Semi-OT: How would you do the playoff this year?

[ragtimejoe1]

Next year, the BCS is gone and 4 teams will be included in a playoff. Actually, most years, I would say the top 4 probably includes the best team in the nation. This year it would be:

1) FSU vs. Mich State
2) Alabama vs. Clemson

With 2 loss Stanford, 1 loss Baylor and Ohio State on the outside looking in. I'm not sure the 4 team playoff is going to work. This year, it looks a little messy.

Thoughts?

 

[BeaverPoke]

Needs to be16 teams. 11 conference champions and 5 wild cards. Puts major emphasis on winning your conference.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Needs to be16 teams. 11 conference champions and 5 wild cards. Puts major emphasis on winning your conference.

I think it would be too large and too many games for 16 teams. Realistically, our conference champ (and the MAC's, the Sun Belt's, etc.) would be beaten badly by the big boys this year.

I think somewhere around 6 or 8 would catch the best teams most years. I get the angle of everyone having a chance, but I think for football, it is just way too many games.

 

[MrTitleist]

You forgot Auburn. Two ACC teams might be excessive.

 

[COS Cowboy]

Needs to be16 teams. 11 conference champions and 5 wild cards. Puts major emphasis on winning your conference.

I think it would be too large and too many games for 16 teams. Realistically, our conference champ (and the MAC's, the Sun Belt's, etc.) would be beaten badly by the big boys this year.

I think somewhere around 6 or 8 would catch the best teams most years. I get the angle of everyone having a chance, but I think for football, it is just way too many games.

16 is perfect. It's only 4 games to the title and only 2 teams will go that far. All the other divisions do it. And yeah, the MWC champ and the MAC Champ probably wouldn't go far this year, but they deserve the chance. Do you like the fact that the entire MWC along with the rest of the G5 is out of the national title hunt before they've even played a game? A 16 team playoff with autobids for conference champs solves that. It works for the big boys too. They get to start out with an easy game if they are highly ranked.

 

[MrTitleist]

Fun fact: FBS football is the only sport on the Earth were a team can go undefeated and not be called "champion."

 

[ragtimejoe1]

16 is perfect. It's only 4 games to the title and only 2 teams will go that far. All the other divisions do it. And yeah, the MWC champ and the MAC Champ probably wouldn't go far this year, but they deserve the chance. Do you like the fact that the entire MWC along with the rest of the G5 is out of the national title hunt before they've even played a game? A 16 team playoff with autobids for conference champs solves that. It works for the big boys too. They get to start out with an easy game if they are highly ranked.

I definitely understand the "fairness" angle, and I understand the benefits of 16 teams. I just don't think it would ever fly with finals, Christmas, etc.

Realistically, has there been a year where the top 8 didn't have the best team? I do think we (GO5) do need some sort of guaranteed spot if we are ranked high enough or undefeated. If there are 2 of us, then we have a play in game or something.

After seeing TCU and Utah struggle so much, I've changed my tune a little on this.

 

[Wicks]

Fun fact: FBS football is the only sport on the Earth were a team can go undefeated and not be called "champion."

That's not quite a fact. A club in European football (soccer for you ultra naturalists) could draw all their games making them undefeated but they would be nowhere near the champions of that league.

:lol:

 

[fromolwyoming]

16 is perfect. It's only 4 games to the title and only 2 teams will go that far. All the other divisions do it. And yeah, the MWC champ and the MAC Champ probably wouldn't go far this year, but they deserve the chance. Do you like the fact that the entire MWC along with the rest of the G5 is out of the national title hunt before they've even played a game? A 16 team playoff with autobids for conference champs solves that. It works for the big boys too. They get to start out with an easy game if they are highly ranked.

I definitely understand the "fairness" angle, and I understand the benefits of 16 teams. I just don't think it would ever fly with finals, Christmas, etc.

Realistically, has there been a year where the top 8 didn't have the best team? I do think we (GO5) do need some sort of guaranteed spot if we are ranked high enough or undefeated. If there are 2 of us, then we have a play in game or something.

After seeing TCU and Utah struggle so much, I've changed my tune a little on this.

For Utah, they really haven't had a good QB since what's his name's Freshmen year. Ever since, they've sucked. And the QB position is emphasiesed heavily in the spread.

TCU, they lost their starting QB early in the season (their back up QB is basiacally a RB that is being told to throw) and are still re-building depth from losing a ton of players to those drug scandals.

 

[Bryoming]

Needs to be16 teams. 11 conference champions and 5 wild cards. Puts major emphasis on winning your conference.

I think it would be too large and too many games for 16 teams. Realistically, our conference champ (and the MAC's, the Sun Belt's, etc.) would be beaten badly by the big boys this year.

I think somewhere around 6 or 8 would catch the best teams most years. I get the angle of everyone having a chance, but I think for football, it is just way too many games.

16 is perfect. It's only 4 games to the title and only 2 teams will go that far. All the other divisions do it. And yeah, the MWC champ and the MAC Champ probably wouldn't go far this year, but they deserve the chance. Do you like the fact that the entire MWC along with the rest of the G5 is out of the national title hunt before they've even played a game? A 16 team playoff with autobids for conference champs solves that. It works for the big boys too. They get to start out with an easy game if they are highly ranked.

16 is too many, in my opinion. It needs to be 12. Every conference champion gets in plus 1 wild card. Top 4 teams get a bye.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

16 is perfect. It's only 4 games to the title and only 2 teams will go that far. All the other divisions do it. And yeah, the MWC champ and the MAC Champ probably wouldn't go far this year, but they deserve the chance. Do you like the fact that the entire MWC along with the rest of the G5 is out of the national title hunt before they've even played a game? A 16 team playoff with autobids for conference champs solves that. It works for the big boys too. They get to start out with an easy game if they are highly ranked.

I definitely understand the "fairness" angle, and I understand the benefits of 16 teams. I just don't think it would ever fly with finals, Christmas, etc.

Realistically, has there been a year where the top 8 didn't have the best team? I do think we (GO5) do need some sort of guaranteed spot if we are ranked high enough or undefeated. If there are 2 of us, then we have a play in game or something.

After seeing TCU and Utah struggle so much, I've changed my tune a little on this.

For Utah, they really haven't had a good QB since what's his name's Freshmen year. Ever since, they've sucked. And the QB position is emphasiesed heavily in the spread.

TCU, they lost their starting QB early in the season (their back up QB is basiacally a RB that is being told to throw) and are still re-building depth from losing a ton of players to those drug scandals.

Good points. Still, I would be okay with 8 and a semi-guaranteed spot for GO5. Basically a system that would give every GO5 team a chance to control their own destiny.

 

[YankPoke]

I am with any number of 8, 12, or 16. I just want it to guarantee that there is at minimum 1 spot, and do something where if you have an undefeated team that is non AQ they get a bid even if there is more than one for their guaranteed spot.

 

[BeaverPoke]

No way you can do 12 teams. 11 conference champions and 1 wild card.
So the wild card would naturally be the #12 seed, which is going to be a 1 loss SEC team.

If you do the 11 conference champs, actually 10 conference champs now the WAC doens't exist.
So 10 conference champs, with 6 wild cards.
Odds are the seeding would be something like this in most years:
1. SEC
2. Pac12
3. Big 10
4. Big12
5. ACC
6. MWC
7. AAC (Big East)
8. C-USA
9. MAC
10. Sun Belt
11. SEC #2
12. Pac12 #2
13. Big10 #2
14. SEC #3
15. ACC #2
16. Big12 #2

#16 @ #1
#15 @ #2
#14 @ #3
#13 @ #4
#12 @ #5
#11 @ #6
#10 @ #7
#9 @ #8

In the situation listed above, Wyo could potentially be hosting a Top 10 team in LSU, or Alabama in Laramie, because we won our conference and they did not.

Same as the NFL really. The Chiefs are likely to have the 2nd best record in the AFC yet be a 5 seed.
It puts a lot of emphasis on being the best team in your division (in this case, conference).

The winner of the 1/16 and 8/9 play each other, the winner of the 2/15 and 7/10 play eachother and so on.

It would be extra important for teams falling in the 7-10 range to finish strong and not rest anyone as they want homefield advantage. I know if you are western kentucky, you probably don't want to have to go to somewhere cold like Fort Collins, Logan, or Laramie for the first round.
This way, the little guys get their shot, and the big conferences still end up with the most teams in it.

Higher seed gets home-field until the National Championship game.
Just imagine the big boys for once, having to go to a small school, and for a game where it matters.

Plus, that way, you don't hear the same old crap about the small schools and how they would get killed if they had to play a hard schedule week after week.
When it comes down to the post season, the best team will have to win, week after week.

 

[Bryoming]

No way you can do 12 teams. 11 conference champions and 1 wild card.
So the wild card would naturally be the #12 seed, which is going to be a 1 loss SEC team.

If you do the 11 conference champs, actually 10 conference champs now the WAC doens't exist.
So 10 conference champs, with 6 wild cards.
Odds are the seeding would be something like this in most years:
1. SEC
2. Pac12
3. Big 10
4. Big12
5. ACC
6. MWC
7. AAC (Big East)
8. C-USA
9. MAC
10. Sun Belt
11. SEC #2
12. Pac12 #2
13. Big10 #2
14. SEC #3
15. ACC #2
16. Big12 #2

#16 @ #1
#15 @ #2
#14 @ #3
#13 @ #4
#12 @ #5
#11 @ #6
#10 @ #7
#9 @ #8

In the situation listed above, Wyo could potentially be hosting a Top 10 team in LSU, or Alabama in Laramie, because we won our conference and they did not.

Same as the NFL really. The Chiefs are likely to have the 2nd best record in the AFC yet be a 5 seed.
It puts a lot of emphasis on being the best team in your division (in this case, conference).

The winner of the 1/16 and 8/9 play each other, the winner of the 2/15 and 7/10 play eachother and so on.

It would be extra important for teams falling in the 7-10 range to finish strong and not rest anyone as they want homefield advantage. I know if you are western kentucky, you probably don't want to have to go to somewhere cold like Fort Collins, Logan, or Laramie for the first round.
This way, the little guys get their shot, and the big conferences still end up with the most teams in it.

Higher seed gets home-field until the National Championship game.
Just imagine the big boys for once, having to go to a small school, and for a game where it matters.

Plus, that way, you don't hear the same old crap about the small schools and how they would get killed if they had to play a hard schedule week after week.
When it comes down to the post season, the best team will have to win, week after week.

I would propose that seeding wouldn't be done by conference. It would be done by a committee like the NCAA basketball tournament. Each conference champion and a wild card get in, but a #5 Alabama team that didn't win their conference wouldn't be the 16 seed. Conversely, a 2 loss Stanford or Oregon that will win the PAC this year wouldn't be a #2 seed. You have to win to get it, but once you're in the seeding is out of your hands.

 

[YankPoke]

No way you can do 12 teams. 11 conference champions and 1 wild card.
So the wild card would naturally be the #12 seed, which is going to be a 1 loss SEC team.

If you do the 11 conference champs, actually 10 conference champs now the WAC doens't exist.
So 10 conference champs, with 6 wild cards.
Odds are the seeding would be something like this in most years:
1. SEC
2. Pac12
3. Big 10
4. Big12
5. ACC
6. MWC
7. AAC (Big East)
8. C-USA
9. MAC
10. Sun Belt
11. SEC #2
12. Pac12 #2
13. Big10 #2
14. SEC #3
15. ACC #2
16. Big12 #2

#16 @ #1
#15 @ #2
#14 @ #3
#13 @ #4
#12 @ #5
#11 @ #6
#10 @ #7
#9 @ #8

In the situation listed above, Wyo could potentially be hosting a Top 10 team in LSU, or Alabama in Laramie, because we won our conference and they did not.

Same as the NFL really. The Chiefs are likely to have the 2nd best record in the AFC yet be a 5 seed.
It puts a lot of emphasis on being the best team in your division (in this case, conference).

The winner of the 1/16 and 8/9 play each other, the winner of the 2/15 and 7/10 play eachother and so on.

It would be extra important for teams falling in the 7-10 range to finish strong and not rest anyone as they want homefield advantage. I know if you are western kentucky, you probably don't want to have to go to somewhere cold like Fort Collins, Logan, or Laramie for the first round.
This way, the little guys get their shot, and the big conferences still end up with the most teams in it.

Higher seed gets home-field until the National Championship game.
Just imagine the big boys for once, having to go to a small school, and for a game where it matters.

Plus, that way, you don't hear the same old crap about the small schools and how they would get killed if they had to play a hard schedule week after week.
When it comes down to the post season, the best team will have to win, week after week.

I would propose that seeding wouldn't be done by conference. It would be done by a committee like the NCAA basketball tournament. Each conference champion and a wild card get in, but a #5 Alabama team that didn't win their conference wouldn't be the 16 seed. Conversely, a 2 loss Stanford or Oregon that will win the PAC this year wouldn't be a #2 seed. You have to win to get it, but once you're in the seeding is out of your hands.

Agree with the 16 also agree with seed by committee. I like the spot for 10 conference champs as well.

 

[BeaverPoke]

All I am proposing is that the top10 seeds are reserved for conference champions.
Nothing like a 13-0 Boise State going to play @ Georgia in the first round simply because Georgia is in the SEC.
The top 10 are all conference champs, and then the committee decides who is the best team out of those 10 all the way to the 10th best out of those 10. Then the next 6 spots, for the wild card be by the committee as well.
The more we let a 1 loss Alabama be the #2 or #3 seed, the more the big conferences are going to make the rest of us irrelevant.
Kansas City isn't going to be the #2 seed in the AFC this season, because they didn't win their division.
It's all about winning the conference.

 

[COS Cowboy]

All I am proposing is that the top10 seeds are reserved for conference champions.
Nothing like a 13-0 Boise State going to play @ Georgia in the first round simply because Georgia is in the SEC.
The top 10 are all conference champs, and then the committee decides who is the best team out of those 10 all the way to the 10th best out of those 10. Then the next 6 spots, for the wild card be by the committee as well.
The more we let a 1 loss Alabama be the #2 or #3 seed, the more the big conferences are going to make the rest of us irrelevant.
Kansas City isn't going to be the #2 seed in the AFC this season, because they didn't win their division.
It's all about winning the conference.

Interesting idea about the seeding, but I don't think it would fly. Would love to see a warm weather team like Florida or 'Bama have to go some place like Boise or Laramie in December. Still highest seed hosting would mean they'd have to go to Ohio St. or Michigan or someplace like that in Dec.

 

[Wyo2dal]

Unfortunately we're going to end up with 2 SEC Teams and 2 various conference teams every year and those various conferences will never include the MWC.

Personally I think this new playoff system was designed 100% to eliminate the chance of a 2008 Utah or Boise State from ever breaking into a NC Title game and they got away with it even more so than it was before. Everyone was happy at the thought of a Playoff system because 90% of the College Football world thought it would mimic the FCS system not cater to the SEC.

 

[ItSucksToBeACSURam]

Unfortunately we're going to end up with 2 SEC Teams and 2 various conference teams every year and those various conferences will never include the MWC.

Personally I think this new playoff system was designed 100% to eliminate the chance of a 2008 Utah or Boise State from ever breaking into a NC Title game and they got away with it even more so than it was before. Everyone was happy at the thought of a Playoff system because 90% of the College Football world thought it would mimic the FCS system not cater to the SEC.

Couldnt have said it better myself. I think this new 4 team playoff is even worse than the current BCS platform. Now a MWC team has 0 chance of a National Title. Ever. They will never get picked over a SEC team. Its sad.

 

[YankPoke]

Unfortunately we're going to end up with 2 SEC Teams and 2 various conference teams every year and those various conferences will never include the MWC.

Personally I think this new playoff system was designed 100% to eliminate the chance of a 2008 Utah or Boise State from ever breaking into a NC Title game and they got away with it even more so than it was before. Everyone was happy at the thought of a Playoff system because 90% of the College Football world thought it would mimic the FCS system not cater to the SEC.

IMO once they see how much money they are making off of this limited playoff scenario it is only a matter of time before they expand. We will be at 8 teams within 5 years IMO.