Official argue about all dumb things BCS and CFB playoff thread

[BobJoeJim]

Four team playoff. No more than that. The number 5 team has not ever (prior to this year) in the history of the BCS had a legitimate claim to the national title in my opinion. It *might* happen this year, but it still might not, and that would be a massive fluke. Let the top four battle it out, everyone who deserves a shot gets one, use the current BCS formula to determine it (with more computers included, so that it's a genuine computer POLL), and you're golden.

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
Four team playoff. No more than that. The number 5 team has not ever (prior to this year) in the history of the BCS had a legitimate claim to the national title in my opinion. It *might* happen this year, but it still might not, and that would be a massive fluke. Let the top four battle it out, everyone who deserves a shot gets one, use the current BCS formula to determine it (with more computers included, so that it's a genuine computer POLL), and you're golden.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm okay with a 4 team system as well.
But with an 8 team system you have a better opportunity to give a team like HAW or BSU a chance when they put together an awesome season. And personally, I think it would be exciting seeing a BSU/OU type game with more on the line than just Fiesta Bowl Pride.

[BobJoeJim]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Four team playoff. No more than that. The number 5 team has not ever (prior to this year) in the history of the BCS had a legitimate claim to the national title in my opinion. It *might* happen this year, but it still might not, and that would be a massive fluke. Let the top four battle it out, everyone who deserves a shot gets one, use the current BCS formula to determine it (with more computers included, so that it's a genuine computer POLL), and you're golden.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm okay with a 4 team system as well.
But with an 8 team system you have a better opportunity to give a team like HAW or BSU a chance when they put together an awesome season. And personally, I think it would be exciting seeing a BSU/OU type game with more on the line than just Fiesta Bowl Pride.

[/ QUOTE ]
That would be a nice upside to an 8 team tourney, but it's not worth the downside of giving teams like LSU/USC/Kansas shots that they don't deserve because they managed to hang around in the top 8. It would devalue the regular season too much. USC's loss to Stanford SHOULD eliminate them from contention (if they lose a second game as well). In a four-team playoff it still does. In an eight-team playoff they can still backdoor their way in, and that's bad. Bad enough that an eight-team playoff would be worse than the current system.

Best options in order:
1. Four team "and one" playoff
2. Current BCS
3. Eight team playoff

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
In an eight-team playoff they can still backdoor their way in, and that's bad.

[/ QUOTE ]


meh. all year long I think we've had one team trying to out-backdoor the other to get back into the race.
I forget the order but it was just silly with each 1 or 2 team losing week after week and 2 other teams 'backdooring' their way into the chase only because somebody else lost.

It doesn't make it exciting for me. I just think it's kind of stupid. I like the games enough as it is but all this stuff of "USF loses and now BC is in the picture...BC loses and now Oregon is in the picture...Oregon loses and now Kansas is in the picture...LSU loses, again, and now WV is in the picture" blah blah blah.

It's non-stop backdooring and you still have OSU hoping they get to backdoor their way in if OU can knock of Mizzou.

So I don't really have a problem with LSU backdooring their way in to a 4 team or 8 team playoff. I feel like it's happening every single week.
You will simply have a situation of 2 losses still being realistically good enough to stay in the title chase. Losing 3 games and you are most certainly out.
A BCS team losing only 1 game all year pretty much gets to stay in the picture more often than not although you will have some situations like KU right now who would likely not make the cut.


Anyway, my preference would actually be for 16 teams in a college playoff.
Give teams like HAW, BSU and maybe even BYU a chance.
I think it would be tremendously exciting. If they get blown out by LSU or OSU by 45 points then no biggie. Not really different than Duke winning their first round basketball game by 45 points.

[Quicksilvre]

[ QUOTE ]
Four team playoff. No more than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

[iggymcfly]

[ QUOTE ]

That would be a nice upside to an 8 team tourney, but it's not worth the downside of giving teams like LSU/USC/Kansas shots that they don't deserve because they managed to hang around in the top 8. It would devalue the regular season too much. USC's loss to Stanford SHOULD eliminate them from contention (if they lose a second game as well). In a four-team playoff it still does. In an eight-team playoff they can still backdoor their way in, and that's bad. Bad enough that an eight-team playoff would be worse than the current system.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who exactly do you think would make a 4 team playoff this year? It would be West Virginia, Ohio State, the OU/Mizzou winner and..... USC. Do you really think a Bulldog team that doesn't win its own division or an LSU that tanked at the end of the year would get in over Pete Carroll's bunch?

Usually, I'm all for an 8-team playoff, and I still think it's the best long-term solution, but this year, I'm glad that it's just the top 2. Every team's had their fair shot and it's made the end of the season much more exciting.

[eviljeff]

10 game regular season, 16 team playoff

[Bump_Bailey]

[ QUOTE ]
10 game regular season, 16 team playoff

[/ QUOTE ]

The correct answer. Just like 1-AA, first round game at better seed. Then second round and further at Pasadena, New Orleans, etc.

[MicroBob]

Yeah, something like this.
Just let the conference winners in even from the mid-majors. It works for college hoops just fine. Even though a 16 seed has never beaten a 1 seed there have still been some exciting games. You can still keep the conference championships to determine who represents each conference.

You will have 5 at-larges plus champs of the 11 conferences:
ACC, Big 12, Big East, Big 10, C-USA, MAC, MWC, Pac 10, SEC, Sun Belt, WAC


Other elgibile teams can still go to smaller bowl games. I don't think this set-up makes it any less prestigious for 6th place Big 10 or 4th place CUSA or 3rd place MAC to go play at the Fort Worth Bowl or Emerald Bowl or Pointsettia Bowl or GMAC Bowl, etc.

These smaller bowls don't exactly need to be protected in the first place imo. Many of them are relatively new and only came on the scene because they are able to take advantage of the system and get a TV contract, etc.
hell, most people joke about the sillyness and pointlessness of some of these smaller bowl games.


It wasn't too long ago, less than 10 years, that a 10-1 Miami, Ohio team that beat a #11 ranked UNC did not get an invite to any bowl simply because there weren't enough bowls around and they just weren't a big enough attraction.
Only one MAC team went to a bowl and that year Marshall with Pennington and Moss went 11-0.
Meanwhile, 6-5 UNC went to the Las Vegas Bowl that year.

I think there were 16 or 17 bowl games 10 yrs ago perhaps...as opposed to 32 or 33 now I think.

Now you have 3 bowl games guaranteed for the MAC and 5 bowl games for the freaking CUSA. This is great for those conferences. They get revenue and get on TV, etc etc.
But these are bowl games that are NOT steeped in tradition or in dying need of being preserved.
Even the small schools that get their chance to go to bowls no longer get THAT excited about it.
And again, I'm not even sure that a playoff system would need to detract from the pagentry and excitement that is the Motor City Bowl one little bit.

I mean, it's nice for Troy to go to a bowl, but I think they are more excited about competing with an SEC team in the regular season than they are about taking on a Northern Illinois in the Emerald Bowl like they did a couple yrs ago.


But think of the excitement for a Central Michigan or Hawaii or BYU or UCF if we set it up so that they get their shot at LSU or WV or whoever.
Yeah, most of the time they'll get killed. But I honestly don't see why that's such a horrible thing when we have the exact same thing in the college hoops tourney every year.

[ClarkNasty]

My understanding is that the problem isn't that a tourney would make less money than the Bowls. The problem is that tourney revenue would have to be split amongst all teams and not just the BCS teams.