this playoff system would work!
This system would work if every conference required a championship game. So yes the big 10 would need one more team. Heres how it'd work this year.
The winner from all these championship games would go into an 8 team playoff.
SO this year it would end up like this in "championship week"
Big Ten- Penn State vs. Ohio State
Big 12- Oklahoma vs. Missouri (should be Texas instead of OKL but the big 12 system sucks)
Pac 10- USC vs. Oregon
SEC- Florida vs. Alabama
ACC- Boston College vs. Georgia Tech
Big East-Cinci vs. Pitt
then for the mid majors, you would have to have some sort rule if any independents remained
MAC winner vs. Conf USA winner
Ball St. vs. Tulsa
WAC winner vs. Mountain West winner
Boise St. vs. Utah
... after all these championship games were played we would then have some sort of ranking system to rank the seeds, heres what i would project would happen this year with the higher seed hosting the game except the NC which is of course at a neutral site.
1. Florida
---------------Florida
8. Ball State
------------------------------Penn St. (hey were B10 fans here
4. Penn St
---------------Penn St.
5. Utah
---------------------------------------------Penn St.
3. USC
---------------USC
6. Cinci
-----------------------------Oklahoma
2. Oklahoma
---------------Oklahoma
7. Georgia Tech
This would give mid majors a chance and would keep the importance of the regular season. Also this would make sure that you HAD to win your conference. If you lost before the NC you could simply go to a regular bowl. For example in this scenario you could still have a OSU vs. USC rose bowl, traditional.
Regular Season= 11 games
Championship week = 1
Playoff= max 3
The max number of games a team could play is 15, as of right now an SEC, Big 12, MAC, or ACC team could end up playing 14 games if it makes it to the conference championship, thats only an addition of 1 game!
and to ND--- join a damn conference you greedy sob's.
December 3rd, 2008 at 8:52 AM ^
Yup, this is the playoff system I (and probably others) proposed over 2 years ago and again about 2 months ago.
December 3rd, 2008 at 12:10 PM ^
sorry enjoy, your mistaking. Maybe you should look over your own proposal because actually ours are quite different.
December 3rd, 2008 at 7:13 PM ^
Sorry, I meant the overall concept.
You're right as far as details, one problem with this one is the elimination of the 12th game.
That is NOT going to happen. It was added for only 1 reason -- MONEY. Figure it out around 60 games would be canceled. At 50,000 fans per game, $50 per fan, that is like 150 Million Big Ones!
December 3rd, 2008 at 10:37 AM ^
How would you divide the Big10 so that OSU and PSU were in different divisions?
The best division, imho would result in OSU and UofM in different divisions. Then schedule it so we always play each other, but earlier in the year. Then, generally, the season would close out with a B10CG with OSU and UofM.
In order to do that, you'd need to divide the conference into North and South. This could be done by eliminating a team in Indiana or Illinois, or by adding a team in a place like New York. So, say we add Syracuse, (team with tradition, already in a BCS conference) it would be a bit of a fluff team added to the BigTen North, balancing out all of the fluff in the BigTen South (Purdue, IU, NW)
I'd be much more interested in a BigTen CG if we just kicked out NW. It'd never happen, unless we could convince them to go the way of UChicago (which would never happen, unless they had at least a decade of never winning a BigTen game, and with Indiana just as terrible as they are, most of the time worse, it's just not feasible).
So under this Big10 + the Orange
BigTen North-BigTen South
UofM-OSU
PSU-Wisco
Iowa-Purdue
Minn-Illinois
MSU-NW
Syr-IU
Everyone would play each team in their division every year, as well as the same team in the other division each year, along with two rotating teams from the other division.
Hm... the more I look at this the more I like it. It would preserve all of our rivalries (hell, it'd let us play for the jug every year too). Still play OSU to close out the season most years (I mean, it generally is the BigTen Championship game each year anyway)... hmm...
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:24 PM ^
Per NCAA regs, conferences need 12 teams before they can have a title game, so dropping a team from the B10 doesn't solve anything.
December 3rd, 2008 at 10:47 AM ^
This is a pipe dream, you would need waaaay too many things to change - at the individual conference level - to work.
If something happens, it will be much simpler than this, probably determined by BCS ranking or something similar (is Ball State really the 8th best team in the country? probably not...you need to allow for 2 or even 3 teams from a conference to have a chance.)
December 3rd, 2008 at 3:51 PM ^
This is why a 16 team tourney is needed. 11 conference champs, plus 5 at large. 11 conference champs gives every team an equal chance, and the 5 at large guarantees you have at least the top 10-12 teams in the nation.
December 3rd, 2008 at 7:02 PM ^
I'm pro-playoff in general, but I do agree to an extent with the anti-playoff argument that it could make the season too long. If we have a 12-game regular season, plus conference title games, plus a playoff, we'd be asking teams to play essentially an NFL-length schedule (without the opportunity to sign free agents to fill gaps during the season, as NFL teams do). I know the lower levels of football play a lot of total games, but they also feature smaller, less hard-hitting players. The weekly punishment a D-II player gets is considerably less than what a BCS-conference player has to take.
If we ever adopt a playoff, I'd like to see the conference title games be abolished. Let teams share conference titles - there's nothing wrong with that. Just use the BCS formula to pick eight teams, and then have them square off. The absolute most games a team could play, then, would be 15. (Actually, I'd go a step further and drop the 12th regular-season game to shave it down to 14 games max, but that will never happen.)
December 3rd, 2008 at 7:17 PM ^
I'll repeat a previous post.
D2 and FCS all have a 16 team playoff and a 12 game schedule.
Your argument is totally bogus!!
December 3rd, 2008 at 7:19 PM ^
And as I noted above, players in those divisions are smaller and slower and don't dish out or take as much weekly punishment. I am pro-playoff, but I don't think this concern should be dismissed.
December 3rd, 2008 at 7:25 PM ^
So, since the NFL players are even bigger and dish out even more punishment, how do they survive a 16 game season (with added preseason games) and a playoff?
December 3rd, 2008 at 7:43 PM ^
Michigan ohio state wud be in same divison. They wudnt want em to play twice in same season. Its same as , what if texas/oklahoma were playing eachother twice a yr?
Yano how mich/osu play eachother every yr? that means theyd be in same conference, along wit MSU.
Prob mich/osu/msu/indiana/minnesota/purdue
and
Wisc/Northwestern/iowa/PSU/illinois/ ????
December 4th, 2008 at 8:46 AM ^
Aside from your inability to form coherent sentences, I'd like to ask for your reasoning behind thinking the two (historically) best teams in the BigTen would need to be in the same division.
No matter how it is divided, SOMEONE will play each other both in the regular season and in the championship game. It's how it works. Remember how last year Mizzou lost twice to the Sooners? When the Big 12 was formed the best two teams were kept in separate divisions (Nebraska and Texas). Also, if the BigTen were to be divided into divisions, how do you see All of the western most schools being lumped in with... PSU?
Don't post unless you think things through carefully, and certainly don't post if you can't spell or use basic grammar.
December 4th, 2008 at 3:43 PM ^
Have each school add another team they always play. For M maybe add Minnesota (to tUOS and MSU) so the LBJ is played for every year. Play 5 of the other 7. Then the teams with the top 2 conference records play for the championship.
People would be happier if Oklahoma was playing Texas again this weekend instead of Missouri. Forced divisions only lead to years where an apparently less than deserving team is playing for the crown.
December 5th, 2008 at 8:38 AM ^
When you don't have divisions, there's really no reason to have a championship. In the result two teams have identical records, record vs. = tie breaker, and if there's a 3 way tie, you run into the exact same problem you have this year: Deciding what two teams had the better season of the the three (and the 'problem' now is letting the BCS pick because both sides have laid claim to the chance to play for the Big12 championship). The 'what if' factor on TT keeping it closer with OU is high.
In theory, the Big12 could have 4 one loss teams, each to other Big 12 one loss teams(maybe 6, I haven't really looked at it). How then, would you set it up? At some point, you just need to pick.
Teams get screwed in DIA football. It's happened since forever. If you want to have a playoff, relegate yourself to FCS.
December 4th, 2008 at 7:31 PM ^
Hey, come on up to Boyne!! The snow is awesome and just keeps coming down (my plowing bill is going to really hurt).
Looks like another 6" of powder for tomorrow morning.