Not to beat a dead horse...Playoff talk...

[OU_Sooners75]

First a playoff would be meaningless, just like the BCS, unless you give every conference and every team the same chance of playing in it.
A lot of people are all set on a 4 or 8 team playoff.
BULL. ****!
That still shows favoritism and homerism.
If they are going to do a playoff...then here is a very logical, may not be the best, but better than anything I have seen so far...

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

What to do with all the teams?:

Since there are 119 teams, with Western Kentucky trying out to make it 120 the following needs to take place.
All teams must join a conference (there are currently 11 conferences and 4 indy schools).
All conferences must be set at 10 schools each. This give 12 conferences.
All conference teams must play each other and 3 non conference games. (9+3=12)
No conference championship games. Conferences will determine their champions through the field of play. If by chance of ties, all conferences will settle through a list of tie breakers, which include NO RANKINGS.Who plays in the Playoffs?:

All conference champions are included into the playoff bracket. It does not matter which conference or which team is the champion. If they are a conference champ, they qualify. This gives a 12 team format.
If decided to go to a 16 team format, then add all 12 conference champs and four at large teams. These four teams would be the top four RPI teams that did not win a conference title. No conference restrictions, this is to find a true champion, not an opinion.
The seedings would be picked through a ranking system much like the RPI, not the BCS.
If only a 12 team format is chosen, then the top four seeds will have a bye the first week.Where will the games be played?:

The first round will be played at the higher seeded team's home field.
Second round will also be played at the higher seeded team's home field.
The final two rounds can be played in current BCS Bowls. With one bowl being left out each season. With those bowls rotating each year. If the Rose bowl does not wish to break its tradition, then they can be thrown to the wayside and the Fiesta, Sugar, Cotton, and Orange Bowls will be the bowls.This makes it where there will be a max of 16 games a season if you play for the national championship.

Also, if the question is abut missing too much school...then the playoffs can be played each week, starting 2 weeks after the end of the regular season, until the champion is crowned.
If need be, between the semifinals and the championship, each team could have a week off to prepare to play the game. It would put the National Championship as the final game played for the season!

[SoonerInFortSmith]

All fine and good except for the 12 conferences w/ 10 teams. There will never be such a major shuffling of conferences.

[Jboozer]

"3. The seedings would be picked through a ranking system much like the RPI, not the BCS."



Rather than the BCS how about a random draw to play at neutral locations. If you're the best your have to beat everybody, so seeding shouldn't matter(neither should location)

[OU_Sooners75]

All fine and good except for the 12 conferences w/ 10 teams. There will never be such a major shuffling of conferences.


Never?

Big 8 and SWAC for the Big 12.
When the SWAC defuncted...some teams went to the SEC and some went to the Big 8.

It would not be that much of a shuffling...and the NCAA can do it if they really want to make a plausible solution to this BCS mess.

[OU_Sooners75]

"3. The seedings would be picked through a ranking system much like the RPI, not the BCS."



Rather than the BCS how about a random draw to play at neutral locations. If you're the best your have to beat everybody, so seeding shouldn't matter(neither should location)


Okay, and what happens if the two best teams in the nation actually play in teh first round?

Seeding helps pair it up at the end, not at the beginning.

[Jacie]

The NCAA deciding which conference specific teams are in would be a major shift in policy for them. The schools would have to agree to surrender the high degree of autonomy that they currently enjoy. They are interesting ideas and you put a lot of thought into it but in the end, it is way too practical to ever be implemented.

[OU_Sooners75]

The NCAA deciding which conference specific teams are in would be a major shift in policy for them. The schools would have to agree to surrender the high degree of autonomy that they currently enjoy. They are interesting ideas and you put a lot of thought into it but in the end, it is way too practical to ever be implemented.

So, it is time for the schools to stop thinking for themselves when it effects the entire league.

Like Notre Dame...they make the BCS, the retain the entire amount.

OU makes it, they have to split it with the rest of the conference. ..Not really fair is it?

If the NCAA wants a viable championship that will discontinue the bickering...then they must do something.

Even if it is not to change the conferences...they must implement a better way to do it...and that way is not a +1 , 4 or 8 team playoff.

It is something that gives every school a legitimate shot at becoming national champions

Hell, it would also make it easier for the high powered teams to schedule each other more oftern, since 1 game does not make or break their season!

[MichiganSooner]

Why the comment about schoolwork? Basketball teams travel halfway across the nation on a school night; at least the football teams play on Saturday. And OU plays OSU in baseball every season on the Friday night of OSU's commencement. Not that I care about their commencement but it seems pretty righteous of people not to allow football teams to play a few weeks before final exams but student/athlete seniors cannot attend their own commencement. And the same weekend is supposedly the start of deadweek at OU because final exams start on Monday. How is a student athlete supposed to prepare?

[snp]

If they are going to do a playoff...then here is a very logical, may not be the best, but better than anything I have seen so far...

Total conference realignment is the opposite of logic.

[XingTheRubicon]

That may be the dumbest grouping of words I will ever read.

[sooner_born_1960]

The NCAA holds Nations Championships in all other sports (and all other divisions in football) without realigning conferences. They can do it in football too. At-large teams would be a requirement before I could get onboard.

[stoops the eternal pimp]

If the selection process doesn't involve rock-paper-scissors or a heated game of Uno, I'm not in

[soonermix]

just to be that guy but members of the sunbelt really deserve to play for the MNC every year?

and if we are realigning conferences who gets left out of the Big XII? SEC? ACC?

[MamaMia]

I say this every year. I should bookmark it.

Any team, like Notre Dame, who is not in a conference needs to be made to join one if they want a shot. Secondly, we need to do away with playing teams who aren't in our conference first. Then each conference needs to have a conference champion. Seed the teams. Then let the playoffs begin. Its really that simple.

[goingoneight]

Thank you, voice of reason.^^^

[SUPERFAN]

Not to be an A-hole but the SWAC has the likes of Grambling State and Southern, I think you were talking about the SWC...


Never?

Big 8 and SWAC for the Big 12.
When the SWAC defuncted...some teams went to the SEC and some went to the Big 8.

It would not be that much of a shuffling...and the NCAA can do it if they really want to make a plausible solution to this BCS mess.

[soonervegas]

I hope you are all back here AFTER you ruin college football.

[TMcGee86]

Gag. I want a playoff but this is a terrible idea.

So this year, OU would get in, UT and TTU would be left out, but the likes of Buffalo, ECU, and Troy would get to play for a championship?

Great system. :rolleyes:

[OU_Sooners75]

Gag. I want a playoff but this is a terrible idea.

So this year, OU would get in, UT and TTU would be left out, but the likes of Buffalo, ECU, and Troy would get to play for a championship?

Great system. :rolleyes:


:confused:

Okay....if there is a 16 teams format...and 11 conferences....

That means five other teams, the top five highest ranked teams that are not conference champs wouid get in, with no conference restrictions. (this way since I am trying to show this with only 11 conferences)

Meaing if that was the case Last year these are the teams that would have been in the Playoff, under the way I suggested at top.

Conference Champs (seed):
SEC: Florida (1)
Big 12: Oklahoma (2)
MWC: Utah (4)
PAC-10: USC (3)
Big 10: Penn State (5)
ACC: Virginia Tech (6)
Big E: Cincinnati (7)
WAC: Boise State (8)
CUSA: East Carolina (14)
MAC: Buffalo (15)
SunBelt: Troy (16)


Top 5 eligible teams (seed): reflective of the final BCS rankings.
**Texas** (9)
Alabama (10)
**Texas** Tech (11)
Ohio State (12)TCU (13)


The brackets would could have been something like this:

#1 Florida vs. Troy
#8 Boise State vs **Texas**
.......................................Winner of the matchup above and below
#4 Utah vs. TCU
#5 Penn State vs. Ohio State
.................................................. ........................................ Championship Game
#3 USC vs. East Carolina
#6 Virgina Tech vs. **Texas** Tech
.......................................Winner of the matchups above and below
#7 Cincinnati vs. Alabama
#2 Oklahoma vs. Buffalo

Again this is just an example. So yes, Texas and Texas Tech would make the playoff.

[OU_Sooners75]

Gag. I want a playoff but this is a terrible idea.

So this year, OU would get in, UT and TTU would be left out, but the likes of Buffalo, ECU, and Troy would get to play for a championship?

Great system. :rolleyes:


You do realize that it sometimes happens that way in D-1AA and below, right?

But a 16 team playoff with less conferences give the opportunity for good teams that are not conference champions to play for the NC.

[boomermagic]

You do realize that it sometimes happens that way in D-1AA and below, right?

But a 16 team playoff with less conferences give the opportunity for good teams that are not conference champions to play for the NC.




Correct

[TMcGee86]

:confused:

Okay....if there is a 16 teams format...and 11 conferences....

That means five other teams, the top five highest ranked teams that are not conference champs wouid get in, with no conference restrictions. (this way since I am trying to show this with only 11 conferences)

Meaing if that was the case Last year these are the teams that would have been in the Playoff, under the way I suggested at top.

Conference Champs (seed):
SEC: Florida (1)
Big 12: Oklahoma (2)
MWC: Utah (4)
PAC-10: USC (3)
Big 10: Penn State (5)
ACC: Virginia Tech (6)
Big E: Cincinnati (7)
WAC: Boise State (8)
CUSA: East Carolina (14)
MAC: Buffalo (15)
SunBelt: Troy (16)


Top 5 eligible teams (seed): reflective of the final BCS rankings.
***Texas*** (9)
Alabama (10)
***Texas*** Tech (11)
Ohio State (12)TCU (13)


The brackets would could have been something like this:

#1 Florida vs. Troy
#8 Boise State vs ***Texas***
.......................................Winner of the matchup above and below
#4 Utah vs. TCU
#5 Penn State vs. Ohio State
.................................................. ........................................ Championship Game
#3 USC vs. East Carolina
#6 Virgina Tech vs. ***Texas*** Tech
.......................................Winner of the matchups above and below
#7 Cincinnati vs. Alabama
#2 Oklahoma vs. Buffalo

Again this is just an example. So yes, *Texas* and *Texas* Tech would make the playoff.

If you add the at large seeds, then I am slightly more with you. However I just dont think the logistics of it can be pulled off. Too many games.

[TMcGee86]

You do realize that it sometimes happens that way in D-1AA and below, right?

But a 16 team playoff with less conferences give the opportunity for good teams that are not conference champions to play for the NC.

Yeah, and I dont think it's the best system. I'm pro-playoff, but just because something is a playoff doesn't make it the best system out there.

Taking only conf champs is a bad system imho. And unless all the conferences have CG's I am totally against any system that would include the conf champs.

I'd rather just keep the BCS and take the top 16 teams.


But again, imho 16 is way too much. I'm for a 6 team playoff.

[OU_Sooners75]

If you add the at large seeds, then I am slightly more with you. However I just dont think the logistics of it can be pulled off. Too many games.

In D-1AA the two teams that made the National Championship game finished the season with 15 games played each.

In D-II the two teams that made the National Championship game finished the season with 15 games played each.

In D-III the two teams that made the National Championship game finished the season with 15 games played each.


With that said, how, at a max 16 games, is it too many games? Hell, if they did away with the Conference Championships and an 11 game regular season then the two teams that played for the National Championship would only play 15 games.

I do not buy the, "too many games," arguement at all!

In Oklahoma, 6A-2A...to if you make the state finals, regardless of winning or losing, you play...yep...15 games!

[OU_Sooners75]

Yeah, and I dont think it's the best system. I'm pro-playoff, but just because something is a playoff doesn't make it the best system out there.

Taking only conf champs is a bad system imho. And unless all the conferences have CG's I am totally against any system that would include the conf champs.

I'd rather just keep the BCS and take the top 16 teams.


But again, imho 16 is way too much. I'm for a 6 team playoff.


Not attacking you...but please, re-read the OP again. I do not think you read it correctly. And if that is the case, I appologize for giving more than one scenario.

I happened to give both a 12 and a 16 team scenario. I perfer the 16 over the 12, that way you can include at least 4 or 5 better teams.

[TMcGee86]

Not attacking you...but please, re-read the OP again. I do not think you read it correctly. And if that is the case, I appologize for giving more than one scenario.

I happened to give both a 12 and a 16 team scenario. I perfer the 16 over the 12, that way you can include at least 4 or 5 better teams.

Yeah I saw that you had two, I was just saying one that only included conf champs is bad imho.

[TMcGee86]

In D-1AA the two teams that made the National Championship game finished the season with 15 games played each.

In D-II the two teams that made the National Championship game finished the season with 15 games played each.

In D-III the two teams that made the National Championship game finished the season with 15 games played each.


With that said, how, at a max 16 games, is it too many games? Hell, if they did away with the Conference Championships and an 11 game regular season then the two teams that played for the National Championship would only play 15 games.

I do not buy the, "too many games," arguement at all!

In Oklahoma, 6A-2A...to if you make the state finals, regardless of winning or losing, you play...yep...15 games!

The problem is no one goes to those games and the schools dont count on them for revenue generation like D1 schools do.

D3 is lucky to have 5k in the stands total. S2 slightly more and even D1AA doesnt have the attendance that the big schools have.

I'm not against it because of too many games being hard on the athletes, I'm against it because I dont think the logistics can be pulled off.

I know it's possible, but I want a system that is so easy that there is no valid argument against it.

[MichiganSooner]

I'd like a playoff but the way it is is kinda like its always been. Play games and argue.

[OU_Sooners75]

The problem is no one goes to those games and the schools dont count on them for revenue generation like D1 schools do.

D3 is lucky to have 5k in the stands total. S2 slightly more and even D1AA doesnt have the attendance that the big schools have.

I'm not against it because of too many games being hard on the athletes, I'm against it because I dont think the logistics can be pulled off.

I know it's possible, but I want a system that is so easy that there is no valid argument against it.


LMFAO...one lame excuse after the other huh?

Fact is, it is not about how many games...it is about making the most money....and frankly, a playoff would generate more interest and more money in the long haul than what we have now.

[OU_Sooners75]

I'd like a playoff but the way it is is kinda like its always been. Play games and argue.


No...the way it used to be is better than this.

Debates, ya...ie 1997 (nebraska and Michigan).

At least then, the bowls really were not tied to each other.

You can thank the Bowl Coalition for that crap!

[TMcGee86]

LMFAO...one lame excuse after the other huh?

Fact is, it is not about how many games...it is about making the most money....and frankly, a playoff would generate more interest and more money in the long haul than what we have now.

Well, obviously its not lame considering no one is even in the ballpark of what you are proposing.

I would like a playoff that is so easy that the BCS looks like the jerks that they are for refusing it. 16 teams doesnt get you there. Too many games, too many trips, too hard on the bowls, too hard on the kids, too long, too many teams included that shouldn't be, waters down the regular season, there are tons of excuses for it not to work.

A 6 team playoff doesnt do that. All those excuses go away.

[SoonerInFortSmith]

The problem is no one goes to those games and the schools dont count on them for revenue generation like D1 schools do.

D3 is lucky to have 5k in the stands total. S2 slightly more and even D1AA doesnt have the attendance that the big schools have.

I'm not against it because of too many games being hard on the athletes, I'm against it because I dont think the logistics can be pulled off.

I know it's possible, but I want a system that is so easy that there is no valid argument against it.

So you're saying if OU played 3 home playoff games in a row we wouldn't fill the stands? BS
And when we did fill 'em it would mean MORE revenue.
And I'm pretty sure Troy and Buffalo fans would fill their stands for a playoff game against a top-ranked team, if they were lucky enough to have a home game.

[soonerfan28]

I would be for a plus one at this point. An eight team playoff maybe but it would depend how it was set up. I think w/a plus 1 you only need to add another bowl to the mix of Rose,Fiesta,Orange,& Sugar. I would think it would be the Cotton who felt shunned when the currnet system was put into place and the fact that it's now at a billion dollar stadium doesn't hurt.

[TMcGee86]

So you're saying if OU played 3 home playoff games in a row we wouldn't fill the stands? BS
And when we did fill 'em it would mean MORE revenue.
And I'm pretty sure Troy and Buffalo fans would fill their stands for a playoff game against a top-ranked team, if they were lucky enough to have a home game.

But could troy or buffalo go to USC one week, OU the next, and Florida the next? All without knowing in advance if the game was going to be held much less where?

I guess they do this in D1AA, but I just think it would be a nightmare on schools in D1.

[SoonerInFortSmith]

But could troy or buffalo go to USC one week, OU the next, and Florida the next? All without knowing in advance if the game was going to be held much less where?

I guess they do this in D1AA, but I just think it would be a nightmare on schools in D1.

There's this thing called the internet......Where you can go and book flights......The same day if need be........WWWWOOOOOOOWWWWW!

[soonermix]

i got it.

8 team playoff...

a) bcs conference champions get in
b) top ranked non-bcs school gets in.
c) next highest school gets in
d)any other non-bcs school ranked higher than a bcs conference champ gets in and that conference gets the boot
e) any school ranked 8 places higher than a bcs conf champ gets in and that conference gets the boot but not before the non-bcs school

[sooner_born_1960]

But could troy or buffalo go to USC one week, OU the next, and Florida the next? All without knowing in advance if the game was going to be held much less where?

I guess they do this in D1AA, but I just think it would be a nightmare on schools in D1.

Blasphemer. Why would they need to go to Florida the week after playing OU?

[CrimsonJim]

Damn, ya beat me to it, 1960. :D

[The Remnant]

I am an old fart and I kind of miss the way they used to do it. Let them play and let the polls decide. Then again, I don't own a cell phone either.

[TMcGee86]

Blasphemer. Why would they need to go to Florida the week after playing OU?

heh, I didn't even mean to actually. My subconscious just pwned me. :O

[TMcGee86]

There's this thing called the internet......Where you can go and book flights......The same day if need be........WWWWOOOOOOOWWWWW!

Not saying it can't be done, obviously. I'm just saying these are the arguments against it. Just listen to any of the AD's that are anti-playoff.

And let's be honest, booking a flight is the least of the worries. It's not exactly that easy.

[OU_Sooners75]

Well, obviously its not lame considering no one is even in the ballpark of what you are proposing.

I would like a playoff that is so easy that the BCS looks like the jerks that they are for refusing it. 16 teams doesnt get you there. Too many games, too many trips, too hard on the bowls, too hard on the kids, too long, too many teams included that shouldn't be, waters down the regular season, there are tons of excuses for it not to work.

A 6 team playoff doesnt do that. All those excuses go away.

And basing a playoff on just 5% of the teams is not fair either. having a playoff of 6 teams does not quill the arguments and the butthurtness (i know that is not a word).

Anything less than giving all teams a legitimate shot at a national championship still puts everything in the hands of biased human voters...when this should not be about pollsters, but what teams did throughout the season.

I played in the NAIA. Not great talent, but better than D3 for damn sure. My redshirt sophomore season we made it to the National Semis. That was a total of 14 games for us.

If you would, answer this:

Do you honestly think that Troy, North Texas, Ball State, Buffalo, Tulsa, teams from lesser conferences will actually make it into a 6 or even 8 team playoff?

No they wont...why? Because of bias.

And before you ask, will those teams have a legitimate shot at winning a title? Probably not, but that does not excuse the fact that they should be given the opportunity to play for one. It is not the kids (players) fault that they win their conference, and that conference is considered lesser.


If the NCAA goes with a 6or 8 team playoff, then they need to make a new division, a super d-1 division and put the six to eight strongest conferences into the division.

That way the lesser conference teams can then determine their own champion.

All these kids go to college to play. And I would almost guarantee that 100% of those kids dream about winning a national championship!

Basing off experience in playoffs, it was not too hard, too long, or too many teams included.

[OU_Sooners75]

But could troy or buffalo go to USC one week, OU the next, and Florida the next? All without knowing in advance if the game was going to be held much less where?

I guess they do this in D1AA, but I just think it would be a nightmare on schools in D1.

:confused:

So they can do it in smaller divisions and it is alright...but they do it in D-1A and it is a nightmare?

LMFAO....

Geez bro, you sound kinda like a Bowl Committee representative.

[starclassic tama]

exactly. that's the most ridiculous argument against a playoff i can imagine. so every other sport, at every smaller level than D-1 can have a playoff, but the top-shelf athletic talent football players in big time college football couldn't handle a playoff? give me a break, so stupid. the only reason i would favor a 4 or 6 team playoff over a 16 team one is simply to keep the regular season really exciting.