First Playoff Committee Poll Is Out

[CenTexDave]

TCU moved up to 7th. If they win out I think they have an excellent chance at being in the 4 team playoff. Miss St plays Auburn and late Ole Miss. Bama plays Auburn later on. Lots on one loss teams in the top 25.

[LauraA]

Well Auburn beat Mississippi, so that should make the decision a little easier. They were discussing during the Nebraska game I think how there are too many SEC teams and that some might be over ranked. Nebraska has 1 loss. Why should they pick a team with two losses over them? The Big Ten and the Big 12 are getting overlooked and all the love is going to the SEC. I mean someone besides the SEC should get to play in the BCS.

[CenTexDave]

It's not the BCS anymore. It's the College Football Playoff. Four teams chosen by 12 idiots. Then #1 will play #4, #2 takes on #3 and those winners will play for the championship.
Yeah, Auburn beat Ole Miss but it was extremely close. If you saw highlights it was sickening - Auburn WR appears to score the winning TD, DB grabs him, folds him in half backwards and breaks his leg, so he fumbles.
Something will happen in the SEC - Auburn and Bama still have to play and Miss St and Ole Miss still play.
Oregon has probably sewn up a berth in it. One interesting thing about Oregon - I agree they are very good, but all their games have been at home or right there on the West Coast. Bring it to the south or midwest and let's see how good you are.
TCU never lead against WVA until the end of game FG, yet they move up. We'll see how they do with Kansas State, who seems to be a media darling right now.
The Big Ten can forget it. The media hates the Big Ten. Just watch some of their games and you hear these wise-ass announcers just bad mouth them. Michigan State might slide in the final four if they beat Ohio State and win the Big Ten Championship AND a couple of others end up losing.
Nationwide, IMO, college football is losing some interest because of this garbage. If you want to have a playoff then have one. All other divisions do it with 16 teams. It would be easy, but these rinky-dink bowl games like the GoMama.com bowl and Toilet Bowl complain. Tough crap. Get with the program or your bowl game can have Schneckelsburg Tech vs. East Bumf__k in it. :)

[kantwin]

Not Auburn WR, Ole Miss WR lost it at the goal line. I was flipping back and forth between that fame and the Arkansas - MIss State game. Both were barn burners.
The SEC definitely will eat their own. Big disadvantage for this format.

[CenTexDave]

Yep, sorry, was the Old Miss WR. Broken leg. Ouch.
It might not be as big a disadvantage as you think. The 12 committee members are supposed to be considering strength of schedule, so that would work in their favor.
But if a two loss SEC team makes it in over a one loss Big 12, Pac-12 or Big Ten champ there will be riots, mayhem, looting, mass destruction, etc. :)
I love college football. But these nonsense has been going on forever - have a legitimate 8 or 16 team playoff.

[fchafey]

I also think the media is keeping teams that travel well in the picture. God forbid we get another VaTech/Clemson match up in the Sugar Bowl. Gotta fill those cities that have the big bowls. The media does hate the Big 10 and Big 12, being a PSU fan I see it and it isnt just the pedofile jokes, it has been this way for a good while. The SEC and PAC 12 are the honeys and will be above any 1 loss team from another conference. Gotta keep the revenue for the SEC channel flowing.

[LauraA]

It's not the BCS anymore. It's the College Football Playoff. Four teams chosen by 12 idiots. Then #1 will play #4, #2 takes on #3 and those winners will play for the championship.
Yeah, Auburn beat Ole Miss but it was extremely close. If you saw highlights it was sickening - Auburn WR appears to score the winning TD, DB grabs him, folds him in half backwards and breaks his leg, so he fumbles.
Something will happen in the SEC - Auburn and Bama still have to play and Miss St and Ole Miss still play.
Oregon has probably sewn up a berth in it. One interesting thing about Oregon - I agree they are very good, but all their games have been at home or right there on the West Coast. Bring it to the south or midwest and let's see how good you are.
TCU never lead against WVA until the end of game FG, yet they move up. We'll see how they do with Kansas State, who seems to be a media darling right now.
The Big Ten can forget it. The media hates the Big Ten. Just watch some of their games and you hear these wise-ass announcers just bad mouth them. Michigan State might slide in the final four if they beat Ohio State and win the Big Ten Championship AND a couple of others end up losing.
Nationwide, IMO, college football is losing some interest because of this garbage. If you want to have a playoff then have one. All other divisions do it with 16 teams. It would be easy, but these rinky-dink bowl games like the GoMama.com bowl and Toilet Bowl complain. Tough crap. Get with the program or your bowl game can have Schneckelsburg Tech vs. East Bumf__k in it. :)

I totally agree. There is truly a bowl for everyone. North Texas even went to a bowl last year. As long as your record is above .500 you are probably going to some bowl. By the way, we all know Nebraska is going to win the Big 10 :)

[CenTexDave]

The winner of the Big Ten will be the winner of Saturday's game between Ohio State and Michigan State. If I was you, I'd worry now about having Nebraska get by Wisconsin.

[sojourner truth]

Can't wait to see how Minnesota does... Nothing like seeing home grown talent succeed.

[CenTexDave]

Minnesota's loss to Illinois was a shocker, and unfortunately Cobb's fumble is what lead to the winning score. But he's having an amazing year. The Golden Gophers are currently 6-2, with their only loss to TCU, so can't hold that against them. The only problem is their last 4 games are against Iowa, Ohio State, Nebraska and Minnesota. The might get by Iowa, but doubt they can beat those other teams.

[CenTexDave]

I totally agree. There is truly a bowl for everyone. North Texas even went to a bowl last year. As long as your record is above .500 you are probably going to some bowl. By the way, we all know Nebraska is going to win the Big 10 :)

North Texas only went to a bowl game because of those two kids from Cove who played for them - Brelan Chancellor and Brandin Byrd. Take those two off their team and their offense wouldn't have moved the ball. :)

[BobKerley]

The only problem is their last 4 games are against Iowa, Ohio State, Nebraska and Minnesota. The might get by Iowa, but doubt they can beat those other teams.

I think you might have meant Wisconsin but, yeah, although Iowa and Nebbie arent very good, tOSU and Wisky are a tough matchup.

[cnjbond]

I just wish they would have a regular playoff just like all the other sports...it would be nice to see a no name catch a hot streak and win the championship on the field and not just crown a champ on paper!

[CenTexDave]

Yeah, Wisconsin.

[BobKerley]

I just wish they would have a regular playoff just like all the other sports...it would be nice to see a no name catch a hot streak and win the championship on the field and not just crown a champ on paper!

I hope they dont. I dont understand why people are in such a rush to destroy the best game in America - D1 football. I do not want the bowls to do away, which would happen with a true playoff.

[CenTexDave]

Oh yeah. Some of those bowl games are such classics. The highlight of the football season - two 6-6 teams playing. :))

[BobKerley]

Oh yeah. Some of those bowl games are such classics. The highlight of the football season - two 6-6 teams playing. :))

That shouldnt matter. If I want to watch two podunk 6-6 teams play, that's my preference. Matter of fact, I would like to see MORE bowl games created. If two teams want to play each other, why should anyone else care?

[cnjbond]

I hope they dont. I dont understand why people are in such a rush to destroy the best game in America - D1 football. I do not want the bowls to do away, which would happen with a true playoff.

I'm not exactly sure how a true playoff system destroys the best game in America when every single other major sport has a playoff system. I think having 200 bowl games has done a pretty good job of destroying it.

[CenTexDave]

It used to be a bowl game was a reward for a good, no - a great - season. I remember when there were only 4 of them and they were all played on New Year's Day - the Rose, Cotton, Orange and Sugar. Then along came a few others which would pit good teams - Gator, etc.
Finally came the garbage bowl games - the Humanitarian Bowl started by Boise State so they could get into a bowl game.
Watch away. I do like Bowl Week, but some of the match ups I just laugh at. The BCS started the destruction of bowl tie-ins and this new playoff will make it worse. No reason whatsoever a 16 team playoff could not happen. Start the Saturday following the conference champ games, continue up through the weekend before Christmas, so by then you are down to 4 teams. Then continue just as they intend to do it now - semis rotate among the big bowl games on New Year's Day and the championship game a week later. There would be plenty of bowl games left for the mediocre.

[BobKerley]

I could see it in the pros for contract incentives and what not but why are amateur playoffs important?

Additionally, other playoff systems suck. Did you go to Mary Hardin-Baylor playoff away games in previous years? yuk. We have just been fortunate with MH-B in that they have been very good and a lot of their playoff games have been at home. Nonetheless, I would be a huge advocate for doing away with D2 and D3 playoff systems and move to a regional bowl game during the holidays as a final game for the season. The NFL is an American monopoly that can make a playoff work with their inherent advantages but Playoffs for amateur football is unnecessary and a money loser for all levels except maybe the top 16 teams of D1 football if they ever go to that model.

The bowl system is a big winner for some teams to go out as champions of something. It helps with the fanbase and recruiting. Did you know that because of the playoff system, the season was over for some ranked teams before it was even November?

The bowl system is also perfect for fans to plan a winter vacation around during the holidays and this is why the affiliated bowl system was such a big hit for 75 years or so. I like to buy my Alamo or Cotton bowl tickets in July but shell out thousands of dollars while jumping through my butt for a lower level game with a week or two notice - aint gonna happen.

[BobKerley]

It used to be a bowl game was a reward for a good, no - a great - season. I remember when there were only 4 of them and they were all played on New Year's Day - the Rose, Cotton, Orange and Sugar. Then along came a few others which would pit good teams - Gator, etc.
Finally came the garbage bowl games - the Humanitarian Bowl started by Boise State so they could get into a bowl game.
Watch away. I do like Bowl Week, but some of the match ups I just laugh at. The BCS started the destruction of bowl tie-ins and this new playoff will make it worse. No reason whatsoever a 16 team playoff could not happen. Start the Saturday following the conference champ games, continue up through the weekend before Christmas, so by then you are down to 4 teams. Then continue just as they intend to do it now - semis rotate among the big bowl games on New Year's Day and the championship game a week later. There would be plenty of bowl games left for the mediocre.

That's just a ruse to get rid of bowl games altogether. Once an 8 or 16 team playoff is accepted or in place then there will be a movement to make the playoffs a home game for the higher ranked team. Again, something I'm not in favor of. Most northerners dont mind taking a winter vacation in Florida, or California, or the south (esp for one game) but southerners will not like going to most northern locations in December and January, esp for more than one game. It's no accident that the bowl games sprung up where they have.

[CenTexDave]

I never said to cancel all the other bowl games.
Yep, two losses by now and you won't be considered for the playoff. Sad, but true.

[BobKerley]

It doesnt matter if you want them to go away; they will go away with a playoff system. What's the point of going to a playoff system if you are not going to have a playoff system? This is why it will be hard for the NCAA to come off a four-team playoff because it WILL destroy the bowl system but... that's what people want for whatever reason.

I have asked people, "How does having a playoff system help you personally? What does it really do FOR YOU?" And, guess what? nobody has given me a good answer... but, I CAN tell you what a bowl system does for me.

I didnt say they wouldnt be considered for a playoff due to losses; I said that their season is over. It's over because their regular season is finished while the fortunate teams get ready for the playoffs.

[CenTexDave]

That's just a ruse to get rid of bowl games altogether. Once an 8 or 16 team playoff is accepted or in place then there will be a movement to make the playoffs a home game for the higher ranked team. Again, something I'm not in favor of. Most northerners dont mind taking a winter vacation in Florida, or California, or the south (esp for one game) but southerners will not like going to most northern locations in December and January, esp for more than one game. It's no accident that the bowl games sprung up where they have.

That's what people up north want to see. Always keep hearing them tell Bama, Florida, LSU, USC to come up north in Dec or Jan. lol

What you trying to do won't be done - there is too much money for the schools from these bowl games and TV.

[Night Owl]

That shouldnt matter. If I want to watch two podunk 6-6 teams play, that's my preference. Matter of fact, I would like to see MORE bowl games created. If two teams want to play each other, why should anyone else care?
Someone's else's opinion doesn't matter, but yours does. Ok, got it. NEXT!!!!!

[Night Owl]

That's just a ruse to get rid of bowl games altogether. Once an 8 or 16 team playoff is accepted or in place then there will be a movement to make the playoffs a home game for the higher ranked team. Again, something I'm not in favor of. Most northerners dont mind taking a winter vacation in Florida, or California, or the south (esp for one game) but southerners will not like going to most northern locations in December and January, esp for more than one game. It's no accident that the bowl games sprung up where they have.
If it does, good riddance.

[BobKerley]

Someone's else's opinion doesn't matter, but yours does. Ok, got it. NEXT!!!!!

I didnt say anything about anyone else's opinion - NEXT! LOL

I guess some just read what they want to see

[BobKerley]

That's what people up north want to see. Always keep hearing them tell Bama, Florida, LSU, USC to come up north in Dec or Jan. lol
What you trying to do won't be done - there is too much money for the schools from these bowl games and TV.

Exactly, getting the playoffs to be hosted by the schools will be the next push but it's too much to do right now. And, it's not what I want to do at all; I like the bowl system.

The Bowl affiliation model was good for me. The BCS was fine and did what it was chartered to do. The move to four team playoff just changes the argument from what teams get left out and the same will happen if they go to an 8 team playoff. All for what? For whatever reason, people have this strange emotional dedication to destroy the bowl system and, again, for what?

[gnatsum]

Strength of schedule STILL has a lot to do with the college football rankings--HOW ELSE does one explain Marshall, with its 8-0 record, sitting down there in #23? #22 is Duke with its 7-1 record, and at #24 is 6-3 West Virginia?!? There are only three undefeated teams left in the classifications, and Mrs. Sippi State and Flo Rida State are 1 and 2. So why isn't Marshall number three in the nation? Ole Miss is #12 with its 7-2 record.
http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings

I know the "answer"--it's just that this looks odd. Maybe it'll make more sense if MS and FSU both lost their next two games...:)

(and a slightly off-topic sports championship thought--Ryan Newman still has a chance to win the NASCAR Nextel Cup Championship...without winning a SINGLE race this season!! Hmm...)

[CenTexDave]

I'm glad they consider strength of schedule. Remember when Brigham Young won the national championship? They ran through the weak WAC, had a #### bowl game (think it was the Humanitarian Bowl) and played a crappy Michigan team which they barely beat. At the end of all the bowl games they were the only undefeated team so won the nat championship. Cut me a freaking break!!

[BobKerley]

I'm glad they consider strength of schedule. Remember when Brigham Young won the national championship? They ran through the weak WAC, had a #### bowl game (think it was the Humanitarian Bowl) and played a crappy Michigan team which they barely beat. At the end of all the bowl games they were the only undefeated team so won the nat championship. Cut me a freaking break!!

agree.... even though 1984 was an anomaly, the SOS inherent in the BCS was a benefit over the old the bowl affiliation model since it really didnt have any parameters. IMO, 1984 was probably the weakest ordained national champion in my lifetime, however, I dont look at it by what BYU did or did not do but, rather, by all the opportunities lost. A bounce here or there and any one of 3 or 4 teams could have been crowned national champion. It was an exciting night watching the games and the scores on the ticker.

[cnjbond]

Exactly, getting the playoffs to be hosted by the schools will be the next push but it's too much to do right now. And, it's not what I want to do at all; I like the bowl system.

The Bowl affiliation model was good for me. The BCS was fine and did what it was chartered to do. The move to four team playoff just changes the argument from what teams get left out and the same will happen if they go to an 8 team playoff. All for what? For whatever reason, people have this strange emotional dedication to destroy the bowl system and, again, for what?

No one is HERE is trying to destroy the bowl system per se, there just needs to be a playoff system that gives those teams from weaker conferences a fair chance to make it to the national championship and the best way for that to happen is to reduce (not eliminate) the human factor of ranking via polls and let them earn a birth through conference championships coupled with a playoff system.

[BobKerley]

No one is HERE is trying to destroy the bowl system per se, there just needs to be a playoff system that gives those teams from weaker conferences a fair chance to make it to the national championship and the best way for that to happen is to reduce (not eliminate) the human factor of ranking via polls and let them earn a birth through conference championships coupled with a playoff system.

If your goal is to give "weaker conferences a fair chance" and "reduce the human factor" then the current system fails miserably on both accounts. The best chance in my lifetime for a mid-major or a "weaker conference" team to get a fair chance with the big boys was with the BCS format that leaned heavily on objective computer rankings taking a lot of the human element out of the equation. What did people do? they whined about that too! And, as a result, what do we have now? A panel of administrators making human decisions on playoff games. With slate of only four games and a human panel, there is virtually NO CHANCE for a "weaker conference" team to get included in the playoff sweepstakes and this isnt going to change much going to an 8 team playoff. congratulations, you got exactly what you did not want.

[CenTexDave]

Whoa there, Bob.
Those "objective computer rankings" were programmed by a host of individuals - 4 or 5 different computer rankings. It was all human element.
And that is why I say a 16 team playoff. Sure, the 17th team will piss and moan, but that's better than the way it was with the BCS (#3 would feel cheated - remember when Auburn was undefeated and passed over?), or #5 this year will feel cheated. And whoever ends up #5 will be a very good team.

[BobKerley]

No one is HERE is trying to destroy the bowl system per se, there just needs to be a playoff system that gives those teams from weaker conferences a fair chance to make it to the national championship and the best way for that to happen is to reduce (not eliminate) the human factor of ranking via polls and let them earn a birth through conference championships coupled with a playoff system.

And, I'll say it again... with every incremental expansion of a playoff format, you ARE destroying the bowl system, whether you want to admit to it or not. NOBODY will be happy with a four team playoff or an eight team playoff because it does exactly the opposite of what you say you want. The only way to do what you want is to have a playoff that includes ALL the conference champions, which would in turn give the "weaker conferences" a shot to knock off some power conference teams without human decision making. To do that, you have to destroy the bowl system and probably a home game advantage for the higher ranked team. The power conferences WILL NOT go along with that and would most likely break off from Division 1 if the NCAA pushes it or form a new division of power conferences with a playoff on neutral sites (bowl games), which is likely to happen when people are not going to be satisfied with the current system. This may happen anyway if and when power conference schools expand pay to players, a system that "weaker conferences" can not compete with.

So, again, what's the advantage of going to a quasi playoff system?

[BobKerley]

Whoa there, Bob.
Those "objective computer rankings" were programmed by a host of individuals - 4 or 5 different computer rankings. It was all human element.
And that is why I say a 16 team playoff. Sure, the 17th team will piss and moan, but that's better than the way it was with the BCS (#3 would feel cheated - remember when Auburn was undefeated and passed over?), or #5 this year will feel cheated. And whoever ends up #5 will be a very good team.

Of course computers were programmed by people... but once the algorithms are set before the season, then it was mostly objective how it plays out. That's no different than setting rules in the off season for the sport. Was it perfect? no... and I think tweaks could have been made; e.g. strengthen the SOS so that going undefeated wasnt as valuable as it turned out to be rewarding teams for playing hyper-weak schedules. Regardless, it was the most objective format - by far - that gave teams the best shot at the end of season games without going to a pure playoff format.

[BobKerley]

Whoa there, Bob.
Those "objective computer rankings" were programmed by a host of individuals - 4 or 5 different computer rankings. It was all human element.
And that is why I say a 16 team playoff. Sure, the 17th team will piss and moan, but that's better than the way it was with the BCS (#3 would feel cheated - remember when Auburn was undefeated and passed over?), or #5 this year will feel cheated. And whoever ends up #5 will be a very good team.

A couple of other points...

Sure, some fans complained that their team should have been in the BCS games or the MNC game but there really wasnt very many - actually, hardly any - legitimate injustices during the BCS era; just a lot of complaining from fans. If the goal was to match up the top two teams for a NC game, then the BCS really did a good job of doing that, IMO, which is all is was chartered to do. I only have one complaint for the BCS NC matchups and that was when both teams were from the sec. I believe that decision destroyed the BCS for even those that were on the fence with the format, however, that could have been rectified quite easily.

Also, I seriously doubt you will see a 16 team playoff for the power conference teams. It isnt advantageous to them and they have options that the "weaker conference" dont have. I think you will have a split in Division 1 football before that happens; essentially creating a quasi semi-pro farm system for the pros.

[CenTexDave]

It already is a farm system for the pros. :)
The thing is these lesser bowls could be part of the playoffs. Not all bowl games are played on New Year's Day. This year the Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowls will be the semi-finals. I'm not going to bother about looking up the dates all these bowl games are played, but let's say the first round is played on Sat., Dec 13 (one week after conference championship games) in 8 minor bowl games such as the GoDaddy.com Bowl, etc. Next round on Sat., Dec 20 ( 4 games, 8 teams) in bowl games generally considered a step up (Outback, Gator, etc). Could then have the semis (2 games, 4 teams) on Sat., Dec 20 (Holiday Bowl, etc). Then break until New Year's Day and have the National Championship - rotate it among the usual top bowl games (Rose, Orange, Sugar, Fiesta). I realize it could cause travel problems for people seeking tickets to the game and travel, but no system is fool proof.

[cnjbond]

If your goal is to give "weaker conferences a fair chance" and "reduce the human factor" then the current system fails miserably on both accounts. The best chance in my lifetime for a mid-major or a "weaker conference" team to get a fair chance with the big boys was with the BCS format that leaned heavily on objective computer rankings taking a lot of the human element out of the equation. What did people do? they whined about that too! And, as a result, what do we have now? A panel of administrators making human decisions on playoff games. With slate of only four games and a human panel, there is virtually NO CHANCE for a "weaker conference" team to get included in the playoff sweepstakes and this isnt going to change much going to an 8 team playoff. congratulations, you got exactly what you did not want.

I agree, the current system sucks and so did the BCS. I still don't understand how all the other sporting entities can come up with a playoff system but not D1 football...except for the fact that no one wants to come off of the big pot of gold at the end of the rainbow AKA the Don't Squeeze The Charmin Bowl or whatever other crazy bowl someone can come up with.

I think college basketball has a good system, granted bball has a lot less wear and tear on the body than football but if they reduced the number of regular season games (God forbid since football is the big money maker for most of these schools), determine your conference champs, allocate a few at large teams and then let 'em play it out on the field.

I know it's easier said than done but again, the current system is garbage.

[Night Owl]

And, I'll say it again... with every incremental expansion of a playoff format, you ARE destroying the bowl system, whether you want to admit to it or not. NOBODY will be happy with a four team playoff or an eight team playoff because it does exactly the opposite of what you say you want. The only way to do what you want is to have a playoff that includes ALL the conference champions, which would in turn give the "weaker conferences" a shot to knock off some power conference teams without human decision making. To do that, you have to destroy the bowl system and probably a home game advantage for the higher ranked team. The power conferences WILL NOT go along with that and would most likely break off from Division 1 if the NCAA pushes it or form a new division of power conferences with a playoff on neutral sites (bowl games), which is likely to happen when people are not going to be satisfied with the current system. This may happen anyway if and when power conference schools expand pay to players, a system that "weaker conferences" can not compete with.

So, again, what's the advantage of going to a quasi playoff system?
Sounds good to me. I like your plan. Get rid of bowl games. You convinced me that is the way to go.

[BobKerley]

I still don't understand how all the other sporting entities can come up with a playoff system but not D1 football...

Can you name the college "sporting entities" that DO have a true playoff system?

You mention basketball but basketball doesnt have a true playoff system. They have a tournament where they seed teams in regional and neutral locations. They could have four games in two days at the Cotton bowl for instance with teams seeded 1-4. Is that what you want in football? It must be; otherwise, why mention it? This is how it works in college baseball as well, which also is not a true playoff system. Of course neither the NBA nor does MLB do it this way; they both have playoffs. Are you confusing pros with college? And, believe you me, there isnt a shortage of arguments about which team get seeded where, what regional they get placed in, and what teams get left out of the tournament regardless of how big the number of teams that get included. Seeding teams and regional placement is NOT a playoff and has as much of the human element as anything else.

In basketball, they are already talking about expanding the teams for the tournament. There use to be several good end of season tournaments in college basketball; they still have these other tournaments but you dont hear about them anymore. The NCAA tournament has gotten so large that they are purposely squeezing out the significance of the other tournaments such as the NIT, which use to be a good tournament in its own right. Why is the NCAA doing this? money... the "big pot of gold at the end of the rainbow"... but, apparently, that pot of gold is ok - right? If it were not for the pot of gold, the NCAA should go back to a 16 or 32 team tournament and let the other tournaments have some good teams but they wont.

[CenTexDave]

It is what it is. Good luck and trying to do away with bowl games or getting the NCAA to change a thing. I believe you mentioned the possibility of the super conferences splitting from the NCAA. That is entirely possible. Many years ago many of the power schools took the NCAA to court over the amount of games that each team could appear on TV. I believe the NCAA had some rule about only 1 national telecast and 2 or so regional telecasts each year. While I imagine the intentions were good to allow all teams to have a chance to be on TV, in reality nobody wants to see 2 3-8 teams battling it out. So the schools sued and won and a organization named College Football Association came into being which controlled the TV. I believe the NCAA finally made peace with them and now teams can appear as often as one of the many networks wants to put them on television.

[BobKerley]

It already is a farm system for the pros. :)
The thing is these lesser bowls could be part of the playoffs. Not all bowl games are played on New Year's Day. This year the Rose Bowl and Sugar Bowls will be the semi-finals. I'm not going to bother about looking up the dates all these bowl games are played, but let's say the first round is played on Sat., Dec 13 (one week after conference championship games) in 8 minor bowl games such as the GoDaddy.com Bowl, etc. Next round on Sat., Dec 20 ( 4 games, 8 teams) in bowl games generally considered a step up (Outback, Gator, etc). Could then have the semis (2 games, 4 teams) on Sat., Dec 20 (Holiday Bowl, etc). Then break until New Year's Day and have the National Championship - rotate it among the usual top bowl games (Rose, Orange, Sugar, Fiesta). I realize it could cause travel problems for people seeking tickets to the game and travel, but no system is fool proof.

It is a defacto farm system but it will become condensed primarily into the power conferences if certain things occur (purposely obtuse not trying to derail the thread)

The bowls work so to speak because they get to choose the teams that will fit in their bottom line. The bowls will not work if it is ran or controlled by the NCAA. Additionally, big schools such as Texas or the farmers will not want to do this. They do it now to some degree because they have a contractual obligation to the conference that sets up bowl affiliation. If the bowls are "seeded" by the NCAA, then there is no bowl obligation for the schools, therefore, why would a school that has a 100,000 seat stadium choose to play additional games in 40, 50, or 60 thousand seat venues halfway across the country? they wont. If this happens, I'm fairly confident that the big schools will insist on the higher "seeded" teams hosting at least the first round or two.

Some people seem to think the NCAA or its chairman has some control over this but he really doesnt. It's kind of like the NFL commish really doesnt have any leverage unless the overwhelming majority of owners give it to him on a particular issue and the teams that bring in the most money have the most say. That is similar with the NCAA. The NCAA chairman really doesnt have any leverage unless the college presidents concur on a particular issue. D1 football has turned into a beast that needs to be fed and is dependent on the big schools that bring in the money.

[BobKerley]

It is what it is. Good luck and trying to do away with bowl games or getting the NCAA to change a thing. I believe you mentioned the possibility of the super conferences splitting from the NCAA. That is entirely possible. Many years ago many of the power schools took the NCAA to court over the amount of games that each team could appear on TV. I believe the NCAA had some rule about only 1 national telecast and 2 or so regional telecasts each year. While I imagine the intentions were good to allow all teams to have a chance to be on TV, in reality nobody wants to see 2 3-8 teams battling it out. So the schools sued and won and a organization named College Football Association came into being which controlled the TV. I believe the NCAA finally made peace with them and now teams can appear as often as one of the many networks wants to put them on television.

Yep, in 1984 the University of Okiehoma et al filed an antitrust suit against the NCAA and won. The NCAA had controlled the media distribution (in the name of fairness, and fairness is a word used a lot in the playoff argument) of member institutions from 1957 (?) till 1984. 0U was on tv one game more than they were allotted and was cited by the NCAA. When the NCAA lost the centralized media distribution in 1984, there was a lot of confusion for a few years and schools didnt know what to make of the deregulation that naturally occurred due to the court case. A few years later, Notre Dame seized the opportunity and struck their own media deal with NBC which shocked a lot people at the time.

I'm not sure if the NCAA made peace with anyone. They lost and had to live with the consequences. And, once the college presidents (who really run the NCAA) realized their brand had value, then there was no turning back.

[CenTexDave]

I won't ever watch a Notre Dame game unless I see on a different TV channel that they are losing. Then I'll gladly switch to that game. :)

[cnjbond]

Can you name the college "sporting entities" that DO have a true playoff system?

You mention basketball but basketball doesnt have a true playoff system. They have a tournament where they seed teams in regional and neutral locations. They could have four games in two days at the Cotton bowl for instance with teams seeded 1-4. Is that what you want in football? It must be; otherwise, why mention it? This is how it works in college baseball as well, which also is not a true playoff system. Of course neither the NBA nor does MLB do it this way; they both have playoffs. Are you confusing pros with college? And, believe you me, there isnt a shortage of arguments about which team get seeded where, what regional they get placed in, and what teams get left out of the tournament regardless of how big the number of teams that get included. Seeding teams and regional placement is NOT a playoff and has as much of the human element as anything else.

In basketball, they are already talking about expanding the teams for the tournament. There use to be several good end of season tournaments in college basketball; they still have these other tournaments but you dont hear about them anymore. The NCAA tournament has gotten so large that they are purposely squeezing out the significance of the other tournaments such as the NIT, which use to be a good tournament in its own right. Why is the NCAA doing this? money... the "big pot of gold at the end of the rainbow"... but, apparently, that pot of gold is ok - right? If it were not for the pot of gold, the NCAA should go back to a 16 or 32 team tournament and let the other tournaments have some good teams but they wont.

I mentioned basketball because of the way teams "earn" a berth into the tournament/playoff, whatever you want to call it. If they win their conference, then it's an automatic bid into the tournament which is what I alluded to earlier by letting the conference championships be a teams ticket into the playoffs/tournament. I also understand there are teams that get invited to March Madness due to human selection/at large bid but there are also quite a few teams that get in due to winning their conference. Now I won't argue with you on the seeding (I don't think there'll ever be a truly "fair" way to seed but it is what it is).

I don't agree with expanding the BBall tournament to more teams because it starts to water it down...just like the 35 bowl games in college football.

[CenTexDave]

Have to remember in basketball they have a regular season champ and a tournament champ. Both usually get in.
We don't need a 64 team playoff in football, but it does need to be expanded.

[BobKerley]

I mentioned basketball because of the way teams "earn" a berth into the tournament/playoff, whatever you want to call it. If they win their conference, then it's an automatic bid into the tournament which is what I alluded to earlier by letting the conference championships be a teams ticket into the playoffs/tournament. I also understand there are teams that get invited to March Madness due to human selection/at large bid but there are also quite a few teams that get in due to winning their conference. Now I won't argue with you on the seeding (I don't think there'll ever be a truly "fair" way to seed but it is what it is).
I don't agree with expanding the BBall tournament to more teams because it starts to water it down...just like the 35 bowl games in college football.

That's what you want in football? There are 10 conferences and four independent teams in D1 college football. Do you think it should also include D2 and D3 as well like basketball does? Did you know that some conferences (such as the Ivy league) do not have a conference tournament in basketball (but I dont know if that matters). Do you think because it works in college basketball (I'm not sure it "works" but it does monetize a sport that had problems previously), that it should work in football? really? I think college basketball has become ridiculous expanding automatic bids to teams who arent even in division 1. There use to be a day when making the NCAA tournament use to be a big deal; it really isnt any more.

So... You think all the conference champions should have equal access to the playoffs? You think Toledo (Mid America Conference) or Georgia Southern (Sun Belt Conference) should get an automatic bid to the playoffs just as the sec champion would? I have a hard time believing that the big schools would go along with that for very long. This isnt the NFL where the goal is to create parity and equal competition across divisions and conferences for the good of the monopoly. To do what you want to do, you really have to blow up the conferences and redistribute the traditional power teams for equal access but you know that aint gonna happen.

Additionally, D1 football already plays 12-13 games in the regular season as it is. Add another game for a bowl for about 70 teams and a 15th game for the final two in the NC game. In order to do what you want, this whole process would have to change. Frankly, a lot of the power schools have outgrown the bowl system, in that, they really dont need a third party financing and organizing a showcase game for them. They are hanging on to it for tradition purposes and that's about it. And, they surely dont need nor want the NCAA coming in, organizing a playoff system and taking a huge cut as they do the NCAA tournaments (including basketball and baseball). It it comes down to it, I think the power conference teams would break off from D1 football and form their own division and showcase games or break away from the NCAA altogether in football.

And, again, why? What is this overwhelming desire to change things? What makes THIS such an emotional issue for people? What does going to a playoff really get you? It's important to destroy tradition... because?... it's the season for hope and change? What is it and why is it necessary?
I think I've had enough hope and change to last me for a long time.

[BobKerley]

We don't need a 64 team playoff in football, but it does need to be expanded.

Why? You make a declarative machination but have yet to say why it is so important.

[Soldierhorn]

it's not important Bob. People have just been sucked into the mentality that change is good.

[Soldierhorn]

There are 10 conferences and four independent teams in D1 college football.

there are actually about 24 D1 conferences

[CenTexDave]

There are 10 Division 1 (FBS) conferences and, I think, four independents - Army, Navy, Brigham Young and Notre Dame.

[BobKerley]

FBS is what I was going by but soldierhorn is right, there are about 24 division 1 conferences but the FCS actually have their own playoff.

[BobKerley]

But it does beg the question: If a D1 playoff is going to be started, why would other D1 schools get left out? Why wouldnt it just absorb the FCS playoff as well? We want to be fair - right?

[CenTexDave]

Come on, Bob. I do remember when Appalachia State shocked the world by beating Michigan that year, but Michigan went went on and had a bad team that year. Some may say that was the result of that upset, but they have never really recovered. They just recruited bad.
Including the FCS in the playoffs would be a joke. As good as some of those teams are, they could hardly hang with the FCS powerhouses.
I'm sure many would like the entertaining 78-0 blowouts.

[BobKerley]

But we are talking "fairness" arent we? The whole point of this was to include the "weaker conference teams" wasnt it?

[CenTexDave]

If that is what your desire is. I can see the seedings and matchups now: #1 FCS vs #16 FBS. I take back that 78-0 blow out. Would probably be worse. :)

[cnjbond]

Whoa there, no one is getting emotional just stating that the current system of determining a national champion could use some fixing because the past system and (probably) the current one are still gonna leave a lot of questions. Again, I PREVIOULSY stated that in order for an expanded playoff system to work, REGULAR season games would have to be reduced (which probably wouldn't happen because of $$$$$$).

The tournament/playoff system that I'm talking about would be limited to the D1 schools. If I'm not mistaken, the other divisions have a playoff, right?

Do I think any of these "good ideas" will happen? Heck no because I surely don't have deep enough pockets to makeup the $$$$$ that these schools would lose, so until Warren Buffet writes me in his hill to inherit his fortunes (which if that happened, pumping $$$$ into a college football playoff system would be so far down on my lists to do that it might as well not be on the list....although starting my own bowl might not be a bad idea ;) ) this is just a bunch of dreaming.

To the Hopes and Dreams and other nonsense, not sure what it has to do with the discussion, I could careless about that.

[BobKerley]

Whoa there, no one is getting emotional just stating that the current system of determining a national champion could use some fixing because the past system and (probably) the current one are still gonna leave a lot of questions. Again, I PREVIOULSY stated that in order for an expanded playoff system to work, REGULAR season games would have to be reduced (which probably wouldn't happen because of $$$$$$).

Not emotional? Then why are people so adamant to change something if they are not emotionally tied to it?

There is no perfect system and a playoff is no panacea. It just changes the arguments.


The tournament/playoff system that I'm talking about would be limited to the D1 schools. If I'm not mistaken, the other divisions have a playoff, right?

yeah, and as stated beforehand, there are about 24 division 1 conferences. And, no, not all divisions have a playoff. And, the ones that do are wasting losing money needlessly chasing a wooden trophy. Regional D2 & D3 teams should drop the playoff format and opt for a regional bowl game; something they would actually make money doing.

[CenTexDave]

But think of the fun those kids would miss. I'm sure Mary Hardin Baylor players just loved traveling to Alliance, OH back in Dec, 2004 to play Mt. Union. Cold, snow, but they won!!!!!!

[BobKerley]

Again, I PREVIOULSY stated that in order for an expanded playoff system to work, REGULAR season games would have to be reduced (which probably wouldn't happen because of $$$$$$).

NOBODY wants to cut back on regular season games. Matter of fact, there's a lot of pressure for all the conferences with championship games to go to a nine conference game slate instead of 8 like the sec has right now. The sec likes its weak out of conference slate of four games for each team since it helps the w/L record for the conference. Additionally, it gives them 7-8 home games for added revenue. The teams are not going to want to give up home game revenue for a lower tier playoff game somewhere else - aint happen'in

[BobKerley]

But think of the fun those kids would miss. I'm sure Mary Hardin Baylor players just loved traveling to Alliance, OH back in Dec, 2004 to play Mt. Union. Cold, snow, but they won!!!!!!

They could have the same game in a bigger venue and probably make it on tv while making money at the same time. If they had a regional bowl game, that would be a must attend game for me and a lot of fans but I will not go to Ohio to watch a playoff game even if it were a national championship game.

[CenTexDave]

I would, but maybe not in December. :))

[BobKerley]

I would, but maybe not in December. :))

That's for darn sure.

Additionally, the pageantry of a local bowl game would help with recruits even at the division 3 level and the regional high school coaches would love it. The division 2 and 3 playoff is "out of sight - out of mind" for most people.

[CenTexDave]

I've never been to a UNMB game, but their new stadium looks great and Rick loves going to their games.

[cnjbond]

Not emotional? Then why are people so adamant to change something if they are not emotionally tied to it?

There is no perfect system and a playoff is no panacea. It just changes the arguments.


No, REALLY...not being emotional about it because I know what Chuck's says or writes on this here CenTexTalk forum ain't worth much and I'm sure it won't have any affect on an expanded playoff system being adopted. Better yet, the sun will hopefully come up tomorrow whether or not I get my wish that the format would change.

[cnjbond]

Again, I PREVIOULSY stated that in order for an expanded playoff system to work, REGULAR season games would have to be reduced (which probably wouldn't happen because of $$$$$$).



NOBODY wants to cut back on regular season games. Matter of fact, there's a lot of pressure for all the conferences with championship games to go to a nine conference game slate instead of 8 like the sec has right now. The sec likes its weak out of conference slate of four games for each team since it helps the w/L record for the conference. Additionally, it gives them 7-8 home games for added revenue. The teams are not going to want to give up home game revenue for a lower tier playoff game somewhere else - aint happen'in

Sooooooo, you're basically agreeing with what I just said?

[CenTexDave]

These 3 pages of back and forth banter and ideas will never come to fruitation - the bowls and TV money is too much to ever change much. I just hope they expand the playoffs for the FCS in the coming years.