Potential BCS/Playoff improvements

[HiFiGator]

I don't know what just happened. I was giving my opinion on the playoff thread and then when I went to enter it, I was sent back to the login screen. I re-logged in and then it told me that the thread didn't exist. The worst part is that it erased my rather eloquent expose'.

I tried to recreate it, but alas, the original masterpiece is forever gone. Here is the same basic question from another board and my suggestions:



Anything is better then this. Right now the best shot wold be for a +1 type set-up. It's not perfect but I'll take it over the madness we have now.



I think most of us would be in agreement in saying that the BCS is not working perfectly. Many would suggest it isn't working at all.

My question to you all is what would you like to see done? This could be anything from a realistic tweaking of what we have now, to a clean sweep of the current system, replacing it with a true playoff system.

Ideally, we would have a true playoff tournament -- a winter madness if you will -- but even a 16 team playoff would add 3 more weeks to the season, so it would either drag into middle January or the season would be shorter, unless the playoffs conflicting with semester finals.

In any case, even though we might ideally like something along those lines, that isn't a realistic option.

That being said, what do you think would work?


Personally I think you could do a 12 team playoff, with the top 4 seeds gettiing a first round buy and the 5th through 12th seeds playing on the weekend that is now the conference championships. That way there could still be the 3 week dead period for finals and Christmas. Then depending on how the calender falls, the 8 reamaining team would play in four games, essentially replacing four of the major Bowls. These games would occur between Dec. 27th and Jan. 1st, depending on how the days fall. That would leave 4 teams playing in the National semifinals around Jan 3rd-7th. I think the semifinals should be on campus at the higher seeds. Then there should be a real National Championship game which would be no more than one week after when it is now.

I really think a system like this could work and would make everyone happy.

If you think about it, the lesser bowls would still get some decent teams and their status wouldn't be lessened in any way. I mean seriously, would the Sun Bowl or the Insight.com Bowl be somehow less important since it would then feature teams outside of the playoff? I think not and in any case, they now feature teams outside the BCS.

As for the major bowls, they woudl still get marquee attention with their matchups. Just for illustration, the Rose might feature a #1 Ohio St. and a #8 USC this season. The Sugar might feature a #2 LSU and a #7 Missouri. The Fiesta might pit #3 Okalahoma and #6 West Virginia Then Virginia Tech and Georgia would be squaring off in the 4,5 matchup in the Orange Bowl.

I really think something like that would work.


I know a lot are pushing for a "plus one" but this year just shows how flawed that would still be. Ohio St., LSU, Oklahoma, Va. Tech, Georgia and USC could all have reasonable arguments. Even if you take out Georgia, since they didn't win their conference, you would still have 5 teams trying to claim 4 spots.

I understand that there always has to be a cutoff and there will always be someone that is on the outside looking in. But think about it in hoops terms: sure some teams get jerked around and are relegated to the NIT, but in all seriousness, what is the likelihood that any of those teams had a realistic shot of winning the whole thing.

What do you think of this idea and what other suggestions can you all come up with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry that was a bit long winded, but the keys are these:

-- 12 team playoff using something similar to BCS rankings for seedinds
-- Top 4 seeds get a bye
-- seeds 5 through 12 play 4 games on campus of higher seed on the first Saturday in December
-- Top four seeds would be the host at the 4 major bowls (Rose, Fiesta, Sugar and Orange) and would play the surviving 4 teams from the first round

-- The semifinal matches would be one week later on campus of the two highest remaining seeds
-- National Championship game would be the next week and would be rotated among the big 4 bowls as it is now


What is wrong with that proposal?

[Lalli25]

I would cut it to the top 8 but stay with a lot of the principles you already stated. That would still keep the regular season intact and keep the importance of every game just as great. There wouldn't be a rule about how many teams from a confrence could get in either.

[TStone]

Conference Championships aren't going to go away so any plan would have to involve playoffs starting later.

I have previously proposed a 16 team playoff system where every conference champion (yes, one team from EACH of the 12 conferences) gets a bid with four "wild card" spots for teams deemed worthy. Worthiness of the final four spots and playoff seeding would be based on the current BCS ranking method.

The first three weeks would be played at the home field of the higher seed and the championship would be played at a neutral site.

Coordination of the games would have to work around student's final exam schedule... possibly having the first playoff round the second Sat in Dec with a 1 or 2 week break then resuming and finishing the playoffs either the second or third week in Jan.

[raz67stang]

First let me say I am very PRO playoff, its the only way to have a true champ. But i do wonder if having a playoff would hurt the regular season as so many people say. College football has the best regular season of any sport, hands down. Just how much does that change if we get a playoff?

[Will4144]

First let me say I am very PRO playoff, its the only way to have a true champ. But i do wonder if having a playoff would hurt the regular season as so many people say. College football has the best regular season of any sport, hands down. Just how much does that change if we get a playoff?

Not at all. You'd still have to win your Conference Championship to play in the tournament, or at least beat down most of your Conference and all of your out of conference schedule.

[TKE226]

There is no way there will ever be a playoff. I dont know why people debate this. There is too much politics involved. I don't even see the "Plus One" option happening soon, that is maybe 3-4 years away. The university presidents dont want a playoff. The bowl cities dont want a playoff.

As far as the Plus One goes - I think if that ever happened. The bcs bowls would play out and then there would be a "re-seeding" and the #1 and 2 would play. Which, still is a problem given the Rose Bowl's obsenely close tie to the Pac-10/Big 10. They wont give up that tie ever.

Personally, I like to BCS and know that there may be some tweeks to the calculations but there wont be a playoff.

[Lalli25]

First let me say I am very PRO playoff, its the only way to have a true champ. But i do wonder if having a playoff would hurt the regular season as so many people say. College football has the best regular season of any sport, hands down. Just how much does that change if we get a playoff?

The thing is that normal years if a team loses 1 or 2 games they have no shot at being in the championship game. With a playoff of 8 teams there would be teams who may have lost 2 games but are still in contention and fighting to make the last place spot. That doesn't mean the losses didn't matter, but that after losing your season isn't over and all there is left to play for is the outback bowl. It would make all of the top 25 games matter in Nov. not just the top 4 teams games matter.

[jstrom]

I hope there never is a playoff. I love the bowl atmosphere and playoffs are fan based. The schools and conferences don't really benefit, IMO. The bowl system absolutely helps the SEC year in and year out more than just about any other conference. A playoff would hurt the SEC unbelievably.

[willy]

I don't know what just happened. I was giving my opinion on the playoff thread and then when I went to enter it, I was sent back to the login screen. I re-logged in and then it told me that the thread didn't exist. The worst part is that it erased my rather eloquent expose'.

I tried to recreate it, but alas, the original masterpiece is forever gone. Here is the same basic question from another board and my suggestions:







I think most of us would be in agreement in saying that the BCS is not working perfectly. Many would suggest it isn't working at all.

My question to you all is what would you like to see done? This could be anything from a realistic tweaking of what we have now, to a clean sweep of the current system, replacing it with a true playoff system.

Ideally, we would have a true playoff tournament -- a winter madness if you will -- but even a 16 team playoff would add 3 more weeks to the season, so it would either drag into middle January or the season would be shorter, unless the playoffs conflicting with semester finals.

In any case, even though we might ideally like something along those lines, that isn't a realistic option.

That being said, what do you think would work?


Personally I think you could do a 12 team playoff, with the top 4 seeds gettiing a first round buy and the 5th through 12th seeds playing on the weekend that is now the conference championships. That way there could still be the 3 week dead period for finals and Christmas. Then depending on how the calender falls, the 8 reamaining team would play in four games, essentially replacing four of the major Bowls. These games would occur between Dec. 27th and Jan. 1st, depending on how the days fall. That would leave 4 teams playing in the National semifinals around Jan 3rd-7th. I think the semifinals should be on campus at the higher seeds. Then there should be a real National Championship game which would be no more than one week after when it is now.

I really think a system like this could work and would make everyone happy.

If you think about it, the lesser bowls would still get some decent teams and their status wouldn't be lessened in any way. I mean seriously, would the Sun Bowl or the Insight.com Bowl be somehow less important since it would then feature teams outside of the playoff? I think not and in any case, they now feature teams outside the BCS.

As for the major bowls, they woudl still get marquee attention with their matchups. Just for illustration, the Rose might feature a #1 Ohio St. and a #8 USC this season. The Sugar might feature a #2 LSU and a #7 Missouri. The Fiesta might pit #3 Okalahoma and #6 West Virginia Then Virginia Tech and Georgia would be squaring off in the 4,5 matchup in the Orange Bowl.

I really think something like that would work.


I know a lot are pushing for a "plus one" but this year just shows how flawed that would still be. Ohio St., LSU, Oklahoma, Va. Tech, Georgia and USC could all have reasonable arguments. Even if you take out Georgia, since they didn't win their conference, you would still have 5 teams trying to claim 4 spots.

I understand that there always has to be a cutoff and there will always be someone that is on the outside looking in. But think about it in hoops terms: sure some teams get jerked around and are relegated to the NIT, but in all seriousness, what is the likelihood that any of those teams had a realistic shot of winning the whole thing.

What do you think of this idea and what other suggestions can you all come up with?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry that was a bit long winded, but the keys are these:

-- 12 team playoff using something similar to BCS rankings for seedinds
-- Top 4 seeds get a bye
-- seeds 5 through 12 play 4 games on campus of higher seed on the first Saturday in December
-- Top four seeds would be the host at the 4 major bowls (Rose, Fiesta, Sugar and Orange) and would play the surviving 4 teams from the first round

-- The semifinal matches would be one week later on campus of the two highest remaining seeds
-- National Championship game would be the next week and would be rotated among the big 4 bowls as it is now


What is wrong with that proposal?



I think that is a very good proprosal.

[Blitzer]

An 8 team playoff at neutral sites isn't financially feasible due to ticket sales. The fans of the 2 teams in the finals would ave had to make 4 road trips in a month to sites all over the country without more than a weeks notice that they were even going to a game for sure. Making one bowl trip is not that hard for a lot of people but I think expecting people to go to neutral sites for all the rounds is too much to expect. The first fround at the least would have to be at home. You could send the 1st round losers to bowl games too, which would help those games out.

[FeartheSpur]

anything would help

[HiFiGator]

An 8 team playoff at neutral sites isn't financially feasible due to ticket sales. The fans of the 2 teams in the finals would ave had to make 4 road trips in a month to sites all over the country without more than a weeks notice that they were even going to a game for sure. Making one bowl trip is not that hard for a lot of people but I think expecting people to go to neutral sites for all the rounds is too much to expect. The first fround at the least would have to be at home. You could send the 1st round losers to bowl games too, which would help those games out.


You bring up a great point, and one I considered strongly when I devised my proposal. With my system, the first round of games would be on campus, as well as the National semifinals. SO coordinating those games would be relatively easy. The 4 major Bowls would host the quarterfinal round as well as the National Title game, which would rotate among the 4 bowls.

One note of interest: the rotation among the 4 big bowls is basically based on the fact that that is how we do it now. Someone else suggested having it rotate around random sites, more how the Super Bowl is done. That would be fine by me, but I just think we would get less resistance if we start with the 4 bowls hosting. I mean, they have the game once every four years as it is. They would put up less resistance if they weren't going to lose that part of the deal.

[Blitzer]

I think the Plus 1 game scenario is going to have the same problem. Most people couldn't up and go to Pasedena for a championship game with only 1 weeks notice.

[JAYBEZ]

I would personally like to see a 8 team playoff, but our best bet is with a 4 team playoff.

This is essentially a plus 1 system. It requires little change and keeps the money making bowl games around for the presidents.

Of course, we will next have controversy about if the teams in the top four actually belong... a never ending cycle...

[HiFiGator]

I would personally like to see a 8 team playoff, but our best bet is with a 4 team playoff.

This is essentially a plus 1 system. It requires little change and keeps the money making bowl games around for the presidents.

Of course, we will next have controversy about if the teams in the top four actually belong... a never ending cycle...


I agree and disagree. As for the # of teams, I think getting past the stigma against a playoff in the first place is the biggest obstacle. Once we get to that point then I don't think the number of teams will be as much of an issue. I think a 4 team playoff just doesn't solve much. Look at this season for example. 2 weeks ago, Missouri, W. Va., Ohio St. and Georgia were the top 4. The very next week it is Ohio St., LSU, Oklahoma and Va. Tech. You could very easily make an argument for USC, Georgia or W. Va. being in the top four as, they all finished with 2 losses and in USC and W. Va.'s case, also won their conference. The 8 team playoff would work, but I don't see that it really adds anything over the 12 teamer. With the 12 team, you have the added incentive of being a top seed, for a bye and potential home game. Plus you include 12 teams to begin with, which in my mind is enough to virtually guarantee that all teams that could realistically win 4 games in a row in the playoffs actually get in to begin with.

As for the "plus one" I just don't think that solves much of anything on its own. Sometimes there are very clearly 2 teams at the top after the regular season. A plus one, just for the sake of the plus one only serves to confuse things, not clear them up. Whereas a real playoff, whether it be 8 or 12 teams gives us closure.