BCS Mess....A concept to think about

[UST82Gopher]

I was thinking about the BCS mess again this year trying to come up with a solution.

What if football adopted the basketball "Bracket Buster" concept? For those that don't follow basketball, the Bracket Buster are late season games scheduled for high ranking mid majors and major conference bubble teams to play each other (in essence to build up their resume while knocking off a NCAA tournament competitor).

What if, on the conference finals weekend, the BCS also matched up the top 8 BCS teams NOT part of a conference final and randomly assigned them up to play each other to help make their cases for a wild card? (I would exclude the BT and Pac 10 champs as they have bids and have no tournament). Obviously, the winners would get huge BCS strength of schedule increases which just might clear up some of the "who did they play" questions.

It would not be any more "games" per say than the conference champions would play and it would not stretch out the season. And, I really don't think it would diminish interest in the Bowl games.

What do you think?

 

[edinafan84]

Just play a straight playoff...if D-1AA, DII, and DIII do it, so should the big dogs.

 

[TheSportsAce]

Amen, Edina.

I've always been a big fan of an 8 or 12-team tournament (where the top four teams would get a bye), picked by a selection committee. Picking the field would carry with it all the drama you get in the weeks before Selection Sunday in March Madness, and each game in the tournament would be huge. And there would be bubble teams...but, just like with the basketball tournaments, bubble teams really wouldn't have much of a chance of winning it all anyways, so you wouldn't really be cutting teams out that would have a serious shot at the title. You could give automatic bids to major conference champions, and then at-large bids to everyone else. And best of all - decisions would be made by PEOPLE with an appreciation for the big picture, including head-to-head game results...of course, selections are debatable, but that's part of the fun of March Madness too.

 

[GophersInIowa]

I agree about the playoffs. Can you imagine some of the first round match-ups you could have? It would be so much fun.

One thing I don't like about the BCS poll is that it includes the Coach's Poll. Why are coaches who probably don't ever see so many of the other teams play get to vote on something that is very important in deciding the BCS? My idea is to combine the coach's poll and AP poll into one. Have another top 25 ranking that is put together each week by a group of a dozen or so guys who's only job all season is to watch games, break them down, and discuss them.

 

[Schlic Daddy]

One thing I don't like about the BCS poll is that it includes the Coach's Poll. Why are coaches who probably don't ever see so many of the other teams play get to vote on something that is very important in deciding the BCS?

I actually think that coaches usually know more about who's the best than the AP because they scout each other and talk to fellow coaches. They have inside info.

 

[Goldmember]

And best of all - decisions would be made by PEOPLE with an appreciation for the big picture, including head-to-head game results...

People are the problem with the current system. The BCS is flawed only to the degree that the human polls are always totally wrong about everything.

 

[oak_street1981]

Pre-season polls are the worst and need to go if they

People are the problem with the current system. The BCS is flawed only to the degree that the human polls are always totally wrong about everything.

have any impact at all as they do.

There needs to be at least a 16 to 24 team play off, and a few scrub bowl games for the rest of the teams, so that I still have something to watch on TV during the week in December, besides the crappy NBA.

 

[Go Gophers Rah]

My personal preference is the "plus one" system. Have the #1 and #4 team meet in one BCS game and the #2 and # 3 in the other on Jan 1. Then, on Jan 10, have the winners of these two games face off.

Otherwise, I think the system should be left alone. I like that a bad loss in September means that it us unlikely that a given team could compete for the NC. Every Saturday is the playoffs!

 

[stevedave23]

I think I am the last person on earth that doesn't want a college football playoff.

College football is about playing your rival on a fall afternoon or evening in a stadium on campus. It's about tailgating, parades, the band, the student section and 100 year traditions. College football is not pro football (thank God). Let's keep it that way.

 

[McGopherFan]

No

You are not.

The original poster apparently does not, and I do not.

College football is great just the way it is, and the tweaking that can be done makes it better.

If a playoff comes in talking about what was will never fill the void of talking about what could or should be.

This discussion is part of the fun, but a final answer of a playoff . . . I just don't think it is necessary.

I think I am the last person on earth that doesn't want a college football playoff.

College football is about playing your rival on a fall afternoon or evening in a stadium on campus. It's about tailgating, parades, the band, the student section and 100 year traditions. College football is not pro football (thank God). Let's keep it that way.

 

[grunkiejr]

I actually think that coaches usually know more about who's the best than the AP because they scout each other and talk to fellow coaches. They have inside info.

That is true within their own conference. However, can Bob Stoops really tell you whether Utah or Penn State is better? He has no direct knowledge of either and unless he came home after a playing a home game and watched a game like PSU/OSU on tv he probably hasn't seen either team play. I also doubt that he is talking to a lot of coaches about Penn State considering they have little to no bearing on his team.

Not to mention that coaches have an inherent conflict of interest because ranking the teams in their conference (or their own team) higher improves the perception of the conference, improves BCS standings, and has the chance of increasing their own pay over time.

Besides, a lot of coaches have the graduate assistants fill out the poll because they don't want to spend the time doing it.

 

[tjgopher]

I actually think that coaches usually know more about who's the best than the AP because they scout each other and talk to fellow coaches. They have inside info.

Coaches live in their own little world. Most of them are so focused on their own squad and preparation for their own game that they actually know very little about teams from across the country. In fact, many of these coaches simply have someone from the school's sports information staff fill out the ballot each week and send it in.

 

[RodentRampage]

I think I am the last person on earth that doesn't want a college football playoff.

College football is about playing your rival on a fall afternoon or evening in a stadium on campus. It's about tailgating, parades, the band, the student section and 100 year traditions. College football is not pro football (thank God). Let's keep it that way.

A playoff doesn't threaten rivalry games. It doesn't threaten tailgaiting. It doesn't threaten the band or the student section. The way we pick a champion is not a 100 year old tradition. We didn't have the AP poll until the 1930's. Until the early 60's, the champion was picked before the bowl games, as the bowl games were considered glorified exhibition games. It then took a couple decades to match #1 and #2 in a championship game.

We already have a playoff, it is just a two-team playoff. We might expand that to a 4-team or an 8-team playoff. But regardless, we'll still be playing our rivals. I'm not a fan of a conference championship game. I miss tie games. But I don't see a tournament as a threat to anything.

 

[stevedave23]

A playoff doesn't threaten rivalry games. It doesn't threaten tailgaiting. It doesn't threaten the band or the student section. The way we pick a champion is not a 100 year old tradition. We didn't have the AP poll until the 1930's. Until the early 60's, the champion was picked before the bowl games, as the bowl games were considered glorified exhibition games. It then took a couple decades to match #1 and #2 in a championship game.

We already have a playoff, it is just a two-team playoff. We might expand that to a 4-team or an 8-team playoff. But regardless, we'll still be playing our rivals. I'm not a fan of a conference championship game. I miss tie games. But I don't see a tournament as a threat to anything.

Having a playoff system may lessen the importance of a rivalry game if both those teams have a possibility of making the playoffs because then it's, "oh well, we'll get 'em in the playoffs." But overall I agree with you, rivalries will be rivalries regardless of records or standings.

However, I would argue that a playoff system could affect tailgating, the student section, etc. Why? Because all of the focus shifts to the playoffs. Making the playoffs, not making the playoffs, peaking in the playoffs, and so on. People may not watch or attend games at the end of the season because their teams has, "no chance to make the playoffs." A playoff system dilutes the importance of the regular season, plain and simple.

 

[Schnoodler]

It's rediculous that we don't have a playoff system in place. There is no good argument except for the bowls losing revenue.

They could have as many teams as they want as long as they utilize a play in system if they go over 16 teams. I really don't care how many teams. four is more than two so let's start there.

 

[RodentRampage]

What we have currently is a two-team, 1 game playoff. So far, it doesn't seem to hurt attendance just because a team is removed from contention for the national championship game, so I don't think that a 4 or 8 team playoff would reduce attendance.

 

[UST82Gopher]

Lots of issues with playoffs

It's rediculous that we don't have a playoff system in place. There is no good argument except for the bowls losing revenue.

They could have as many teams as they want as long as they utilize a play in system if they go over 16 teams. I really don't care how many teams. four is more than two so let's start there.

Actually, the reason why I started this thread is the very good reason that the NCAA sounds off on all the time - they still want to maintain some academic integrity in the football schedule.

Right now, team start camp in early August, start playing ~ Labor Day and, if you are lucky, play through the 1st Saturday in December in a conference championship. That is about a 15 week season with usually at least 1 week off (for bye). Even with this schedule, the season barely ends before most schools quarter/semester exams in early/mid December.

Recognizing that football is a game that requires recovery, even your basic 8 team playoff would add 3 weeks to the season. Where is that going to come from? Shorten the existing season? Ain't going to happen. Most schools need the revenue from their football programs to fund the rest of their athletic dept. They are not going to go from 12 games to 10 to accommodate a playoff schedule. Extend the season through finals? Not likely either as it would be a PR night mare for the college Presidents. Eliminate the bowls? Not going to happen either - too much money involved. (and even more importantly, too much TV programing for the Holiday period when many people are watching TV) Play into mid January? At least this is possible but at the risk of making college football a 6 month sport.

So, I don't see any playoff in the near future. Which is why I was thinking a basketball style bracket buster might be the best short term way of getting the best teams into the BCS championship game. If played on the championship weekend, by non qualifying teams, you at least make everyone earn their BCS spot by beating a strong team at season's end.

 

[Schnoodler]

Actually, the reason why I started this thread is the very good reason that the NCAA sounds off on all the time - they still want to maintain some academic integrity in the football schedule.

Right now, team start camp in early August, start playing ~ Labor Day and, if you are lucky, play through the 1st Saturday in December in a conference championship. That is about a 15 week season with usually at least 1 week off (for bye). Even with this schedule, the season barely ends before most schools quarter/semester exams in early/mid December.

Recognizing that football is a game that requires recovery, even your basic 8 team playoff would add 3 weeks to the season. Where is that going to come from? Shorten the existing season? Ain't going to happen. Most schools need the revenue from their football programs to fund the rest of their athletic dept. They are not going to go from 12 games to 10 to accommodate a playoff schedule. Extend the season through finals? Not likely either as it would be a PR night mare for the college Presidents. Eliminate the bowls? Not going to happen either - too much money involved. (and even more importantly, too much TV programing for the Holiday period when many people are watching TV) Play into mid January? At least this is possible but at the risk of making college football a 6 month sport.

So, I don't see any playoff in the near future. Which is why I was thinking a basketball style bracket buster might be the best short term way of getting the best teams into the BCS championship game. If played on the championship weekend, by non qualifying teams, you at least make everyone earn their BCS spot by beating a strong team at season's end.

That's all bogus though. We've been done for two weeks. we could be moving into the second weeks of playoffs already. And then how many teams go on to bowl games? How long does that extend their season?? Plus we're only talking about the advancing teams and not every team in the NCAA. There is literally no good reason except cash for the bowls.

 

[UST82Gopher]

That's all bogus though. We've been done for two weeks. we could be moving into the second weeks of playoffs already. And then how many teams go on to bowl games? How long does that extend their season?? Plus we're only talking about the advancing teams and not every team in the NCAA. There is literally no good reason except cash for the bowls.

As a Gopher fan it pains me to say this but the reason we have been done for two weeks is that we were not a strong enough team to move on to a conference championship (I know - assuming the BT had one)

Florida, Alabama, Oklahoma, Ball State and USC all play this weekend - Dec. 5/6. Should we start the playoffs with out them? Or do we need to at least let them finish their season (USC's game is a regular season game).

The bowls extend the season AFTER the schools are done with finals. You might recall that one of Mason's gripes when the U changed to semesters was that it became difficult to get all 15 practices in due to finals. (Of course, if he would have gotten us to a Jan. 1 Bowl, that would not have been a problem )

So let me follow up on your bogus comment. You acknowledge the cash for the bowls, but do you not recognize the cash for the schools? Schools get paid to go after all. And cash for the networks?

Seasoning lengthening is bogus? Insuring that student athletes can study for finals is bogus? (Ever notice that both the hockey and basketball Gophers play no games during finals?) Not sure how many would agree with that.

So, what is your solution? Please be specific if you can.

 

[Schnoodler]

As a Gopher fan it pains me to say this but the reason we have been done for two weeks is that we were not a strong enough team to move on to a conference championship (I know - assuming the BT had one)

Florida, Alabama, Oklahoma, Ball State and USC all play this weekend - Dec. 5/6. Should we start the playoffs with out them? Or do we need to at least let them finish their season (USC's game is a regular season game).

The bowls extend the season AFTER the schools are done with finals. You might recall that one of Mason's gripes when the U changed to semesters was that it became difficult to get all 15 practices in due to finals. (Of course, if he would have gotten us to a Jan. 1 Bowl, that would not have been a problem )

So let me follow up on your bogus comment. You acknowledge the cash for the bowls, but do you not recognize the cash for the schools? Schools get paid to go after all. And cash for the networks?

Seasoning lengthening is bogus? Insuring that student athletes can study for finals is bogus? (Ever notice that both the hockey and basketball Gophers play no games during finals?) Not sure how many would agree with that.

So, what is your solution? Please be specific if you can.

the other divisions can handle it. Hell even the highschools can handle it. Cash for schools is irrelevent since it will be replaced with probably even bigger payouts. There are more schools committed to a longer season now than there would be for a playoff series. Even if you took two weeks off for schools to get in their finals there is plenty of time. You could run a 64 team tourney in the amount of time that is currently allocated. there is more than enough time.

There is no disdvantage to the students over the current system.

Here's a quote from one article that says it pretty clearly:

"While the former Division I-AA plays all four rounds in four weeks and stages the title game before Christmas, football’s top division might be better served playing the first one or two rounds in December, breaking for final exams and staging the semifinals just after Christmas and the title game in early January.

Different schools have different academic schedules – two guys sent me a chart last year that showed there was no weekend when someone wasn’t having exams. However, college athletics has never allowed academics to stand in its way before. In this day of 12-team super leagues and midweek television games, this isn’t an excuse.

Something can be worked out.

One of the apologists’ greatest whines is that a playoff would make the season too long. It’s conceivable that some teams would play 17 games. Oh the horror! Mike Tranghese, commissioner of the Big East, once claimed, with a straight face, that so many players would be injured a team might not complete the playoff.



Really? The kids at the old Division I-AA, Division II and III must just be tougher, even though they often sport smaller rosters than major college football. In plenty of states high school teams that win the state title play between 16 and 18 games and the best players often compete on both offense and defense. The NFL does it and more with just 53-man rosters."
--Dan Wetzel Yahoo Sports

 

[McGopherFan]

Current system or tweek thereof to stay

That's all bogus though. We've been done for two weeks. we could be moving into the second weeks of playoffs already. And then how many teams go on to bowl games? How long does that extend their season?? Plus we're only talking about the advancing teams and not every team in the NCAA. There is literally no good reason except cash for the bowls.

Bowl by rule expand the season by 15 days of practice, with an additional 4 or fewer days for travel, events and game.

Easier to avoid finals conflicts. We may have been done two weeks, but the non-academic conferences played and have championship games remaining.

To make it fair the first round goes to top seeds. Can you imagine the fight an ACC or SEC school would put on to avoid having to play next week at the Bank? Or even Penn State or Columbus. There is no way the Northern teams should bow to only southern games, the way the bowls are configured now.

Until that hurdle is cleared there won't be more than a four team playoff with Jan 1 and Jan 2 bowls and the National Championship Game to follow.

 

[Schnoodler]

four's fine, just start the process. When that goes well I'm sure they'll figure out how to add one more game expanding to eight, and so on. I like the play-in game idea (bye's for top seeds) for football, it really limits the likely number of games any one team will probably have to play while giving more teams a shot.

They could use the play-in as a feature of conference champs if they really wanted to get more inclusive and creative.

 

[Zeppelin Gopher]

I don't want a playoff either. College Football has the best and most meaningful regular season in all of sports. The day that Florida rests its starters against FSU in preparation of a 1st round tournament game is the day I cry. I'm willing to go to an unseeded plus one, but thats it. There are a ton of College Football purists who agree with me, they just aren't as focal.

 

[RodentRampage]

I don't want a playoff either. College Football has the best and most meaningful regular season in all of sports. The day that Florida rests its starters against FSU in preparation of a 1st round tournament game is the day I cry. I'm willing to go to an unseeded plus one, but thats it. There are a ton of College Football purists who agree with me, they just aren't as focal.

Perhaps there are a great amount of purists who oppose a playoff, and perhaps they just for some inexplicable reason are quiet about it, appeals to a "silent majority" are questionable, as usually that majority is silent because it does not exist.

I have a really hard time imagining that schools are going to mail in games against their rivals, that's a fantasy. Even if coaches were inclined to mail in games against rivals (at the risk of being torn limb from limb by fans), that would be foolish. It would place a teams seeding at severe risk.

 

[Maximus]

I don't want a playoff either. College Football has the best and most meaningful regular season in all of sports. The day that Florida rests its starters against FSU in preparation of a 1st round tournament game is the day I cry. I'm willing to go to an unseeded plus one, but thats it. There are a ton of College Football purists who agree with me, they just aren't as focal.

You mean "meaningful" as in how Texas beating Oklahoma has now been deemed irrelevant?

College Football purists = "we want computers to decide our champion" & "we want the coaches to vote strictly on what's good for their team and/or conference"

Where do you think Mack Brown put the Sooners on his ballot? Top 15? Top 25? Now that's pure.

Maybe Florida losing to Florida State means a quarterfinal game in Gainesville has now been moved to a quarterfinal game in Boise (or TCF Bank Stadium)?

 

[50PoundHead]

I think you take the coaches from the top 8 teams by computer and have the coaches play a tournament on Mattel Talking Football to determine the seeds for the NCAA championship.

Sure it sounds odd, but then, so is the system they are using now.

 

[Schnoodler]

Use the See and say. The coaches just pick an animal and they take turns pulling the string.

 

[GopherGold24]

50 Pound Head, thats not a bad idea. My two proposals would be we either:
1) Put all 8 teams in a bracket and play it out on Electric Football
or
2) Play it out on Bill Walsh's Football for Sega. By the way, Mike Rozier rolled on that game. As did Darrian Hagan.