BCS vs Playoff
Admittedly, I did not put as much thought or research into my idea as did "heckdchi", but this popped into my head around 2 years ago and this is the first time I've published it or told it to anyone outside my friends and family. Having said that...
A playoff is very possible and my suggestion satisfies everyone involved even the oldtimers, which I consider myself, and the money motivated bowl commishes.
Right now we have a 12 game season with admittedly 3 - 4 cream puff games in almost every major conference. If you take the season and chop it down to 8 games that are all played in conference / regional (for non-conference teams), and then take a week to rank everyone (to me it doesnt matter what formula you use) and then begin a 7 week playoff, then every team in D1 gets a shot at the title.
Now let me digress...if we took two weeks in preseason training and had controlled scrimmages with teams out of conference (like the NFL) then technically we have a 10 game season albeit modified.
Back on track...at the end of the eight game regular season, the computers rank teams according to their regions (split them up however you like but there is a framework already devised in basketball). Then begin playing playoff games according to your bracket it should only take 17 total weeks to hold a season. Now some teams will only be playing a 9 game season as it appears (half of the D1 schools) and 3/4ths will only be playing a 10 game season, etc etc but once we are down to 2 teams that have made it all the way through the process, then we take a week off and the bowl commishes sit down and select teams to come play in their bowl. If you want to keep it traditional (Rose bowl - Big Ten v Pac 10, etc) ok, fine by me. The point is that if we started the 1st weekend in September or end of August, the regular season is over November 1st. Take a week off and begin playoff games the second weekend in November. You play the next 6 weeks straight according to your bracket as mentioned before then take another week off to deliberate the bowl situation and for the final 2 teams to properly prepare for a national championship opponent, you are still done around Christmas.
This scenario appears to me to solve the debate with length of season because the teams that only have a 9 game season if they dont get selected to a bowl have more time to recover, start training earlier and recruit more, oh and then there's always start studying for finals. Also for the guys that go the distance or nearly the distance the pro scouts get a real look at how these star athletes will hold up to a 15 game season.
Money-wise: the regional playoffs can be set up to make more money for the cities that the games are played in (neutral turf), then when the playoff are coming to an end the bowls and their host cities still make their money and the national champ game can filter as is through the big 4 (orange, fiesta, sugar and rose). We get to keep our bowls and we get a real national champion without the computers leaving someone out.
Now I know that there are probably a lot of holes in my theory but I think with a little sit down time, the powers that be can work out the kinks and the fans, the coaches, the schools, the bowls, and the pro scouts are all happy.
Give me some feedback...
December 11th, 2008 at 1:58 PM ^
"This scenario appears to me to solve the debate with length of season because the teams that only have a 9 game season if they dont get selected to a bowl have more time to recover, start training earlier and recruit more, oh and then there's always start studying for finals."
Except for the problem that arises when the schools that don't get 12 games aren't happy about the lost revenue.
December 11th, 2008 at 4:02 PM ^
Good point: my response to that would be - #1 - just win baby! and #2 Make your stadium available as a future host site for the playoff later rounds
December 11th, 2008 at 5:25 PM ^
With any BCS tweak or Playoff System proposal, the boundary of plausibility is "will make more money for all stakeholders."
If you don't include "will make more money for all stakeholders" in your plan, I promise you, your plan will never be more than a plan on a message board.
December 11th, 2008 at 6:40 PM ^
Another good point...I forgot we were dealing with the economics of college football instead of the love of the game and the truth involved with finding a real "National Champion". Now I'm not saying this to irritate the two well thought out suggestions. I guess my sentiment is for how things in college football are going as a whole. When I played college ball back in the early 90's, I saw first hand how the game was changing. When I lost my love of the purity of the game and the sense of pure competition of it all, I decided to get out while I still had some love and passion for it vs. remember the game in another way.
Now back to the suggestions, I do see your point but as I said, for those teams that dont make it past the 1st round of playoffs. They get 1st choice on hosting future round(s). Not just one round, and you could also cycle between them on alternate years. The smaller schools that normally wouldnt make it as it is today, with the dismal turnouts wouldnt have to host but one or two games to make up the difference lost and then some. Think about it, in my town/city, UAB is the major school, their attendance is under 20,000 usually and their ticket sales are probably 1/3 of the larger schools like an Alabama or Michigan. One hosted game with an attendance of 80,000 or more at customary ticket prices and they have made up their difference plus the equivalent of at least a 13 game regular season while still having a cut for the teams playing in that round of the playoffs.
Not that this is the only answer, I'm sure people smarter than me can come up with better ideas and ways to keep everyone in the black if they really want to. The way I see it we can all look at the negatives or we can begin to look for the possibilities of a solution to a problem that the majority really wants.
Please excuse the sarcasm at the beginning, I do appreciate the suggestions but I do think it is possible. Simply enough, a +1, 4 or 8 or 16 team playoff is simply not fair to all.
December 11th, 2008 at 9:05 PM ^
Ehh, not every team i dont think should go. Id say 10-11 game season.. top 16 teams go.
But, big question is.. Where wud games be played? Like in NFL? Better record teams/(playoff percentage pts) get home?
Maybe now we can actually own southern teams in our home turf, playing a team like florida in late november in ann arbor. Hell yeah. not so fast in the cold are we SEC?
December 12th, 2008 at 11:06 AM ^
maybe not every team but then again, what happens when there is a team that comes out of nowhere, as it happens in college basketball every few years. What do we tell them? "Oh, no, you cant be a part of this cause you're just a little nobody and you dont deserve the same chance that all other D1 schools deserve".
I know what you're saying but when you think about it, and I do quite often, when I play devils advocate it sounds like I'm being a snobby elitist. Besides, 16 doesnt even come close to enough teams to have a true representation.
Comments