Coaches' timeouts are worse. Basketball teams should get one, full stop.
One More On Playoffs
Just one more fantasy-laden post about a college football playoff, and only because excellent input was received. After this I'll put it away, secure in the knowledge that this particular dead horse won't be messing with mgoblog in time soon.
To recap: mgoblog advocates an eight-team playoff selected by a bouncyball-like committee. The first two rounds are on campus at the higher-seeded team's stadium. Champions from the top five conferences (Pac 10, Big 10, ACC, SEC, Big 12) are automatically qualified. The committee then selects one team that is either an independent or a smaller conference champion. Two at-large bids are dispensed. The committee places an emphasis on quality non-conference opponents.
IBFC responded wisely per usual with an eight-team playoff of his own with a couple pertinent differences:
- No at-large bids. Only the top eight conference champions get in.
- Two different scheduling items, both of which have slightly less home-field advantage.
I think excluding any at-large bids at all might encourage better matchups in non-conference games but it would remove much of their importance. NC games would be less important since they could only impact playoff seedings, not who gets in. Minor differences, though. I'd be 95% happy with his proposal... though I get the feeling he wouldn't be, since he's posted before that he would prefer a return to ante-bellum CFB and a de-emphasis on national championships. IBFC also floats a great idea for seeding: let the top four seeds choose their opponents from the bottom four. Heaps of intrigue added, plus the disrespect factor provides juicy motivation for the newly-ordained #8.
ParadigmBlog also chimed in with something I still find tres icky: 12 teams all culled from the five or six power conferences. I did managed to back him down from 16, so I guess some progress was made, and a system with byes does place a heavy emphasis on making it to the top four, but mgoblog still thinks that's too many. A matter of taste, I guess.
Some commenters preferred a four-team playoff that works within the BCS system, perhaps with a couple games in December before the bowls. I'd be 95% fine with that, too, though I think eight teams would open up nonconference schedules more.
One thing is clear: the BCS is close to the worst of all possible worlds. It is a half-solution to a problem that the BCS itself created. It's forced college football into a no-man's land where non-conference schedules are weak, the end of the season is more often than not unsatisfying, and the traditions of the game are damaged. We hates it.
I would be happy with almost anything that doesn't let more than a couple teams that did not win their conferences in. Four, six, eight, fine. I'd prefer flagrantly unfair homefield advantage. I'd like the Rose Bowl to be the last game of the season. I know Bo will probably die if anything like this is implemented, and I know I'll miss some of the traditions from the past. I think it's worth it.
IBFC made an excellent, harrowing point, though:
To me, the structure is less important than the selection process. I'm firmly anti-playoff, but the biggest fear stems from a firm belief that "they" will get it wrong. I mean, you can't get wronger than the BCS, and we've had that for almost a decade.
Blue-Gray Sky: it's time to head to the grotto and start praying.
Right, right. Shutting up on this, too. The "mgoblog forces itself to shut up" list now reads:
- Terry Foster
- Great Sissy Boy Blogger Slapfest
- College Football Playoff
- NBA refereeing
Hopefully soon to be added: The Incredible Awesomeitude of Steve Breaston.