College Football Playoff Format

College Football Playoff Format

Postby TheBuckNut » 12 Sep 2005, 13:10

A post in the OSU thread by Frank the Tank got me thinking. What would be an acceptable format for a playoff in college football?

Should there be four teams? Six? Eight? Twelve? Or should they just lump the entire top 20 together for a massive tourney?

Well, the main knocks on a playoff format are the extended length of the season and the amount of games played after a playoff. Both of these, of course, are absolutely ridiculous when you consider three things:

1. Every other division in college football, from D1-AA to NAIA has a playoff format and champions wind up playing about 15 games.

2. Starting soon, every college team will be playing 12 game schedules anyway with teams playing a conference championship playing 13.

3. The final bowl games are played in early January.

So, in order to appease the hypocritical jackasses who say they don't want to extend a season, the playoff format should be between 4-8 teams, that way the most games a team would play would be 15, or 16 if they had a conference championship contest.

Four, in my opinion, is too small, considering there could be one undefeated teams and four teams with one loss.

To me, the best playoff format would be to have five automatic bids to the champions of the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, PAC 10, & SEC and three at large spots. The highest ranked teams in the final poll would receive the higher seeds, regardless of whether or not they won their conference.

Hypothetically speaking, let's say it looked like this (using random teams):

Final Regular Season Poll

1. USC
2. Texas
3. Ohio State
4. Florida State
5. Iowa
6. Michigan
7. Georgia
8. Tennessee

CONF. CHAMPS

ACC - Florida State (#4)
BIG 10 - Ohio State (#3)
BIG 12 - Colorado (#20)
PAC 10 - USC (#1)
SEC - Georgia (#7)

At Large

#2 Texas
#5 Iowa
#6 Michigan

The playoffs would then look like this:

1.) USC (#1)
vs.
8.) Colorado (#20)

----

4.) Florida State (#4)
vs.
5.) Iowa (#5)

----

2.) Texas (#2)
vs.
7.) Georgia (#7)

----

3.) Ohio State (#3)
vs.
6.) Michigan (#6)

In that format, you could see USC play Colorado, Iowa, and Texas.

Any thoughts?
TheBuckNut
Grantland Editor
 
Posts: 129
Joined: 07 Sep 2005, 08:01
Location: Toledo, Ohio

Postby Frank the Tank » 12 Sep 2005, 13:16

Some of this has been discussed in the BCS Debacle thread, but I'm going to leave this thread open as the playoff format got lost in the BCS insults in the other thread. Let's say that this thread is specifcally for how a playoff would work. Go to the other thread if you want to say "it'll never happen", or "it's a dumb idea", or "the BCS is great" etc. etc. etc.

I like the idea of a 12-team playoff.

- It gives great incentive to finish in the top 4 to get that bye week
- You'll get 11 great games, and with only four games in any given weekend finding TV slots shouldn't be difficult
- The chance of a worthy team being excluded is close to nil
- It will give the BCS conference shutouts like Utah a real chance to show if they can play with the big boys
2015 SOTSG Fantasy Football Champion

BostonSucksMyBalls 11/2/2016: "I hate the internet. No accountability. Just a wasteland of shitheads."
User avatar
Frank the Tank
TiVo's Prophet
 
Posts: 31556
Joined: 16 Nov 2004, 08:34

Postby JohnnyDamon » 12 Sep 2005, 13:24

Personally, my idea is to give 16 slots...the 6 BCS conferences get automatic bids (Big East, Big 12, Big 10, SEC, Pac-10, and ACC), then give 10 at-large bids, and the conference champs would get the top 6 seeds...

Since conference championships are set for December 3 this year, you could end the season anywhere between December 31-January 6...

So, if it works this way, here's the 6 hypothetical teams...

ACC: Va. Tech (5)
Big 10: Ohio State (3)
Big East: Louisville (6)
Big 12: Texas (2)
Pac-10: USC (1)
SEC: Florida (4)

Hypothetical At Large Bids (in order): LSU, Notre Dame, Florida State, Tennessee, Michigan, Iowa, Miami, Georgia, Arizona State, Georgia Tech

Meaning:

Round 1, December 10, 2005

1. USC vs. 16. Georgia Tech
8. Notre Dame vs. 9. Florida State
4. Florida vs. 13. Iowa
5. Virginia Tech vs. 12. Iowa
2. Texas vs. 15. ASU
7. LSU vs. 10. Tennessee
3. Ohio State vs. 14. Georgia
6. Louisville vs. 11. Michigan

Round 2, December 17, 2005

1. USC vs. 9. Florida State
4. Florida vs. 5. Virginia Tech
2. Texas vs. 7. LSU
3. Ohio State vs. 11. Michigan (how can you be opposed to a playoff if this happened?)

Semifinals, Christmas Eve 2005

1. USC vs. 5. Va. Tech
2. Texas vs. 3. Ohio State (or if this happened?)

Finals, January 3, 2006

1. USC vs. 3. Ohio State

This is all hypothetical, of course, but wouldn't this be better than what we have now? And you can keep the other bowls (you get rid of all the BCS bowls this way, but use them as sites for the games), as well the Continental Tire Bowl, the Silicon Valley Classic, the Humanitarian Bowl, and the GMAC Bowl. That means 56 teams still get to see postseason action, and everybody walks away happy.
Last edited by JohnnyDamon on 14 Sep 2005, 20:20, edited 1 time in total.
I've grown so used to you somehow, Lord I'm nobody's sugar daddy now, and I'm lo-oo-onesome, I've got the lovesick blues.
User avatar
JohnnyDamon
The Bomb Dick
 
Posts: 5875
Joined: 06 Jan 2005, 13:01
Location: Oxford-town.

Postby SouthernYokel » 12 Sep 2005, 13:36

As long as we keep the Smurf bowl, i'm happy. Nothing like watching football on a seafoam blue field. So asthetically pleasing.
JT99 wrote:imagine working your entire board life on being a guy investigating every nook and cranny of others' sexual lives only to have some drunken baboon stumble into the r&t jackpot
User avatar
SouthernYokel
Hank the Hangover Turtle
 
Posts: 29808
Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 08:09

Postby TheBuckNut » 12 Sep 2005, 13:36

I have to admit, I like the 16 team thing. I mean, I really do. That would be fun to watch.

And I only gave 5 conferences in my idea because the Big East still being a BCS conference is a farce. Their top two teams are Louisville and Connecticut...

But yea, I REALLY like the idea you had for 16 teams.

They could still do the lame bowls too for the crappy teams. They would just have to be done by the first week of the playoffs.

I would also like to see them still play the nuetral field bowl format for the final three games - rotating between the Sugar, Fiesta, Rose, and Orange Bowls. One of the four would have to be used for the best two non-playoff teams or a win-in game if 16 & 17 had the same ranking....that would be the last game before the playoffs.
TheBuckNut
Grantland Editor
 
Posts: 129
Joined: 07 Sep 2005, 08:01
Location: Toledo, Ohio

Postby JohnnyDamon » 12 Sep 2005, 13:39

SouthernYokel wrote:As long as we keep the Smurf bowl, i'm happy. Nothing like watching football on a seafoam blue field. So asthetically pleasing.


Fair enough, we can get rid of, say, the Music City Bowl instead of the Humanitarian bowl. Man, this would work well.

TheBuckNut wrote:They could still do the lame bowls too for the crappy teams. They would just have to be done by the first week of the playoffs.

I would also like to see them still play the nuetral field bowl format for the final three games - rotating between the Sugar, Fiesta, Rose, and Orange Bowls. One of the four would have to be used for the best two non-playoff teams or a win-in game if 16 & 17 had the same ranking....that would be the last game before the playoffs.


My feeling is, you can do the crappy bowls on the weekdays between the actual playoff games. If you did this, it still wouldn't take away from the playoffs, and you could get them all in instead of having to do all of them in a 5-day period early in December. In my system, we use the campus for the first two rounds(if you have a higher seed, you should be rewarded and those teams that get out of the first or second round on the road have shown they belong), then use the Orange Bowl for one semifinal, Sun Devil Stadium for the other semifinal, and the Rose Bowl for the national title (and the next year, have wherever the Sugar Bowl is for one semifinal, the Orange Bowl for the other semifinal, and Sun Devil Stadium for the finals, and keep rotating them like that)...
I've grown so used to you somehow, Lord I'm nobody's sugar daddy now, and I'm lo-oo-onesome, I've got the lovesick blues.
User avatar
JohnnyDamon
The Bomb Dick
 
Posts: 5875
Joined: 06 Jan 2005, 13:01
Location: Oxford-town.

Postby ron caron » 12 Sep 2005, 14:00

I like JD's 16-team format as well. The only change I would make is to eliminate any tie between polls and the at-large teams. To select those teams, I suggest a committee similar to the basketball tournament with anyone who ever participated on the BCS committee being DQ'd of course. The reason for this is what Frank pointed out in another thread - the poll is inherently biased by preseason expectations, making it harder for surprise teams and anyone who doesn't play the frontrunners to gain ground. Man, those hypothetical matchups were sweet, JD. (Cue Simmons' "wife googling divorce lawyers" joke)
User avatar
ron caron
Pink Helmet
 
Posts: 375
Joined: 25 Jul 2005, 15:54
Location: dairy land

Postby SouthernYokel » 12 Sep 2005, 14:02

Why would simmons' wife divorce you? You and the monkey been spending too much time at big boy donuts trying to steal pastries through the air vent?
JT99 wrote:imagine working your entire board life on being a guy investigating every nook and cranny of others' sexual lives only to have some drunken baboon stumble into the r&t jackpot
User avatar
SouthernYokel
Hank the Hangover Turtle
 
Posts: 29808
Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 08:09

Postby JohnnyDamon » 12 Sep 2005, 14:04

ron caron wrote:I like JD's 16-team format as well. The only change I would make is to eliminate any tie between polls and the at-large teams. To select those teams, I suggest a committee similar to the basketball tournament with anyone who ever participated on the BCS committee being DQ'd of course. The reason for this is what Frank pointed out in another thread - the poll is inherently biased by preseason expectations, making it harder for surprise teams and anyone who doesn't play the frontrunners to gain ground. Man, those hypothetical matchups were sweet, JD. (Cue Simmons' "wife googling divorce lawyers" joke)


To combat this problem, what we do is we eliminate preseason polls, and the polls don't come out until after week 3. What we also do is use former coaches, players, current coaches, and sportswriters and broadcasters who have seen enough to make fair judgments on who is good and who is not (in other words, if Cornelius Bennett decides to make Alabama is #1 team in America, even if they've lost 7 games, he's off the list). And sure, there would be controversy over that 16th spot, but for the most part, the team in that spot will have 1 or 2 losses, so they can't really complain because they controlled their own destiny and didn't get the job done.
I've grown so used to you somehow, Lord I'm nobody's sugar daddy now, and I'm lo-oo-onesome, I've got the lovesick blues.
User avatar
JohnnyDamon
The Bomb Dick
 
Posts: 5875
Joined: 06 Jan 2005, 13:01
Location: Oxford-town.

Postby SouthernYokel » 12 Sep 2005, 14:10

even the 64 team basketball tourney gets flack for excluding "worthy teams" Every year, the team that wins the NIT flicks a big "told you so" middle finger to the NCAA for not including them (SC last year, go cocks). I don't think anyone would take too seriously that 16 spot being controversial, because it's so far removed from BCS-style controversy.
JT99 wrote:imagine working your entire board life on being a guy investigating every nook and cranny of others' sexual lives only to have some drunken baboon stumble into the r&t jackpot
User avatar
SouthernYokel
Hank the Hangover Turtle
 
Posts: 29808
Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 08:09

Postby JohnnyDamon » 12 Sep 2005, 14:18

Exactly. I assure you there wouldn't be no crap like in 2001 or 2003, when Oregon and USC deserved a shot at the national title. In my system, Nebraska and Oklahoma would have had to get it done on the field, or there would be no shot at a national title. This would be so simple, it would bring in a ton of money, and the players wouldn't miss any class(since my system has on-campus games first and second round, those schools that get out for Christmas late aren't punished). How can the Presidents not see this.
I've grown so used to you somehow, Lord I'm nobody's sugar daddy now, and I'm lo-oo-onesome, I've got the lovesick blues.
User avatar
JohnnyDamon
The Bomb Dick
 
Posts: 5875
Joined: 06 Jan 2005, 13:01
Location: Oxford-town.

Postby SouthernYokel » 12 Sep 2005, 14:24

Change is hard baby, change is hard. They have to get so many powerful people, companies, associations, conferences, and schools to sign on to this. They know the money is there, it's just that the money is here now too. And i don't want to go too far here and pull us out of the format, so i'll stop now.
JT99 wrote:imagine working your entire board life on being a guy investigating every nook and cranny of others' sexual lives only to have some drunken baboon stumble into the r&t jackpot
User avatar
SouthernYokel
Hank the Hangover Turtle
 
Posts: 29808
Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 08:09

Postby JohnnyDamon » 12 Sep 2005, 14:27

True, but you can make this appealing (no missed class, the bowl system stays intact, you can make a ton of money, and can basically change the image of D-I football forever)...
I've grown so used to you somehow, Lord I'm nobody's sugar daddy now, and I'm lo-oo-onesome, I've got the lovesick blues.
User avatar
JohnnyDamon
The Bomb Dick
 
Posts: 5875
Joined: 06 Jan 2005, 13:01
Location: Oxford-town.

Re: College Football Playoff Format

Postby nova » 05 Mar 2014, 11:07

JT99 - Wed Mar 05, 2014 10:37 am: open assignment: pick 5 college football programs who have not won a BCS title and rank them from most likely to least likely to win one within next 10 years


I'm going to modify this assignment, since there have been a lot of years where there are multiple national champions. For the sake of this ass, I'm going to consider teams who haven't won a title since 1970, aka the post-Sam Cunningham Era.

5. UCLA (Last title: 1954)

4. Michigan State (last title: 1939)

3. Texas A&M (last title: 1939)

2. Oregon (last title: never)

1. Stanford (last title: 1940)
Jew Jitsu: It's like you guys are incompatible with each other but have to make due cause you can't pull out.
User avatar
nova
Thrifty Negro
 
Posts: 25499
Joined: 04 Aug 2005, 16:04
Location: King's Tower | Los Angeles, CA

Re: College Football Playoff Format

Postby Briandong79 » 18 Mar 2014, 15:28

Baylor isn't exactly beefing up its non-conference schedule in the face of the new playoffs format, scheduled to play Liberty and Incarnate Word (wtf?) in 2020 and 2019, respectively.

http://sportsblogs.star-telegram.com/ma ... itive.html
PhillyJim76 - Tue Nov 22, 2016 9:20 am: X?I wrote a disturbing clueless fan fiction story that got me in hot water in college
User avatar
Briandong79
Beep Boop
 
Posts: 31130
Joined: 28 Apr 2005, 13:35
Location: MoreCowbell's phone

Next

Return to College Sports

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest