yep yep yep this is what ive been saying

[wolverine]

this is what ive been saying all along about college football and the BCS its time we had an playoffs let the top 16 go at it and let the best team win


http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-bcs102009&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

[amazinblue]

16 teams will never happen.

I think that some of the second and third tier bowl games could be used as a "play-in" for smaller conferences. The idea I am an advocate of is this - the four major bowls really "start" the playoff - the six major conference winners, plus two at-large teams - which can be determined in a variety of ways.

The major bowls (Rose, Sugar, Fiesta, and Orange) return to their traditional match-ups, and a "plus 3" system is set up after that. I don't think "seeding" teams in the major bowls and holding them prior to the New Year's Day timeframe is the best way to do it - since, the seeding is very subjective anyway. The only "real" disadvantage for the Big 10 is that the Rose Bowl is usually a "home" game or close to it, for Pac 10 teams and the Big 10 team has to win that game (the Rose Bowl) to advance.

There is far too much money and tradition in the major bowls to have those games without an impact.

[The Michigan Man]

16 teams will never happen.

I think that some of the second and third tier bowl games could be used as a "play-in" for smaller conferences. The idea I am an advocate of is this - the four major bowls really "start" the playoff - the six major conference winners, plus two at-large teams - which can be determined in a variety of ways.

The major bowls (Rose, Sugar, Fiesta, and Orange) return to their traditional match-ups, and a "plus 3" system is set up after that. I don't think "seeding" teams in the major bowls and holding them prior to the New Year's Day timeframe is the best way to do it - since, the seeding is very subjective anyway. The only "real" disadvantage for the Big 10 is that the Rose Bowl is usually a "home" game or close to it, for Pac 10 teams and the Big 10 team has to win that game (the Rose Bowl) to advance.

There is far too much money and tradition in the major bowls to have those games without an impact.

The biggest fallacy of a proposed FBS 16 team playoff is that it will somehow destroy the current bowl system. The 1st round games are hosted by the higher ranked teams. The next round is 4 games, where this season would potentially be held at the Cotton, Capital One, Rose, and Sugar Bowls. The next round is 2 games, held at the Fiesta and Orange Bowls. The finals are at the BCS Championship Game at the Rose Bowl.

In a 16 team tourney, every one of those bowls will make a tremendous amount more $$ than if they had some handpicked, meaningless matchup. TV revenue will be through the roof. We are currently watching these non-NC games because we are fans, not because they mean anything. Last year, we watched Georgia vs. MSU,VT vs. Cinci, Ole Miss vs. Texas Tech, Utah vs. Alabama, tUOS vs. Texas, etc….so what? What did the winner get? A better position for the preseason polls, bragging rights, and that‘s about it.

Each year, the bowl venues rotate to host different rounds. All of the other bowls can still take place – the world won’t be deprived of the Music City Bowl (Kansas vs Minnesota), the Sun Bowl (Oregon St. vs Pitt), or the Eaglebank Bowl (Wake Forest vs. Navy), so have no fear, you’ll still get these amazing games.

[amazinblue]

The biggest fallacy of a proposed FBS 16 team playoff is that it will somehow destroy the current bowl system. The 1st round games are hosted by the higher ranked teams. The next round is 4 games, where this season would potentially be held at the Cotton, Capital One, Rose, and Sugar Bowls. The next round is 2 games, held at the Fiesta and Orange Bowls. The finals are at the BCS Championship Game at the Rose Bowl.

In a 16 team tourney, every one of those bowls will make a tremendous amount more $$ than if they had some handpicked, meaningless matchup. TV revenue will be through the roof. We are currently watching these non-NC games because we are fans, not because they mean anything. Last year, we watched Georgia vs. MSU,VT vs. Cinci, Ole Miss vs. Texas Tech, Utah vs. Alabama, tUOS vs. Texas, etc….so what? What did the winner get? A better position for the preseason polls, bragging rights, and that‘s about it.

Each year, the bowl venues rotate to host different rounds. All of the other bowls can still take place – the world won’t be deprived of the Music City Bowl (Kansas vs Minnesota), the Sun Bowl (Oregon St. vs Pitt), or the Eaglebank Bowl (Wake Forest vs. Navy), so have no fear, you’ll still get these amazing games.

MM,

Perhaps its that I think that 16 teams would dilute the meaning of bowls and conference championships. I read something interesting today - Ole Miss (I believe) is 2-0 in conference play - oh, that's 2-0 against Conference USA, while they are 1-2 in the SEC. It's not that I don't believe there are good teams outside of the 6 major conferences - there are, and teams like Utah and Boise State have proved it where they need to - on the field against major conference teams in major bowls.

I agree that we only watch the Poulan Weedeater and other notorious bowl games because - they are the only game that's on the air at that time. And, some of the matchups are less that ideal.

I also believe that one thing that makes the major bowls attractive and profitable is that they are "destinations" - and you usually have enough notice to actually PLAN a trip there that can be affordable. If there was some upset in early round - perhaps because the flu devastated a good major conference team - or that weather played a significant factor (which I think can be a good thing - warm weather teams playing in cold weather climates in December) - would that "lower ranked, non-major conference be able to fill the Rose or Fiesta Bowl? How happy might that make the organizers for these tradition filled affairs.

My thought is - take the other "mid-major conferences" with ND (until they join a conference) and use the tier 2 bowl games - or home fields to determine who the two at-large teams should be. Then, insert those two teams into the round of 8 played at the four major bowls. From there, we go to a Plus 3 system.

[The Michigan Man]

MM,

Perhaps its that I think that 16 teams would dilute the meaning of bowls and conference championships. I read something interesting today - Ole Miss (I believe) is 2-0 in conference play - oh, that's 2-0 against Conference USA, while they are 1-2 in the SEC. It's not that I don't believe there are good teams outside of the 6 major conferences - there are, and teams like Utah and Boise State have proved it where they need to - on the field against major conference teams in major bowls.

I agree that we only watch the Poulan Weedeater and other notorious bowl games because - they are the only game that's on the air at that time. And, some of the matchups are less that ideal.

I also believe that one thing that makes the major bowls attractive and profitable is that they are "destinations" - and you usually have enough notice to actually PLAN a trip there that can be affordable. If there was some upset in early round - perhaps because the flu devastated a good major conference team - or that weather played a significant factor (which I think can be a good thing - warm weather teams playing in cold weather climates in December) - would that "lower ranked, non-major conference be able to fill the Rose or Fiesta Bowl? How happy might that make the organizers for these tradition filled affairs.

My thought is - take the other "mid-major conferences" with ND (until they join a conference) and use the tier 2 bowl games - or home fields to determine who the two at-large teams should be. Then, insert those two teams into the round of 8 played at the four major bowls. From there, we go to a Plus 3 system.

You make some valid points.

It appears that the biggest flaw in the system that I proposed is the lack of notice for traveling alums. If my school wins its first round game on Dec 26, I have to scramble to get tickets and make travel arrangements on Jan 2, and potentially Jan 9. Plus, those 8 schools who get eliminated in the 1st round won't be participating in a neutral site bowl, and the alums of that school may be upset about that.

Otherwise, I think the system is workable. The lower gate attendance would be offset by the increased TV revenue. Last year's Orange Bowl of VT vs. Cinci would be replaced by a potential tourney matchup of Florida vs USC or Alabama vs. Iowa, with the winner advancing. I'm not going to be flipping channels for the latter two matchups, I'm going to be clearing the schedule to watch every minute of it.

I would use the BCS rankings to choose the top 16, regardless of conference. All of the major conferences would be represented (if the best team in a conference can't crack the top 16, they don't deserve a courtesy nod), and a few non-BCS teams would be included. If the season ended today, teams like TCU, Boise St, and BYU would be mixed in with the big schools.

[amazinblue]

I would use the BCS rankings to choose the top 16, regardless of conference. All of the major conferences would be represented (if the best team in a conference can't crack the top 16, they don't deserve a courtesy nod), and a few non-BCS teams would be included. If the season ended today, teams like TCU, Boise St, and BYU would be mixed in with the big schools.

MM,

I have to disagree with you on the pick of the "top 16" and using the BCS formula - which is based on polls / computers - and introduces the subjectivity. And, let me give you this as an example - let's say that havoc occurs in the Big 10 this year - four teams tie for the title - each having two losses - my scenario could be Iowa, MSU, PSU, and Michigan. Well, should that occur - it's possible that no team would be ranked by polls or the BCS in the top 16 - and, I don't believe that a major conference should be "shut out" of the party. A major conference should mean something - not everything.

Beside that - I'd welcome schools like TCU, Boise, and / or BYU / Utah into the playoff structure.

I just feel the four major bowls should be really worth something - with the opportunity to draw significant crowds to those games. And, it might be toughest on the lower ranked / play-in schools since they will be traveling a lot to go to the games. The only impact is that if second tier bowl games are used - then we might miss some of the #5, #6, or #7 ranked conference teams squaring off in December. And, the teams / spots taken by the playoff structure would reduce the number of bowl playing teams, and the opportunity for those teams to get an "end of season bowl trip" and the extra practice time associated with a bowl game.

I'm still for the four majors followed by a Plus 3.... and, I'm sticking to it!