Imwhatzup's BCS Playoff system

[malky]

I hope EA does a 2k baseball move and gives us the option of a playoff this year cause the college football playoff plus 1 is going to be announced this year book it

[Da Hype Iz Real]

Quote: Originally Posted by imwhatzup

Not if you make conference champs automatically included. 12 champs 4 at-large then the season is really important.

This.

Also i think a good idea could be that the top seeds of the 16 team tourney go to Conference champs in the order they are ranked in the top 25 and then the next seeds are filled in by the remaining top 25.

This model Would have gotten 2 teams from the CUSA and Mwc In using the final rankings might have stopped the conference realignment madness.

[UniversityofArizona]

I would like an option for the Big 10 champ to play the Pac-12 champ somewhere in there. I love watching the Rose Bowl and although having the NCAA host it would probably remove the Rose Bowl branding at least the matchup would be there. I definitely want a playoff though if only for the simple fact that the winner would get an actual NCAA championship, and not some make believe award given by third parties.

[DorianDonP]

Quote: Originally Posted by imwhatzup

I think this model would be fair to everyone and would give the feel of march madness. Maybe 12 division champions and 4 at-large with seedings based on rankings. [img]http://www.operationsports.com/forums/

Why should a 3 loss team be playing for a national championship? Many times since the BCS has been implimented, the 11th ranked team in the final BCS standings has been a 3 loss team. Many times a conference winner has 5 or 6 losses. Why should they be rewarded by catching fire in one month of the season?

I don't want to give College Football the feel of March Madness. WHY? September to December in CFB is already MADNESS. It's what makes the regular season so fun, to know if you lose once, you might be done. Why risk losing that?

No one cares about the regular season of college basketball. They only care about the tournament. Why would anyone want the same thing to happen to college football? College Football has the most unique and best regular season of any sport. We should be striving to maintain that, not copying what works in basketball.

What stops an undefeated team with one regular season game from resting starters in preparation for the tournament?

You know what made the 1997 UF upset of FSU, or the 2006 ULCA upset of USC, or the 2007 Pitt upset of West Virginia so memorable for the winning team and hurtful for the losing team?

There was no playoff to look forward to for the losing team. It was win or your championship dreams are gone.

When number 1 ranked Powerhouse loses to unranked rival in the last game of the year, I dont want to hear "we'll see the losing team in the playoffs" as they walk off the field. I want to see them totally destroyed, knowing they let it slip away.

Quote: Originally Posted by imwhatzup

Not if you make conference champs automatically included. 12 champs 4 at-large then the season is really important.

No, then you have completely diluted the importance of regular season games. A team would be able to theoretically lose 50% of their regular season games and STILL win a national championship.

The current system is not perfect. But the remedy is a plus one system. Four teams, almost always undefeated, or one loss teams. Keeps the regular season great and gives CFB a better post season.

[DorianDonP]

Quote: Originally Posted by UniversityofArizona

I would like an option for the Big 10 champ to play the Pac-12 champ somewhere in there. I love watching the Rose Bowl and although having the NCAA host it would probably remove the Rose Bowl branding at least the matchup would be there. I definitely want a playoff though if only for the simple fact that the winner would get an actual NCAA championship, and not some make believe award given by third parties.

Four team playoff sure.

Anything more than that is destroying the regular season, IMO. Even if you make it a 16 team playoff, it still will be determined by a third party. What separates a 10-3 SEC team ranked 11th in the BCS from a 12-1 MNW team ranked 12th in the BCS?

[imwhatzup]

Quote: Originally Posted by DorianDonP

Four team playoff sure. Anything more than that is destroying the regular season, IMO. Even if you make it a 16 team playoff, it still will be determined by a third party. What separates a 10-3 SEC team ranked 11th in the BCS from a 12-1 MNW team ranked 12th in the BCS?

Actually I wanted to kind of modify what the bracket shows you have those conference champs and at-large bids based on ranking.

[johnnyg713]

so your saying the playoffs should be 5 weeks?

[woodjer]

This is essentially the same playoff system that I've been pitching to my friends since 1998-99.

I'd like someone to explain to me how the current system makes the regular season more relevant because I don't get it. Seriously, I've never understood that argument and I've never seen/heard it any way other than "one loss could knock you out of the running." One loss knocked Bama out of the SEC championship game this year. In this format, they would have had to hope their play during the regular season would give them an at-large bid. To me, that means that 12 teams would use the regular season to prove they deserve a shot and the other 108 teams would be relying on their regular season performance to state their case for a shot at the title. It just doesn't seem like it's meaningless when I think of it that way.

The reason college basketball's regular season doesn't matter is that the conferences all (except the Ivy League) have tournaments too. A team like Towson (1-31) could get on a hot streak for the CAA tournament and end up playing in the championship tournament while Drexel (regular season CAA champs) watches from the sideline. In that setup, I totally get why the regular season doesn't matter.