Ok so after about 3300 people actually read my blog, only about 20 left responses, but those were 20 good responses. Before I get into this I want state that I do not actually think this will ever happen, but given the uproar I hear every season and people's obsession with competitive fairness I figured I would come up with a playoff system thats 100% fair. I just put out there for everybody to see and see what you thought. So down to buisness:
Ill start off where I was wrong:
1) There was one thing I didnt consider, that was the effect adding teams to conferences would have on basketball. I have no ideas how to make that work.
2) I did not take the politics of the NCAA in to account, but I know because of that this plan will never happen.
12 team conferences
I said expand each conference's football membership to 12 to force each conference to hold a championship game. Is it fair that Missouri finished the regular season with one loss and ranked number 1 only to lose a post season game and lose out on a BCS berth and a National Championship berth while Ohio State did not play a post season game and moved in to the top spot by doing nothing? In the system I proposed it would be wrong to require 3 teams to win a conference championship game, while its not necessary for 3 others. The 12 teams would ensure everybody had a fair and equal path to the playoffs. Plus a team would not be able to ride a weak schedule (like West Virgina and Missouri both almost did) to the Title game.
What about non-major conferences?
Sure not allowing the MAC, WAC, Sun Belt, and Mountian West in to the playoff would cause controversy and result in a lawsuit of some kind, most likely anti-trust. But come on, do any of those conferences have a team that could win the National Title. Would FAU or Central Michigan actually stand a chance? I know App State beat Michigan I havent spent the past 4 months in a cave, but the reason that was so big is becasue something like that 999/1000 times wont happen. Lets not focus on the abberation.
Theyre students first, a playoff would interefere with finals.
Is that stopping the FCS, D-II, or D-III from holding playoffs thru next week? And thier programs don't bering in nearly as much cash as an FBS powerhouse.
Use this scenario for a first round of a playoff
Rose: Pac 10 Champ v Big 10 Champ
Sugar: SEC Champ v. Big East Champ
Orange: Big 12 Champ v ACC Champ
Fiesta: Two at Large Bids
The whole point of this playoff system I proposed is to eliminate at-large bids to eliminate controversy. This system would cause an uproar becasue Missouri would not be there, and possibly Georgia too, and we would have the same issues with the BCS we have now. This is why a 16 team playoff would fail and a plus one model wouldnt work either. Also a bowl game cannot be used as a playoff, that would cost conferences millions in payout and theyre nuts if they do that.
Notre Dame will never join the Big Ten, or share thier NBC money with them.
Well there wouldnt be a seperate contract for them either, so theyll be stuck at 11 National Championships for eternity, and out BCS/playoff money. But then again if they wanna keep thier NBC money let them, its thiers not the conferences, Just dont give them any of the conferences ABC money. Plus there would be 6 conference title games on championship saturday and ABC cant show 5 of them. So give NBC the Big 10 title game for a fee and split that money evenly. That should work for everybody.
Why have Delaware elevate to FBS and not anyone else?
Because Delaware is a state institute with greater access to state funds than App State. Theres not an immediate rival like UMass would have in UConn and BC. It has a loyal fan base and a big following in Delaware (bc theres really nothing else there).
But enough about the BCS, were gonna hear all about it next year, so all i can say OSU 42 - LSU 6, the Buckeyes expose an overrated LSU team and the state of Michigan breathes a sigh of relief that their next head coach will not be Les Miles.
New Topic: http://www.fannation.com/blogs/post/85796