Jump to content

BCS Championship Game v. Playoff System???


tigerman1186

Recommended Posts

I know the 'talking heads' are making a lot out of the new play-off system, but I'm going to miss the BCS championship game…I know we got screwed in 2004, but basically the final 2 teams playing in the BCS game were the top 2…I could be totally wrong, but I liked the month long build up for the game…now there will only be a week in between the 1st round games and the championship contest…we'll see, but it won't surprise me to see a lot of fans stating the BCS wasn't so bad after all…..Should Alabama and Michigan State had been given a chance to play for the championship???

Link to comment
Share on other sites





I like the 4 team playoff but I'm not sure how I'm going to like the polls decided by committee rather than the formula used with the BCS. I actually need to do a little reading up on how its going to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the 'talking heads' are making a lot out of the new play-off system, but I'm going to miss the BCS championship game…I know we got screwed in 2004, but basically the final 2 teams playing in the BCS game were the top 2…I could be totally wrong, but I liked the month long build up for the game…now there will only be a week in between the 1st round games and the championship contest…we'll see, but it won't surprise me to see a lot of fans stating the BCS wasn't so bad after all…..Should Alabama and Michigan State had been given a chance to play for the championship???

I'm with you I thought the bcs actually worked. It was only evident we got screwed in 04 after the fact. I also didn't like conference expansion. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup. The BCS always worked itself out, except for 2004. I am OK with a 4-game playoff as designed, since it incorporates the existing bowl structure. I do not want it to go beyond that.

I also don't like that polls won't mean anything. It's what made college football so unique.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone should be prepared for the #4 seed to win a championship in a play-off format.

In the NFL system, wild card teams have won and frequently the winner did not have the best regular season record. With fewer teams in the NCAA playoff, every team will have a great record and a great season so it's very likely a #4 is capable of winning the big game. When that happens, the "bring back the BCS" campaign will begin. Just sayin'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think having the championship game a week after the semi-final will lead to a much better played game. The long layoff between the end of the regular season and the championship game has always been an issue. Now we need to somehow find a way to shorten the time between the end of the regular season and the semi-finals. I would like to see two weeks between the end of the regular season and the semi-finals then two weeks between the semi-finals and the final. That would mean moving up the bowl games hosting the semi-finals but it would make it much better for the teams and the fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After 2004 I'm stunned anybody on this board is in favor of the BCS system. Go undefeated in the SEC beating 5 top 10 teams along the way but enter post season without any possibility of winning the national title? The 4 team playoff is better IMO but they're going to need to refine it through trial & error. I mean Condoleeza Rice will be one of the few voices in who's final 4 but not a single data/numbers person is? I'm especially interested in how game venue and board selection is handled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After 2004 I'm stunned anybody on this board is in favor of the BCS system. Go undefeated in the SEC beating 5 top 10 teams along the way but enter post season without any possibility of winning the national title? The 4 team playoff is better IMO but they're going to need to refine it through trial & error. I mean Condoleeza Rice will be one of the few voices in who's final 4 but not a single data/numbers person is? I'm especially interested in how game venue and board selection is handled.

Game venue has been preselected to certain bowl games with 1-4 and 2-3 at regular bowl games as I understand.

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/college-football-playoff-schedule.php.

The biggest delay is between end of regular season and the "bowl game" which has been standard for a long time....and the length of delay depends on whether a team has a conference playoff...so some maybe have a longer wait before their play-off. As for the delay for the championship, 10 days is not bad IMO, gives small injuries time to heal, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone should be prepared for the #4 seed to win a championship in a play-off format.

In the NFL system, wild card teams have won and frequently the winner did not have the best regular season record. With fewer teams in the NCAA playoff, every team will have a great record and a great season so it's very likely a #4 is capable of winning the big game. When that happens, the "bring back the BCS" campaign will begin. Just sayin'

I actually feel like that would totally validate getting rid of the BCS. Right? All these years you've had the #3/4 teams (and fans) on the outside looking in saying "we should have been there." So if one of the lower seeds wins it, doesn't that resonate?

After 2004 I'm stunned anybody on this board is in favor of the BCS system. Go undefeated in the SEC beating 5 top 10 teams along the way but enter post season without any possibility of winning the national title? The 4 team playoff is better IMO but they're going to need to refine it through trial & error. I mean Condoleeza Rice will be one of the few voices in who's final 4 but not a single data/numbers person is? I'm especially interested in how game venue and board selection is handled.

Agreed. It might be messy for the first couple of years. The mystery behind the final ranking system appears to cause some consternation among fan bases. I, for one, would like to see the computers factored back in somehow. They always seemed to weight the schedule strength heavier and ignore the name on the jersey a little better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After 2004 I'm stunned anybody on this board is in favor of the BCS system. Go undefeated in the SEC beating 5 top 10 teams along the way but enter post season without any possibility of winning the national title? The 4 team playoff is better IMO but they're going to need to refine it through trial & error. I mean Condoleeza Rice will be one of the few voices in who's final 4 but not a single data/numbers person is? I'm especially interested in how game venue and board selection is handled.

Yeah, it was horsecrap. But, after it happened, everyone knew it was horsecrap, and the BCS and the voters both took steps to try to keep something like that from happening again. They refined it through trial & error, too. It sucked, but 1) it's been 10 years and 2) the BCS gave us the right combination of 1&2 pretty much the entire time. I don't have any complaints overall. I enjoy the controversy as well, and think it's very healthy for college football (contrary to what others may think). The best part of the BCS was that every team and every fan knew what it had to get done and what needed to happen to other teams each week for their team to move up the rankings. That means you could have a real emotional investment in a game you normally wouldn't care much about (I mean, I would anyway, I'll watch any CFB you put in front of me). Now, I worry about the Playoff and the selection committee and the discussions being held behind closed doors.

If you thought the BCS was a crapshoot, you just wait. Now, you get to play the entire season and still won't know if it's good enough or if it's impressive enough in the eyes of some panel closeted away. You thought there was wailing and gnashing of teeth when #3 gets left out? You just wait and see how much #5-#8 and their fans start screaming about not getting their shot, and that they're better than one, if not more than one of the teams in the playoff. All #3 had to argue was they were better than #2.

This process is going to make everyone realize how good we, as fans of college football, have had it over the past 16 years, 2004 included. I guarantee, three seasons of this, and everyone will clamor to go back - especially if people who are clamoring to expand the playoff further get their way, and we end up with 8 teams (then #9-#16 will argue, quite correctly, that the difference between #8 and say, #12 is probably not much, and they deserve their shot).

If I wanted to watch the NFL, I'd watch on Sunday. But no thanks, you can keep 32 teams each losing at least 4 games a year and it not mattering a whit because they know that they just need to get hot in January and can be the 12th best team in the league. Same goes for College Basketball. Guess what doesn't matter there? Yeah, pretty much the whole regular season, because come March, they'll take pretty much anyone that showed a pulse over the past several months. You literally could not watch a single game, not care about a single result, and not miss anything when it comes to figuring out who's the best in the nation.

ESPN, as much as we trash them, got it right a couple years ago when they came out with the CFB slogan "Every Game Matters." In the college game, it does. Every one of your games matters because 1 slip up means that you fall from the ranks of the unbeaten. Not only that, but with over 120 total teams, every game that day played by any other team had at least an indirect effect on the rankings and positioning of the people in front of you.

It's why we glue ourselves to the TV on Saturday and watch to see if App State beats Michigan, or if Clemson beats FSU, or some team that beat you loses to another team, or that you can pull for a team that you beat to beat some really good opponents so it makes you look better, or some team you'll never play plays another team you'll never play, but that team is supposed to be good and one of YOUR opponents beat them, and you beat them, so you get a bump....and on and on and on.

It's what makes College Football so wonderful, so attractive. And instead of preserving it, we're trying to water it down (and don't get me started on Bowl Games. I don't care if there are 35 of them. I don't care if you pit Tulane and UT-San Antonio, give me MORE. For crying out loud, it's the last gasp of football for the year, and I drink it up like a man in the desert trying not to die of thirst.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After 2004 I'm stunned anybody on this board is in favor of the BCS system. Go undefeated in the SEC beating 5 top 10 teams along the way but enter post season without any possibility of winning the national title? The 4 team playoff is better IMO but they're going to need to refine it through trial & error. I mean Condoleeza Rice will be one of the few voices in who's final 4 but not a single data/numbers person is? I'm especially interested in how game venue and board selection is handled.

Yeah, it was horsecrap. But, after it happened, everyone knew it was horsecrap, and the BCS and the voters both took steps to try to keep something like that from happening again. They refined it through trial & error, too. It sucked, but 1) it's been 10 years and 2) the BCS gave us the right combination of 1&2 pretty much the entire time. I don't have any complaints overall. I enjoy the controversy as well, and think it's very healthy for college football (contrary to what others may think). The best part of the BCS was that every team and every fan knew what it had to get done and what needed to happen to other teams each week for their team to move up the rankings. That means you could have a real emotional investment in a game you normally wouldn't care much about (I mean, I would anyway, I'll watch any CFB you put in front of me). Now, I worry about the Playoff and the selection committee and the discussions being held behind closed doors.

If you thought the BCS was a crapshoot, you just wait. Now, you get to play the entire season and still won't know if it's good enough or if it's impressive enough in the eyes of some panel closeted away. You thought there was wailing and gnashing of teeth when #3 gets left out? You just wait and see how much #5-#8 and their fans start screaming about not getting their shot, and that they're better than one, if not more than one of the teams in the playoff. All #3 had to argue was they were better than #2.

This process is going to make everyone realize how good we, as fans of college football, have had it over the past 16 years, 2004 included. I guarantee, three seasons of this, and everyone will clamor to go back - especially if people who are clamoring to expand the playoff further get their way, and we end up with 8 teams (then #9-#16 will argue, quite correctly, that the difference between #8 and say, #12 is probably not much, and they deserve their shot).

If I wanted to watch the NFL, I'd watch on Sunday. But no thanks, you can keep 32 teams each losing at least 4 games a year and it not mattering a whit because they know that they just need to get hot in January and can be the 12th best team in the league. Same goes for College Basketball. Guess what doesn't matter there? Yeah, pretty much the whole regular season, because come March, they'll take pretty much anyone that showed a pulse over the past several months. You literally could not watch a single game, not care about a single result, and not miss anything when it comes to figuring out who's the best in the nation.

ESPN, as much as we trash them, got it right a couple years ago when they came out with the CFB slogan "Every Game Matters." In the college game, it does. Every one of your games matters because 1 slip up means that you fall from the ranks of the unbeaten. Not only that, but with over 120 total teams, every game that day played by any other team had at least an indirect effect on the rankings and positioning of the people in front of you.

It's why we glue ourselves to the TV on Saturday and watch to see if App State beats Michigan, or if Clemson beats FSU, or some team that beat you loses to another team, or that you can pull for a team that you beat to beat some really good opponents so it makes you look better, or some team you'll never play plays another team you'll never play, but that team is supposed to be good and one of YOUR opponents beat them, and you beat them, so you get a bump....and on and on and on.

It's what makes College Football so wonderful, so attractive. And instead of preserving it, we're trying to water it down (and don't get me started on Bowl Games. I don't care if there are 35 of them. I don't care if you pit Tulane and UT-San Antonio, give me MORE. For crying out loud, it's the last gasp of football for the year, and I drink it up like a man in the desert trying not to die of thirst.)

We agree on pretty much everything! :bow:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the playoff idea - but hate that we have a "selection committee". Should have used the BCS polls to determine 1-4. No human is completely unbiased and no selection committee is going to allow 2 SEC teams in with so much TV money at stake. Sorry bama....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree that a 4-team playoff will water down the regular season. Going back 5 seasons, only 3 teams have finished in the top 4 of the final BCS rankings with 2 losses. The other 17 top-4 teams in that time period had 1 or 0 losses. A single loss will still do massive damage to a team's title hopes, and it's still only going to be 1-loss and undefeated teams in the picture except for rare occasions, just like it was under the BCS.

As for a team complaining that they should have been in 4th place instead of 5th, that is a significant upgrade from what happened to us in 2004 (it's only by sheer luck that it hasn't happened again).

If the playoff expands to 8 teams, then all of the above is BS and I will be on board with you guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me be clear: I agree with you Loof. I like the 4 team because it's utilizing the existing postseason bowls. I am not sold on the committee. My compliant about watering down was more for the 8- or more team playoff I see people advocating for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just think it's gonna put a strain on fans in general...conference championship to site of first playoff game to site of second playoff game and then championship...that's a lot of money and traveling...that's kind of the only beef i have with the system...i'm gonna wait on everything else and see how it plays out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me be clear: I agree with you Loof. I like the 4 team because it's utilizing the existing postseason bowls. I am not sold on the committee. My compliant about watering down was more for the 8- or more team playoff I see people advocating for.

Ahh, gotcha. Apologies for any misinterpretation.

Reserving judgment on the committee, but it does seem a bit strange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the playoff because it does open the national title possibilities to the lower tier schools. Now if a couple make it into the playoffs and get drummed a couple years in a row they may start getting shut out again but atleast they had a shot. As things stood before the Boise St. of the world never had a chance. They only have a small chance now but atleast it is something. The only major problem I see with the playoff system is what could have happened last year with AU and bama. Had we had the playoffs last year it would have likely meant AU and bama meeting in the semis. That would have NOT have been ok. AU would have had to play an additional game (SECCG) while bama got to sit back, scheme, and heal up. I could deal with possibly meeting them again in the championship but not the semis. Meeting in the semis would have meant there was no reward to actually winning the SECCG. So something needs to be put into place to make sure teams from the same conference don't meet in the semis. Bama needed to "earn" the right to play AU again and get another shot at beating us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm amazed ... Nostalgia for the BCS already? Smh. I'm glad to see a playoff finally getting implemented to cfb's premier division. Let me clear, though -- I think an 8 team playoff is the ideal number. However, a 4 team playoff will suffice for now. I predict the playoff format will become so popular that we will eventually see an expansion beyond the initial 4. Spurrier is on record as saying we should have a 16 team playoff.

As for the bowl "system" ... who really cares to see Bumfrack Egypt State play Timbucktu Tech in the Poulan Weedeater Bowl anymore? The networks do a fantastic job of refusing to show how empty the stadiums are for those bowl games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the playoff system as long as it doesn't expand beyond 8 teams. Picking two teams is leaving too many who have a legitimate claim out of the mix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm amazed ... Nostalgia for the BCS already? Smh. I'm glad to see a playoff finally getting implemented to cfb's premier division. Let me clear, though -- I think an 8 team playoff is the ideal number. However, a 4 team playoff will suffice for now. I predict the playoff format will become so popular that we will eventually see an expansion beyond the initial 4. Spurrier is on record as saying we should have a 16 team playoff.

As for the bowl "system" ... who really cares to see Bumfrack Egypt State play Timbucktu Tech in the Poulan Weedeater Bowl anymore? The networks do a fantastic job of refusing to show how empty the stadiums are for those bowl games.

I only have nostalgia for the process of picking teams - not so much for the "top 2". The BCS should have picked 4 and had a playoff - that, IMO, fixed what was wrong with the BCS.

Completely agree with the number of bowl games. A bowl game use to be a reward for a good season. Now 6-6 or potentially 5-7 gives you a reward. I watch very few of the first bowl games. I like the 8+ plus win teams because they actually did something at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are nuts. Why are you advocating for LESS football? By the time December rolls around, football is almost over for 8 months - you should savor any game you can get your eyes on. I watch every bowl game, every year, unless I am called away by work or travel.

I mean, to each their own, I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are nuts. Why are you advocating for LESS football? By the time December rolls around, football is almost over for 8 months - you should savor any game you can get your eyes on. I watch every bowl game, every year, unless I am called away by work or travel.

I mean, to each their own, I guess.

Heard that!

It's not like there aren't still varying levels of prestige associated with the different bowls. Nobody from a program with a pulse feels "rewarded" going to Shreveport. But if some of the smaller schools get a little fun in the sun in mid-December? No skin off my back. And hey, some of those games turn into top flight entertainment in the 4th quarter. Watching 2 teams I have no emotional investment in trade paint until the last possession of the game on a Thursday night is up there in my book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are nuts. Why are you advocating for LESS football? By the time December rolls around, football is almost over for 8 months - you should savor any game you can get your eyes on. I watch every bowl game, every year, unless I am called away by work or travel.

I mean, to each their own, I guess.

Heard that!

It's not like there aren't still varying levels of prestige associated with the different bowls. Nobody from a program with a pulse feels "rewarded" going to Shreveport. But if some of the smaller schools get a little fun in the sun in mid-December? No skin off my back. And hey, some of those games turn into top flight entertainment in the 4th quarter. Watching 2 teams I have no emotional investment in trade paint until the last possession of the game on a Thursday night is up there in my book.

:clap:

Seriously, though, I am a little curious - those of you who wish for fewer bowl games...what is your normal Saturday like?

I, personally, start making a nice breakfast with extra bacon with ESPN GameDay on (and, I guess for this next season, the SEC Network GameDay), and then from Noon until Midnight, my rear end is parked on the couch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are keeping the bcs, the exact same formula will spit out the top 25 and the top 4 will go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

most of the time. maybe the committee will throw an Oregon in over a pac 12 champ Stanford.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...