FanNation - The Republic of Sport

8 team playoff, that's a waste of time. Bring in the champs from every major conference, and then 8 at large. 16 teams, 16 games, seeded using the same formula that is used for basketball.

The too many game argument is bunk. Div I-AA (now the playoff subdivision) does it, as does Div II and Div III. What is it only unfair to kids in Div I. Money (and a BCS contract until 2010) is what is keeping it from happening

16 could work too. Regardless of the playoff FORMAT the notion that the BCS has less mistakes (or even less significant one) is just flat wrong

The_K1NG
However, if you extend it to a 16-team playoff, that would add 4 weeks to the season.

----------
Dec 2 = Last Game played....then what? we wait for like forever for the BCS bowl games...why not use the 'time off' and keep playing...and still end the season around the same time as it ends now (Jan 3rd)

With the 16 team suggestion...
Dec 8 = 8 Games Playoff (16 teams)
Dec 15 = 4 Games Playoff (8 teams)
Dec 22 = 2 Games Playoff (4 teams)

Take christmas week off

Jan 1 = National Championship
------------------------------

The_K1NG
and there would be controversy over good teams being left out.

There will always be teams that would be left out..it happens in the nfl, mlb etc....

I agree with Southernbred. Small schools should have a shot if they go undefeated. Especially if their conference opposition is more evenly matched. Unlike some of the teams that get in and have played big named schools that are not as strong as they use to be.

Small schools...non bcs schools or whoever go undefeated will feellike 'hey we got shafted'...what do you propose to do? Have those teams get embarrass by playing with the 'big boys'?

I suppose the pros can do it also...say have the Las Vegas Stars (minor league team..if they win the minor league title or whatever it is they win) play the Boston Red Sox for the championship.....that would really make sense and fair....

Shorten the regular season if necessary and have a sixteen team playoff system.
College kids are young and strong. Not like they are going to get tired playing a longer overall season. the football is not that heavy.

BlueVegas... Utah won their bowl game as did Boise State. Regardless all the top 4 or 5 bigboys would be in

I haven't seen one comment from someone anti-playoff pro BCS yet...

Bucky regardless works better than King's status quo. I just think playoffs are a longshot but 8team is more likely be approved than 16team.

I went to a division I-AA (then) and playoffs are exciting even at a lower level of play. We would finally get to see great traditions play one another.

I dont care if 8, 12, 16. I am just tired of what we have. If King continues this thing I'll explain why

Why do we need 8 or more teams?

If the answer is to just give teams that didn't win their conference another shot, we don't. If the answer is to give a 2nd chance to teams that couldn't get thru the season with 0 or 1 loss, the answer is no. If it is so a bunch of homers can hope their underperforming team can put together a string of 3 or 4 wins to reclaim their schedule, the answer is definitely NO (lessens the importance of the regular season games, as would guaranteeing a spot to the conference champion).

Ifyou only look at teams that have a legit claim to be in the top 2, this year as in most 4 or 4 would suffice. You have to go deep in any given year to justify more than 5. In Alphabetical order:
LSU
Oklahoma
OSU
USC
WVa

I don't have a problem leaving out teams that didn't win their conference.
I don't have a problem leaving out teams from lesser conferences that didn't play a very notable non-conference schedule and had numerous close calls against mediocre teams.
I don't have a problem leaving out VT because they already lost (and lost big) to another major conference champion in the above list.

And to be honest, this is only an issue because only 1 team from a major conference completed the season with only 1 loss. If 2 teams had finished with just 1 loss, or if a team from a lesser conference went undefeated AND won convincingly AND played a notable non-conference schedule, this year wouldn't be an example of needing a playoff.

In all honesty, every 2 loss team this year either lost to a team from the lower half of their conference, didn't win their conference title, or lost to a conference champion from another conference - NONE of them deserve to be playing for the title, but 1 of them has to, and LSUs win over VT makes them as good if not better choice than the others (the only other good claim I see is USC).

it is not safe to say a playoff would have just as many problems - it is safe to say it introduces a lot of new ones, an the more teams in the playoffs, the more problems introduced.

Prove it. You are too focused on this year. And the TD isnt for this year. The scenario you mentioned with undefeated teams staying home (from major conferences) or 1 loss teams has happened over and over. Did you actually read my argument every one of them was an instance except this year.

Even this year -- you need one because you dont know who the #2 team should be. OU, USC, LSU, and VT all have arguments.

And again the TD is about playoffs in general not this year alone

If you would just alleviate the pansy non-conference games during the season and plug in the extra games from a 16 team play-off then I think the problem would be solved..
The little guy would miss out on a financial windfall by not getting paid to get their azzzzez kicked.. But, if a play-off system is the way to go.. Then, all teams just play within their conference and then the top 16 in the Nation go into a play-off situation.

I think a playoff system would be incredibly exciting. Imagine instead of watching games on Jan. 1st that solve nothing except bragging rights between conferences if every game on Jan. 1st had a team that could potentially end up playing for the title. It would make for some great football.

even if the playoff system had problems wouldnt it be better than seeing every coach in the NCAA vote their team #1?

I think one of tragedies of the BCS system is teams get left out who have a legitimate argument that they are the best in the country and the system has no justification as they why they aren't. A playoff system (8 or 16, just give me one) has a much stronger justification for teams that get left off, but more importantly the teams that get left off in that system would not be considered one of the favorites for the national title for the most part. There is something fundamentally different about telling top 5 team they don't have shot at the title and telling a 6-15th ranked team they don't.

The bowl situation is where it is at however, you have a lot of money and time invested into these events. I believe the bowls could be made into certain playoff games along the way, using a regular rotation based on tier. Another thing that could be implemented to keep the bowls happy is create an NIT type second tier playoff. NIT champions in NCAA basketball are given some clout and then give that program something to prove the next year. I could see at least a 2 tier playoff system also giving non-BCS conference schools a chance to test their meddle against BCS conference foes as well as allowing for maintaining of the lower ranked bowl games.

In the end I think something should be done.

The first bowl game is Dec. 20th. The BCS game is Jan. 7th.
More than enough time for at least an 8 team playoff. If you went a game every 6 days it expands to a 16 team playoff.

A playoff works for every other sport. March Madness is one of the greatest sporting events of the year. It is maddening that every year people argue about the problems of the BCS but nobody does anything about it.

16 team playoff format

11 conference champions are automatic, and each conference can determine whether they need a playoff or go by the results of the regular season. This ensures that every team in every conference has a shot at winning the championship. Any playoff system that only includes 6 conferences is still broken.

5 at large invitations go to the 5 highest ranked teams that did not win their conference. This provides a way for independants and additional teams in strong conferences to participate.

These 16 teams are seeded by their ranking in the BCS and follow the traditional 16 team bracket. They play 8 games on Dec 8 (higher seed gets the home field) 4 games on Dec 22 after a 2 week break at bowl sites, 2 games on Dec 29 at bowl sites and the championship game on Jan 5.

Teams that didn't earn a spot in the playoff but that are bowl eligible can still be invited to one of the many irrelevant bowls that already exist. There could in fact be another playoff tournament like the NIT for the next 16 teams that get invited.

Example for this year:
Dec 8
#1 OSU (Big10) vs. #16 Central Michigan (MidAm)
#2 LSU (SEC) vs. #15 Troy (SunBelt)
#3 VaTech (ACC) vs. #14 Central Florida (ConfUsa)
#4 Oklahoma (Big12) vs. #13 BYU (MtnWest)
#5 Georgia (at large) vs. #12 Florida (at large)
#6 Missouri (at large) vs. #11 ASU (at large)
#7 USC (Pac10) vs. #10 Hawaii (WAC)
#8 Kansas (at large) vs. #9 West Virginia (BigEast)

Assuming home teams win you get:
Dec 22
OSU vs. Kansas (Cotton Bowl)
LSU vs. USC (Sugar Bowl)
Va Tech vs. Missouri (Outback Bowl)
Oklahoma vs. Georgia (Peach Bowl)
[Every one of these matchups are better than what the BCS gave us this year]

Dec 29
OSU vs. Oklahoma (Rose Bowl)
LSU vs. Va Tech (Orange Bowl)

Jan 5
OSU vs. LSU (Fiesta Bowl)

And we all know that whatever two teams make it through that bracket will be a great matchup and will deserve to be in the championship game. The bowls can rotate who gets which games. Every one will be tuning in to see these games.