The fight for a playoff to replace the BCS begins
Moderators: Bill_Abner, ScoopBrady
Let's be honest, how many of the mid and low-tier schools and schools from non-power conferences actually would have a chance at winning the national championship even if there was a playoff? The fact is that even with a playoff system you would still have essentially the same schools as you do now competing for the title. I'm all for a playoff system, but not for the reason of giving the little guys a shot. Exactly how far do these people want to take things? A playoff system would choose schools largely based on polls. Well, those are biased too. Yes, the current system stinks but this is not a matter that merits legislative attention. We've all seen what a grand job Congress has done of messing up the major things it supposedly concentrates on. I shudder to think what they could do to the NCAA if given half the chance.
-
johnvon314
- Benchwarmer
- Posts: 250
- Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 4:00 am
- Location: Concord, NC
I hate to be the major pessimist here, but how long has the playoff conversation been going on? Certainly as long as I've been following sports (30+ years). The BCS was a compromise that allowed the bowl system to remain in place while creating a championship game. That was considered a major step as we're all old enough to remember when there was no chance of a #1 vs #2 game. The one major concession was the Rose Bowl not having its tradition Pac-10/Big 10 matchup every year.
As long as the university presidents of the power conference schools have gobs of money being poured into bowl system, it will take an act of Congress to change things. Even more dire, there are essentially a few men who hold complete veto power (John Swofford, James Delaney, etc.)that prevents a playoff measure even being considering. I am disapponted (not surprised though) in Swofford, my old AD at UNC, as he was pretty progressive on many fronts. It just shows how ingrained the the system is as even a new voice must speak and think the same as the old ones. It is impossible for a pro-playoff leader to work into the system.
John
As long as the university presidents of the power conference schools have gobs of money being poured into bowl system, it will take an act of Congress to change things. Even more dire, there are essentially a few men who hold complete veto power (John Swofford, James Delaney, etc.)that prevents a playoff measure even being considering. I am disapponted (not surprised though) in Swofford, my old AD at UNC, as he was pretty progressive on many fronts. It just shows how ingrained the the system is as even a new voice must speak and think the same as the old ones. It is impossible for a pro-playoff leader to work into the system.
John
What makes March Madness so great? Is it the Final Four or the first couple rounds where those little schools get an opportunity for the big upset. Many people I know love Round one more than the finals. Sure there may not be that many upsets and they might not get past the next round but rooting for the underdog is fun, unless that underdog is playing your team. The Davidsons of two years ago and George Mason run to the Final Four a few years back were some of the most exciting times in the tournament history. Throw in a Gonzaga making a few runs while I am at it.toonarmy wrote:Let's be honest, how many of the mid and low-tier schools and schools from non-power conferences actually would have a chance at winning the national championship even if there was a playoff?
As for football
Utah showed Bama up
Boise State over OU a few years ago
BYU did win a National Title back in like 1984
It is not just about would they have the chance to win one, it is giving them the chance to try.
11 Conference Champions + 5 at large. Bam, you have a playoff with no conference left behind. The regular season matters as much, if not more than it did in the past. Slim down the non-conference matchups and put the premium on conference play.
It amazes me that people forget or ignore the fact the FCS (former div1-aa) has been able to do a playoff all these years.
[url=http://sites.google.com/site/bmdsooner/]My place for games![/url]
bdoughty wrote: Say the Bubba Gump team and the Billy Bob team (I know nothing about Nascar) got together and created specific rules that catered to racers on their teams, giving them special allownaces.
That almost made me choke on my sandwich.
Oh and just to stay on thread topic I have no issue with a few congress members working on this issue. It is a monopoly issue and the fat cats who are in control need a swift kick in the pants so the lil' guys have a chance too. Especially with all the Boise's and Utah's of late. Since when did Congress have to deal with only ONE problem at a time (THAT is a waste of time).
On paper I like your idea of 11 plus 5. However, football cannot be compared to basketball. There is no way a 16 team playoff at this level is viable. That is 4 post-season games for the final two teams. Then you have to factor in the conference championship games, making it 5 non-regular season games. Hell, that's nearly half a season. I can maybe see a system whereby the top 8 ranked teams at most do a playoff. Out of the top 8 teams I am confident one of those teams will be the best in the country. Even then, though, you still have the problem of the outsiders screaming bloody murder over the system that ranks the top 8 teams, most if not all of which would be from power conferences. Additionally, a lengthy playoff system would tremendously favor teams with good depth since the season would be extended so much; and who has the most depth? You got it -- the major powers.bdoughty wrote:What makes March Madness so great? Is it the Final Four or the first couple rounds where those little schools get an opportunity for the big upset. Many people I know love Round one more than the finals. Sure there may not be that many upsets and they might not get past the next round but rooting for the underdog is fun, unless that underdog is playing your team. The Davidsons of two years ago and George Mason run to the Final Four a few years back were some of the most exciting times in the tournament history. Throw in a Gonzaga making a few runs while I am at it.toonarmy wrote:Let's be honest, how many of the mid and low-tier schools and schools from non-power conferences actually would have a chance at winning the national championship even if there was a playoff?
As for football
Utah showed Bama up
Boise State over OU a few years ago
BYU did win a National Title back in like 1984
It is not just about would they have the chance to win one, it is giving them the chance to try.
11 Conference Champions + 5 at large. Bam, you have a playoff with no conference left behind. The regular season matters as much, if not more than it did in the past. Slim down the non-conference matchups and put the premium on conference play.
It amazes me that people forget or ignore the fact the FCS (former div1-aa) has been able to do a playoff all these years.
Really?toonarmy wrote: There is no way a 16 team playoff at this level is viable.
http://www.ncaa.com/brackets/2008/ncaa_ ... tball.html
Been doing the 16 team playoff for years. The teams that make it that far are pretty good and play at fairly high level.
Just ask Michigan.
The two teams in the FCS title game played 15 games each. Limit non conference to 2 or 3 games depending on the size of the conference. Make the total games played 10 or 11. Throw in a championship game FOR EACH CONFERENCE that matches the top two teams in each conference. This is important to have, not only for good rematches but in cases like for example the Big 10, you sometimes get two teams tied at the top that did not play each other that year.
You just can't go with 8, too small. 16 teams allows for all conferences to gen an entry. Sure the other 5 will be power schools but that is to be expected. Some teams will get left out, that is also to be expected. My route at least tells each school, win your own conference and get a chance to play for a national title.
[url=http://sites.google.com/site/bmdsooner/]My place for games![/url]
Sorry, but I still say 16 teams is simply not viable at this level. It would be tough to cut regular season games from the schedule to accommodate having more playoff games. By doing so you are cutting out some serious revenue from athletic departments since that is one or two less games they can get revenue from. The little schools get screwed in that process since every team would have to cut regular season games, yet only 16 (primarily power schools) teams will get in. How is it fair to make everyone cut out regular season games just so that 16 of the over 100 schools can have a playoff? I understand that the lower levels do a playoff system, but division 1-A is a different beast with much more money at stake. And the whole issue of fans having to travel multiple weeks, as Jared points out, is another real issue to face. Even a playoff of 8 teams is a bit of a stretch, and the most I can ever see realistically included in a playoff system.