Better yet…instead of arguing politics OR arguing if it could ever happen because we know the major corporations and established programs would fight to the death to prevent it:

What are your thoughts on a College Football playoff system? How many teams? When would it start?

discuss…

TeamBeer said

Better yet…instead of arguing politics OR arguing if it could ever happen because we know the major corporations and established programs would fight to the death to prevent it:

What are your thoughts on a College Football playoff system? How many teams? When would it start?

discuss…

This is a better topic.  It really would be simple, you keep the system the way it is know as far as how you qualify for a BCS bowl and then you seed them 1-8.  You can still have the Orange, Fiesta, Rose, and Sugar Bowls but they are playoff games.  I really dont understand how they cant figure out a way to make more money from having more games?  But anyway, with the way the system is right now there are teams (Utah, Hawaii, Boise State, one day FAU)that no matter what cannot go to the title game and that is not right….not saying they would always win, but you have to give them a chance at a shot of the title.

Besides that, if UF goes to the title game with a home loss to Ole Miss I will drive to Gainesville and punch a random fan in the face.

walty12 said

if UF goes to the title game with a home loss to Ole Miss I will drive to Gainesville and punch a random fan in the face.

:o

Florida_Owl said

walty12 said

if UF goes to the title game with a home loss to Ole Miss I will drive to Gainesville and punch a random fan in the face.

:o

And grab a Burrito from Burrito Bros. while I am there.

Its ridiculous that they would be ahead of Texas (lost to undefeated TT) or ahead of Oklahoma (lost to Texas) or even ahead of Oklahoma State (lost to Texas).  Mississippi might be doing ok this year, but they are not at the level of the losses of any of these teams.  I can't wait to see how the Big 12 pans out.. what a mess.

I'd love to see Boise State or one of the non-BCS teams crash the party but we all know the BCS will never allow that to happen

The fundamental flaw in the BCS is not the lack of a playoff, its the lack of equal treatment under the law for all teams in Div 1-A.  I can see how a playoff would encourage a team to possibly bench their star players for a meaningless regular season game, and distort (not ruin) the importance of every game.

A better system may be to have playoffs built into the system we have via conference championships.  Create conferences of 7 teams that are part of super conferences of 14 teams.  Win your conference (6 games) and go to your super conference championship (13th game).  If you win your super conference you go to a BCS game, auto-bid.  That sends about 8 teams.  Take 2 as at-large and you have your 10 team BCS bowl structure as it currently stands.  All teams are treated equally so even if a 16 team super conference was composed almost entirely of Sun Belt-esque teams (unlikely) the recruiting playing field would be equalized with a SEC-esque conference.  In fact the impetus would likely be for current big name teams to avoid being in a conference with other big names teams (to ensure a BCS bid)…and playing those big name teams as OOC games (to ensure a high enough ranking).  Conferences would be highly regional, lowering transportation cost and increasing rivalries, while OOC games would tend to be larger spectacles designed to improve the team's ranking while not affecting the opportunity for a general BCS bid.  This disincentivizes playing small time teams (ie I-AA) and actually promotes games like USC-Ohio State, or Florida-Oregon…all during the regular season.

When all the super conference championships are finished, the top teams in the country will be clear, and it could be anyone.

Here are my thoughts as posted in another thread. Note that at the time I was picking teams based on how they looked in September.

A 16 team play-off that guarantees all conference champions and then at-large teams based on rankings. The bowl system can stay intact by playing playoff games at major bowl sites and non-playoff teams can still go to bowls. It would be comparable to teams getting invited to the NIT. Basically meaningless, but teams still like to get the invite. Realistically teams outside of the national championship game don't have a shot at the title as it stands so keeping bowls for non-playoff teams would be the same thing.


The question of season length comes into play, but some teams are already playing 14 games with 12 regular season games plus a conference title game and bowl game.

The solution is to cut the regular season to 11 games. Teams with conference title games make those  first round playoff games. So the top conferences get their two teams in right away (if they qualify based on a top 25 ranking). Other teams that are eligible play their first round games against non-conf opponents the same week. Here is a hypothetical example of the first round.

Note: Toss out the MAC championship, just take the conference winner after 11 games. No conference shall have more than two eligible playoff teams.

Oklahoma vs. Kansas (BIG12 championship)
Florida vs. Auburn (SEC championship)
Boston College vs. FSU (ACC championship)

At large teams (based on conference title) and seeded:

USF (Big East) vs. Miami, OH (MAC)
FAU (SBC) vs. BYU (MWC)
Fresno State (WAC) vs. Ohio State (BIGTEN)
USC (Pac10) vs. East Carolina (CONFUSA)

Two at large teams:
Wisconsin vs. West Virginia


Another option is to keep the conference title games as automatic bids and have the other ten teams advance based on a playoff selection committee.

GO OWLS!!!