Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by Jens1893, Jan 8, 2008.
I am beginning to think that the SEC, Big 12, Big East and ACC should just go ahead with their plans and tell the conference that can´t count and the PAC 10 to stick it up their arse if they don´t want to participate and rather see the Rose Bowl as the pinacle of College FB.
I would absolutely love a playoff...
That being said, Georgia can whine all they want this year but if they could have won their division in the SEC and actually played in their conference championship then they would have a claim - but for now just be happy you got the big bucks and STFU Georgia.
It's got to be 16 teams, but 8 teams is a start. I think a legitimate argument could be made that the #9 team could be just as good as the #1 team. I don't think that same argument could be made for the #17 team.
Somebody said they missed having the bowls on New Years, and I feel the same way. If they're gonna do a playoff, then they need to get in done before Christmas imo. If the existing bowls want to stick around it would still be a nice reward for teams that become eligible. Extra bowl practices, etc. As it is now most bowls are pretty much meaningless in the national picture.
The problem with 16 teams is that then you have to squeeze 4 games in for the championship teams after season. You begin to run out of time for this. Also, I don't believe there are truly 16 teams that could win it on any given day..
Nino Burjanadze may be on to something.:smile2:
Baloney. That argument is nonsense. There would only be two teams that would play all four of those games. It's not like they would be subjecting the entire D-1 football to playing upwards of 16 games a season. As it sits right now, many teams already play 14, so what's the difference? We already moved the championship game back an entire week, why not move it back another? Meaningful New Years bowl games are a thing of the past. :sad1:
While true that the #16 team would probably have a very tough time with the #1 team, the same thing can't be said about the #9 team, which is why you have to go from 8 teams to 16.
I said in my post that the two championship teams would have to play 4 games, not everybody. And it would make the season boring knowing teams can lose 3 and possibly 4 games and still make the spread. I want every game to matter so teams don't rest players at the end of the season for the playoffs. If it were only 8 teams then every team would have to play their best to the finish in order to make it.
I seriously doubt a 4 loss team would make it into the playoff. But a three loss team who lost three OT games on the road to Florida, Georgia and Tennessee wouldn't be eligible? (hypothetical SEC team there, say LSU or Arkansas or Alabama).
On ESPN radio today, they had some "expert" on... He said that the key thorn in the sides of pro-playoffs presidents is Gordon Gee, on the board of nothing else but the big 10, and current President of THE Ohio State Buckeyes... And why would he be for a playoff? His team seems to have been helped the most by the BCS. A playoff would expose them early instead of the NC game.
Gee's biggest argument seems to be that it would be too challenging for the student-athlete, and that they would be missing too much class. So my question to Gee would be, "So you're saying 1-AA d-2 and d-3 kids don't go to school?" All of which have a 16 team playoff. I just don't buy it, also, many can argue that small private division 3 schools are more challenging academically, (one can argue). Not to mention, they won't miss class at all if you think about it. When is bowl season played? During college's winter break, most of which last 3-5 weeks! I don't buy it.
Well, under this year's week 14 BCS ranking, a 4 loss Tennessee team would have done just that. However, I suppose that you could make the case that the formula could be fixed to prevent that.
Also, as has been mentioned earlier, I would also be wary of having a 16-team field because of the "resting their starters" mentality in the last weeks. However, this is my two cents:
Have a 12 team field. Top four get a "bye." I think that there's no way that the number 16 team could hang with the number 1 team, and I also have my doubts that the number 13 team could, either. This way, the teams are motivated to play starters in a late season game.
Go back to 11 games, first round and conf. champ games are at "non-neutral" sites. Colleges will whine about the loss of revenue from a lost game, but if you give the best team in the conference home field advantage in the conf. champ. game as well as the first round of playoffs, this dulls the blow a bit. In addition, I don't think that all fanbases will travel to more than two "neutral site games" per year. This doesn't make sense unless...
Have the BCS bowls move to being the quarterfinals, all on New Years day This makes for a "Must see TV" event to keep TV execs and bowl boards happy. Which would you rather watch, "Division One Quarterfinals" or "BCS Bowls All Day New Years Day." It also moves up the schedule nearly a full week to make sure that we're only going a week extra rather than two. An extra week would likely be considered in a "plus-one" format too.
Semifinals at team sites with best seed Extra home game revenue for schools, prevents overextending fan base for extra travel.
Championship game at rotating, neutral site It could be a BCS bowl site or not. I think that it would be better to have it not be one to prevent teams from having to play in the same game site twice.
You'd also keep the regular bowls for teams who don't qualify. I can't figure out how to determine conference championship game site for a conference with two undefeated teams.
The problem with the BCS is when Bowls like the Rose Bowl invite a team like Illinois instead of Georgia. IMHO, Illinois did not deserve a BCS Bid. A USC versus Georgia game in the Rose Bowl would of been great.
Why should Gordon care? It's not like Vandy will ever get in the top 30 at the end of the season let alone the top 16.:lol:
He left Vandy last July. He is back at OSU.
OOps missed that.:smile2:
I think we will get a playoff of sorts in 2-3 years. The bowls have to maintain some stature to get people to come - how may times can any fan travel to a post season game. Even an uber fan could not travel 3 weeks a row unless wealthy. The fact is that if there were not big $$ at stake we would have a playoff like DII. Also the "in crowd" benefits monetarily just by showing up (see OSU)
Football is somewhat unique because the players can't play day in and day out - jeez in baseball/basketball they can play 2-3 games a day etc.
I suppose if you chose the top 12 there would be #13 who felt screwed. Also if there were a straight forward play off system - what would we have to bitch about?
If there's a playoff, I'd say go the NFL route and have all the games except the final on campus. I'm not sure that many people would travel 3 weeks in a row to bowl locations.
Rotate the bowl that gets the championship game, and all the other bowls can invite teams that didn't make the playoffs (or even the teams that lost in the first couple of rounds).
That will never work. Any playoff system would have to incorporate the bowls if there's going to be any kind of agreement. In theory, I agree with your assertion. In reality, that simply won't fly. :sad1:
I don't like the idea of a 16-team playoff because I like the uniqueness of keeping the entire regular season meaningful. I think 4 teams is the ideal size for a playoff.
Well, then do it just like the BCS; Only two, at most, get in from each conference. That'd motivate the natives.
119 teams, I think playing for the top 16 will be pretty meaningful.:thumbsup:
But how many of those are realistic title contenders? Less than half, that's for sure. There may be 119 division I-A teams, but in reality there's about 3 different levels of football being played within those 119.
Another thing a 16-team playoff does is allow teams like Boise St and Utah and yes, even Hawaii a realistic chance at making the field every year. Then pretty much every D-1 team has a real shot at winning the championship. Pare it down to 8 teams, and it's far less likely that you'll get too many smaller schools in the mix.
The top tier has dramatically grown over the past few years as we have seen numerous upsets by schools who were in the middle tier. Non-BCS schools have won 2 of the 3 BCS bowls they have been in.
Separate names with a comma.