Say what you want about the bowls, but...

Donate To GopherHole

I think a playoff should have six teams. The top six in the BCS no matter the conference. This would give a bye to the top two teams and allow it to use bowls as the games. There should be a reward to the top two to not have to win three games to win a NC.

A playoff system only works if the bowl system is still in place for all teams that win 6+ games.
 

FreakyDeke said:
Do you really want to live in a world where a 4 loss UConn team is the National Champion? That's what people mean by a playoff system diminishing the regular season.
Click to expand...

Is that your argument? UConn would have no chance to win the playoff. That isn't the worse case scenario either, the worst case scenario is an undefeated TCU or Auburn a few years back not getting a chance to play either #1 or #2 ranked team. If UConn somehow won it would further prove the fraudulence of the ranking/ bowl system that crowns teams on paper and not on the field.
 

goldengophers said:
Is that your argument? UConn would have no chance to win the playoff. That isn't the worse case scenario either, the worst case scenario is an undefeated TCU or Auburn a few years back not getting a chance to play either #1 or #2 ranked team. If UConn somehow won it would further prove the fraudulence of the ranking/ bowl system that crowns teams on paper and not on the field.
Click to expand...

How would UConn have no chance to win the playoff?

I agree that it sucks for an undefeated team to not get a shot at the title if there are more than 2, I was just pointing out that even though a playoff would have an undisputed champion, it might not be the "best" team that year.
 

highwayman said:
You gotta start the second week of December at earliest. Most seasons end Thanksgiving, but lots go on for a week more. You have to do two weeks in between games to make travel plans--if you want 20,000 fans to travel, one week is not enough time. This ain't basketball with set regionals in set cities a year ahead of time. It's easy to get fans into Minneapolis or Dallas on short notice, but tough to get that many into Tuscaloosa or State College.

Use 4 Bowl games for the Quarters (Rose, Cotton, Capital One, Sugar), Two for the Semis (Fiesta, Orange) and One for the Title (Rose-Sugar-Fiesta-Orange site). Rotate Quarters/Semis annually as you see fit. Championship mid-January.
Click to expand...

I know there are a lot of barriers to a 16 team tournament. Major changes would be required. That being said, these 'reasons' are not valid.

1. Regular seasons would have to end at or prior to Thanksgiving.
2. The regular season was recently moved to 12 games. It would probably have to be dropped to 11 games (maybe not).
3. Since the first round games would be at the home of the higher seed, the comment about 'travel time' is not valid.

One other point: I have seen several references to a playoff being some sort of NFL copy. I have not seen it described as a copy of the ALREADY EXISTING playoffs in the other NCAA divisions of football.
 


highwayman said:
Use 4 Bowl games for the Quarters (Rose, Cotton, Capital One, Sugar), Two for the Semis (Fiesta, Orange) and One for the Title (Rose-Sugar-Fiesta-Orange site). Rotate Quarters/Semis annually as you see fit. Championship mid-January.
Click to expand...

This will fail. You would be asking fans to travel three weeks in a row all over the country. Fans would have to role the dice on whether their team would win a quarter and travel to semi-final. You would be counting on a lot of neutral fans/locals buying tickets. I think only the championship game should be at a Bowl Site.

Playoff games need to be regional or at home of higher seed. Possibly at the nearest indoor venue to higher seed.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
This will fail. You would be asking fans to travel three weeks in a row all over the country. Fans would have to role the dice on whether their team would win a quarter and travel to semi-final. You would be counting on a lot of neutral fans/locals buying tickets. I think only the championship game should be at a Bowl Site.

Playoff games need to be regional or at home of higher seed. Possibly at the nearest indoor venue to higher seed.
Click to expand...



...with heating coils:D
 

I don't really mind the bowl games themselves. However I can not stand so many things about what the whole bowl system has become.

The bowl selection system is still less about how good the teams are and more about how well the fans will trvel.

New Year's Day used to be about sitting on your ass and watching quality football. But now it's about mediocre football. I get to watch two teams (Northwestern and Texas Tech) who were both sub-.500 in their conference. If I don't like that I can watch Penn State (4-4) vs. Florida (4-4) or Mississippi State (4-4) vs. Michigan (3-5). Where is the quality here?

For about 2 hours there will be 4 Big Ten games on at the same time on New Year's Day. Thanks NCAA. If you're going to insist on having 40 bowl games, can you at least spread out the teams viewers will likely be interested in watching?

One of the best bowl games this year, MSU vs. Alabama, is on at the same time as 3 other games. Meanwhile because of the BCS the whole country gets to watch Oklahoma beat the snot out of a team that has been D1-a for about 10 years as the Prime Time game.

The Rose Bowl is Big Ten vs. a WTF conference and it's not even on ABC anymore.

But all this aside, I least get to watch a Kentucky (2-6 in SEC) play on January 8th so I guess I can't complain.

</rant>
 




I was just looking through the bowl schedule and found it interesting that Nebraska and Washington play for the second time this year, this has to be a rare occurrence.
I also didn't realize that none of the BCS games would be on ABC, I thought at least the national championship would be ESPN on ABC. The Bachelor must be pulling huge ratings these days...
 

The top 8 teams in the BCS this year have lost a combined 7 games. So tell me how a playoff which utilizes BCS rankings would diminish the regular season? You lose more than 1 game, you have a slim to none chance of getting in.

Furthermore, an argument that I have yet to see (sorry if I missed it) is that the players have a right to play for a legitimate national championship.
 

hailtothegophers said:
The top 8 teams in the BCS this year have lost a combined 7 games. So tell me how a playoff which utilizes BCS rankings would diminish the regular season? You lose more than 1 game, you have a slim to none chance of getting in.

Furthermore, an argument that I have yet to see (sorry if I missed it) is that the players have a right to play for a legitimate national championship.
Click to expand...

Because 4 of those 7 loses belong to one team. I know UConn is an exception, not the rule, but the fact that you can lose 4 games, but win your conference, and then win the national championship kinda sucks.

*edit* Sorry, I assumed you included UConn in that stat. They are in the BCS, but not in the top 8. They would still be in the playoff, though, so the point is still valid.
 

UCONN isn't in the top 8 in the BCS this year.
 



Schnauzer said:
I know there are a lot of barriers to a 16 team tournament. Major changes would be required. That being said, these 'reasons' are not valid.

1. Regular seasons would have to end at or prior to Thanksgiving.
2. The regular season was recently moved to 12 games. It would probably have to be dropped to 11 games (maybe not).
3. Since the first round games would be at the home of the higher seed, the comment about 'travel time' is not valid.

One other point: I have seen several references to a playoff being some sort of NFL copy. I have not seen it described as a copy of the ALREADY EXISTING playoffs in the other NCAA divisions of football.
Click to expand...

I don't think you'd need 16 teams. If you use the eight team scenario, the conference championships of the big conferences are de facto playoff games.

You could have a rule that says that any conference champion finishing in the top eight of the ranking or any conference champion that defeated a team ranked in the top eight of the rankings gets an automatic bid. If more than eight, they are selected in order of final ranking.

This would exclude the MAC teams but would let in a Minnesota ranked fifteenth when they upset #2 Ohio State in the Big Ten championship. It would also make at large bids very hard to come by and would discourage the independents.
 


I am all for the play-offs, with one rule; you have to win your conference. Period.

Make it six teams or eight, don't care. But then 6 or 8 conferences would be represented. This pushes the remaining BCS conferences that don't have a conference championship to add one or let their system of tie-breaks determine their representative.

On top of this, I wouldn't guarantee any conference a spot. If the WAC (my favorite of all time) is better than the ACC or Big East, they get in. BCS rankings determine the top 6/8 conference champions (not based on conference ratings, but individual team). If we need to give our current big-6 conferences a free in, give them six spots and leave two for the best 2 at-large conferences.

This way, conference regular season is still important and non-conference is important for BCS ratings to ensure you go.

As for the bowls not mattering - I don't understand this. If the #20 team is playing the #23 team now, how is it different if the top 8 teams are in a play-off or just in 4 bowl games. Seems the same to me. I tune in because I love the games.

All in all, I like the idea of feeling that the best team was named champion. I think you either need to go to a play-off or stop calling the winner of #1 v #2 the "National Champion" because we often have multiple undefeated teams or 1-loss teams and you just don't know.
 

mom8pop said:
I am all for the play-offs, with one rule; you have to win your conference. Period.

Make it six teams or eight, don't care. But then 6 or 8 conferences would be represented. This pushes the remaining BCS conferences that don't have a conference championship to add one or let their system of tie-breaks determine their representative.

On top of this, I wouldn't guarantee any conference a spot. If the WAC (my favorite of all time) is better than the ACC or Big East, they get in. BCS rankings determine the top 6/8 conference champions (not based on conference ratings, but individual team). If we need to give our current big-6 conferences a free in, give them six spots and leave two for the best 2 at-large conferences.

This way, conference regular season is still important and non-conference is important for BCS ratings to ensure you go.

As for the bowls not mattering - I don't understand this. If the #20 team is playing the #23 team now, how is it different if the top 8 teams are in a play-off or just in 4 bowl games. Seems the same to me. I tune in because I love the games.

All in all, I like the idea of feeling that the best team was named champion. I think you either need to go to a play-off or stop calling the winner of #1 v #2 the "National Champion" because we often have multiple undefeated teams or 1-loss teams and you just don't know.
Click to expand...

I agree with your point on the conference champion.

I think most of us that want a scenario where January 1 is the traditional bowls reset as the quarterfinals of a tournament or who prefer a plus one have concluded that if an alternate - separate from the bowls - tournament was started, that the bowls would go the way of the NIT. The NIT was once the cats meow in the early part of the 20th century, now it is nothing more than a score or two on the ESPN crawl.

That is why I (and other traditionalists) favor:

1) Old Bowl System
2) BCS
3) NYD Bowls as quarterfinals
4) New tournament, bowls disappear or become like NIT
 

When you say Old Bowl system, I presume you mean the system before the BCS, not the ancient system when the national championship was given out before the bowls?
 

RodentRampage said:
When you say Old Bowl system, I presume you mean the system before the BCS, not the ancient system when the national championship was given out before the bowls?
Click to expand...

Yes, pre-BCS, in the fashion of the 70's - 90's.
 

FreakyDeke said:
Because 4 of those 7 loses belong to one team. I know UConn is an exception, not the rule, but the fact that you can lose 4 games, but win your conference, and then win the national championship kinda sucks.

*edit* Sorry, I assumed you included UConn in that stat. They are in the BCS, but not in the top 8. They would still be in the playoff, though, so the point is still valid.
Click to expand...

Not everyone thinks conference champions should get an automatic bid into the playoffs. If it were an 8 team playoffs, it should be the top 8 ranked teams. If you win one of the big 5 conferences, there's a very good chance you're in the top 8.

Or another idea is that all BCS conference champions get an automatic spot into the playoffs but must be ranked in the top 12, 15 or some other number. This would prevent a team like UConn from getting into the playoffs.
 

Say what you will about the bowls, but I'm watching an NFL game where a team might finish the year 7-9 and win their division, and have a chance (albeit a small one) at reaching the Super Bowl. Horrid product. The exact opposite of what I like about late season college football.
 

Unregistered User said:
Say what you will about the bowls, but I'm watching an NFL game where a team might finish the year 7-9 and win their division, and have a chance (albeit a small one) at reaching the Super Bowl. Horrid product. The exact opposite of what I like about late season college football.
Click to expand...

It's the first time in the history of the NFL that a sub-.500 team made the playoffs. It's not like it happens every year. Just like UConn is an anomoly, so is Seattle.

I hate the bowl system. It's basically pointless to me the fan. It might have meaning to others but to me, they're just exhibition games with some nostalgia. I enjoy watching Gopher Football and when they're in a bowl game and I hope they win but seriously, when they lost to TT, UVa, Kansas, etc in recent years, I reaction was "oh well."

A playoff gives meaning to the whole process. Name another NCAA sport on any level where an undefeated team (TCU this year) has no chance at winning the NC? There are none. It's just stupid. The fact that a NC is partially determined on paper is just plain wrong. We don't know how Oregon or Auburn would do against TCU's defense. They'd be the underdog but it certainly wouldn't be the biggest upset in CF history.

People point to Boise St upsetting Oklahoma a couple of years ago in a BCS bowl as a reason why bowls are so great. I use it as an example of what's so wrong. That game had no meaning to me. It was a great finish to a game but both team's season ended that night and neither was holding up a NC trophy. It's seriously one of the few bowl games not involving the Gophers that I can even recall who won (and I have a pretty darn good memory). I tend to be able to recall memorable events. I'm not the biggest NFL honk but I can recall numerous playoff games over the years because of what was at stake.

Go and enjoy your GoDaddy.com bowl game. I'll take something that has an end goal to the process which isn't determined by perception, like every single other sport, regardless if its pro or college.
 

Unregistered User said:
Say what you will about the bowls, but I'm watching an NFL game where a team might finish the year 7-9 and win their division, and have a chance (albeit a small one) at reaching the Super Bowl. Horrid product. The exact opposite of what I like about late season college football.
Click to expand...

Equally bad is a team going undefeated and not getting a chance at the championship. Or if three teams have one loss, but all win their conference championship, and one team is left out.

Again, this would never happen in college football even with the playoffs. It's not like anyone is talking about 32 teams making the playoffs in college football. If you had an 8-team playoff, most teams would have two or less losses.
 

FreakyDeke said:
A 16-team playoff will not happen. Teams that go to the NC game will have played 17 games.

Do you really want to live in a world where a 4 loss UConn team is the National Champion? That's what people mean by a playoff system diminishing the regular season.
Click to expand...

If UCONN beat four quality teams in a playoff system, then yes, they would deserve to be National Champions.
 

I enjoy most of the bowls. I do not watch some because I really don't care about Southern Miss, FIU, Toledo, etc, but I am a football fan and it is better than watching a lame sitcom on TV.

For those who do not support the playoff system, this is my question: Does D1 FBS have it correct and every other sport from Little Leauge to the Olympics have it wrong? I think it is crazy that we have to debate who the National Champion is. Who is to say TCU couldn't beat Auburn or Oregon? I don't know if they can, but I would love to see a game between the two winners. The only way we will ever get a true National Champion is through a playoff system. D1 FCS has a great playoff system and there playoffs are done before New Years.

Yes, I know that a playoff system would kill some wonderful traditions. We could always go back to the bowl system if the playoffs were attempted and failed. It is not like if we go to a playoff system it is going to be like that forever. It would be fun to see a 5 year trial. Maybe it would fail, maybe it would flourish.
 

MNfootballfan said:
I enjoy most of the bowls. I do not watch some because I really don't care about Southern Miss, FIU, Toledo, etc, but I am a football fan and it is better than watching a lame sitcom on TV.

For those who do not support the playoff system, this is my question: Does D1 FBS have it correct and every other sport from Little Leauge to the Olympics have it wrong? I think it is crazy that we have to debate who the National Champion is. Who is to say TCU couldn't beat Auburn or Oregon? I don't know if they can, but I would love to see a game between the two winners. The only way we will ever get a true National Champion is through a playoff system. D1 FCS has a great playoff system and there playoffs are done before New Years.

Yes, I know that a playoff system would kill some wonderful traditions. We could always go back to the bowl system if the playoffs were attempted and failed. It is not like if we go to a playoff system it is going to be like that forever. It would be fun to see a 5 year trial. Maybe it would fail, maybe it would flourish.
Click to expand...

And I'll just add that a playoff system wouldn't change a whole lot with the bowls. There would still be 30-something (or whatever it is) bowls like there is now. You could use several of the current BCS bowl games for the 2nd round of the playoffs.

Also, as it is now, some of the traditions have been lost already. The Rose Bowl doesn't always have the Big Ten vs. PAC-10. I would love for the Gophers to play in the Rose Bowl someday, but I also think having a true champion is just as important.
 

play offs would be fine if they use lower bowls for the games and keep the traditional big bowls back to their traditional rivalries
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom