NCAA Proposes BCS - 4 Team Playoff

[BINGO]

College football finally stops fumbling with proposed playoff system: Doug Lesmerises analysis | cleveland.com


College Football: BCS Bosses Want Four-Team Playoff - The Daily Fix - WSJ

 

[luckyluke22]

I love it. Also a big fan of college taking new years day back

 

[Dodub]

This is really a plus one game that they have been proposing for years, just stated as a playoff to appease some people

 

[CalamityX11]

we want 8.....

or i do.....

 

[Jikkle]

8 would be ideal but I'll take 4 as anything to change the current format would be better than the way it is now.

 

[imac_21]

I don't see the point in expanding to 8. If 8, why not 16? Or at least 12?

 

[clyde_carbon]

Nice. I think 8 teams is perfect.

 

[Jikkle]

I don't see the point in expanding to 8. If 8, why not 16? Or at least 12?

The major problem people have with the current system mainly relates to the feeling is there are just as deserving teams that should get a title shot but never get it because only two teams can be #1 and #2.

8 would be the perfect number because that far back would cover pretty much every team that deserves a shot at the title.

If the parity in college football was the same as the NFL I think you could argue 12 but once you start getting outside that top 5 range the distance between teams gets larger and larger.

There is no perfect system and there will always be arguments about which teams should and shouldn't be in it but I will say it's better than the current system.

 

[Bemular]

The major problem people have with the current system mainly relates to the feeling is there are just as deserving teams that should get a title shot but never get it because only two teams can be #1 and #2.

8 would be the perfect number because that far back would cover pretty much every team that deserves a shot at the title.

If the parity in college football was the same as the NFL I think you could argue 12 but once you start getting outside that top 5 range the distance between teams gets larger and larger.

There is no perfect system and there will always be arguments about which teams should and shouldn't be in it but I will say it's better than the current system.

That...

 

[imac_21]

The major problem people have with the current system mainly relates to the feeling is there are just as deserving teams that should get a title shot but never get it because only two teams can be #1 and #2.

8 would be the perfect number because that far back would cover pretty much every team that deserves a shot at the title.

If the parity in college football was the same as the NFL I think you could argue 12 but once you start getting outside that top 5 range the distance between teams gets larger and larger.

There is no perfect system and there will always be arguments about which teams should and shouldn't be in it but I will say it's better than the current system.

4 teams covers every team that deserves a shot at the title. This year, if we're completely honest, Oklahoma State was the only team that had a legit claim and was left out.

In 2010, you could make a strong case for TCU, but not really anyone else. I could see possibly expanding to 6 (or 5), but even that seems like overkill. The idea is to determine the best team in the country. It's not to put together a month long playoff system that will make lots of money.

 

[Bemular]

4 teams covers every team that deserves a shot at the title. This year, if we're completely honest, Oklahoma State was the only team that had a legit claim and was left out.

In 2010, you could make a strong case for TCU, but not really anyone else. I could see possibly expanding to 6 (or 5), but even that seems like overkill. The idea is to determine the best team in the country. It's not to put together a month long playoff system that will make lots of money.

I see you are unfamiliar with the BCS. Trust me, determining the best team in the nation is quite subordinate to the cash that flows from both sides of the equation. (public & private)

Kidding aside, and to the point of determining the best team in the nation, if an 8th ranked team can win 3 games in a playoff, then what makes them less deserving than a 4th ranked team that wins two?

A big part of why I want to see an 8 team format (or even more) is to bring some attention to other schools that otherwise would wind up with a consolation bowl.

 

[imac_21]

I see you are unfamiliar with the BCS. Trust me, determining the best team in the nation is quite subordinate to the cash that flows from both sides of the equation. (public & private)

Kidding aside, and to the point of determining the best team in the nation, if an 8th ranked team can win 3 games in a playoff, then what makes them less deserving than a 4th ranked team that wins two?

A big part of why I want to see an 8 team format (or even more) is to bring some attention to other schools that otherwise would wind up with a consolation bowl.

If the idea were simply to make money, they wouldn't be going to a playoff system.

Playoffs do not determine the best team. They determine the team that was playing the best at the time. Unless you subscribe to the theory that in 2010/11 the best two college basketball teams in the country were Butler and UConn.

The reason playoffs are exciting in most sports is the upset. The idea of an upset contradicts completely the idea that the best team will win.

So if 8 teams is okay, then why not go to 12 or 16? If a 16th ranked team can win 4 games in a row then aren't they deserving?

 

[RobertPhD01]

Nice. I think 8 teams is perfect.

Agree not an extra month of playoffs, but top 8 teams get a chance to become champs! I like it

 

[Bemular]

If the idea were simply to make money, they wouldn't be going to a playoff system.

The idea is not simply to make money, but money will determine the final product more than any other component of the decision making process.

Playoffs do not determine the best team. They determine the team that was playing the best at the time.

And occasionally they don't even determine that. To be more precise, the only thing playoffs determine is a champion.

Just because you were able to rise to the level of play necessary to be the best team in the regular season doesn't mean you are good enough to rise to the level of play required to be a champion.

The reason playoffs are exciting in most sports is the upset. The idea of an upset contradicts completely the idea that the best team will win.

Excitement is innate to any playoff format, and while upsets certainly add to the excitement they are not the reason for it. As far as the idea that the best team will win, well, if we are to believe that the winner of any match constitutes the best team/player on that day, then not only would an upset not contradict the notion of the best team winning - it would support it.

But, as I mentioned earlier, the playoffs are not about crowning the best team they are about crowning a champion - which, much more often than not - is a different team.

As a final word on upsets, there are different levels of upset depending upon the playoff format and how the team is portrayed in the media.

Thus, in March Madness you will have Cinderella's - in an 8 team BCS football playoff you won't - unless the team is from a very small market and the BCS needs to boost ratings - then they will hype the shit out of that team.

So if 8 teams is okay, then why not go to 12 or 16? If a 16th ranked team can win 4 games in a row then aren't they deserving?

That is a very fair question and a very accurate statement. Why not 12 or 16 or even 24 or 48? The answers are obvious. At some point you begin to diminish the integrity of the playoffs, present prohibitive logistical challenges and exceed the point of maximum returns.

IMO, no playoffs or a 4-team playoff dilutes the championship the same way but from the opposite direction. If the BCS top 25 represents "the field" then the top 8 making the playoffs would represent 32% which is in line with the NFL.

 

[imac_21]

That is a very fair question and a very accurate statement. Why not 12 or 16 or even 24 or 48? The answers are obvious. At some point you begin to diminish the integrity of the playoffs, present prohibitive logistical challenges and exceed the point of maximum returns.

IMO, no playoffs or a 4-team playoff dilutes the championship the same way but from the opposite direction. If the BCS top 25 represents "the field" then the top 8 making the playoffs would represent 32% which is in line with the NFL.

I feel that there is generally a significant drop in quality after the 3rd or the 4th team. Sometimes even after the 2nd team.

I can't think of a year where any of the schools from 5-8 could legitimately claim that they deserved a shot at a national title.

I also don't think the top 25 represents the field. "The field" is made up of the FBS teams. Sure some of them suck and don't have a shot at top 8, but did anyone really think Indy was a threat in the NFL without Peyton? You can't discount the bad teams from the field simply because they're bad. Every team in the top 25 will play multiple teams that are not in the top 25.

The reason I'm content with a 4 team playoff is that the mandate of the BCS is to determine the best team in the nation. Having 8 teams builds excitement because there's a chance that Wisconsin could knock off LSU or Alabama (in theory, but probably not in practice).

The argument for a playoff is because there have been many years when the 3rd team in the BCS could make a legitimate claim to belonging in the championship game (Auburn in 04, TCU last year, Oklahoma State this year). By going to a 4 team playoff, you give those teams a chance.

However, it's just going to bump the conflict down from 2 vs 3 to 4 vs 5. How many years will it take before fans of the #5 school are complaining that they deserve a shot.

If we go to 8 teams, it will be the #9 school complaining.

The problem isn't the number of teams that qualify for the playoffs, it's the way they are selected. There's no complaints in pro sports because the playoff spots are earned on the field. The BCS will never be able to fully offer that opportunity.

You see it in the NCAA basketball tournament. Even with 68 teams now qualifying, there are schools feeling they were screwed and unjustly excluded.

But I got way off track there.

 

[Bemular]

I feel that there is generally a significant drop in quality after the 3rd or the 4th team. Sometimes even after the 2nd team.

I can't think of a year where any of the schools from 5-8 could legitimately claim that they deserved a shot at a national title.

I also don't think the top 25 represents the field. "The field" is made up of the FBS teams. Sure some of them suck and don't have a shot at top 8, but did anyone really think Indy was a threat in the NFL without Peyton? You can't discount the bad teams from the field simply because they're bad. Every team in the top 25 will play multiple teams that are not in the top 25.

The reason I'm content with a 4 team playoff is that the mandate of the BCS is to determine the best team in the nation. Having 8 teams builds excitement because there's a chance that Wisconsin could knock off LSU or Alabama (in theory, but probably not in practice).

The argument for a playoff is because there have been many years when the 3rd team in the BCS could make a legitimate claim to belonging in the championship game (Auburn in 04, TCU last year, Oklahoma State this year). By going to a 4 team playoff, you give those teams a chance.

However, it's just going to bump the conflict down from 2 vs 3 to 4 vs 5. How many years will it take before fans of the #5 school are complaining that they deserve a shot.

If we go to 8 teams, it will be the #9 school complaining.

The problem isn't the number of teams that qualify for the playoffs, it's the way they are selected. There's no complaints in pro sports because the playoff spots are earned on the field. The BCS will never be able to fully offer that opportunity.

You see it in the NCAA basketball tournament. Even with 68 teams now qualifying, there are schools feeling they were screwed and unjustly excluded.

But I got way off track there.

Not off track at all -

But it looks like both the 8 and/or 16 game is off the table.

BCS Discards The 8 & 16 Game Playoff Idea

 

[kennyt12]

Nice. I think 8 teams is perfect.

I agree with you Clyde. I think 8 is perfect but 4 is a way of getting there foot in the door. In a couple of years they'll realize it needs to be 8 and can expand.

 

[Flyingiguana]

most years 4 teams would be good, but last year i could see boise state being left out of a 4 team playoff. hopefully the 4 team playoff is the first step towards creating a more expanded playoff format in the future.

 

[BINGO]

Which teams, conferences benefit most from a college football playoff? - NCF - ESPN

 

[Bemular]

BCS gets boot in favor of 4-team playoff

"No. 1 will play No. 4, and No. 2 will play No. 3 on Dec. 31 and Jan. 1. The sites of those games will rotate among six bowls."

''I think it's tremendous progress,'' said Washington State coach Mike Leach, a playoff proponent. ''Five years ago there wasn't even dialogue about a playoff. Instead of diving in the water, they dipped their toes in. I think it's' going to be ridiculously exciting and it's going to generate a bunch of money. I wish they dived in.''

Leach predicted that the playoff field would eventually grow.