Should there be an 8 team (pig skin) play off?
- Thread starter 12375CAT
- Start date
Yes, my idea is to take all of the current P5 conferences and break all 64 teams up into regional groups. The best team from each region would then be part of the playoff.
I'm not sure whether the conferences would have to be broken up and the teams in the geographic region all play each other and also some select non-region games, or teams kept their conference alignment and there is some formula for who the regional representative would be.
I'm not sure whether the conferences would have to be broken up and the teams in the geographic region all play each other and also some select non-region games, or teams kept their conference alignment and there is some formula for who the regional representative would be.
And what would your plan be for all the smaller sports? The conferences are more than just football. Eight teams would be good, 16 would be too many.
Ranger Dan says Lions will qualify for an 8 team play off
&
Ranger Dan agrees WE ARE the
I'm glad that you asked... I would institute a relegation system, similar to European soccer. The worst teams in each region would move down and the top teams in the non P5 would move up. Again, this would be based upon some criteria.
So the schools that no one cares about or follows would get the same share of money as everyone else? We would have our own little socialist society? I don't think we need to revamp the entire conference system just to get more teams in a playoff for football.
The TV money would be given to those teams with the best viewership. So, even if Penn State would have dropped out of the top group in their region back in 2000-2004 (for example), they would still have been on TV because of all of the alumni and general fan interest. The playoff money would be divided with all teams within the top group of the region getting a larger share than the teams below the top group. So, teams in the top groups with the most TV viewer interest would get more than teams in the lower group with less TV interest.
Real simple. 10 conferences, 10 conference champs. Make the 3 independents join a conference or, they can't participate (ND, Army, BYU). Conference champs face off, no ESPN, committee b.s. based on someone's opinion. Just let the teams prove it on the field like every other division. End of story. Current bowl structure tied into games (some bowls will bitch about losing out but do we really need more crappy bowl games?). Rotate the championship game around the old time "big bowls". Of course that will never happen due to corporate greed and all the potential money lost by some companies.
I agree with this method. If you want a national championship, then ONLY conference champs get into the playoffs. Any time you have other non-conference champions in the mix you have tournament with a tournament champ. They are not NATIONAL CHAMPS because they did not win conference and maybe not even their division. Current bowls get to host the games; can still have other bowl games.
Now as for other bowls, only teams that are 7 & 5 (and even better 8 & 4) can play in a bowl game. Not enough teams; cancel the game. Games that do not fill at lease 2/3 of seats for two consecutive years are cancelled for at least 5 years. Maximum number of games including the aforementioned playoff and championship game would be 24. Also, no bowl games can be played before Christmas or after New Years Day. Playoff games are dispersed so that teams have a week to prepare for next game, but championship game must be played within 8 days of New Years.
10 teams is almost impossible to set up a bracket fairly. You would have to have byes and decide who gets the byes. Either has to be 8 teams or 16 (or 32 if you want to get crazy). They would have to go to 8 conferences or someone is either getting left out or there has to be play in games and then a way to decide who has to play in. If they go to 8 teams then they will be able to include pretty much any team that counts. There will always be teams left out that complain, but that happens all the time.
I would favor a 16 team national playoff - incorporating the existing lower tear bowl games, but I think the season would have to be shortened by a game or maybe 2 and conference championship games eliminated
Then how do you determine the conference champion in conferences that have divisions and not everyone plays each other?
Actually, if u go w/ a 16-team Playoff w/ 1 "autobid" per conference and 5 "at large" selections, there is no need to "force" Independents to join a conference. Beyond that, it is absurd to claim that University's should be "forced" to join conferences so there student-athletes can compete in extracurricular sports sponsored via the NCAA. The NCAA or the "P5 BCS Organization/Affiliation" attempting to ram anything down a member University's throat is the "tail wagging the dog", no?....and very likely to be viewed unfavorably (e.g., fail), if challenged in Fedreral Court under Anti-Trust codes, don't you think? The decision to join a conference is the University's and the University's alone.
Notre Dame is an ACC team. They may claim otherwise and their football team gets special dispensation from the ACC to only play 5 games in conference and not play in their championship game but make no mistake - they are an ACC team.
Simple 16 team solution.
Conference Championship games played on the first weekend of December as they currently do.
First round playoff games played on the second weekend in December. Playoff sites at the highest seed team's stadium. The home teams fans would turn out and fill the stadium.
Second round playoff games played on the third weekend in December. Playoff sites at the highest seed team's stadium. This guarantees a sellout crowd.
After the second round four teams remain and will play in the final four championship third round on
January 1 at the selected BCS stadium. The games will be sellouts and TV ratings high.
The winners of the third round meet in the final fourth round and play for the National Championship. This game would be no later than eight days after the New Year's third round game.
The game would be sold out . TV ratings would be through the roof!
Conference Championship games played on the first weekend of December as they currently do.
First round playoff games played on the second weekend in December. Playoff sites at the highest seed team's stadium. The home teams fans would turn out and fill the stadium.
Second round playoff games played on the third weekend in December. Playoff sites at the highest seed team's stadium. This guarantees a sellout crowd.
After the second round four teams remain and will play in the final four championship third round on
January 1 at the selected BCS stadium. The games will be sellouts and TV ratings high.
The winners of the third round meet in the final fourth round and play for the National Championship. This game would be no later than eight days after the New Year's third round game.
The game would be sold out . TV ratings would be through the roof!
I think it's already enough with 4.
These kids are supposed to be getting an education. When they're missing weeks of school by flying around the country like an NFL team how are they gonna keep up with classes? And how's an average fan supposed to be able to afford the plane fare, hotel room and tickets to follow their team's trek to all points of the compass in a quest for a title?
These kids are supposed to be getting an education. When they're missing weeks of school by flying around the country like an NFL team how are they gonna keep up with classes? And how's an average fan supposed to be able to afford the plane fare, hotel room and tickets to follow their team's trek to all points of the compass in a quest for a title?
No guarantee of a sell out crowd for the second round playoff games. It would be in the heart of Christmas break so few students will be there. It will also depend on what teams are in it because some teams don't support their team regardless. Not to mention the cost of attending multiple playoff games (even home games cost people a lot of money to go).
Yes, 8 conference champions. No conference should be allowed 2 entries. ONLY conference winners. Use the current bowl structure and make them bid for the games. Oh how the money will roll in. You can't be "National Champions" if you lose your conference. We should not let a couple of independents dictate how this works. Sorry ND, join up or watch from the sidelines.
How about this ... ten conference winners and the six highest ranked teams of the conference losers?! It would hit all of my major objectives:
1. A team like Houston (or Utah or Boise from years back) could shock the world. Isn't that what makes March Madness so exciting ... a true underdog can win it all!?
2. It would still reward the P5 for having "tougher" competition as they are more likely to be the highest ranked conference losers, but they would still be the 11-16 seeds.
3. It would make everyone join a conference if they want in. I'm tired of the entire CFB would revolving around what ND wants to do! Eff them!
4. The first round (8 games) can be in eight "lesser" bowls. My picks would be Alamo, Citrus, Gator, Holiday, Music City, Outback, Pinstripe and Sun bowls. I'm sure everyone's list would be different.
5. The final three rounds (7 games) can rotate among the seven strongest, longest standing bowls that are in seven different states across the country. My picks would be Rose, Sugar, Orange, Cotton, Fiesta, Peach and Liberty bowls.
6. It would entice the Big 12 to live up to their name and get two more teams (BYU and ND?) so they have a conference game and the chance of getting two teams in the playoffs (not just one).
7. Least important is it would still give the networks a reason to rank teams ... both for seedings and the six highest ranked "losers". Face it, they need something to talk about all season to justify the large amount they pay to cover the sport.
So hypothetically if ND and BYU joined the Big 12 and Army went to the Sun Belt, this could have been the playoff setup this year:
1 Clemson (ACC champ)
16 USC (PAC runner-up)
2 Alabama (SEC champ)
15 Temple (AAC runner-up)
3 Michigan State (B1G champ)
14 Florida (SEC runner-up)
4 Oklahoma (Big 12 champ)
13 UNC (ACC runner-up)
5 Stanford (PAC champ)
12 ND (Big 12 runner-up)
6 Houston (AAC champ)
11 Iowa (B1G runner-up)
7 Western Kentucky (CUSA champ)
10 Arkansas State (Sun Belt champ)
8 SDSU (MWC champ)
9 Bowling Green (MAC champ)
Tell me that wouldn't be exciting?!
1. A team like Houston (or Utah or Boise from years back) could shock the world. Isn't that what makes March Madness so exciting ... a true underdog can win it all!?
2. It would still reward the P5 for having "tougher" competition as they are more likely to be the highest ranked conference losers, but they would still be the 11-16 seeds.
3. It would make everyone join a conference if they want in. I'm tired of the entire CFB would revolving around what ND wants to do! Eff them!
4. The first round (8 games) can be in eight "lesser" bowls. My picks would be Alamo, Citrus, Gator, Holiday, Music City, Outback, Pinstripe and Sun bowls. I'm sure everyone's list would be different.
5. The final three rounds (7 games) can rotate among the seven strongest, longest standing bowls that are in seven different states across the country. My picks would be Rose, Sugar, Orange, Cotton, Fiesta, Peach and Liberty bowls.
6. It would entice the Big 12 to live up to their name and get two more teams (BYU and ND?) so they have a conference game and the chance of getting two teams in the playoffs (not just one).
7. Least important is it would still give the networks a reason to rank teams ... both for seedings and the six highest ranked "losers". Face it, they need something to talk about all season to justify the large amount they pay to cover the sport.
So hypothetically if ND and BYU joined the Big 12 and Army went to the Sun Belt, this could have been the playoff setup this year:
1 Clemson (ACC champ)
16 USC (PAC runner-up)
2 Alabama (SEC champ)
15 Temple (AAC runner-up)
3 Michigan State (B1G champ)
14 Florida (SEC runner-up)
4 Oklahoma (Big 12 champ)
13 UNC (ACC runner-up)
5 Stanford (PAC champ)
12 ND (Big 12 runner-up)
6 Houston (AAC champ)
11 Iowa (B1G runner-up)
7 Western Kentucky (CUSA champ)
10 Arkansas State (Sun Belt champ)
8 SDSU (MWC champ)
9 Bowling Green (MAC champ)
Tell me that wouldn't be exciting?!
Yes. I had an idea for an 8 team playoff involving the 4 BCS bowls, and not having the CFB season run so far into January.
My attempts to speak to the Powers That Be on this issue, however were thwarted. Needless to say. I. WAS. OUTRAGED.
My attempts to speak to the Powers That Be on this issue, however were thwarted. Needless to say. I. WAS. OUTRAGED.
My suggestion was similar, but with 8 conferences and 8 conference champs. I think having byes is a non starter.
Suppose the best most superior team in all of CFB suffers key injuries & loses 2 games so don't win their division but still qualify as an @ large @ the pig skin final 8 but are totally healthy by playoff time.
Now why can't the best most superior team be in the final 8 (if they qualify)
?
Last edited:
Forcing conference champs into playoffs only dilutes the pool. Who wants to see a two or three loss conference champ in a playoff (it could happen-remember the Big East). A committee should determine who the teams are so that the playoff can be limited to the best teams in the country. Frankly, I think four is plenty. In fact, this year four was two too many.
Go back to an 11 game season with no conference title game and have a 16 team playoff. Teams from 17 to 75 or whatever can play in a bowl game and have their fun there. The only schools pissed off will be those just outside the 16 team window that didn't make the playoffs.
Having everyone play 12 games and 16 or so more of them play 13 games (via a conference championship game) before we even get to bowl games or playoffs is simply ridiculous.
I didn't plan it that way, but I think the above is basically what JVP called for many years ago, before the regular season grew to 12 games and conference title games proliferated.
Having everyone play 12 games and 16 or so more of them play 13 games (via a conference championship game) before we even get to bowl games or playoffs is simply ridiculous.
I didn't plan it that way, but I think the above is basically what JVP called for many years ago, before the regular season grew to 12 games and conference title games proliferated.
4 is not enough as clearly deserving Conference Champions, such as Houston this year, are eliminated by design by the "BCS Controlling Organization" in favor of an exclusively BCS-Conference invitational rather than on worthiness (e.g., eliminated because they are a non-BCS-Conference Champion via professional boxing promoter-esque "rigging" rather than the merit of their on-field accomplishments).
Houston can play Msu, osu, Bama, USC, etc. on the road OC games to qualify over a P5 conference winner. NCAA CBB 64 team playoff is a tourney, not a championship playoff. Many people don't watch CBB regular season because it's basically a seeding tourney for March madness. It really doesn't crown a champion, more like a best team in March/April (I.e. uConn in 2014).
If you want cfb fans to stop watching, go to 8 or 16 teams and reduce the regular season to a seeding tourney for the playoffs. 4 teams makes every week and every game count: for teams and fans!
The point is to figure out who is #1. Remember that problem? Typically #1 can be found in the top 4 teams.
Board handle appropriately has "tired" in it as that is the same old & tired hypocritical nonsense argument that the NCAA & BCS-Conferences (e.g., the NCAA Member Intitution Representatives - the University Presidents) have been using from time immemorial and why it took this GD long to even have uber lame-@ss 4-team "invitation-only" fraud-playoff structure. Really? Did you just rollout the biggest BS excuse of them all to argue against a "real", legitimate playoff structure?
Is that what "the Committee decides" accomplishes? Because I'm pretty sure it's designed to "accomplish" what was done to Houston this year - which happens EVERY YEAR unlike the fairly infrequent example you gave.
So Just an FYI and you may already know this. Division 3 has a 32 team playoff, Division 2 has a 24 team playoff and I pretty sure that 1AA (FCS) has a 16 team playoff (if not more).
Division 3 uses the concept that for every 7 teams 1 play-off spot. They actually have Automatic Qualifiers (Conf Champs) and then a Pool B qualifers (Conferences w/o the minimum number of members to get an AQ, and then Pool C which is at large bids for 2nd place teams and others.
So the D3 champs and runner ups play in 15 games. 10 regular season and then 5 playoff games. That is if they make it to the finals.
Just some info.
When you rig it such that is impossible for a DESERVING non-BCS-Conference team to finish top 4, what you are suggesting is what is known as a "tautology" friend. This year a good example, your nonsense is only true if you accept the BCS-Conference-rigged "rankings" as imperically infallible and absolute ", so according to you the rigged BCS-Conference-System final ranking of #18 for Houston (who finished 13-1, won their Conference Championship via Conference Championship Game and beat the 2nd highest ranked team from their respective BCS-Conference in the "Final BCS-Controlled Rankings" [e.g., ranking that drives "4-team invitational tournament"], Florida State who was ranked #9 in Final BCS-Conference-Controlled Rankings in their bowl game. Didn't just beat F$U, but led the entire game by 2 and 3 touchdowns handling F$U far easier than ACC Champion and "rigged-system" #1, Clemson! Just absurd to claim there is ANY empirical evidence to suggest Houston could not compete with anybody on the field, but to suggest that there were clearly 17 BCS-Conference teams provably better on an absolute, empirical, objective basis is beyond farcical.
I don't want to let anyone in who "came in second", regardless of how you measure that. The MNC a few years ago where LSU and Bama had a rematch was an abomination.
How could it possibly be an abomination, it matched the #1 and #2 ranked teams of the empirical, infallible, objective P5-BCS-Conference-Controlled System "Selection Committee Rankings"? You are never going to be able to do better than, were talking about unbiased football super geniuses here. In fact, I'm pretty sure one of their members has that title on his business card:
Wile E. Coyote
Super Genius
Super Genius
