College football playoffs?

Submitted by sterling1213 on

For those of you who favor a playoff in football, does this tounament cause some pause for you?  The big reason I always hear when people are arguing for a playoff in football is that it provides a "true champion".  With one game left the elite eight  there is a good chance that no team in the top 10 will even make the final four.  No one can argue that any of the remaining 5 teams have been the best team in college basketball this season.   I don't care for the bcs but I would like to see the old bowl system (pre-bcs) restored.  The bowls allow for the whole season to count.  The unintended consequences of a playoff are a bigger risk than most will let on. 

MGoBoard

CompleteLunacy

March 28th, 2011 at 2:16 AM ^

It's a lot easier to justify a lower-seeded team being left out than #3 in the country with a same record as #1 and #2. Ultimately all the whining over whether VCU deserved the NCAA tourney or not in bb is moot, because we're talking about #68 here! But it highlights a point...no matter what, somebody's going to bitch about it not being good enough.

However, I think football can still do better. Much better. Four teams is substantially better than just two. Is it enough? Probably not. But its exponentially better than two. Some years some deserving teams will still be left out for sure...and that cannot be avoided...but it's not a reason to suggest what we have in college right now is "working good enough". Because it's not. 

Joined: 11/13/2010

MGoPoints: 12910

bmacdude

March 27th, 2011 at 6:03 PM ^

Five FLUKES out of Five.  It is a rare occasion.  Plus, basketball is a different animal than football.  A field of 8 football teams in a playoff would be worth an incredible amount of money.  There is a way to make it happen.

Joined: 08/29/2009

MGoPoints: 109

Kyrie_Smith

March 27th, 2011 at 6:16 PM ^

I wouldn't want to go back to the old format at all. I would have given my left nut and both my wife's ovaries to see Michigan play Nebraska back in 1997.

Joined: 09/02/2009

MGoPoints: 1

smwilliams

March 27th, 2011 at 6:33 PM ^

A Football Tournament would be easy as pie...

8 Conference Games

3 Non-Conference Regular Season games for ACC, Big 10, SEC, Pac-10/4 Non-Conf Regular Season games for Big East/Big 12

Conference Championship Game

Champions of ACC, Big 10, SEC, Pac-10, Big East, Big 12 gets auto bids.

2 at-large berths (can't go to same conference)

Use BCS ranking formula to seed teams 1-8.

Quarterfinals are the Cotton Bowl (TX), Gator Bowl (FL), Fiesta Bowl (AZ), Sugar Bowl (LA)

Semifinals are the Rose Bowl and Orange Bowl

BCS Championship Game rotates between various NFL stadiums.

Done and done.

Joined: 08/20/2010

MGoPoints: 9917

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

March 27th, 2011 at 6:46 PM ^

Nobody asked for any gumdrop-rainbow-land fantasy proposals, but it seems like every playoff discussion sooner or later becomes a magnet for everyone's special idea.  And I will say this until the whole world believes it: You can't have a football playoff using the bowls on neutral sites.  Aside from the fact that you have to get the bowls to agree with it, which they won't, the basketball quarterfinals (which is what's going on now) can't even fill a basketball arena.  12,000 people for the Florida-Butler game in New Orleans.  Please explain to me how you think it's a good idea to change the Sugar Bowl from an event that attracts 74,000 people to one that attracts 12,000 people.  Please explain why you think the Sugar Bowl would sign on for that.

It's like I said above about playoff fans: I think you want this playoff because you think it's a cool bracket, not because you really thought it through and settled on the best, most feasible idea.

Joined: 07/02/2008

MGoPoints: 41586

Monk

March 27th, 2011 at 8:02 PM ^

in a 16 team playoff, the round of 16 and 8 and maybe even the semis would be at the higher seeded team's campus, like the nfl does it, and how college hockey used to do it.  The championship would be at a neutral site.  As for the bowl, you're right, they would not fit in the playoffs, they would still exist and still have games for the teams that didn't make the playoffs.  

The bowls wouldn't go away, and still have good matchups, for the sake of discussion say, Wisconsin and MSU made the playoffs from the big ten and Stanford and Oregon made the playoffs from the pac ten.  The rose bowl would then be OSU and Arizona, not a bad matchup.  Now the bowls won't make as much money, but the playoffs would more than compensate for that.  

Joined: 12/25/2008

MGoPoints: 952

NateVolk

March 27th, 2011 at 9:54 PM ^

Plus with your proposal, everybody would make way more money. Even the Big Ten and SEC Commissioners admit that system such as yours would create significantly more revenue (some estmates say conservatively $750 million per season in total revenue) then the current system does.

The bowls bank a bunch of money and pay all their chairman and organizers tons of money now, while they shake down participating schools for ticket purchases and sponsor fees.  We do not need to  worry about the bowls.  They'll always be a market for college football in December with a bowl name attached.   Maybe some will wither, but who cares about the Beef O' Brady's Bowl or whatever?  

What the NCAA tournament does this year is what it does every year: makes fans of major college sports dream longingly about the possibilities for football.  Money will drive us to a better system then we currently have. The only question is will be as awesome as what basketball has. Meaning: will it reasonably give every Division 1-A school  a chance when fall practice opens?

Joined: 07/19/2010

MGoPoints: 6863

ixcuincle

March 27th, 2011 at 6:55 PM ^

But students can't take classes during a month long playoff! :(

But students have to "take finals", or "tradition" or some other shit...just put in a playoffs already.

Joined: 08/11/2010

MGoPoints: 6801

bacon

March 27th, 2011 at 7:02 PM ^

Until Michigan gets back to winning the Big 10 again on a regular basis, I couldn't give a crap about which team wins the national championship.  

Joined: 01/04/2009

MGoPoints: 18646

evenyoubrutus

March 27th, 2011 at 8:06 PM ^

I saw "College Football Playoffs?" and 87 replies and I thought "Finally!" then clicked then saw the post and was like "aw, damn" (sad face).

In response to the question, I would be opposed to a 64-team college football playoff, yes.  Otherwise, a playoff that featured only the top 10, or 12, or 16 would not have the same problem cited in the post.

Joined: 11/04/2008

MGoPoints: 178383

GGV

March 27th, 2011 at 10:39 PM ^

 

but I don't think i favor a play-off system any more, or at least i'm not as hot to see one as I once was.  The recent Super Bowls change my mind rather than the NCAA B-ball tourny.

I don't really buy that Green Bay was the best team in the NFL this year.  Nor do I think any team was better than the Patriots in 2007, etc...

Play-offs are an exciting product but I don't think they necessarily produce the best team in the end.

 

If we do go to a play-off system, I'd almost like to see a reguar season champion voted by the writters & coaches (they use to do that prior to the bowls, so some precedence there)

Joined: 09/06/2010

MGoPoints: 1252

funkywolve

March 28th, 2011 at 11:28 AM ^

In the NBA, NHL and MLB where you have best of 5 and best of 7 formats, the vast majority of the time the best team is going to win out in the end.  When you have a one and done format, anything can happen.

Joined: 10/08/2008

MGoPoints: 20263

michiganfanforlife

March 27th, 2011 at 10:39 PM ^

I have been praying for a playoff for years now. I don't think the NCAA will get their head out of their ass quick enough to do this before I die, but I wish they would. The "regular season won't count" people are delusional. If there are only 4-8 teams, you will still have to go undefeated or 1 loss to make it. Some years we have 4-5 undefeated teams. All the other arguments sound like Charlie Brown's parents to me. WA WA WHAH WHA Wa. 

The tournament crowns a champ that wins every game, and settles the argument. Until they have it there will always be a paper tiger champ and tons of fans wondering what would have happened. Maybe the teams that are hot right at the right time win, and they aren't neccesarily THE best team. Who cares? You still have an outright winner and no wishy washy "this team turns on tv's" bullshit. 

Joined: 05/05/2009

MGoPoints: 2788