U.S. Department of Justice asks NCAA why there's no playoff for football

[TDbuff]

Not lose and you get a second or third chance that a playoff gives. As I stated earlier I wouldn't be opposed to a plus one. Do that and every team you mention as being left out has a shot.

Unless you put every team into the bracket you will always have someone complaining that they didn't get a fair shot, put every team into the bracket and teams complain that they got a bad draw. No system will be free of discussion, that is what sports fans do. The winners gloat and the losers look for excuses (like we would have won a playoff) but a playoff wouldn't make the final outcome better, only different and in my mind less valid.

I understand no system is free of discussion. And like I said, I thought 16 teams was a bit much, and my BCS examples only include a couple extra teams that deserve a shot, and if they went to a 4-8 deep playoff, I'd be more than happy.

But one of the reasons that the championship is not a measure of the season is because the best teams rarely play each other during the season. If you're an ESS EEE SEE fan, than you believe the best teams are playing each other every week in conference, but what are the 5 other BCS conferences supposed to do. You have to subjectively compare W-L records between strength of schedules that vary greatly?! That's lame. It's football, not politics.

You want to see a true measure of a season, watch the English Premier League, 20 teams, everyone plays each other twice, home and away, the one with the best record at the end is the champion. College football is not comparable to that.

And the argument that someone will always be complaining is lame as well. Right now, nobody has an avenue to show how good their team actually is outside the top 2. Like I said before, it's football, not politics. The best teams should prove it on the field, not in the minds of voters/fans. If you're worried about a great team faultering against a weaker team, maybe they weren't that great to begin with.

 

[TDbuff]

So MtnBuff doesn't agree with you. So what? Doesn't mean you need to insult his arguments and call him a troll. You both feel passionate about your stance, and by just yelling louder and more insultingly doesn't make you right all of the sudden. I happen to agree with him and not you. So now it is two against one, so that makes us right doesn't it? Maybe, but I'm not going to keep hammering at you because I think it will make my argument more valid. Personally I'll continue enjoying college football as it is, and if it is changed I hope it works.

I don't know what you're doing here. Are you arguing or are you just jumping in to tell me I'm dumb?

Much appreciated either way, very insightful post.

 

[PhillyBuff]

I understand no system is free of discussion. And like I said, I thought 16 teams was a bit much, and my BCS examples only include a couple extra teams that deserve a shot, and if they went to a 4-8 deep playoff, I'd be more than happy.

But one of the reasons that the championship is not a measure is a season is because the best teams rarely play each other during the season. If you're an ESS EEE SEE fan, than you believe the best teams are playing each other every week in conference, but what are the 5 other BCS conferences supposed to do. You have to subjectively compare W-L records between strength of schedules that vary greatly?! That's lame. It's football, not politics.

You want to see a true measure of a season, watch the English Premier League, 20 teams, everyone plays each other twice, home and away, the one with the best record at the end is the champion. College football is not comparable to that.

And the argument that someone will always be complaining is lame as well. Right now, nobody has an avenue to show how good their team actually is outside the top 2. Like I said before, it's football, not politics. The best teams should prove it on the field, not in the minds of voters/fans. If you're worried about a great team faultering against a weaker team, maybe they weren't that great to begin with.

Exactly.... the biggest problem with college football is the schedule. If you can fix the scheduling, then maybe you can have a champion.

 

[azbuff]

It is a fallacy to compare a team "getting hot" in the NCAA basketball tournament and the potential for a team to get "hot" in a football playoff. First, using this year's NCAA basketball tournament as an example, UConn wouldn't even have made the playoff in the first place (the "numbers argument" doesn't hold here because there is no way a team with a .500 conference record ever makes a football playoff). Second, the performance of basketball teams can change drastically from game to game, typically depending on the play of one or two players. Football teams can certainly be streaky as well, but their play tends to be more consistent due to the number of players involved in each game (30? 40?).

I also believe there is little pressure on the NCAA to continue expanding the basketball tournament. The NCAA expanded the tournament to produce more revenue, not to bow to pressure from collegiate administrators. Alternatively, in the event of a football playoff, the NCAA will want to limit the number of games played.

 

[ScottyBuff]

Exactly.... the biggest problem with college football is the schedule. If you can fix the scheduling, then maybe you can have a champion.

That is the point of the playoff... to get the top teams across the conferences to be forced to play each other finally.