| FTBL If you could have a playoff in division I-A football...

[Bamaman37]

I've been hearing a lot of talk about college football Division I-A needing a playoff. I think it is very obvious that a playoff system needs to be put in place, but I am curious as to how you think one should be implemented. If it were up to me, this is how I would do it.


The first thing I would is make the Independents (Army, Navy, Notre Dame, and Western Kentucky) all join a conference. Each conference would then have a conference championship game, just like the SEC and Big-12. Then, I would have a 16-team tournament. This is done in Division I-AA, Division II, and Division III. The winner of each of the 11 conferences would get automatic bids, and the remaining 5 bids would go to at-large teams. The higher seed would get home-field advantage in the first 3 rounds, with the National Championship game being played at a neutral site. The "lower-tier" bowl games could still be played by the teams that didn't make the playoffs, much like the NIT in college basketball. Also, the BCS standings could still be used to help seed the teams, as well as choose the at-large teams. So, under this system, this is how I would seed this years 16-team field:


(1) Ohio St
(16) Central Michigan
(8.) Hawaii
(9) Kansas


(5) Georgia
(12) Arizona St.
(4) Oklahoma
(13) BYU


(6) USC
(11) Florida
(3) Virginia Tech
(14) Central Florida


(7) Missouri
(10) West Virginia
(2) LSU
(15) Florida Atlantic


So, if it were up to you how would you do a playoff? Who would be in your playoff this year?

 

[Guest]

At the most 8 team playoff. If your below 8th, I don't think you have a legit shot at winning the NC. So you pair off the Top 8 teams, 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, and so on. Same situation, the higher ranked team has home field atvantage, and the Campionship game rotated around the BCS Bowl spots.

As Bamaman said, the non-playoff teams can play in the meaningless bowl games just as they do now.

I honestly wish they would either do this, or even a plus one, or go back to the old bowl system.

 

[ghice]

I say take the 6 BCS conf. champions, and 2 at large bids.

So that would mean:

#1 OSU
#2 LSU
#3 VT
#4 OU
#7 USC
#9 WVU

And the 2 highest in the BCS not in this group:

#5 Georgia
#6 Missu


--------------------------------------------


OUTBACK BOWL
#1 OSU v
#9 WV

ORANGE BOWL
#2 LSU v
#7 USC

FIESTA BOWL
#3 VT v
#6 Missu

Chick-Fil-a Bowl
#4 OU v
#5 Georgia

Sugar Bowl
Winner of Outback
Winner of Orange

Rose Bowl
Winner of Fiesta
Winner of Chick-Fil-a

BCS NC Game
Winner of Sugar
Winner of Rose

 

[crimsontradition14]

I say take the 6 BCS conf. champions, and 2 at large bids.

So that would mean:

#1 OSU
#2 LSU
#3 VT
#4 OU
#7 USC
#9 WVU

And the 2 highest in the BCS not in this group:

#5 Georgia
#6 Missu


--------------------------------------------


OUTBACK BOWL
#1 OSU v
#9 WV

ORANGE BOWL
#2 LSU v
#7 USC

FIESTA BOWL
#3 VT v
#6 Missu

Chick-Fil-a Bowl
#4 OU v
#5 Georgia

Sugar Bowl
Winner of Outback
Winner of Orange

Rose Bowl
Winner of Fiesta
Winner of Chick-Fil-a

BCS NC Game
Winner of Sugar
Winner of Rose

I really like this a lot, though it is tough in any system to ever really tell who the best team is. It is always just a matter of who shows up and when obviously.

 

[moreno_iv]

I've been hearing a lot of talk about college football Division I-A needing a playoff. I think it is very obvious that a playoff system needs to be put in place, but I am curious as to how you think one should be implemented. If it were up to me, this is how I would do it.


The first thing I would is make the Independents (Army, Navy, Notre Dame, and Western Kentucky) all join a conference. Each conference would then have a conference championship game, just like the SEC and Big-12. Then, I would have a 16-team tournament. This is done in Division I-AA, Division II, and Division III. The winner of each of the 11 conferences would get automatic bids, and the remaining 5 bids would go to at-large teams. The higher seed would get home-field advantage in the first 3 rounds, with the National Championship game being played at a neutral site. The "lower-tier" bowl games could still be played by the teams that didn't make the playoffs, much like the NIT in college basketball. Also, the BCS standings could still be used to help seed the teams, as well as choose the at-large teams. So, under this system, this is how I would seed this years 16-team field:


(1) Ohio St
(16) Central Michigan
(8.) Hawaii
(9) Kansas


(5) Georgia
(12) Arizona St.
(4) Oklahoma
(13) BYU


(6) USC
(11) Florida
(3) Virginia Tech
(14) Central Florida


(7) Missouri
(10) West Virginia
(2) LSU
(15) Florida Atlantic


So, if it were up to you how would you do a playoff? Who would be in your playoff this year?

Is your real name Dan Wetzel?

The Wetzel Plan

 

[Outlaw]

Actually, D2 is a 24 team playoff. 16 teams play in the first round, 8 teams get a bye to the second round.

 

[CrimsonPirate]

If the college presidents are against playoffs because they say there would be too many games, why did they allow a 12-game regular season?

I really don't see the need for a conference championship game. Back when Tulane and Tech were in the SEC, we didn't have one. The champ was crowned on the basis of conference games won. The championship games are there strictly for the money they generate. Get rid of them, go back to a 10-schedule, and you wind up with 3 extra weeks in which to schedule a playoff.

 

[Guest]

If the college presidents are against playoffs because they say there would be too many games, why did they allow a 12-game regular season?

I really don't see the need for a conference championship game. Back when Tulane and Tech were in the SEC, we didn't have one. The champ was crowned on the basis of conference games won. The championship games are there strictly for the money they generate. Get rid of them, go back to a 10-schedule, and you wind up with 3 extra weeks in which to schedule a playoff.

\

Exactly what I was thinking. :wink:

 

[Bamaman37]

Is your real name Dan Wetzel?

The Wetzel Plan

LOL! Great minds must think alike! :lol: That is exactly the way I have wanted it for a long time!

Actually, D2 is a 24 team playoff. 16 teams play in the first round, 8 teams get a bye to the second round.

Oops! You're right, I forgot about the first round byes. That's the only thing I don't like about the DII playoffs.

 

[Guest]

I say take the 6 BCS conf. champions, and 2 at large bids.

So that would mean:

#1 OSU
#2 LSU
#3 VT
#4 OU
#7 USC
#9 WVU

And the 2 highest in the BCS not in this group:

#5 Georgia
#6 Missu

That's a pretty good format, that actually could work.

 

[Guest]

We all know that the biggest issue is money. There is a lot of revenue for cities and individual colleges so on..so forth. My proposal will keep the best of both worlds while maintaining a bowl championship series. I have heard different variations. It is extremely simple and no lost football weekends right up to the SuperBowl

Keep a traditional New Years Day with 4 major bowls with the top 8 finishing teams.

Orange Bowl winner plays Suger Bowl winner Jan. 8
Cotton Bowl winner plays Rose Bowl winner Jan. 8

Orange/Suger winner plays Cotton/Rose winner Jan.15

Championship Game Jan. 22

Bowls can even have a lottery event to choose teams.

 

[srollins]

I say take the 6 BCS conf. champions, and 2 at large bids.

So that would mean:

#1 OSU
#2 LSU
#3 VT
#4 OU
#7 USC
#9 WVU

And the 2 highest in the BCS not in this group:

#5 Georgia
#6 Missu


--------------------------------------------


OUTBACK BOWL
#1 OSU v
#9 WV

ORANGE BOWL
#2 LSU v
#7 USC

FIESTA BOWL
#3 VT v
#6 Missu

Chick-Fil-a Bowl
#4 OU v
#5 Georgia

Sugar Bowl
Winner of Outback
Winner of Orange

Rose Bowl
Winner of Fiesta
Winner of Chick-Fil-a

BCS NC Game
Winner of Sugar
Winner of Rose

I like this idea in general, but, I don't think you would ever see four bowl games played with the winners of the four playing in two more bowls. Then those two winners in a final championship game. Those two teams would essentially get to play in three bowl games in one year.

Once you let the conferences get that much money up for grabs and it would be a total sham.
I like the idea of a hybrid bowl/playoff something like this:

1) conference champs are seeded and placed in a play-off using thier seeding (6 plus 2 at-large per your idea) (at this time, 9 and 10 are waiting for the dust to settle)

2) after this play-off round, new rankings determine bowl placement. The four winners would be 1-4 with 1 and 2 playing in the Championship Game. 3 -10 would play in 4 "BCS-style" bowls consisting of 3 vs. 10, 4 vs. 9, 5 vs. 8 and 6 vs. 7.

3) Teams outside the top ten would fill out the rest of the conventional bowl schedule using conference tie-ins, etc. as they are now

Could something like this work, or is it dumb?

 

[Guest]

I say take the 6 BCS conf. champions, and 2 at large bids.

So that would mean:

#1 OSU
#2 LSU
#3 VT
#4 OU
#7 USC
#9 WVU

And the 2 highest in the BCS not in this group:

#5 Georgia
#6 Missu


--------------------------------------------


OUTBACK BOWL
#1 OSU v
#9 WV

ORANGE BOWL
#2 LSU v
#7 USC

FIESTA BOWL
#3 VT v
#6 Missu

Chick-Fil-a Bowl
#4 OU v
#5 Georgia

Sugar Bowl
Winner of Outback
Winner of Orange

Rose Bowl
Winner of Fiesta
Winner of Chick-Fil-a

BCS NC Game
Winner of Sugar
Winner of Rose

I like this idea in general, but, I don't think you would ever see four bowl games played with the winners of the four playing in two more bowls. Then those two winners in a final championship game. Those two teams would essentially get to play in three bowl games in one year.

Once you let the conferences get that much money up for grabs and it would be a total sham.
I like the idea of a hybrid bowl/playoff something like this:

1) conference champs are seeded and placed in a play-off using thier seeding (6 plus 2 at-large per your idea) (at this time, 9 and 10 are waiting for the dust to settle)

2) after this play-off round, new rankings determine bowl placement. The four winners would be 1-4 with 1 and 2 playing in the Championship Game. 3 -10 would play in 4 "BCS-style" bowls consisting of 3 vs. 10, 4 vs. 9, 5 vs. 8 and 6 vs. 7.

3) Teams outside the top ten would fill out the rest of the conventional bowl schedule using conference tie-ins, etc. as they are now

Could something like this work, or is it dumb?

I don't think it is far off base.

Personally, I could see a modification to the existing bowl system where the top 6 + 2 at large play in 4 of the BCS bowls, and the rotating BCS Championship game is held 2 weeks later...basically an 8 team playoff, using the current BCS system plus 2 elimination games...that could make for a 16 team schedule under the current 12 game + Championship model. Giving the top 2 teams a bye might be one way around some of the confusion...so the 3 seed would play the 5, the 4 plays the 6...the winners play the 1 & 2 seeds and the winners of those games play in the finals. It would still use the same bowls, only people would not get a month in advance to plan for their trip...that is probably the biggest holdup...the money that fans bring to a venue when they arrive a few days early. With a playoff, that would be greatly diminished.

Alternately, a plus one would work in most seasons.

 

[srollins]

Giving the top 2 teams a bye might be one way around some of the confusion...

Hey, this gives the Big-Ten a way of getting Ohio State in with relative ease.

Just win out with a cupcake schedule, sit on thier butts in Columbus while other conferences place thier top 2 teams rankings on the line with championship games, then the voters and computers rank them 1 or 2 and they get a bye...

It works great for ESPN too (aka. "Big-Ten Country") :wink: