JeepinBen's Football Playoff Proposal - December Madness
Brian's front page post got me riled up enough to try to bang out a diary over my lunch hour. Please critique and suggest ways to make it better in the comments, I might mess up some numbers as I'm doing this quickly from memory. Here we go:
What is the most entertaining playoff in all of sports? March Madness. (MM for short in the diary) The NCAA already hosts (and keeps the revenue from) a ridiculously exciting tournament every year that has huge interest and kills productivity all over the US. It leaves us with an NCAA National Champion - something we don't currently have in football. So, since the NCAA has a very successful playoff structure, my playoff proposal is to simply scale it down and apply it to football:
BCS Problems: Small group picked, way of picking extremely messed up (see coaches' poll numbers etc.) Voters decide only 2 teams to "decide it on the field". Teams 3-8 in any given year are pissed, Ticket sales are down, TV #s are down, the NCAA receives no money from it, conferences lose money on it, etc.
MM Problems: Low attendance at early rounds, the refs still love Duke, Teams #65-68 (or whatever, I think of it as a 64 team tournament) are pissed and... ??? Please add more in the comments, I'll add them.
Remember, the NCAA takes 430 some BBall teams and slots 64 (ish) into a tournament. I'm going to attempt to do that with 120 football teams into 8-12. (Once I drew up my proposal I had 11... which seems like as weird a number as 65 or 68). May I present... December Madness
Schedule: Conf Champs all decided 1st week of December. 2nd week is Bye week/play in game. December week 3 is 8 team tourney. Week 4, 4 teams left. New years day (ish) Champ Game. December Madness
What works well from March Madness and we're going to try to take with us:
Conference Champ Auto Bids - 33 in Bball, we'll take 5 in Football. B1G, SEC, ACC, BigXII and PAC12 Champs - you're in the tourney. Lets the Conference championship game matter (Like the BBall Conference tourney). I also wouldn't be adverse to a "play in game" or two for the little-guy conference champs.
Selection Committee: They do it in hoops, do it here. The polls still matter as that'll be part of the "resume" like RPI and Sagarin ratings are in bball. You could use the polls to help rank the tournament (like in basketball). There would be 3-6 "At Large" bids used here to get your 8 - 12 teams. Would the last team left out be pissed? Yes sir. Sucks for the 65th basketball team too. One week into an awesome tournament no one cares.
Site Locations: Here's where I'm not 100% sure on what to suggest. I've been to NCAA Regional games and they're always half empty. It's hard enough to have fan bases travel to 1 bowl game much less the 3 it'll take in my proposal so at least Round 1 is a home game. Conference Champs get to host the home games, rotating 1 every 5 years on the road (Pic below). The big Bowls will host Round 2 and the Championship rotating every year (I realize that's 3 games for the current Big 4 Bowls... but the last bowl can choose any two teams not in the tournament to invite. the 1 bowl can get shafted every 4 years).
Remaining money grabs bowl games are free to invite whomever they want to whatever they want. I love that Lloyd got carried off after we beat florida, teams not in the tournament should be able to end their season with a win. Hey, there's still an NIT out there.
Hopefully this graphic works and sums up my proposal nicely. Why is this a bad idea? The NCAA already does most of it. What do you think?
| Play In Games (2nd week Dec) | 1st Round (3rd week Dec) | Final 4 (4th week) | Champ Game | |||
| At Large #1 | NYD Ish | |||||
| AT | Game 1 Winner | |||||
| AT MWC Champ | AT | SEC Champ | ||||
| SEC Champ | vs | |||||
| Large 2 | B1G Champ | |||||
| AT | Game 2 Winner | AT Sugar Bowl | ||||
| Big East Champ | AT | B1G Champ | ||||
| B1G Champ | vs | |||||
| At Large 3 | PAC12 Champ | |||||
| AT | Game 3 Winner | AT ROSE BOWL | ||||
| At Large 4 | AT | Big12 Champ | ||||
| Big12 Champ | vs | |||||
| Pac12 Champ | ||||||
| ACC Champ | AT Fiesta Bowl | |||||
| AT | ||||||
| Pac12 Winner | ||||||
| (ACC Hosts next year, someone else gets shafted. Rotates) | (Orange Bowl hosts national title next year, someone rotates off) | (Again, site rotates between bowls) | ||||
January 11th, 2012 at 2:44 PM ^
Whatever does end up happening, I really doubt the conference commissioners cede control to the NCAA; that's a huge pile of money they leave on the table (actually it's more like writing a check to the NCAA). Delaney simply wouldn't be doing his job if he allowed the NCAA to host a championship tournament.
The other issue with eight teams is, when was the last time an eigth ranked team looked like they deserved a shot at the title? I realize they would have to play three games over highly ranked opponents, but right now we have Alabama bashing on the front page for not winning their conference, imagine the uproar when Boise couldn't win the MWC and ended up winning the tournament.
January 11th, 2012 at 3:07 PM ^
If Boise doesn't win the MWC and got picked as an at large, they would still close the year with wins against four of the best teams in the country. I still think that would be a pretty impressive resume that not many people could argue with.
January 11th, 2012 at 3:22 PM ^
No it's definitely better from a "you don't deserve it" category, don't get me wrong. I guess I'm just echoing the masses of college football fans with a completely unreasonable expectation for our postseason.
January 11th, 2012 at 3:40 PM ^
Don't a lot of conferences lose money on bowl games? Is that bowls in total, not the BCS bowls? Maybe I don't know enough about exactly how the current BCS cartel functions.
Edit: And with regards to the "uproar" if Boise was an at large who won... at large's win all the time in BBall. We survive.
January 11th, 2012 at 3:49 PM ^
The BCS (if I remember the details correctly, the broad strokes are correct) is run by a committee with the conference commissioners of the SEC, B1G, PAC, BXII, ACC, BE, ND's AD and one representative for all the other FBS conferences. Basically, I would think that if the Big Ten, SEC and Pac want something, it would get done quickly.
The BCS bowls pay out a ton of money to conferences (reportedly $47m to the B1G this year) and that would be transferred from conference revenue to NCAA revenue if the BCS handed over control of the postseason to the NCAA. The conference doesn't take much of a hit (if any) if, say, M had sold six tickets to the Sugar Bowl. The bowls are awful bargains for schools with ticket allottments and handpicked hotels and what-not, but they seem to be a great deal for conferences.
January 11th, 2012 at 2:45 PM ^
I could live with this. No matter what system you come up with, everyone is going to nit-pick it. There is no perfect system.
January 11th, 2012 at 3:46 PM ^
The Rose, Sugar, Orange and Fiesta Bowl kick off the play off on Jan 1, and the semifinal and NC game after that. All the 'also rans' can still play in their pizza pizza bowls or whatever they are.
You'd probably have to take one regualr season game for this to happen, so the eventual winner plays only 15 games.
January 11th, 2012 at 4:01 PM ^
Fanbases aren't gonna travel to 3 bowl games. By giving someone a home game you're rewarding conference champs and their fanbases, while ensuring a sellout.
Just my justification for my crazy ideas
January 11th, 2012 at 4:17 PM ^
I like your attempt but it will never work. We know from statistics that if it is possible, it will happen (T-test). So this year is a good case study. The SEC championship was Georgia and LSU. Lets say Georgia gets lucky for one game and beats LSU.
Then take UCLA and Oregon for the Pac 12 Championship game. Lets get a little crazy and say UCLA wins that game.
Let's look at Big 12 and say Oklahoma beats Okie State. Clemson beat Va Tech so lets keep that.
SEC=Ga
Pac 12= UCLA
B1G=Wisky/MSU (no problems with either)
Big 12 = Oklahoma
ACC=Clemson
So now you have LSU, Bama, Oregon, Okie State, Va Tech and Stanford (all BCS teeams this year) all on the outside looking in. There is only 4 At Large Bids. So who in this real scenario gets left out? Whoever it is will bitch like hell. I can hear Lee Corso now, "The system is broken, lets march on the White House. Obama save us."
Now I agree the chance of this occuring is small but the fact is that IT COULD HAPPEN. Then everyone will bitch if Bama gets left out, or Oregon runs the table except for their NC game and they lose to a UCLA team with a losing record.
The BCS is designed to match number 1 vs number 2. It does that. No agrument. Now the argument boils down to "who should be 1 and 2". There lies the problem. Just as in this playoff picture it will be worse.
Then you have the issue of scholarships. We all know the SEC signs up players for one year at a time. They pull schollies whenever they want. The B1G has honor and forces its member schools to honor scholarships. How is that going to be settled? The SEC commissioner talks a good game about stopping that practice but the major schools will not agree to this.
I just dont understand why everyone wants a playoff in football. College Football is the best sport. We have the most unique end of year system. I dont want NCAACF to be like NCAABB or the NFL or D2 and D3. I like the tradition of the bowls. I wish we would go back the old way.
Why does everyone want change? Just for the sake of change? Everything sounds good on paper but the devil is in the details. I dont want to get political but its just like health Care for all. It sounds nice but now that everyone realizes that it is a disaster, politicians are running for cover.
A college playoff is a wet dream. Its fun to dream about but when you wake up to reality, all you have is a mess.
January 11th, 2012 at 4:20 PM ^
is a broken system. The health care system is totally broken. It needs to be fixed (END POLITICAL TOPIC. NO COMMENT ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE/WILL FIX IT)
The current BCS system is broken. It needs to be fixed. A playoff works for everything else, including every other level of college football. If you have all of those teams on the outside looking in, the answer to anyone bitching is "WIN YOUR DAMN CONFERENCE". That's a lot better way to get in than "Purposely vote OSU 4th Nick Saban to help your own team, which feeds numbers into a computer, which gets info from 6 other voters which....." It wont be perfect, but Bama couldn't bitch about being left out, because if you want to make the playoffs, win your conference. That simple
January 11th, 2012 at 4:49 PM ^
continue. You, me, and the general public cannot stop Schools and ESPN from bitching. As I pointed out, in this year's situation it was possible that the current number 1-4 teams would be left out.
You dont think that LSU, Bama, Okie St, Oregon would not be bitching if they lost their championship game but was left out of the NC picture? LSU for example could have had a bad day against Georgia and under the current system would probably drop only to #2 and still be in the NC game.
Under a playoff system, LSU and Bama would be left out. When you look at the details, a playoff will never work.
January 11th, 2012 at 4:57 PM ^
This year. And the response is "Win your conference."
End of story. Win your conference, you're in.
Bball teams get left out all the time. It happens. In a playoff system there is a bonafide way that you guarantee a chance at the title. Win your conference. This year one of the teams didn't even win their division, and all the other conference champs had no chance at a title.
January 11th, 2012 at 4:59 PM ^
not stop the bitching. That will not be any better than what we have now. So if we had a few bad bounces this year, Bama, LSU, Oregon, Stanford, Okie State would all be on the outside.
I say we just throw darts on a board. At least the selection process cant be argued. Although the Rednecks in the SEC will say the darts were FIXED. The bitching will NEVER stop.
I applaud your effort but a college football will never stop the bitching. Either keep the current system or go back to the old way.
January 11th, 2012 at 9:42 PM ^
Luck? How about the teams decide it on the field. Now they're at the mercy of voters. How is that any better than deciding football championships with, you know, football games?
January 11th, 2012 at 5:02 PM ^
I dont like the idea of win your championship and you are in. If UCLA had won this year they are in. Is that what we want? A team with a losing record to win the NC? I thought the idea is that the NC is the two best teams NOT the two luckiest teams.
January 11th, 2012 at 5:35 PM ^
It's one thing to add a game in December, but now some teams would play (and travel) every week in that month. That's brutal to a student-athlete, which most of these kids legitimately are (i.e. no pro career).
If there is to be a tourney like you want, it needs to happen primarily in January.
January 11th, 2012 at 6:44 PM ^
The issue of having a real national football div. 1 championship isn't that hard - the lower divisions do it easily without hardly a peep of complaint. So the mechanistic issues really are all about the entrenched vested monied interests.
Since this is the "hot stove" season for college FB, and we're dreaming, here are some random thoughts on the notion...
1. If you want to have a system that allows for losses early and still have a shot to "play" one's way back use the system called the "Swiss System" - it is the system used to pair teams and players for one on one play when there are lots of players and only a limited number of rounds when a round robin isn't possible. It begins by seeding all of the teams to create the initial draw - so Number 1 plays Number 120, 2 vs 119 and so. In the subsequent rounds similar scores play each other. By round 8, there would be only 1 unbeaten team (after round 1, half the teams are unbeaten, after round 2, only at most 1/4, after round 3 at most 1/8...so after round 7 we've eliminated 128 teams from the unbeaten ranks). That leaves two weeks for the top remaining teams - the unbeaten and a few 1 and 2 loss teams. Pluses: Every week there would be unbeaten teams playing each other until the end. At the end only the very best will be left by record. An early loss isn't critical and allows a team to play one's way back up. And the lower rank teams will have incentive to play because they will be matched up against comparable opposition and playing for seeding next year. Also admittedly it would be a betting bonanza - pairing teams with similar records should help split the betting or make the betting provocative. Negatives: how to divy up the home games fairly and how to manage it with travel would be night mare. But it shows that actually it is possible in theory to play and get a legitimate champion without necessarily playing more games.
2. We'll just have to give it a bit more time - political meddling and money will ultimately sway things. The bowl organizers are clearly motivated by money. There are a lot of politicians who prefer to spend time fiddling around with college football rather than the not so much fun work of running the country (see the various US Senators drawn into the Big 12 - Big East whose in what conference). It won't happen next year but it will happen. Remember when the Fiesta Bowl first started? Then the first BCS? That all took time but it happened so, when the dollars start heading into the 8 and 9 figure range for the total package, we'll see a real playoff.
January 11th, 2012 at 7:21 PM ^
start the playoff in September. The D2 and D3 system does not have the traditions and pagentry of the D1 teams. D1 schools (like us) have deep rooted traditions that the true fan base will not approve.
I for one cannot and will not support any playoff that disrupts the traditional rivlaries that we have. Granted we didnt always play ohio in late November but it has become an annual right of passage for many families to attend the ohio game played in late November.
Also, no one cares about the D2 and D3 schools. I laugh when people use this argument. I always ask, "tell me two things: name the champions for the last 5 years for the D2 and D3 teams and name the top 5 rivalries (in on paticular order).
I have yet to find ANYONE that can answer this. So if the D2 and D3 is so great, why doesnt anyone know or care about it? If no one cares about it, why do WE want it? Its not logical.
Comments