Your CBS playoff system.
 

Prolly a repost.

If they devised a playoff system how should they do it?

1. How many teams should be in it?
2. How would you add the bowl names in them?

etc....

Top 12 teams, Bowl name used for each game.

My ultimate dream of each conference's champion being put in a playoff will never happen, so I'd be happy with just taking the top 16 or whatever.

4 teams would be the most you can do with out shortening the season and starting the playoffs in november

16 teams - 11 conference champions, 5 at-large; seeded by BCS rankings

This year:

Dec 8, 15 - Home games for higher seeds, losers go back into bowl pool
Jan 1 - Football Final Four, rotating BCS Bowls (Fiesta and Orange this year)
Jan 7 - Sugar Bowl (essentially a third-place game)
Jan 8 - National Championship game (New Orleans)

So complicated.

My brain matter is on the wall that was so complicated.

Start the playoffs late December.

Do a 12 team playoff or something that would give the #1 and #2 teams a bye with major bowl names being used for each game and give the other smaller bowls to the other top teams.

What about when the students have to take exams?

You mean like those NFL-lite I-AA players who are unfortunate enough to be playing for a national title?

But yeah, standards are so strict for college athletes. There's no way there'd be any wiggle room for players from the 8 schools that would be practicing during finals.

So you are going to have college students play 16 games? I would think you need to pay them at that point.

You're fakeposting, right?

It's not even the same league. D-2 and D-1 are even the same game in preparation. Like I said though...they started their playoffs two weeks ago. The winner depending on seating with play at most 14 games. And by exam time there are 4 teams left I believe.

I-AA, II, and III all have playoffs; and most of them aren't at school for the football.

I am not. When people start talking about this it amuses me because they are looking at it from a fan perspective and totally neglect the fact that these are students. And they're students first.

The schedule wouldn't have ever been extended to 12 (and by extension, 14 for some teams) if the players being overworked was an issue.

By exam time, there would be a whopping 8 teams left in a 16-team playoff system. Four of those teams would be playing at home, and 50-something other teams would be preparing for their bowl games anyways.

I don't really care. This is the first season I have really gotten into college ball. I just remember last year in my coaching class the coach asking us to make a playoff system for college ball and this is what we all came up with.

There is a huge difference between bigtime college football. It's not even close it terms of investment and preparation.

Yes. Somebody think of the students.

I'm sure the Oliver Twists at Hawai'i would be willing to take their finals a week later if it meant they had an actual shot at a national title.

Yeah, those guys at Delaware and Appy State are ****in' slackers.

Problem is, their playoff format recongizes an "official" Championship game, whereas in I-A, it doesn't, unless there are actually two teams undefeated.

More than two undefeated teams = "unofficial"
No undefeated teams = "unofficial"

That's how I see it in my book.

I like it the way it is....I would remove more of the subjective aspect of it and put more weight on stats.

That's not really far to the rest of the student body, but I that you're right. Too bad Hawaii plays in a weak conference.

Yeah, because Hawai'i would turn down an invitation to the Pac-10 if they got it.

That's fair to the students who play their asses off for their university.

"Sorry, you're excluded from ever sitting at the big kids' table because your school wasn't part of our club fifty years ago."

That's the problem. People are going to "assume" that Hawaii gets in becuase of the weak conference, yet for arguement sakes, that Boise St. beat Oklahoma last year.

Could Boise beat Florida? Probably not, but there's always that shadow of doubt, considering that Boise team went undefeated, and did beat Oklahoma?

The don't have the size or speed to hang in the SEC or ACC and probably the other 6 major conferences.

OU is weak team and that's why theybarely got beat by Boise State. That's an indictment on OU and the Big 12.

Prove it.

Oh, what's that? You can't? Gee, if only there were a way to determine which teams were better... say, on a patch of grass or something...

LMAO....so you think Hawaii could beat the top ten BCS teams? Or could consistently perform in the SEC, ACC, Big East, B12, Big11 or PAC-10? Come on.

Well, nobody gave Pitt a chance to beat WV, yet they just did.

How the hell can you actually know that? You can't, becuase the only way they could beat those teams is that a playoff format would solve the issue.

I can't hear you with all of that Cartel cock shoved down your throat.

\

I felt like they would beat WVU. It took a freak accident to do it, but I've watched both programs closely for over 15 years. Pitt has played spoiler a bunch.

Awwww isn't that nice. Grow up. That's why nobody likes you.

Yeah, and I figured that could happen. It just that WVU was what, a 4 TD favorate to win this game?

Or how about the Application St over Michigan? Or Standford over USC? Or how about Louisiana-Monore (I think?) over Alabama?

The way this season went, which was very crazy, I would bet that the playoffs would be even more crazier.

Everybody loves me, damnit!

Also, please find some new material. You could give this whole "Holocaust denier/BCS defender" thing another few years if you did.

Well shiiiiiiiiiiiit, dude. Maybe we should just decide who's the champion based on who you feel deserves it.

Makes as much sense as the current system.

Again..not funny...please...get some material.,

That's not new material, GB.

As a matter of fact, that's MY MATERIAL from the post you're replying to.

A playoff isn't going to get the best team either. As a person who's attended 12 bowl games in the past 15 years...it really is expensive. With a 12 team playoff...I just don't see people traveling and expending the money to go to all these games. When Virginia Tech played for the National Championship I spent 1300/person before we ate or drank a drop. I have spent as little as 600 to go to a gator bowl. Students go to these games too, they wouldn't be able to afford it. D-2 they load up the kids on a school bus and take them their.

Oh well... as long as the players have fun it really doesn't matter.

With the 16-team playoff I posted up there, it's:

Higher seed home game
Higher seed home game
Fiesta/Orange/Rose/Sugar Bowl on Jan 1st
National Championship on Jan 8th

Hardly a stretch.

I understand that, but can't they at least try to make those games regionally before going to the semi-finals and finals which would be practically nationwide?

So you want is teams being forced to leave their starters in the entire game so that they can run up the score?

So why does it work for basketball and all other sports but it can't work for D1 football? That makes zero sense.

Just like in basketball whoever wins is the best team and you really can't argue that because they won the title.

Dude, those equations created for calculation that it weeds out the best teams. Multiply that times 7 different calculations and you have a very good indicator. Keeping in mind the criteria for their equations is subject. So there is a subjective aspect to the equations. I think you weigh the completely subjective polls less.

I'd go with the winner of each of the 6 major conferences, let each of those figure out how they want to chose their winner. Then toss in 2 from the mid-major conferences, again, let them figure out which two they pick. There isn't really a need for Wild Cards, and this takes some writer/coach who has never seen team X play completely out of the picture.

So who are the 6 major conferences and who are the 2 mid-major conferences?

It's the money. You aren't going to fill the seats in a 12 team playoff. Hawaii students aren't going to Florida. It wouldn't be able to support itself on the expectations. 4-8 teams with a shortened season is the best you can do and still maybe keep it profitable from the roota to the toota.

Yep and I would use the top 4 bowl games as playoff games and have a Final Four type venue for the championship

That could also work. Say,

Ohio State
LSU
Virginia Tech
USC
Oklahoma
West Virginia
Hawaii
BYU

Ta-da. At least then you've got the 8-best conference champions with an actual chance, and everyone else can play in their own happy little Cotton/Holiday/Meineke Car Care/Armed Forces Bowls.

Yeah. Florida has trouble filling the seats when they're playing buy games, right? They'd DEFINITELY struggle to sell tickets to the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP PLAYOFFS.

BS. They would make a ton more money with a playoff system because the TV rights would be HUGE for this. It would dwarf what they currently have now.

The problem is though, what about Conference USA? Or the Mid-American Confernece? Mountain West?

If we were to take all the conferences in the D-I level, that is 11 teams total.

I can't decided if the final 4 idea is a good one or a bad one.

They why bother playing Hawaii at all. They don't bring anything to the table.

I'd rather have representation from every conference, but 8 would be fine if it allowed for the best two non-BCS conference champions to have a shot, too.

Also, C-USA was terrible this year.

That is my, let the mid majors figure out which 2 they are going to send. It is up to them to decide how and who.

As terrible as they have been, they do have a conference championship game that they play.

So seems to be fair to me that whoever wins that conference championship should have all the right to join in the playoff format.

So earning a shot means nothing to you?

I'm not talking about Hawaii in particular, because anyone who needs overtime to beat San Jose State is obviously not a complete team, but what about 13-0 Auburn in 2004? What did they do wrong?

You still can't have the students playing that many games. 13 should be the most and 14 the max.

Simple, everyone loves to see Cinderella get her chance.

No, that's unnecessary and leads to crazy politicking amongst conferences that don't care about the others. Just state that the 8 highest-ranked teams who are conference champions earn spots in the playoffs.

Not the people that get the money

What makes 15 games more egregious than 14?

I agree they need to shorten the season. Have only 10 game seasons and the most the championship teams would play would be 13.

Yeah, cutting out the San Jose School of the Blind game early in everyone's schedule would just be a killer for the league...

So your entire position basically boils down to, "The Cartel wants to keep their cash away from everyone else, SO THERE."

Amazing.

Apparently not enough. USC was the better team that season and most agreed. They barely won their bowl game in unimoressive fashion.

Yeah, all they did was win every single game they played. Losers.

I guess you think split "national titles" (2003) are awesome, too?

Eh, not really. I just think the ranking system is a joke, as proven again this year when the #1 team in the league seems to keep losing. But that is why I was willing to let the mids figure out how they wanted to be represented.

It's up to them how they want to make money. And I support that.

I'm not the biggest follower of college football in history, but IMO of all the teams that have been jobbed or will be by the BCS, Auburn in 04 got it worst.

Those games give those schools exposure and money they wouldn't get on their own. If you want to only go to confernce play you could keep the games down, but something else will suffer.

I think this year is a lot like any other year, except we are missing 2 or 3 great teams that are normally at the top of the table

Yeah, the money bowl system is what made this mess in the first place. Cracks me up that 1-AA has no trouble with having playoff's, but the big guys have to have their 6 win teams in a bowl game...

The thing is, though, it's not like C-USA really gives a shit about the WAC's best interests. I'm sure they could hammer out some system, but I don't see why the negotiations are necessary, and that would frankly just strengthen the divide between the haves and have-nots.

Or what about this? Merge the WAC and the MWC. Sure that's 18 teams, but they can rotate the schedule around, and have their own conference championship game.

That'd make 10 instead of 11 conferences, and you can rank them by the BCS in terms of using them as slotting.

They ought to at least match up the top 4 teams in a simple playoff. Or the top 5 plus one wild card that the voters can use or something. There has to be some kind of definition for this process.

And they need to say, whichever way, all BCS conferences either need to have a championship game or not. Not a mix of the two.

Oh, NOW you care about the little guys.

The little guys who aren't even a part of Division I-A/FBS. The "little guys" IN the Football Bowl Subdivision don't deserve SHIT, though.

By showing that they are most likely a joke? Don't bitch about Hawaii getting a shot, and defend Florida International in the same discussion if you want to be taken seriously. :D

Because it's fun to go to the games...and more teams get to make more maony this way than if there was a playoff system

Do any of you actually go to bowl games?

I would be fine if they had 5 bcs bowls and then one more game after that to decide the champ

Yep though what is stupid is that a playoff system would make them a ton more money.

That would never, ever, ever, ever, evvvvvvvver happen. BYU, Utah, and Colorado State would scream bloody murder.