Skip to comments.College football discussion: Will 4 or 5 undefeated teams finally force a playoff system?
Posted on 10/15/2005 7:32:25 AM PDT by ken5050
For college football fans, this is shaping up to be one of the best seasons in memory. As of this morning, there are NINE undefeated teams: USC, Texas, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Georgia, Alabama, Penn State, UCLA, and Texas Tech. Because of future scheduled games and conference championships, the maximum number of undefeated teams that could emerge at season's end is FIVE. That would mean that the champions of the Big Ten, Big XII, ACC, SEC, and Pac 10 would all be undefeated, yet only TWO would be selected to play in the BCS championship game, by virtue of a computer program.
Given ties, all of them could potentially stay undefeated.
The OT system has changed that possibility..and for the best...if you rememebr the ND/MSU "tie"..it was awful
Way way way way to early to even think about two teams ending up unbeaten not to mention more than 2.
If they would only make college OT sudden death. Alternating possessions is stupid.
If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
They're going fast!
You have teams like ND that will drop you from the schedule if you do not keep your quality up and teams who try to schedule laffers like (sic) Southern Souix State Bible Teachers College of Miami Nevada. They have a rating system but that only works as good as the input. Lose early but at the end of the season be a GREAT team but be eliminated by the system. Play 11 great teams and be 10-1 or 9-2 and lose out to a 11-0 team from a weaker league and with 3 laffers wins over above mentioned type of schools. Playoff is the only way to stop the sorry system. Play the bowls, take winners from the 4 biggest bowls and go from there. College football ceased to be anything but a Pro sport years ago.
Who knows, by the end of the year, we could be talking about three or four teams with only one loss claiming to play for the National Championship.
Go Texas Tech!!!
>>>>>>>>>>>>If they would only make college OT sudden death. Alternating possessions is stupid.
See I think sudden death is stupid. A coin toss gives the winner a big advantage. This system does not take away any part of the game. Ground it out guys and wide open offences have the same chances in OT as in the regular game. Make much of a change and you penalize some type of off./def. play.
My daughter's High School team had a rivalry game every year on Thanksgiving day - one year we had 7 overtimes! Would have been great except that it was 27 degrees.........
One can only hope...
Seriously, make it where you have to have won your conference championship to get into the playoffs. The year that OU got stuffed by Kansas State in the Big 12 conference championship game and then got to play in the national championship (where they got beat again) should never have happened. Make the conference championships mean something.
They can set up the second tier bowls to host the early rounds of the playoffs and can let the big four host the final rounds and let which of them hosts the actual championship rotate, much like the BCS today. You could keep the smaller bowls to offer games to teams that were good, but not quite good enough to reach the playoffs (kind of like the NIT vs NCAA basketball tournaments)
Of course, each major conference champion would have to be admitted to the first tier. This might force some of the smaller conferences to get together like the SEC and Big-12. (the WAC should never have split).
There are a lot of other things, but the bottom line is that profit drives the system, not the desire to get the two best teams on the field.
I believe that this would cause an incredible demand for the BCS system to be scrapped, and for some type of playoff system, involving 4, 6 (with 2 top seeds getting byes) or 8 teams)
The BCS system is a playoff system. Your problem is that you like me want more teams invited to the post season tourney. And the BCS is not a very good method for picking the two teams in the post season tourney.
This is not a small point. Since we already have a playoff system, the issue is not whether on not the college Presidents will go along with a play off in D1A football, they already have. The issue is the much less controversial one of how many teams should be in that playoff. I vote 8, but certainly it should be more than two.
Yeah, buddy. The top eight teams should be competitive, and it will let teams that jell as the season progresses get into the playoffs. High school teams play as many as six playoff games, so this shouldn't put too big a burden on college teams. While there will obviously be quibbling about the 7th and 8th spot, eight places would provide a space for every team that legitimately has a shot at a national title.
The key decision is how many team are enough and how many are too many. Right now I think everyone agrees that we have too few teams, 2, in the playoff.
Of course in NCAA basketball they take too many teams. No serious analyst of NCAA D1A basketball would for example argue that Arizona team that finished fifth or sixth in the PAC10 a few years ago but won the post season championship was really a "national champ." They were a team that got hot and won a post season tourney. [No offense Zona fans, I am sure even you were surprised when your team got hot that that year won the post season tourney. And there are other examples, I could give since the NCAA went to 64/65 teams.]
Football would need to take enough teams but not too many. Basically, I can see the argument being between an 8 or a 16 team formatt.
This system has long been due for a major overhaul. Very high DUH factor.
I have solved the BCS problem. Kinda lenghty but here is my solution:
1) All college teams play a 10 game season.
2) Thanks giving weekend is Division championships (if needed)
3) The top 12 divisions have seeds in the 16 team playoff.
4) Remaining 4 seeds are for the invites that are rated in the top 10, but did not win their division.
5) First 8 games are assigned to existing bowls.
6) Next 4 games are played on Christmas day
7) Next 2 games are played on New years day.
8: BCS Game played on either first or second Monday night in January.
9) BCS Bowls will still be rotated for the championship game.
This scenario would bring in so much more money not only for the divisions but also for the teams. Unfortunatley, too many bowls have a vested interest in keeping the status quo as they would not get a bigger cut in the revenue generated.
I hope not. Do we really need a playoff system?
It has been my belief that the purpose of the BCS was to screw the post-season up so much that the only way to fix it would be playoffs. That said, here's how it should start:
Step 1: The Big 10 adds a team and begins playing a title game. Notre Dame looks like and attractive addition, but Louisville, Marshall or Cincinatti could work as well.
Step 2: Two weeks after the conference title games, the SEC winner plays the ACC winner for "Champion of the South" (no offense BC fans). The Big 10 winner would play the Big 12 winner for "Champion of the Midwest" (no offense PSU fans). The following week, the winners play each other. Last year that would have featured the LSU-Virginia Tech winner against the Oklahoma-Michigan winner.
Step 3: After two or three years of this, the "playoff" would be expanded by one game. SEC vs C-USA; ACC vs Big East; Big 10 vs MAC; Big 12 vs WAC. This nicely appeases the brides-maid conferences while respecting the fact that the Mountain West is not on the same level as the SEC (as Urban Meyer is learning).
The problem is the Pac-10. In order to be included, they should add two teams and a title game. They could then play the Mountain West winner. This would leave us with five teams after round one instead of four, so one would have to get a bye.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.