Why There Should Be A Playoff

[FaninAma]

The best reason I can give you is the 2006 University of Oklahoma Sooners.

They overcame every obstacle put in their path. Yes they had one true loss(to Texas) but it is unbelievable that college football operates under a system that is so craptastic that a team like OU cannot continue their season in pursuit of a national title on the field.

With our coaching staff, our defense, AD returning and the heart and grit shown by PT and the offense I wouldn't sell this team short against anybody.

[OU-HSV]

IN

[OklahomaTuba]

Absolutely.

Its a CRIME and complete stupidity there hasn't been one for Div-1 now. All the reasons against a playoff are bogus IMO.

[DrZaius]

GREED is the only reason that the STINKIN PRESIDENTS of the University's need unfortunately. This whole problem has nothing to do with football and everything to do with GREED.

I have been begging for a playoff system for a long time and until the President's find a way to get money into their pocket, there will never be a playoff.

But as soon as they can figure it out, there will be playoffs in Division 1A.

[jrsooner]

Its a CRIME and complete stupidity there hasn't been one for Div-1 now. All the reasons against a playoff are bogus IMO.Only fair "playoff" system would be every div1 team would have to play each other, then the one with the best record at the end of the year would be Champion. 119 Div1 teams, 2+ games per week, and each year we will know which team is the best. In fact, they wouldn't have to play all 119 games. When 1 team has enough wins that the other teams can't pass them, then crown that team "Champion", and then call off the rest of the games. Other than that, it will never be fair, because even in "16 team playoffs" we have teams being left out (who wants to be #17?), and teams will be given "easier" teams to play to get to the the top. Not even in the NFL, can you say the best team wins every year.

The Astro's made it to the World Series last year, and I can tell you this there were a ton of teams in their league that was better than them. They just got lucky because their division stinks and could take the easier path!

Even in March Madness, you have #1 vs #16. #2 vs #15, etc. Yep, let the "better" teams play the weaker teams first. That's fair. Only fair way is have all 64 teams play each other. Each team plays 3 games per day, and it's over in about 23 days. Best Record wins. :)

In all fairness to Stoops and the team, I haven't seen them being crybabies that they aren't in the top 2 this year. They say "it happened and we play the next game". I'm glad the coaching staff and team aren't being cry babies like some teams have been in the past when they were #3.

Seriously, I'll take the BCS current format over any joke of a playoff system.

[freshchris05]

have like a bcs like poll and the top 16 or so teams in that poll go into a playoff, and the rest of the teams(if eligible) have different bowl commitee's invite them to their game...


may be a dumb idea without enough substance but it sounded ok when i typed it...

[SoonerTitan]

It's a freaking shame that a team can go undefeated and not play for the title. We need a playoff hands down!

[props]

GREED is the only reason that the STINKIN PRESIDENTS of the University's need unfortunately. This whole problem has nothing to do with football and everything to do with GREED.

okay. correct me if i'm wrong, but wouldn't a playoff system have a higher potential for money? my guess is if there was a playoff system, the ratings for the final 8/4 would be sky high, commanding a pretty high fee to broadcast the games.

again, correct me if i'm wrong.


anyway, i'm against 8 or 16 team playoffs. plus 1 format is the best.

[sooneron]

The top 16??? Are you serious? If there ever is a playoff, it should be the top 8.

[Ike]

My own personal (and probably unpopular) opinion on the matter is this:

Without a playoff system of some kind, national titles are really somewhat meaningless. Yeah, they are still tough to win, and yeah, you still have to be damn good to win one. But assume Boise State finds a way to beat us and remains undefeated? People will clamor that they are still undeserving because they didn't play anyone. But any program thats worth a damn has no intention of ever scheduling them because they are one of those teams that can really make you look bad if they beat you, and they do often put a decent product on the field. Same for the Big East. I'm not entirely sure that if Rutgers had gone undefeated that they would be in the national title game. Or Louisville for that matter. It's a system that rewards the "established" schools because when one of them loses to another, it doesn't make them look too terrible. These teams are going to have a tough time scheduling worthwhile enough non-conference opponents to ever have a chance at a national title. And if they go undefeated, who is to say that they really aren't national title worthy, just because they didn't beat anyone "worthwhile"


The only way, in my opinion, to fix this is with a playoff of some sort.

The way I would prefer to see it happen is that every conference winner should have a shot at the national title. Yeah, that makes the OOC games at the beginning of the season somewhat worthless, but in my opinion, makes every week of the conference schedule so much more important.

Oh, and every conference should have a CCG.

Of course, this is just what I would prefer...but even if this model is rejected, I still feel that national titles won under a BCS or any other system involving votes is inherently biased in a manner that prevents some conferences from EVER producing a national champion, regardless of how good a team they put on the field. And that is just stupid.

[props]

all conference champions? even the MAC?

[freshchris05]

well what if the two best teams are in the same conference?? im not trashing you idea but there needs to be at large bids... i cant really explain what i would like to see but i think there should be a poll that lasts up until a playoff...

[TrophyCollector]

Reasons against -

1. Diminshes the importance of regular season games.
2. Doesn't make a "truer" National Champion - just makes a better, was playing better at the end of the season and made it into the top 4/8/16. What about teams 5/9/17?
3. OU mailing it in vs. shaggie, texass mailing it in vs. cult (on purpose) because they already have home field locked up - that's not college football.
4. Life isn't fair.
5. ANY D-1 team can get to the BCS National Title game IF THEY PLAY A SCHEDULE TO DO SO AND WIN EVERY GAME.
6. Tradition
7. Undefeated seasons are magic, make a team win 14 - 15 - 16 games to win a title and it'll be like the NFL and the 72 Dolphins before someone runs the table again.
8. No system is perfect. The BCS system is good (much better than we had before - it would be Ohio St. vs. USC in the Rose under the old system). A playoff system would be good, but it isn't worth taking away from the regular season.

So if your best reason is OU, are you for a 4 team playoff which leaves us out? Or for a 8 team playoff that has us going to Columbus to face Ohio St. in 2 weeks --> then going to Baton Rouge to beat LSU --> then going to Arizona to face Florida?

[tigepilot]

First I have to say I can't imagine any more than an 8 team playoff which means we would still be on the outside looking in the current BCS.

Second, saying Bosie St is unable to schedule tougher OOC teams is bogus. Remember Fresno St's any time any where attitude they used a few years back. They had some good years AND scheduled some tough teams... OU was one of them. If it must be home and away then yeah they're going to have a tough time but it doesn't mean they can't play a tougher OOC schedule.

[props]

i think trophy's reasons are quite good. many of the reasons i'm against a 16 team playoff, and an 8 team playoff. i think the plus one format handles many of those issues. in my dream world, we'd have two bowl games host the semis (i.e. fiesta and sugar) with the other bowl (i.e. the orange) hosting the nat'l championship. you leave the rose bowl out. sometimes i think they'd rather do their own thing anyway.

all other bowls stay intact maintaining tradition as much as possible.

seasons still matter. you want to win every game or otherwise, you risk being #5.

and it diminishes the whining a bit. i mean, the whining will still be there, always will be unless all 117 teams are in the playoffs, but at least it's a decent answer.

but i'd be okay if we stuck with the BCS. makes things interesting.

[Texas Golfer]

A playoff will dimish the excitement that is college football at the D-1 level. Gone will be the bowl games as we know them. Gone will be the debates that go on for months before the season and for months afterwards. Nobody discusses baseball or basketball after the season is over and few talk about them before the seasons begin.

Personally, I like the arguing and the bantering with other teams about who will or should be playing for the title.

[mdklatt]

A question for playoff proponents: were the St. Louis Cardinals really the best team in baseball this year?

The BCS is not necessarily inferior to a playoff system, just different. There would be just as much controversy with a playoff. The most obvious problem is, how do you determine which teams get in and where they're seeded?

[snp]

The best reason to have a playoff is so it'll we'll stop talking about it.

[tigepilot]

Another thing that bugs me about this anit-BCS talk is when they start going into the did it work this year or that year and they always get it backwards. The system works on years like this one when there is no clear cut 1 and 2 (and I still don't agree with the 2 this year). If it was clear cut (like last year) there would be no need for a system... just take the top two teams in the polls and let em go.

Every time I heard someone say the BCS "got it right" last year I started grinding my teath because they were missing the point.

[FaninAma]

A playoff will dimish the excitement that is college football at the D-1 level. Gone will be the bowl games as we know them. Gone will be the debates that go on for months before the season and for months afterwards. Nobody discusses baseball or basketball after the season is over and few talk about them before the seasons begin.



Are you serious? A playoff would diminish the excitement in D-1 college football? I guess like the playoffs diminish D-1 college basketball.

Any system that leaves the door open for a split championship is a flawed, worthless system.

Yes, the St. Louis Cardinals were the best team in baseball this year because they proved it on the field.

That's the nature of competitive team sports in every organized league above the junior high level. You prove your mettle on the field. You may not be the best team at the start of the year but through hard work and perserverance you may very well be the best team when it is all said and done.

No system is perfect but the more restrictive the system is(ie the BCS) the more likely it will be that there are controversies and injustices done to a team.

How would Michigan not have been left out this year? By receiving one of the two at large bids in an 8 team playoff. Boise State would have gotten the other.

Just remember. The BCS BCSucks.

OU could be playing a meaningful game in a playoff against USC or Michigan or even Boise State. Instead we are playing one meaningless exhibition game out of about 2 dozen other meaningless exhibition games this bowl season.