Does anyone have a plan for a play off system?

[yermom]

it just seems like there is something better than this crappy BCS, but i haven't heard any ideas to change it

[sooneron]

Yeah, this board is stale with no one having an opinion on the subject.

[birddog]

playoffs!? playoffs!?

[OklahomaTuba]

I like the system where a bunch of people who never ever played the game get together with a bunch of computers and tell the people who play football who the best teams are without ever letting them play each other.

Oh, wait..

[texas bandman]

Hey Oklahoma Tuba,
Your signature is too philosophical. Are you sure you're a tuba player? :P

Another Sooner Tuba player
Class of '81

[Vegas Vic]

Edit: posted in wrong thread

[sooner_born_1960]

I don't have a plan, but I think all the plans that include only confefence champions are bad. Every* NCAA sport that has a championship allows for at-large berths.


* I'm not aware of one that doesn't have at-large berths. There very well may be one.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

I think they should have an 8 team playoff and seed the teams in alphabetical order. And they should play all four first round games in the same place on the same day...Sell all day passes for 400 dollars a ticket...

And then re seed the teams in the 2nd round by having the coaches pick a number between 1 and 100..whoever is closest is 1st and etc..

1. Arizona State
2. Kansas
3. LSU
4. Missouri
5. Ohio State
6. Oklahoma
7. Oregon
8. West Virgiana

[noobalicious]

I am a fan of a 6-team playoff idea. This gives benefits to those teams ranked #1 and #2 but it's small enough so people don't whine about taking away from class time or other bs (even though bowls occur precisely when classes aren't).

Since there will still be fans of the old bowl system, and 6 teams will be in the playoffs...subtract 3 useless bowls off the front end of the bowl schedule. You can still keep the old bowl system...just the national championship will exist in the form of the last game of the playoff.

Here's how I would have it. The 6 teams in the playoffs would be the top 6 teams in the BCS, seeded based on their BCS ranking. Side note: although I would like to see them modify the BCS to make computer rankings count less or something. The top two seeds would get a bye just like the conference brackets in the NFL. All of the games except the national championship would be played at the higher seed's stadium (incentive to finish 3 or 4 instead of squeaking in). So if this were to happen right now it would be:

LSU and Oregon bye.

West Virginia at Kansas
Missouri at Oklahoma

Then LSU (#1) would play the lowest remaining seed, and Oregon the highest remaining seed. If the higher seeds were to win it would be Kansas at Oregon and Oklahoma at LSU. The winners of those games would go on to play the national championship game at a neutral site which would rotate among the 4 BCS bowl locations (Fiesta, Sugar, Orange, Rose) each year.

The first round of the playoffs would be played the weekend prior to Christmas (to get the games on a weekend and make sure there is enough time between those games and the next round). The second round both played on New Years Day. The MNC played on Jan 8th as it is always slated.

Selection procedure for the BCS bowls would remain the same. If one of the automatic tie-ins went to the playoff, the bowl could select from the available pool of at large teams.

For instance, in the example above, no Big 10 team would qualify for the playoff so Ohio State would get the automatic tie-in as the Big 10 champ to the Rose Bowl. However Oregon (Pac 10 champ) would be selected for the playoff, so the Rose Bowl could fill that slot with whoever they wanted.

This eliminates some of the arguments that 3-6 would have about not getting to play for the MNC. IMO if you're lower than 6 you probably screwed up enough to deserve not to be there.

[Curly Bill]

Everyone has a plan that they know is the absolute best. Problem is, everyone has a different absolute best plan. :rolleyes:

[sooner n houston]

I nominate Yermon for deep thinker of the SoonerFan nation!!! If only someone would think of a way to have a play-off in college football, wow! Now all we need is for someone somewhere to start a thread or 600 on how to do that! :D

[Collier11]

I like a 18 team playoff with seeds 1 and 2 in the bcs rankings getting a bye. You have a conf champion from each conf, and the next highest ranked 7 teams in the bcs.

[Tulsa_Fireman]

Distant planet.

Crude rudimentary weapons designed from items found in the landscape.

Fight to the death.

[LesNessman]

Yeah.

It's called the regular season.

[Collier11]

Yeah.

It's called the regular season.


I hope you are joking cus that argument is stale and not viable.

Why should a team such as OU who lost in september possibly be shut out of playing for a title when we have one loss and potentially 3 wins against top 10 teams

[Octavian]

Distant planet.

Crude rudimentary weapons designed from items found in the landscape.

Fight to the death.


co-sign.


provided cheerleaders are present.

[stoopified]

I don't have a plan, but I think all the plans that include only confefence champions are bad. Every* NCAA sport that has a championship allows for at-large berths.


* I'm not aware of one that doesn't have at-large berths. There very well may be one.
The problem with at large berths is !)they expand playoff field,2)They would depend on rankings or votes to decide who is in or out.That leads right to the heart of the BCS weakness.Take away polls and guess work,decide it on the field.

[Stoop Dawg]

Yeah.

It's called the regular season.

Have you seen the "regular season playoff champion" trophy Boise St got last year? It's right next to the "we won all our games" trophy.

They might have to get a bigger trophy case.

[Ardmore_Sooner]

it just seems like there is something better than this crappy BCS, but i haven't heard any ideas to change it

Hey n00b use the search button. Gosh!

http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102403&highlight=playoffs


:D :D :D :D :D

[Stoop Dawg]

Here's a search link for you:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=sarcasm+detector

[sooner_born_1960]

The problem with at large berths is !)they expand playoff field,2)They would depend on rankings or votes to decide who is in or out.That leads right to the heart of the BCS weakness.Take away polls and guess work,decide it on the field.
You mean like all the other NCAA championships everyone talks about?

[sooner_born_1960]

yermom, quit being such a noob. ;)

[yermom]

I like a 18 team playoff with seeds 1 and 2 in the bcs rankings getting a bye. You have a conf champion from each conf, and the next highest ranked 7 teams in the bcs.

math is hard

;)

[TUSooner]

Nope.
Nobody.

:)

[OU Adonis]

I hope you are joking cus that argument is stale and not viable.

Why should a team such as OU who lost in september possibly be shut out of playing for a title when we have one loss and potentially 3 wins against top 10 teams

Because its worked for OU up until this year? The only difference is now OU might be left out. How many of you guys wanted a playoff in 2003? Or in 2000?

[Collier11]

Because its worked for OU up until this year? The only difference is now OU might be left out. How many of you guys wanted a playoff in 2003? Or in 2000?


Hand Raised! I have always thought the only fair way is to have a playoff. I didnt think it was fair that Auburn got left out in 04', and I dont think it would be fair this year if Ou, Oregon, Kansas, or mizzou would get left out

[Stoop Dawg]

How many of you guys wanted a playoff in 2003? Or in 2000?

Me.

[Stoop Dawg]

math is hard

;)

11 + 7 was still 18 the last time I checked.

[AlabamaSooner]

I've always liked the idea of an 8 team playoff using the current BCS rankings system. For the first round, you could have 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, 3 vs. 6, and 4 vs. 5. The higher seeds could host the first round games and the final two rounds would be at neutral sites, incorporating the major bowl games that we currently have. Those major bowls would rotate every year. The final bowl location would also rotate.

For example (with current standings):

Game 1: 1 LSU vs. 8 Arizona State (Baton Rouge)
Game 2: 2 Oregon vs. 7 Ohio State (Eugene)
Game 3: 3 Kansas vs. 6 West Virginia (Lawerence)
Game 4: 4 Oklahoma vs. 5 Missouri (Norman)

Game 5: 4 Oklahoma vs. 2 Oregon (Orange Bowl)
Game 6: 1 LSU vs. 3 Kansas (Fiesta Bowl)

Game 7: 1 LSU vs. 4 Oklahoma (Sugar Bowl)

The years in which one of the four BCS bowls aren't in the rotation, that can be the "at large" BCS game. I guess sort of the "consolation prize" for those just outside of the top 8. That's what I would like to see for a playoff at least. :P

[Ardmore_Sooner]

So you could win the Orange and Sugar Bowl in the same year? Would you get a trophy from each? Would the players get all the bowl game perks? Would they stay at the destination for a week?

[usmc-sooner]

how about the winner of the AFC vs the winner of the NFC?

[AlabamaSooner]

So you could win the Orange and Sugar Bowl in the same year? Would you get a trophy from each? Would the players get all the bowl game perks? Would they stay at the destination for a week?

Those are all good questions. Glad I don't have to make those decisions...lol. I think the biggest issue would be the players being on the road for two weeks in a row (although it's not like that doesn't happen in the regular season).

[NYC Poke]

The easy part is devising a playoff plan. The hard part part is getting the bowls, the conferences, and the university presidents on board. Most major football teams are from schools that are entities of the states, and many of the bowls are backed by the communities they benefit. It's a matter of state and local politics (and don't forget the money) all the way along. We're moving in the direction of a playoff, but many constituencies invovled will have to be drawn along kicking and screaming.

[Stitch Face]

33 posts after six hours? Weak.

[Curly Bill]

33 posts after six hours? Weak.

You can only beat on that ol' dead horse so long before you give out. ;)

[Curly Bill]

33 posts after six hours? Weak.

...but notice that within just those 33 posts how many differing opinions there are?

[KingBarry]

I hope you are joking cus that argument is stale and not viable.

Why should a team such as OU who lost in september possibly be shut out of playing for a title when we have one loss and potentially 3 wins against top 10 teams


Well, I'll take a stab at this one.... Maybe because we lost a game in September? I really think the system we have is working alright, with the exception of years when there are three (or possibly more) undefeateds from the major conferences. For example, there was that year when Auburn didn't get to go to the Orange Bowl to play USC. Someone else did. Who was that again?

Oh, if USC has to forfeit that game, will OU be national champs? :rolleyes:

[sooneron]

Edit: posted in wrong thread
Best Vic post, yet.:texan:

[reddfoxx]

I like the system where an undefeated BYU beats a 6-5 Michigan team in the Holiday Bowl for the national title.

[Rock Hard Corn Frog]

:D
I like the system where an undefeated BYU beats a 6-5 Michigan team in the Holiday Bowl for the national title.

Word.


How about the system when some research group(I think from Alabama and Souther California) comes in 50 years later and starts retroactively naming teams national champions.

Actually I think there are Sherpas in Nepal that probably have a playoff system and they have never even heard of football.

My .02 would be something like this. There have probably only been about 20 million people suggest something like this before me but...

All 6 BCS conferences get 12 teams. ND into the Big teneleven. Boise, Fresno St or maybe Hawaii into the Pac-10 etc. Have 72 teams in the BCS conferences. The other 35 of so schools can go F*** themselves. :D :D :D

Anyway everyone plays in a conference championship game and the 6 champs get Auto-bids. Next 10 teams in BCS get in as well. Conf champs and top at large teams host first round games. Second round game sites determined by strip-off of cheer squads....ok maybe not....

[Stoop Dawg]

As a fan, all I want to see, really, is a system where winning all of your games guarantees you a National Championship.

To me, it's ludicrous to call someone a "National Champion" when there is another undefeated team in the same league that they never played.

(And yes, Boise St and Hawaii are technically "in the same league". If they are not going to be given a shot at a NC, then send them back to AA).

[Leroy Lizard]

I suggest someone lock this thread before I start getting involved in it.

You have been warned.

[jkjsooner]

I like a 18 team playoff with seeds 1 and 2 in the bcs rankings getting a bye. You have a conf champion from each conf, and the next highest ranked 7 teams in the bcs.

With 18 teams, 14 teams would get a bye and the other 4 would have to play a first round game to make 16 even in the second round....

Are you sure you didn't mean a 14 team playoff with the top 2 getting a bye?

[DGolemi]

Current BCS Standings:
1. LSU 9-1
2. Oregon 8-1
3. Kansas 10-0
4. Oklahoma 9-1
5. Missouri 9-1
6. West Virginia 8-1
7. Ohio State 10-1
8. Arizona State 9-1
9. Georgia 8-2
10. Virginia Tech 8-2
11. USC 8-2
12. Florida 7-3
13. Texas 9-2
14. Virginia 9-2
15. Clemson 8-2
16. Hawaii 9-0
---------------------- *CUTOFF*
17. Boston College 8-2
18. Boise State 9-1
19. Illinois 8-3
20. Tennessee 7-3
21. Michigan 8-3
22. Cincinnati 8-2
23. Kentucky 7-3
24. Connecticut 8-2
25. Wisconsin 8-3

***Top 16 Cut Off***

Week 1:

(Dallas, TX @ Cotton Bowl, Texas Stadium, Gerald J. Ford Stadium (SMU))

#1 LSU(9-1)
----------------------
| #1 LSU (10-1)
|--------------------
#16 Hawaii(9-0) |
----------------------

#2 Oregon (8-1)
----------------------
| #2 Oregon (9-1)
|--------------------
#15 Clemson (8-2) |
----------------------

#3 Kansas (10-0)
----------------------
| #14 Virginia (10-2)
|--------------------
#14 Virginia (9-2) |
----------------------

#4 Oklahoma (9-1)
----------------------
| #4 Oklahoma (10-1)
|--------------------
#13 Texas (9-2) |
----------------------

#5 Missouri (9-1)
----------------------
| #12 Florida (8-3)
|--------------------
#12 Florida (7-3) |
----------------------

#6 West Virginia (8-1)
----------------------
| #11 USC (9-2)
|--------------------
#11 USC (8-2) |
----------------------

#7 Ohio State (10-1)
----------------------
| #7 Ohio State(11-1)
|--------------------
#10 Virginia Tech(8-2)|
----------------------

#8 Arizona State (9-1)
----------------------
| #9 Georgia (9-2)
|--------------------
#9 Georgia (8-2) |
----------------------

*************************************************

Week 2:

(The Rose Bowl, The Sugar Bowl, The Orange Bowl, & The Fiesta Bowl)

#1 LSU (10-1)
----------------------
| #1 LSU (11-1)
|--------------------
#14 Virginia (10-2) |
----------------------

#2 Oregon (9-1)
----------------------
| #12 Florida (9-3)
|--------------------
#12 Florida (8-3) |
----------------------

#4 Oklahoma (10-1)
----------------------
| #4 Oklahoma (11-1)
|--------------------
#11 USC (9-2) |
----------------------

#7 Ohio State (11-1)
----------------------
| #9 Georgia (10-2)
#9Georgia (9-2) |
----------------------

*************************************************

Week 3:

(The Sugar Bowl)

#1 LSU (11-1)
----------------------
| #1 LSU (12-1)
|--------------------
#12 Florida (9-3) |
----------------------

#4 Oklahoma (11-1)
----------------------
| #4 Oklahoma (12-1)
|--------------------
#9 Georgia (10-2) |
----------------------

*************************************************

Week 4 National Championship Game:

(The Sugar Bowl)

#1 LSU (12-1)
----------------------
| #1 LSU (13-1)
|--------------------
#4 Oklahoma (12-1) |
----------------------

*************************************************
*************************************************
*************************************************

2007 National Champions: #1 LSU Tigers (13-1)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
=================================================
=================================================
=================================================
*************************************************

Terms and Conditions of Playoff System:
1.) All teams play in same location during the first week. The second week takes place in the traditional bowl game locations. (The Bowl Committees shouldn't have a problem with this because they can almost be certain to have the traditonal bowl tie ins). The third week and fourth week take place in the location of the national championship.
2.) NCAA Schedule is shortened from 12 games to 10 (lose two meaningless OOC Games, and two OOC games still remain to schedule quality opponents).
3.)Playoffs begin the first week of 2nd Saturday of December and conclude on the first Saturday in January (Tough NFL, you'll just have to deal with the scheduling conflict.)

[Vegas Vic]

Terms and Conditions of Playoff System:
1.) All teams play in same location during the first week. The second week takes place in the traditional bowl game locations. (The Bowl Committees shouldn't have a problem with this because they can almost be certain to have the traditonal bowl tie ins). The third week and fourth week take place in the location of the national championship.


Your proposed system in one that a lot of fans have suggested over the years.

The problem lies in trying to sell out all of these games for four consecutive weeks (especially without knowing who is going to be playing where until the week of the game).

How many of you OU fans would be making reservations, purchasing tickets, trying to schedule time off from work and traveling for four consective games without really knowing how long OU would be in the playoffs?

Every other football playoff (college and professional) works because all of the games except the championship game are played at the home stadium of one of the participants.

[rubyspirit]

it just seems like there is something better than this crappy BCS, but i haven't heard any ideas to change it
Haven't you heard, every game is a playoff. The BCS system works. If we change it, there will be distracters for the new system. Buck up and accept it. The kids are getting hurt now with the 12 to 14 games they play now. To think they can play even more, is stupid and ridiculous.

[TUSooner]

OK. Let's scrap the whole deal.
You wanna find the best team in CFB, totally ON THE FIELD?
We'll do it like the English soccer leagues:
Using the least arbitrary manner available (it won;t matter, eventually)...

DIVIDE all the teams into "tiers" or "groups" or "leagues" consisting of 14 teams (13 games) - A Premier Tier, a 2nd Tier, 3rd Tier, etc.

Each team plays the other teams in its tier. The bottom 3 in each tier at the end of the season drop down a tier; the top 3 teams in each tier move up.

You can have a playoff for the 3rd advancing spot in each tier if you want. Have a playoff between the top 4 in the Premier tier to determione the Non-Mythical National Champion.

The first few seasons will be tainted by the arbitrariness in the selection process was used in the first season. But after that, the cream will rise, and the dregs will fall.
There will be no 1-season wonder - Hawaii, BSU, (Tulane in 98!) - to crash the party. Solid programs will go up and stay up.

Of course, it kills the existing conferences, bowls, and traditional rivalries; and increased travel and an extra game or 2 is likely.

But if ALL you care about is finding THE BEST TEAM in all of CFB, ON THE FIELD, it's the only way to go.

Thank you.

[Collier11]

With 18 teams, 14 teams would get a bye and the other 4 would have to play a first round game to make 16 even in the second round....

Are you sure you didn't mean a 14 team playoff with the top 2 getting a bye?


im not the worlds best at math, but with 18, 2 get a buy meaning 8 1st rd games, then 8 2nd rd games, and so on...correct me if im wrong?

[Collier11]

Well, I'll take a stab at this one.... Maybe because we lost a game in September? I really think the system we have is working alright, with the exception of years when there are three (or possibly more) undefeateds from the major conferences. For example, there was that year when Auburn didn't get to go to the Orange Bowl to play USC. Someone else did. Who was that again?

Oh, if USC has to forfeit that game, will OU be national champs? :rolleyes:


what the heck are you talking about, did you even read what I wrote. I agreed that it was crap that auburn didnt have a shot at the title, thats why there should be a playoff

[yermom]

im not the worlds best at math, but with 18, 2 get a buy meaning 8 1st rd games, then 8 2nd rd games, and so on...correct me if im wrong?

if the top 2 get byes, that's two less games, thus two less teams. brackets need powers of two, so the closest number is 16. so you'd have 14 teams, not 18

to get 18 you would need 2 play in games, thus the top 14 would be getting byes

[sooneron]

16 teams is retarded. This isn't D2. How many times have you said to yourself, "You know, Rutgers deserved a shot last year"?
The biggest issue is usually one or two teams MAYBE laying claim that they deserved a shot. Pick the four best teams pit them against one another in two of the big bowls and the winners play each other 2 weeks later.

[Rock Hard Corn Frog]

im not the worlds best at math, but with 18, 2 get a buy meaning 8 1st rd games, then 8 2nd rd games, and so on...correct me if im wrong?

If 2 teams get a bye you wind up with 10 teams in the second round. You could have a 14-team playoff with 2 teams getting byes but at that point you might as well just have 16 teams.

By the way...DO NOT use the Division II system. They have 4 regions of 6 team each with 2 teams getting byes. That isn't a problem so much as how the 6 teams are selected. For an example about 2-3 years ago Pittsburg St lost something like 70-21 to Central Missouri, a conference opponent. CMSU actually had a better record by a game. Yet PSU made the playoffs by the virtue of their "stonger schedule". So the playoff system has plenty of flaws as well.

[yermom]

OK. Let's scrap the whole deal.
You wanna find the best team in CFB, totally ON THE FIELD?
We'll do it like the English soccer leagues:
Using the least arbitrary manner available (it won;t matter, eventually)...

DIVIDE all the teams into "tiers" or "groups" or "leagues" consisting of 14 teams (13 games) - A Premier Tier, a 2nd Tier, 3rd Tier, etc.

Each team plays the other teams in its tier. The bottom 3 in each tier at the end of the season drop down a tier; the top 3 teams in each tier move up.

You can have a playoff for the 3rd advancing spot in each tier if you want. Have a playoff between the top 4 in the Premier tier to determione the Non-Mythical National Champion.

The first few seasons will be tainted by the arbitrariness in the selection process was used in the first season. But after that, the cream will rise, and the dregs will fall.
There will be no 1-season wonder - Hawaii, BSU, (Tulane in 98!) - to crash the party. Solid programs will go up and stay up.

Of course, it kills the existing conferences, bowls, and traditional rivalries; and increased travel and an extra game or 2 is likely.

But if ALL you care about is finding THE BEST TEAM in all of CFB, ON THE FIELD, it's the only way to go.

Thank you.

no way, do it with Swiss Style pairings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_system_tournament), and use a Elo Chess rating system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system) then you could rank the best team year after year, lol

if travel, money and ticket sales weren't an issue, that would be the way to go

i actually do like the idea of forcing the top 10 or something from the previous year to play each other the next year, maybe the top 25 all has to play two teams from the top 25 in their non-conference schedule or something

[Leroy Lizard]

Yeah, it sure looks like playoff proponents have it all worked out.

Why don't you start with baby steps? Figure out how many teams. That's all. See if you can come to an agreement.

This ought to be fun. :D

By the way, even with a playoff, a national championship will still be mythical unless it is crowned by the NCAA. Good luck with that one.

[Leroy Lizard]

DIVIDE all the teams into "tiers" or "groups" or "leagues" consisting of 14 teams (13 games) - A Premier Tier, a 2nd Tier, 3rd Tier, etc.

I would love to see how you pick the first 14 teams to occupy the top tier. Oh, ho! That would be truly entertaining. I just hope no one publishes your street address (for your own safety).


You can have a playoff for the 3rd advancing spot in each tier if you want. Have a playoff between the top 4 in the Premier tier to determione the Non-Mythical National Champion.

Bwahahaha!! I can just see a coach in the seventh tier league trying to recruit.

"But just think, in six years we might advance into the premier league and play for the national title!"

"Yeah, but Coach, I will have long graduated."

Unlike English soccer leagues, college football players are only eligible to play for five years after they sign.

[Jdog]

Problems:
How many empty seats do we see at the Big12 championship games. Anyone remember the OU vs cu game in Houston - it was maybe half full.

How many fans can get the time off and afford to travel to Tempe and then to, say LA for the NC game -- I would suppose that maybe 10,000 to 15,000 OU fans at most might make the trip to Tempe - the rest would hope to get a seat for the NC game.

I've got 40 yard line seats in Norman - but I wind up with end zone seats from the University to the Bowl games - I'm not doing that again.

Solution:
Two weeks after conf championship games
(Including ones for both the PAC 10 (with BYU and Utah/or Boise Statein the conf) and Big 10 (w/ND in the conf)
you would have an 8 team playoff with 6 conf champs and 2 wild cards - top 4 seeds get home field advantage(use the BCS computer formulas) - this way they're all sell outs.
A week after that you play two games – at top 2 seeds Home field sites - again sell outs.
Then rotate the 4 major bowl “locations” for the NC game the first or second week in January.

The Bowls become what they were intended to be in the first place - a fun game to attend and a reward for a great season (for the rest of the 111 teams that aren't playing for a NC).

[LittleWingSooner]

4 or 8 team playoff. Possibly 12 teams. No more than 12 though. Any playoff is better than the ****ty system we have today.

[Leroy Lizard]

Thanks for narrowing it down. So we have one vote for a four-team playoff. Or was it eight? Well, maybe 12. But no more than 12.

[Leroy Lizard]

Two weeks after conf championship games

That's during finals week. Nope, not going to happen. And thank God for that.


top 4 seeds get home field advantage(use the BCS computer formulas) - this way they're all sell outs.

Sure, to LOCALS. But locals don't spend money on restaurants, and hotels, and transportation, and tourist sites.

Why would any bowl committee agree to such a thing? Bowl committees are primarily put in charge of ensuring that lots of outside money flows into the city, and you want the favored teams to host the games?

[Sooner24]

Call Craig, I want to have Tiger Woods baby, Humphreys and ask him if he has a plan. He will go on for an hour detailing his playoff plan. :rolleyes:

[LittleWingSooner]

Thanks for narrowing it down. So we have one vote for a four-team playoff. Or was it eight? Well, maybe 12. But no more than 12.

I think more than 16 is too many. With 8 or 12 it gives the Boise State's a chance to prove themselves.

[Fraggle145]

I like bewbs

[yermom]

finally a quality post in my thread :D

[SoonerMachine]

2006 BCS 8-team Playoff Formula:

1. After the regular season ends, rank the eleven D–1A conference champions by the BCS:

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 – Ohio State – Big 10
#2 – Florida – SEC
#5 – USC – Pacific 10
#6 – Louisville – Big East
#8 – Boise State – WAC
#10 – OU – Big 12
#14 – Wake Forest – ACC
#20 – BYU – Mountain West
(NR) – Houston – Conference USA
(NR) – Central Michigan – MAC
(NR) – Troy – Sun Belt

2. Select the six highest ranked conference champions:

#1 – Ohio State – Big 10
#2 – Florida – SEC
#5 – USC – Pacific 10
#6 – Louisville – Big East
#8 – Boise State – WAC
#10 – OU – Big 12

3. Select the two highest ranked at-large teams (conference or independent):

#3 – Michigan – Big 10
#4 – LSU – SEC

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1st Round:

#1 Ohio State hosts #10 OU

#2 Florida hosts #8 Boise State

#5 USC hosts #6 Louisville

#3 Michigan hosts #4 LSU (at-large elimination game)*

2nd Round:

Highest rank hosts lowest rank

Second highest hosts third lowest

3rd Round:

Winners play in the national championship game.

*In the event an at-large team is an independent, then the 1st round will proceed as follows:

1st Round:

Highest rank hosts lowest rank
Second highest hosts seventh lowest
Third highest hosts sixth lowest
Forth highest hosts fifth lowest


Note: All bowl games remain, including invitations to the six teams eliminated prior to the championship.


Historical Examples:

1998

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 – Tennessee – SEC
#2 – Florida State – ACC
#5 – UCLA – Pacific 10
#6 – Texas A&M – Big 12
#9 – Wisconsin – Big 10
#10 – Tulane – Conference USA

At-Large Teams

#3 – Kansas State – Big 12
#4 – Ohio State – Big 10

1st Round:

#1 Tennessee hosts #10 Tulane

#2 Florida State hosts #9 Wisconsin

#5 UCLA hosts #6 Texas A&M

#3 Kansas State hosts #4 Ohio State (at-large elimination game)


1999

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 – Florida State – ACC
#2 – Virginia Tech – Big East
#3 – Nebraska – Big 12
#4 – Alabama – SEC
#7 – Wisconsin – Big 10
#12 – Marshall – MAC

At-Large Teams

#5 – Tennessee – SEC
#6 – Kansas State – Big 12

1st Round:

#1 Florida State hosts #12 Marshall

#2 Virginia Tech hosts #7 Wisconsin

#3 Nebraska hosts #4 Alabama

#5 Tennessee hosts #6 Kansas State (at-large elimination game)


2000

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 – OU – Big 12
#2 – Florida State – ACC
#3 – Miami – Big East
#4 – Washington – Pacific 10
#7 – Florida – SEC
#14 – TCU – WAC

At-Large Teams

#5 – Virginia Tech – Big East
#6 – Oregon State – Pacific 10

1st Round:

#1 OU hosts #14 TCU

#2 Florida State hosts #7 Florida

#3 Miami hosts #4 Washington

#5 Virginia Tech hosts #6 Oregon State (at-large elimination game)


2001

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 – Miami – Big East
#3 – Colorado – Big 12
#4 – Oregon – Pacific 10
#8 – Illinois – Big 10
#10 – Maryland – ACC
#13 – LSU – SEC

At-Large Teams

#2 – Nebraska – Big 12
#5 – Florida – SEC

1st Round:

#1 Miami hosts #13 LSU

#3 Colorado hosts #10 Maryland

#4 Oregon hosts #8 Illinois

#2 Nebraska hosts #5 Florida (at-large elimination game)


2002

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 – Miami – Big East
#2 – Ohio State – Big 10
#3 – Georgia – SEC
#6 – Washington State – Pacific 10
#7 – Oklahoma – Big 12
#14 – Florida State - ACC

At-Large Teams

#4 – USC – Pacific 10
#5 – Iowa – Big 10

1st Round:

#1 Miami hosts #14 Florida State

#2 Ohio State hosts #7 Oklahoma

#3 Georgia hosts #6 Washington State

#4 USC hosts #5 Iowa (at-large elimination game)


2003

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#2 – LSU – SEC
#3 – USC – ACC
#4 – Michigan – Big 10
#7 – Florida State – ACC
#9 – Miami – Big East
#10 – Kansas State – Big 12

At-Large Teams

#1 – OU – Big 12
#5 – Ohio State – Big 10

1st Round:

#2 LSU hosts #10 Kansas State

#3 USC hosts #9 Miami

#4 Michigan hosts #7 Florida State

#1 OU hosts #5 Ohio State (at-large elimination game)


2004

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 – USC – Pacific 10
#2 – OU – Big 12
#3 – Auburn – SEC
#6 – Utah – Mountain West
#8 – Virginia Tech – ACC
#9 – Boise State – WAC

At-Large Teams

#4 – Texas – Big 12
#5 – California – Pacific 10

1st Round:

#1 USC hosts #9 Boise State

#2 OU hosts #8 Virginia Tech

#3 Auburn hosts #6 Utah

#4 Texas hosts #5 California (at-large elimination game)


2005

BCS Rank | Champion | Conference

#1 – USC – Pacific 10
#2 – Texas – Big 12
#3 – Penn State – Big 10
#7 – Georgia – SEC
#11 – West Virginia – Big East
#14 – TCU – Mountain West

At-Large Teams

#4 – Ohio State – Big 10
#5 – Oregon – Pacific 10

1st Round:

#1 USC hosts #14 TCU

#2 Texas hosts #11 West Virginia

#3 Penn State hosts #7 Georgia

#4 Ohio hosts #5 Oregon (at-large elimination game)

[Jdog]

That's during finals week. Nope, not going to happen. And thank God for that.



Sure, to LOCALS. But locals don't spend money on restaurants, and hotels, and transportation, and tourist sites.

Why would any bowl committee agree to such a thing? Bowl committees are primarily put in charge of ensuring that lots of outside money flows into the city, and you want the favored teams to host the games?

I don't think you read my post - I'm saying screw the bowls - My plan doesn't include the Bowls for the playoffs. It's like what the pros do - more about the concern of how many fans will follow a team for three distant post season games at neutral sites. Ask the City of Houston how well their hotels did hosting the Big 12 Championship game. Hotels Norman are sold out for Home games.

but you're right, Finals week would be a problem - but with the TV money that would be involved for only 8 of 119 teams - I'm sure that they could come up with a work around.

[Leroy Lizard]

In many of the seasons you have a #13 or #14 team getting berthed in place of a #8 team simply because it played in a weak conference. Why should teams like Missouri get penalized for playing in a tough conference? The drop from #8 to #14 is pretty large.

[Collier11]

Problems:
How many empty seats do we see at the Big12 championship games. Anyone remember the OU vs cu game in Houston - it was maybe half full.

How many fans can get the time off and afford to travel to Tempe and then to, say LA for the NC game -- I would suppose that maybe 10,000 to 15,000 OU fans at most might make the trip to Tempe - the rest would hope to get a seat for the NC game.

I've got 40 yard line seats in Norman - but I wind up with end zone seats from the University to the Bowl games - I'm not doing that again.

Solution:
Two weeks after conf championship games
(Including ones for both the PAC 10 (with BYU and Utah/or Boise Statein the conf) and Big 10 (w/ND in the conf)
you would have an 8 team playoff with 6 conf champs and 2 wild cards - top 4 seeds get home field advantage(use the BCS computer formulas) - this way they're all sell outs.
A week after that you play two games – at top 2 seeds Home field sites - again sell outs.
Then rotate the 4 major bowl “locations” for the NC game the first or second week in January.

The Bowls become what they were intended to be in the first place - a fun game to attend and a reward for a great season (for the rest of the 111 teams that aren't playing for a NC).
so you are only giving the bcs conference champs a shot, why even have the other 5 conferences then. I for one have no doubt that a central michigan, tulsa, etc... would never have a shot at winning it all, but why have teams in D1 if they have no shot at winning a championship year in and year out?

[Leroy Lizard]

I don't think you read my post - I'm saying screw the bowls - My plan doesn't include the Bowls for the playoffs. It's like what the pros do

Except the pros have large numbers of fans of every team in every city.


- more about the concern of how many fans will follow a team for three distant post season games at neutral sites. Ask the City of Houston how well their hotels did hosting the Big 12 Championship game.

Have you already asked them and, therefore, know the answer? I certainly don't.


Hotels Norman are sold out for Home games.

Sure, for ONE NIGHT. Bowl games, on the other hand, allow for extended stays because fans and chambers of commerce can plan an entire week of festivities. I have a lot of friends that will stay almost an entire week spending money in the host city. Can't do it on short notice.

By the way, hotels in Norman are sold out partly because games are scheduled well in advance.


but you're right, Finals week would be a problem - but with the TV money that would be involved for only 8 of 119 teams - I'm sure that they could come up with a work around.

In other words, you have no solution to this problem, other than to say that greed will override their concern for academics. I may be misunderstanding what you mean by "workaround." So, does this "workaround" involve screwing up the academic careers of those participating in the playoffs? If so, then it isn't a worthwhile solution.

If it is a bad idea to schedule games during final exams, then it is a bad idea no matter how many players are affected.

[Collier11]

In other words, you have no solution to this problem, other than to say that greed will override their concern for academics. I may be misunderstanding what you mean by "workaround." So, does this "workaround" involve screwing up the academic careers of those participating in the playoffs? If so, then it isn't a worthwhile solution.

If it is a bad idea to schedule games during final exams, then it is a bad idea no matter how many players are affected.


Have a 2 week layoff for finals, wouldnt that suffice? They already have a rediculous month to 2 month layoff for bowl games

[Leroy Lizard]

They have a long layoff because not all schools follow the same final exam schedule, especially those on the quarter system.

You see, it isn't as easy as you think. :)

[Leroy Lizard]

...but why have teams in D1 if they have no shot at winning a championship year in and year out?

Because it isn't just about winning the national championship. At no point in time has the national championship been declared the goal for every school in college football. I wish college football fans would get off this notion that winning the national championship can be the only goal for a college football player.

The NCAA doesn't even sanction a national championship. So how important could it really be?

Hundreds of players from all over the country sign with teams that have no realistic chances of winning a national title. Ivy League schools even refuse to play in the Division 1AA playoffs. Obviously, there must be more to the sport than winning "the big one." (Having fun? Getting an education? Meeting a challenge?)

At one time -- a long time ago -- college football was a beautiful sport. But now fans want to turn it into a mini-NFL. "Gotta have a real champion! Gotta have a real champion!" I ask: Why?

[SoonerMachine]

"In many of the seasons you have a #13 or #14 team getting berthed in place of a #8 team simply because it played in a weak conference. Why should teams like Missouri get penalized for playing in a tough conference? The drop from #8 to #14 is pretty large."

Because it emphasizes the regular season and winning your conference. It also minimizes too many 'second chances' to participate for the NC. Furthermore, it better allows for the 'Cinderella scenario' to play out nearly every year (Tulane, Marshall, Boise St., TCU, etc.), while diminishing the chance of rematches occurring in the final regular season top 8.

[Collier11]

Because it isn't just about winning the national championship. At no point in time has the national championship been declared the goal for every school in college football. I wish college football fans would get off this notion that winning the national championship can be the only goal for a college football player.

The NCAA doesn't even sanction a national championship. So how important could it really be?

Hundreds of players from all over the country sign with teams that have no realistic chances of winning a national title. Ivy League schools even refuse to play in the Division 1AA playoffs. Obviously, there must be more to the sport than winning "the big one." (Having fun? Getting an education? Meeting a challenge?)

At one time -- a long time ago -- college football was a beautiful sport. But now fans want to turn it into a mini-NFL. "Gotta have a real champion! Gotta have a real champion!" I ask: Why?


Dont take this personal but WTF? This isnt little league, CFB is a billion dollar a year business, I dont know anyone who plays competitive sports who doesnt play to win.

[KingBarry]

what the heck are you talking about, did you even read what I wrote. I agreed that it was crap that auburn didnt have a shot at the title, thats why there should be a playoff


Well, here's what you wrote.

"Why should a team such as OU who lost in september possibly be shut out of playing for a title when we have one loss and potentially 3 wins against top 10 teams"

You asked the question (btw, it has nothing to do with Auburn), it has only to do with OU this year. You want to know why a one-loss OU should be left out, and I answered "because OU lost a game." It's really not that hard.

If we had beat Colorado, we would be undefeated and ranked number one, and the whole country would be awaiting the next "game of the century" against Kansas.

My point is that teams that don't care of their own business don't have much right to complain about the "system." Teams that do take care of their busines (ala Auburn 04) DO have the right to complain -- on the other hand it comes up so rarely that its not much of an issue.

[yermom]

it doesn't matter if someone is undefeated or not, the problem is comparing teams with the same record

[Collier11]

Well, here's what you wrote.

"Why should a team such as OU who lost in september possibly be shut out of playing for a title when we have one loss and potentially 3 wins against top 10 teams"

You asked the question (btw, it has nothing to do with Auburn), it has only to do with OU this year. You want to know why a one-loss OU should be left out, and I answered "because OU lost a game." It's really not that hard.

If we had beat Colorado, we would be undefeated and ranked number one, and the whole country would be awaiting the next "game of the century" against Kansas.

My point is that teams that don't care of their own business don't have much right to complain about the "system." Teams that do take care of their busines (ala Auburn 04) DO have the right to complain -- on the other hand it comes up so rarely that its not much of an issue.

my point is that in every other sport in college or professional sports, there arent just 2 teams determined by computers that have a shot at the title. Who is to say that the #4 team as determined by pollsters and computers is not better than the #1 or #2 team determined by the same crap system

[KingBarry]

I like DGolemi's plan. We get to play Texas in Dallas, again, and it might even be in the Cotton Bowl!

[Stoop Dawg]

"Gotta have a real champion! Gotta have a real champion!" I ask: Why?

It's a good question.

However, I can only give my own opinion - which you will reject/discredit as being only one fan's opinion. Which is fine.

To get a "real" answer you're going to have to ask these people:

1. The Associated Press
2. ESPN
3. ABC
4. All coaches who participate in the coaches poll
5. All Universities who give cash bonuses to coaches for winning a "National Championship"
6. You can start with David Boren, who fought to get the loss at Oregon "vacated" last year (Why? Who cares?) and is fighting to not have our wins from 2004 vacated (Why? Who cares?).

It might take a little time and effort, but I'm sure that once you contact all of those people and ask them "Why?" that you will eventually be satisified that it is important after all. And if you're still not satisified that it holds some importance after talking to all of those people, you might just need to admit that you don't understand the concept of "competitive sports".

[Rock Hard Corn Frog]

Originally Posted by Leroy Lizard
Thanks for narrowing it down. So we have one vote for a four-team playoff. Or was it eight? Well, maybe 12. But no more than 12.




I think more than 16 is too many. With 8 or 12 it gives the Boise State's a chance to prove themselves.


Can anyone tell for me what is odd about :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Leroy Lizard]

Dont take this personal but WTF? This isnt little league, CFB is a billion dollar a year business, I dont know anyone who plays competitive sports who doesnt play to win.

Then why didn't the NCAA create a legitimate national championship? If it is absolutely so necessary to have a national championship, and the NCAA is the sanctioning body of college football, then why no NCAA title?

Do you think that Akron players begin the season by placing a national championship as their goal? I can tell you that Akron players will tell you that they know they have no realistic chance to win a national championship, but they play the sport anyway. Why would they play if their only goal is not achievable? Even if they think they can somehow win a title at the beginning of the season, do they just quit after the first loss when all hope has vanished?

Why do Ivy League schools refuse to play in the playoffs? That's college football, too.

There is a difference between playing to win and playing for a national championship. Playing to win keeps players excited throughout the season, no matter their record, because they always have the next game to look forward to. Playing for a national championship becomes pointless once you have lost too many games, or play for a team that has no real chance of winning it. I say that playing to win is a better goal for college football, and that the national championship is simpy a secondary matter.


However, I can only give my own opinion - which you will reject/discredit as being only one fan's opinion. Which is fine.

Let's hear it anyway.


To get a "real" answer you're going to have to ask these people:
...
It might take a little time and effort, but I'm sure that once you contact all of those people and ask them "Why?" that you will eventually be satisified that it is important after all.

I am not asking those people; I am asking you. I want to hear your answer.

College football has never had a real national championship. Ever. So why were the games played?

Some of you think that I am stating "A national title is meaningless." I never said that. I am asking about the NECESSITY of a true national championship. Why does there HAVE to be one? And if there HAS to be one, what does that tell us about the significance of OU's past national titles?

[Collier11]

Do you think that Akron players begin the season by placing a national championship as their goal? I can tell you that Akron players will tell you that they know they have no realistic chance to win a national championship, but they play the sport anyway. Why would they play if their only goal is not achievable? Even if they think they can somehow win a title at the beginning of the season, do they just quit after the first loss when all hope has vanished?




of course they dont, cus they know they have no shot! if they had a shot, maybe they would think about it :rolleyes:

[Jdog]

Except the pros have large numbers of fans of every team in every city..
HUH? What does this have to do with what I said


your answer concerning my question about if fans would attend 3 very remote playoff games

Have you already asked them and, therefore, know the answer? I certainly don't..

No but the big 12 has, as has the NCAA - Neutral site attendence for this many games is one of their biggest concerns. I've been to a few poorly attended Bowl games and Big 12 championships. How many of these games do you attend that are over 300 miles away?
I make good money, but I couldn't do it - beside I couldn't take that much time off from work.





Sure, for ONE NIGHT. Bowl games, on the other hand, allow for extended stays because fans and chambers of commerce can plan an entire week of festivities. I have a lot of friends that will stay almost an entire week spending money in the host city. Can't do it on short notice.

Yes so - again I'm talking playoffs not Bowl games!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm not saying do away with the bowls just let them become what they use to be.


By the way, hotels in Norman are sold out partly because games are scheduled well in advance.
Yes - so what's your point?



In other words, you have no solution to this problem, other than to say that greed will override their concern for academics. I may be misunderstanding what you mean by "workaround." So, does this "workaround" involve screwing up the academic careers of those participating in the playoffs? If so, then it isn't a worthwhile solution.

If it is a bad idea to schedule games during final exams, then it is a bad idea no matter how many players are affected.

Liz don't be an idiot - Do you really think that student Athletes take tests on Thursdays or Fridays like everyone else.
Do you really think that they always take finals or midterms with every one else?
Don't they already take midterms now during the season? Are you saying that we should do away with college football altogether because it may "screw up" their academic careers because they have to already have a "workaround" for their midterms?
And Greed? I'm not talking greed - I'm talking about covering costs of travel and hotels and food for the teams and if there's anything left give it to charity?

[Jdog]

so you are only giving the bcs conference champs a shot, why even have the other 5 conferences then. I for one have no doubt that a central michigan, tulsa, etc... would never have a shot at winning it all, but why have teams in D1 if they have no shot at winning a championship year in and year out?

Give them one of my 2 wildcard slots.

Thats better then what they have now. At least they would have chance at the NC game. now all they have is a BCS Bowl game.

[Jdog]

Because it isn't just about winning the national championship. At no point in time has the national championship been declared the goal for every school in college football. I wish college football fans would get off this notion that winning the national championship can be the only goal for a college football player.

The NCAA doesn't even sanction a national championship. So how important could it really be?

Hundreds of players from all over the country sign with teams that have no realistic chances of winning a national title. Ivy League schools even refuse to play in the Division 1AA playoffs. Obviously, there must be more to the sport than winning "the big one." (Having fun? Getting an education? Meeting a challenge?)

At one time -- a long time ago -- college football was a beautiful sport. But now fans want to turn it into a mini-NFL. "Gotta have a real champion! Gotta have a real champion!" I ask: Why?


I ask: why not? especially when Division 1A football is the only NCAA sport that doesn't have a championship.

[Jdog]

In many of the seasons you have a #13 or #14 team getting berthed in place of a #8 team simply because it played in a weak conference. Why should teams like Missouri get penalized for playing in a tough conference? The drop from #8 to #14 is pretty large.

to make the season have more value and be a part of the playoff system (as a round robin). with football, I don't think teams deserve to go if they can't win their conference.

[Sco]

I just want to point out that, pending many win outs, we will have a semi-playoff to finish the season!

#2/3 plays #4 as KU and Mizzou play.

Winner plays #2/3 Oklahoma.

Winner plays #1 LSU.

That's as close to a playoff as we're gonna get in this system, folks!

[Rock Hard Corn Frog]

to make the season have more value and be a part of the playoff system (as a round robin). with football, I don't think teams deserve to go if they can't win their conference.


Jdog. The lizard would argue over the color of an orange. He is a contrarion. If there isn't enough critical mass he will log in as little wing sooner and argue with himself.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

FINISH

[Stoop Dawg]

I am asking about the NECESSITY of a true national championship. Why does there HAVE to be one?

Don't know. But everyone sure is excited about the prospect of OU getting to play for one this year. But as you say, it's not a "real" championship due to this stupid BCS system.


you might just need to admit that you don't understand the concept of "competitive sports".

Go ahead, fess up. It isn't that big of a deal.

[Collier11]

I just want to point out that, pending many win outs, we will have a semi-playoff to finish the season!

#2/3 plays #4 as KU and Mizzou play.

Winner plays #2/3 Oklahoma.

Winner plays #1 LSU.

That's as close to a playoff as we're gonna get in this system, folks!


another appearance from captain obvious :D