How this year's playoff should have looked

[olivecourt]

Tell me this isn't more compelling than the BCS schedule as it currently operates:

Friday, December 17:

#5 Wisconsin at #4 Stanford (night game)

Saturday, December 18:

#8 Arkansas at #1 Auburn

#7 Oklahoma at #2 Oregon (night game)

#6 Ohio State at #3 TCU

Saturday, January 1:

Arkansas/Auburn winner plays Stanford/Wisconsin winner in the Rose Bowl
Oklahoma/Oregon winner plays Ohio State/TCU winner in the Fiesta Bowl

Monday, January 3:
Orange Bowl matches their choice of 1st round losing team vs. at large

Tuesday, January 4:
Sugar Bowl matches their choice of 1st round losing team vs. at large

Monday, January 10:
National Championship game: Rose Bowl champ vs. Fiesta Bowl champ

 

[528646]

I could live with an 8 team playoff, but I would prefer 4 as I think it does a better job of maintaining the integrity of the regular season.

Round 1
Auburn v. Stanford
Oregon v. TCU

Round 2 = matchup round 1 winners

Auburn & Oregon both went undefeated in BCS conferences, so they've got to be in.

Stanford went 11-1 in a BCS conference with an excellent SOS.

TCU is the weakest case by far - they went undefeated in a mid-major conference. But the system is what it is.

Now the odd men out:

Wisconsin & OSU both went 11-1 in a BCS conference, same as Stanford, but both with much weaker SOS. You could make a case they should go in ahead of TCU since they played tougher schedules, but TCU did go undefeated.

Oklahoma & Arkansas both took 2 regular season losses. Not good enough this year when you have 3 undefeateds and 1 excellent one-loss team.

 

[SDK46]

16 works beautifully.

11 conf champs plus 5 at large.

Teams are seeded (exactly like men's BB)

First two rounds are held in higher seed's stadium.

All the other bowls are still held. No changes.

 

[528646]

16 works beautifully.

11 conf champs plus 5 at large.

Teams are seeded (exactly like men's BB)

First two rounds are held in higher seed's stadium.

All the other bowls are still held. No changes.

I think 16 would destroy the regular season as we know it. Take a look at the top 16 right now...no way in heck some of those teams deserve even a sniff at winning a national title (or ruining a legit contenders chances in a 1-in-10 upset).

 

[clonedude]

I think 16 would destroy the regular season as we know it. Take a look at the top 16 right now...no way in heck some of those teams deserve even a sniff at winning a national title (or ruining a legit contenders chances in a 1-in-10 upset).

You could also make the argument that a 16 team field would enhance the regular season as well. You might get the better teams to play a better non-conference schedule if they know that one loss won't ruin their season completely.

 

[HawkI101]

No on the playoff. Everyone is ******** about teams not getting the shot at the national title. In your playoff I would argue there would be more ******** and moaning about who didn't get into it than there is about who is playing in the championship game. I would venture to guess that 90% of college football fans agree that Auburn and Oregon were the two best teams this year and should play for the championship.

If we have a playoff then who would get left out. MSU at 11-1, Boise at 11-1, LSU at 10-2. There would be more teams on a yearly basis that would have an argument to make a playoff than teams that have an argument of playing in the BCS title game.

I used to be a big proponent of a playoff system but have changed my mind over that past 1-2 years.

 

[Xerxes]

I don't think 16 would make the regular season less important.

The NFL has 12 of 32 teams in the playoffs and their regular season is absolutely unforgiving.

For example, a few weeks ago, GB is at the Lions. A win and they are in line for the #2 seed. They lost and the only reason they even have a shot at the #6 seed today is because the Bucs got upset at home by the Lions.

After the Packers lost, it was the Giants who were in line for the #2 seed. They lost a 3TD lead against the Eagles and now need GB to lose today to get the #6.

I really submit in playoff ideas to SDK46. He has the best ideas. Although along with starting a playoff I think all bowls should go bye-bye. Just a bunch of worthless games.

 

[olivecourt]

No on the playoff. Everyone is ******** about teams not getting the shot at the national title. In your playoff I would argue there would be more ******** and moaning about who didn't get into it than there is about who is playing in the championship game. I would venture to guess that 90% of college football fans agree that Auburn and Oregon were the two best teams this year and should play for the championship.

If we have a playoff then who would get left out. MSU at 11-1, Boise at 11-1, LSU at 10-2. There would be more teams on a yearly basis that would have an argument to make a playoff than teams that have an argument of playing in the BCS title game.

I used to be a big proponent of a playoff system but have changed my mind over that past 1-2 years.

I find that pretty difficult to believe. Yes, the three teams you mention would complain. Then everyone else in the country would point out the following things: Michigan State got crushed by a mediocre Iowa team, Boise lost to Nevada, and LSU lost two games, finished third in their own division, and needed a miracle to beat a bad Tennessee team at home.

I prefer 8 teams to 4 because it still encourages teams to play tough non-conference schedules (a four-team playoff would put a huge premium on going undefeated at all costs). I prefer 8 to the 16 team format that is usually mentioned because it throws conference affiliation out the window and just takes eight great teams. There's no Auburn vs. UConn (or Middle Tennessee State) in this scenario-- every game would be a great one matching two deserving opponents.

If this was instituted I would watch every playoff game for the rest of my life. It would be insanely entertaining. In contrast, I watched about ten minutes of the Fiesta Bowl last night.