Why I am AGAINST a playoff system

[CyLoboClone]

Now we have to ask this... what if Temple, North Texas, East Michigan, TCU, and Utah all went undefeated? Say each one of them played ranked teams. Now also assume that every BCS school has three losses. Now we have a huge cluster **** at because there are only so many at large bids and too many unworthy automatic bids.

I wonder what it is like to play in the sun belt? Knowing that no matter how good you do, you cant be as highly ranked as the Mountain West, which will never be as highly ranked as the Big 12.

[cyhiphopp]

I dont want a playoff

The bolls are great

ISU would never get into the playoff

We might make a BCS game by winning the north soon

This!

Any team outside the top 40 or so would hav elittle chance to get into a tournament. They might as well drop to FCS status and not waste their money trying to catch up to the big boys, because we never would.

The playoffs work for the NFL because a decent percentage of teams get into the playoffs and through the draft/free agency makes it possible for bad teams to get better.

In college football it takes a lot more to get better. The best players can go to any school they want and usually go to the top tier ones. The only things they have done to help is limit scholarships. Still, the best schools have way more money to throw around which makes them that much better.

The bowl system at least rewards teams that have decent seasons. If they were requred to be top 32 to get any rewards, a lot of programs would go bye bye.

[tejasclone]

+1
The current system has many flaws but is the only system that has people talking about about football seasons past, present and future. It is in itself the soul of what we love in college football. Not because it was purposely set up that way but because it was an unintentional by product. When was the last time you were drinking with your buddies and decided to bring up the Texas/ISU basketball game from 3 years ago? Or next years match up? Probably not much. The importance of each regular scheduled game does not have as much impact in a playoff system. That is exactly the idea that kills a schools $$$$. Home games bring in the money. Why? Because each one means something. The bulk of money generated for teams are from home games. All other profits combined (including bowls) don't equal its money generating ability. So lets say for example in a playoff world that ISU by week 8 is either for sure in the playoff or for sure out. How willing are fans going to be to go to the remaining games?

ISU already has trouble getting fans to come to home games in November when each game "means something." See: Missouri, 2004.

If a school is fighting to become eligible for the playoffs, then each game still means something. Even once you become eligible, it's not like teams just give up and don't care. You are still fighting for seeding. So, unless you have the No. 1 seed wrapped up by week 8 (not likely), then every game still means something.

And if playoff games are hosted at member schools, imagine how much $$$ and excitement that will generate for an athletic department.

[CyLoboClone]

Oh, and the last time TCU was 12-0, they won the NC.

[isukendall]

+1
The current system has many flaws but is the only system that has people talking about about football seasons past, present and future. It is in itself the soul of what we love in college football. Not because it was purposely set up that way but because it was an unintentional by product. When was the last time you were drinking with your buddies and decided to bring up the Texas/ISU basketball game from 3 years ago? Or next years match up? Probably not much. The importance of each regular scheduled game does not have as much impact in a playoff system. That is exactly the idea that kills a schools $$$$. Home games bring in the money. Why? Because each one means something. The bulk of money generated for teams are from home games. All other profits combined (including bowls) don't equal its money generating ability. So lets say for example in a playoff world that ISU by week 8 is either for sure in the playoff or for sure out. How willing are fans going to be to go to the remaining games?

Many people use the basketball analogy as an argument against a playoff, and I think it is a poor one. Basketball is very different in that there are basically three times as many competitions, thus making it much harder to stay undefeated. Sometimes competing against the same team more than once. A playoff is imperative in basketball.

However, people are right in that basketball doesn't put as much emphasis on the regular season. This is because 65 teams play in the tournament, a logistical nightmare that would be impossible in football. Now, if you make it the top 8 or 16 ranked teams only, or only conference championships, etc. like is being discussed with football, all of the sudden those regular season games seem a lot more important.

I don't think that the 64th ranked football team in the country should have a chance to play for the national championship. But maybe the 3rd, 4th, and probably 6th ranked teams should, especially after winning every game on their schedule.

[aeroclone]

In the current system, we already have a playoff. It's called the regular season

Tell that to Boise State, TCU, or Cincy who could all go undefeated and not have a chance at winning it all. I know you will say that they need to play in a real conference, but wasn't it a few years ago that an undefeated Auburn team was left on the outside looking in?

[MelMel]

ANOTHER ARGUMENT!!

Since I have seen people bring out a 32 team playoff. How does that show who the best team is? I ask this because that means a team has to win 5 straight to win the title. What happens when Tim Tebow gets hurt in the first game and they lose to Pittsburgh in week 2 even though 13 weeks worth of games PROVES that Florida is better than Pittsburgh.

If you have one game you don't have to worry about injuries. You get to see most teams at full strength or close to it. 5 weeks of games doesn't necessarily show which team is the best, just which team can weather the strom and avoid injuries

Are you in favor of getting rid of the NCAA basketball tournament and imposing a similar system in basketball? Also how is your original post not a moot point if only 6 BCS conference champs and the two highest ranked at large teams are allowed in?

[CYKOFAN]

How can anybody doubt that Utah might not have been the best team in the country last year after their bcs bowl romp. Under the current system we'll never know, just like we really won't know who's best this year either. The bcs bowls are only slightly bigger games than the other bowls only because of the higher ranked teams, but they are also basically for their own fans and conference pride. An 8 team play-off would make all 4 bcs much more important, followed by an even bigger build-up to the semi's and true national championship. The NCAA basketball play-offs are awesome all the way thru because a true national champion is being determined. We don't have that in d-1 football, and I believe it's the only sport (including the other football divisions) where the national champion isn't determined by a legitimate play-off.

[Clones85']

Yup, more physical, more disciplined.

Yeah they are more physical when they play against teams like New Mexico St!

Texas pounded TCU two years ago 34-13 (wasn't that close). They would probably win this year by 14 or more.

TCU coaches really well but the talent gap is HUGE between the two.

[Clones85']

Are you in favor of getting rid of the NCAA basketball tournament and imposing a similar system in basketball? Also how is your original post not a moot point if only 6 BCS conference champs and the two highest ranked at large teams are allowed in?

MelMel,

Please explain to me LOGICALLY how football and basketball are the same?! I would like to hear your answer

[CyFever]

This is interesting. NO at-large teams what-so-ever.

That's right. Eliminate 99% of the ******** that goes on now.

Let me flesh it out a little further. This is an 8 team playoff. Keep the BCS conferences as they are now. ACC, Big 12, Big East, Big Ten, Pac 10, SEC. Those 6 conference champions get an automatic berth into the playoff. For the remaining 2 spots, select at-large conference champions from C-USA, MAC, MWC, and WAC. Those are the participants.

The first round is the current BCS bowls. Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, and Orange. Either seed the first round games, or keep traditional affiliations. The next round adds two national semi-final games. The final round is the current BCS championship game. If you play the first round early enough (first or second weekend in December), and the second right after Christmas, you could finish the title game about the same time as now (within a week of New Years).

- No complaining about which BCS conference 'deserves' a second slot.
- No complaining if you got left out by a bizarre conference championship rule, or because you had no conference championship game to 'settle it on the field', or having your perfect season ruined by the conference championship game. It's your conference, change the rules if you need to.
- Gets rid of idiotic independents like Notre Dame (if they want a title shot).
- Only adds two games to the schedule. Shouldn't add any time to the schedule.
- Could allow the rest of the bowl system to be kept relatively intact.
- All results settled on the field. Very little need to worthless pollsters and computers.

About the only complaining that could go on would be the conference champions of the two non-BCS conference that are kept out. This seems to be the best option though instead of adding two more team and trying to figure out seeding, byes, etc. (too much subjectivity) and adding another round, two more games, a few more weeks. And those last two teams have very little chance at winning it all anyway. Maybe include a share of the revenue for them to keep them happy.

How it would shake out this year: school, conference, BCS rank

In:
- Georgia Tech, ACC, 9
- Texas, Big 12, 2
- Cincinnati, Big East, 3
- Ohio State, Big Ten, 8
- TCU, MWC, 4
- Oregon, PAC 10, 7
- Alabama, SEC, 1
- Boise St., WAC, 6

Out:
- Florida, SEC, 5
- East Carolina, C-USA, NR
- Cent. Michigan, MAC, NR

This year, you include 8 of the top 9 BCS ranked teams. Only Florida (5) is eliminated because they lost the SEC championship. The two non-BCS conference not represented did not have their conference champion ranked in the BCS.

[Clonefan94]

All you have to do is say any team that is a BCS conference champ is automatically in the playoffs. The playoffs are then the 6 BCS conference champs and the two top rated teams that aren't already in. You could also mandate that a conferene has to have either a conference championship game or a schedule where all the teams play each other. Then this last week in college football would have been even better as there would be 10 teams competing for the national championship instead of just 3 or 4. Then there are also another 7 playoff games that are just as exciting as these great conference title games, So maybe I am missing something but I guess I fail to see how this argument against a playoff has any merit at all?

As long as it doesn't eliminate the other bowl games being played. Problem is, it eventually will, imo. You think Texas rules our conference now, wait til their the only team that gets to go to a post season. Is their one appearance going to make up for the millions we'll lose, as a conference in bowl payouts? no way a playoff generates the money that the bowl system does. And in the end, that's what's keeping it. They don't play a Big XII championship game, so that at the end of the year we all have a clear understanding of who the champ was. They play it for the millions in revenue it generates for the conference. If the conference lost money on the game, no way would it be played. no matter how many teams there were.

So weather I'm right about what will happen or not. I'm sure a lot of ADs feel the same way I do. "What if this playoff thing, cuts into our bottom line? We count on that Bowl money every year to help subsidize the other teams in the conference. We've never been in the league Championship game, let alone a BCS game. I'm afraid we can't survive as a team without that bowl money."

Not right away, but eventually, I guarantee you, if ony 8 teams made this playoff, eventually, you wouldn't have more than 20 or 30 teams in division 1, or what ever they call it now, college football. I know there is more money being generated than just bowl money, a lot more, but that bowl money is still a sizeable chunk of the year end payout. Money is keeping the playoff from happening.

[tejasclone]

ANOTHER ARGUMENT!!

Since I have seen people bring out a 32 team playoff. How does that show who the best team is? I ask this because that means a team has to win 5 straight to win the title. What happens when Tim Tebow gets hurt in the first game and they lose to Pittsburgh in week 2 even though 13 weeks worth of games PROVES that Florida is better than Pittsburgh.

If you have one game you don't have to worry about injuries. You get to see most teams at full strength or close to it. 5 weeks of games doesn't necessarily show which team is the best, just which team can weather the strom and avoid injuries

Injuries are a part of the game. This is true in any other sport. You could have the best team for the whole season, lose your best player in the playoffs, and your championship disappears. Every other level of football (NFL, FCS, DII, DIII, etc) has to deal with this; why do people feel like FBS should be treated differently?

[greatshu]

ANOTHER ARGUMENT!!

Since I have seen people bring out a 32 team playoff. How does that show who the best team is? I ask this because that means a team has to win 5 straight to win the title. What happens when Tim Tebow gets hurt in the first game and they lose to Pittsburgh in week 2 even though 13 weeks worth of games PROVES that Florida is better than Pittsburgh.

If you have one game you don't have to worry about injuries. You get to see most teams at full strength or close to it. 5 weeks of games doesn't necessarily show which team is the best, just which team can weather the strom and avoid injuries

How's that any different from Bball? Isn't that part of the game?

[cybsball20]

There would probably be even more parity with a playoff system. If, a good coach could go into the MAC and have quite a run, making the playoffs a couple years in a row then you would see them getting bigger and better recruits. This would water down the bog boys in the BCS conferences, leveling them out.