the best non-playoff teams in a reg bowl game.

Qualifing: BCS rankings to be used for seeding. BCS conf champ guarenteed spot as long as they are top 16 (not going to reward a conf who can't field a top 25 team even if they are a BCS conf; like the BE a couple years ago). Top Non-BCS/independant team guarenteed spot if top 16 and no more than two losses. Other non-BCS/ind can qualify (no limit) if it finishes top 12.

Also, like the BCS now, a conf CAN NOT field more than two playoff teams! A playoff must be balanced if it is going to be creditable.

Look at last season for an example (Based on reg season final BCS rankings) using this criteria:

1 Ohio State (B10)
2 Florida (SEC)
3 Michigan (B10)
4 LSU (SEC)
5 USC (PAC10)
6 Louisville (BE)
7 Wisconsin (B10)
8 Boise St (IND)
9 Auburn (SEC)
10 Oklahoma (B12)
11 ND (IND)
12 Wake Forest (ACC)

Note that all 6 BCS champs are included (wake finished 14th but gets bid for top 16 and winning ACC). 2 non BCS (inc ND) are included and earned!

Based of the auto bids, only 10 spots could be filled. This is where a 3rd team from a conf can fill in. That would leave Wisconsin (7) and Auburn (9) After the auto bids, the top remaining teams should fill in IMO. Some years if will get more teams from BCS conf, others it will lock them with 2.

You can expand to 16, but I think 12 will do the trick. A top team would have a easier road and one less game, keeping the integraty of the reg season.
Every team, from ANY conf, can get a shot!

To guarantee everyone a shot, you have to include all conference champions in automatic bids (same as is done in basketball).

First, set a minimum qualification for conferences, ie. minimum 8 teams in a conference.
Allow all conferences to have a championship game (now restricted to conferences with 12 teams), with the winner getting the conferences automatic bid (same as is done with conference basketball tournaments). This would generate even more interest in the conference championship games, as the playoff bid would be on the line. If the conference doesn't want the game, then give the bid to the best record. Might have to go back to 11 games a season to accommodate the championship game.

Right now, there are 11 conferences. This allows 11 automatic bids. The other 5 slots (in a 16 team playoff) are available for at large bids. The at large bids would allow a way for independents to get in, and a second team from a conference to make the playoffs. A selection committee can dole them out, same as is done in basketball. Same committee can set up seeding.

If a conference decides to split up, then do like they did in basketball, and make the 2 new conferences have a play-in game, or not have an automatic bid for x number of years. This will prevent someone (for example, the SEC) from splitting on paper in order to get 2 automatic bids.


The problem with this scenario, and any playoff scenario is that playoff money would mostly split evenly with all the conferences (same as is done with basketball). The conferences with big money tie-ins (6 BCS conferences) with the bowls would lose that money advantage to the conferences without the tie-ins (5 non-BCS conferences). That prevents them from voting for a playoff model. There may be more money overall with a playoff system, but it would be less money for the big money conferences.

In order to do either of these senario's you would have to play more games/ weeks than I suggested in the beginning, NOW you may be getting into later in the NEW year, don't forget the NFL plays thier playoff games on Sat and Sundays.
Losts of conflict if we go much later.

I absolutly HATE the fact that the NC game ends up being in the middle of the week.

Jimbo

 

[markh]

A lot of interesting ideas in this thread. I don't think most of them have a chance. To keep the total number of games to reasonable number, they'd have to drop back to an 11 game schedule, most athletic depts won't want to lose that revenue. Same thing with the conference championship games, they'd have to go. The universities don't want it and the NCAA doesn't seem to want it. The bowls think it would put them out of business.

I think about the only realistic chance is to have the BCS bowl winners play a championship game. It would be only one more game and they could hype the crap out of it. I don't think this will happen soon and maybe never will. IMO, it's the only plan that has a reasonable chance of happening.

 

[boston area dtv]

Can we at least all agree that the only reason there isnt a playoff format is because of money?

All of the kock's arguments about rest and study are moot, when you see that the other divisions play football and have playoffs.

 

[Derwin0]

In order to do either of these senario's you would have to play more games/ weeks than I suggested in the beginning, NOW you may be getting into later in the NEW year, don't forget the NFL plays thier playoff games on Sat and Sundays.
Losts of conflict if we go much later.

Actually, it won't go any later than it is now.

A 16 team playoff is only 3 rounds. 4 counting the championship game.
Most teams have their last game on Turkey Weekend, with Conference Championship games the first Saturday of December. That would leave the next 3 weeks for the playoffs, and still have the Championship game on New Years. Or the playoffs could be delayed a week, allowing the Finals to be on New Years, with the Championship game the following week (where the BCS championship game is now).

 

[Derwin0]

Can we at least all agree that the only reason there isnt a playoff format is because of money?

Exactly, the big boys don't want to share the money with the little guys, which they would have to do if there was a playoff.

 

[Paul Wozniak]

Can we at least all agree that the only reason there isnt a playoff format is because of money?

All of the kock's arguments about rest and study are moot, when you see that the other divisions play football and have playoffs.

I disagree. I believe there would be even more money if we had a playoff.

 

[Jimbo]

Actually, it won't go any later than it is now.

A 16 team playoff is only 3 rounds. 4 counting the championship game.
Most teams have their last game on Turkey Weekend, with Conference Championship games the first Saturday of December. That would leave the next 3 weeks for the playoffs, and still have the Championship game on New Years. Or the playoffs could be delayed a week, allowing the Finals to be on New Years, with the Championship game the following week (where the BCS championship game is now).

I started this thread with it being a 16 team playoff and alot of people did not like that idea, I think it's a good idea because it covers more of the good teams and when you get to 13-20 they are all about the same and half of them have a chance .

Jimbo

 

[Jimbo]

I disagree. I believe there would be even more money if we had a playoff.

I agree ....

 

[Jimbo]

Exactly, the big boys don't want to share the money with the little guys, which they would have to do if there was a playoff.

This depends on who you consider the little guys.
Every bowl game currently gets divied up among the conference teams, except for ND of course.
We can have a whole other thread as to weather or not ND deserved to be in a BCS game the last several years.

Jimbo

 

[JAG72]

I disagree. I believe there would be even more money if we had a playoff.

How would there be more money?

 

[Jimbo]

How would there be more money?

One they can get rid of half of the useless bowl games they have now and that would draw more sponsor money.
They should cut the 32 bowl games now down to at the most 20.

Jimbo

 

[JAG72]

One they can get rid of half of the useless bowl games they have now and that would draw more sponsor money.
They should cut the 32 bowl games now down to at the most 20.

Jimbo

No it wouldn't. You only have so much time in a game that could be sold to the sponsor's. They already sell all the time they can. People that have a bowl named after them are not going to pay as much for just one or two comercials.

 

[Jimbo]

No it wouldn't. You only have so much time in a game that could be sold to the sponsor's. They already sell all the time they can. People that have a bowl named after them are not going to pay as much for just one or two comercials.

But the importance of the games would demand more money to start with.

Jimbo

 

[JAG72]

But the importance of the games would demand more money to start with.

Jimbo

Only to a point. You can take 5 games out of the mix to start with. The BCS bowls already bring in more than you can imagine on advertising dollars. This only leaves you a few games that might bring in a little more money. IMO the week one games would not demand the money that the final two weeks would. That leaves you to about where you are today.