College football: The BCS or a Playoff?

davatron

New member
May 28, 2007
892
0
0
Pat Forde has a nice write up on why he supports a college football playoff.

On the other side of the coin, Ivan Maisel is a staunch supporter of the BCS.

I'm not sure about anyone else here, but I'm all for a playoff system (or as Forde Mentions, at least a Plus One). Some claim the regular season will no longer be important or exciting if a playoff is introduced, which is a silly notion. I believe there would still be a lot of upsets and close games since teams naturally compete to win.

Discuss: BCS or Playoff?
 

1MSUDawgFan

New member
Feb 23, 2008
183
0
0
It would give teams like Boise State a chance to win the national title. As it was, we'll never know if they were the best team on the field or not. That's the point of crowning a team as national champions... to say they were the best on the field that year. Boise State beat everyone they lined up against - including Oklahoma. It isn't the players fault they weren't in the SEC or Big 12. They deserve a shot if they can beat any team they line up against. And the playoff doesn't have to include many teams. Maybe 4 or 8. That way, it would still make the regular season damn important. if you lose 2, you'd be out for sure.
 

QuaoarsKing

Well-known member
Mar 11, 2008
4,892
929
113
I think the best system would be a 16-team playoff, with 11 autobids to conference champions (so they will never have to change the rules if the strength of conferences change), with the first 2 rounds played at home sites.

But any playoff would be better than now.
 
J

JR

Guest
The current system is essentially set up to ensure that the members of the powerful SEC get a disproportionate share of post season revenue.
Unlike Florida and LSU, MSU needs every dollar it can get.
MSU essentially participates in a single eliminatation tournament for the mythical national championship every year. Most years, you go undefeated and win the SECCG, you are going to play for the national championship.

Currently MSU has the best of both worlds.
The only way a playoff system would make sense for MSU, is for MSU to leave the SEC.
 

MaleBovineK9

New member
Jan 23, 2007
214
0
0
11 autobids to conference champions
If they do that then out of conference games would mean jack. Everyone would play their 2nd and 3rd strings during those games. You would have teams in the playoffs with 3 and 4 losses. I don't like the format that the NFL has where teams can just give up the las 2 or 3 games of the season and not play any starters. I wouldn't want college to go the same route.
 

rebelrouseri

New member
Jan 24, 2007
1,460
0
0
Two polls (insert joke about OM nat'l titles and polls here) and traditional bowl games. Some years there is a clear no. 1 and some years there is a split title. So be it. Makes college football unique and keeps the fans talking. Also, bowl games to be played no later than Jan. 1 and no farther north than the gulf states. Also, get rid of about ten bowls.
 

RebelBruiser

New member
Aug 21, 2007
7,349
0
0
MaleBovineK9 said:
11 autobids to conference champions
If they do that then out of conference games would mean jack. Everyone would play their 2nd and 3rd strings during those games. You would have
teams in the playoffs with 3 and 4 losses. I don't like the format that the NFL has where teams can just give up the las 2 or 3 games of the season and not
play any starters. I wouldn't want college to go the same route.

</p>

That's one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard. In basketball, every conference gets an automatic bid, but that doesn't mean that teams tank the entire season trying to save up for the conference tourney. They play as hard as they can all season because every game determines whether or not they have a shot at an at large bid.

Take a look at UGA last year. In a 16 team playoff with 11 auto bids, they sure couldn't afford to lose a non-conference game to Georgia Tech at the end of the year, because they likely would've missed out on one of the at large bids. Same for Oklahoma and anyone else really. You'd basically need to win all of your non-conference games because you'd know that one or two off games during conference play could cost you your shot at the automatic bid.

Now, for the small conferences you may have a point. If you're Memphis, then your games with Ole Miss or UT, or whoever else out of conference really wouldn't mean anything since your shot at an at large bid is basically zero. Your only games that would matter would be your conference games. However, if you still had the bowl system in place to accompany a playoff (like an NIT to the NCAA tourney), then those OOC games would still be important to even the small conference teams that were trying to get bowl eligible.
 

RebelBruiser

New member
Aug 21, 2007
7,349
0
0
JR said:
The current system is essentially set up to ensure that the members of the powerful SEC get a disproportionate share of post season revenue.

Unlike Florida and LSU, MSU needs every dollar it can get.

MSU essentially participates in a single eliminatation tournament for the mythical national championship every year. Most years, you go undefeated and win the
SECCG, you are going to play for the national championship.

Currently MSU has the best of both worlds.

The only way a playoff system would make sense for MSU, is for MSU to leave the SEC.

</p>

This is stupid as well. A playoff would make WAY more money than the BCS currently makes. Sure that money would be split between more conferences. However, the SEC take home would likely be more than it is today if you were to factor in the bowl games as well.
 

patdog

Well-known member
May 28, 2007
50,007
14,757
113
RebelBruiser said:
A playoff would make WAY more money than the BCS currently makes.

Trust me. If this were true, we'd have a playoff today. The 6 BCS conferences aren't in the business of leaving any money on the table for anything. </p>
 

SoxFan343

New member
Feb 25, 2008
200
0
0
A 16 team playoff is not.

Any playoff system that does away with minor bowls, I'm against. Any playoff system that reduces the importance of the regular season, I'm against. USC could lose 4 games and still make the playoff some years under a 16 team format.

I think a plus one is the best option.
 

RebelBruiser

New member
Aug 21, 2007
7,349
0
0
Wrong. If you were to go back and use the BCS standings to put together a 16 team playoff for every year since the inception of the BCS, there would never have been a team with more than 3 losses to get an at large bid. A 16 team playoff with 11 auto bids leaves only 5 at large spots, usually meaning that the last at large spot would go to a team ranked in the range of No. 12 or so in the BCS standings at worst.

I don't care to go look back at the standings, but I don't think a team with 4 losses has ever finished the regular season that high in the BCS standings. You'd have a couple 3 loss teams, but mostly 2 loss or 1 loss teams picking up the at large spots. If you were to apply that format to this past season using the champions of each conference and the top 5 remaining BCS teams, Florida would have been the only at large team with 3 losses (9-3).
 

SoxFan343

New member
Feb 25, 2008
200
0
0
People talked themselves into voting up a two loss LSU team into the national title game. The week before LSU was around 7th in the BCS. Don't think a similar thing won't happen because media types think USC or someone else is the better team. No one has cared who would be the 5th at large team before, but if you make them care, they will. At some point people will vote a 4 loss team up because they think they are the "hot team".
 

MaleBovineK9

New member
Jan 23, 2007
214
0
0
That's one of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard. In basketball, every conference gets an automatic bid, but that doesn't mean that teams tank the entire season trying to save up for the conference tourney. They play as hard as they can all season because every game determines whether or not they have a shot at an at large bid.

Take a look at UGA last year. In a 16 team playoff with 11 auto bids, they sure couldn't afford to lose a non-conference game to Georgia Tech at the end of the year, because they likely would've missed out on one of the at large bids. Same for Oklahoma and anyone else really. You'd basically need to win all of your non-conference games because you'd know that one or two off games during conference play could cost you your shot at the automatic bid.

Now, for the small conferences you may have a point. If you're Memphis, then your games with Ole Miss or UT, or whoever else out of conference really wouldn't mean anything since your shot at an at large bid is basically zero. Your only games that would matter would be your conference games. However, if you still had the bowl system in place to accompany a playoff (like an NIT to the NCAA tourney), then those OOC games would still be important to even the small conference teams that were trying to get bowl eligible.
Lets say LSU is 6-3 (6-0 SEC) heading into the end of the season. They already have the SEC west locked up. They have UM and UPigg left in the SEC and also have a strong non conference game...say VA Tech left on the schedule. If your Les Miles do you play starters in those 3 games and risk getting someone hurt? or do you save them for the SEC Championship/ Playoffs? LSU could be 6-6 heading into the SEC Championship and 7-6 and make the playoffs. See how crappy it could get. If LSU won out from there, they would be the national champion and would be 11-6.
 
Get unlimited access today.

Pick the right plan for you.

Already a member? Login