Mark Vader Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 I have similar ideas as to my *ideal* playoff. Drop the regular season back to 11 games. The "big" conferences MUST have a conference championship game to qualify. All conference champs get a playoff spot, along with 5 wildcards. Wildcards are selected and teams are seeded based on a committee. Higher seeded teams host at least round 1, possibly the quarterfinals. Then money goes directly to the school, not some jackass "bowl executive" who does nothing all year and then cashes a fat paycheck. wildcards are decided mainly by record and strength of schedule. I'd take a 2-loss team with a high profile loss as opposed to a 1 loss team who beat up on 1-AA schools <cough> SEC <cough>. (minus alabama, the only SEC team who will play anyone) All other bowl eligible teams not in the playoffs can then be selected to the bowl of their choice. Whoah, hold on there buddy! The SEC is the premiere conference in college football, and teams like Louisiana State, Georgia, Auburn & Tennessee do not load their schedules with cupcakes. Although you could say that Florida & Mississippi are guilty of that. But Alabama is not the only SEC team that plays tough non-conference opponents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Whoah, hold on there buddy! The SEC is the premiere conference in college football, and teams like Louisiana State, Georgia, Auburn & Tennessee do not load their schedules with cupcakes. Although you could say that Florida & Mississippi are guilty of that. But Alabama is not the only SEC team that plays tough non-conference opponents. Ok, i'll give you some of those schools. I specifically mentioned the SEC by name, because of a team like florida that hasn't gone on the road outside of the southeast in about 20 years. I just hate the garbage schedules a lot of top teams have. Even FSU is starting to do it that way since Jimbo took over. While it was time for Bowden to move on, he was never afraid to play anyone. Jimbo is content with playing UF and 3 cupcakes and that's extremely frustrating. I want to eliminate that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Vader Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Ok, i'll give you some of those schools. I specifically mentioned the SEC by name, because of a team like florida that hasn't gone on the road outside of the southeast in about 20 years. I just hate the garbage schedules a lot of top teams have. Even FSU is starting to do it that way since Jimbo took over. While it was time for Bowden to move on, he was never afraid to play anyone. Jimbo is content with playing UF and 3 cupcakes and that's extremely frustrating. I want to eliminate that. I know what you mean. I'm a Michigan fan, and lately they have been scheduling more soft opponents than I would like to see. I'm glad that they signed a long contract to play Notre Dame, but I wish they didn't schedule so many MAC teams. Not that the MAC is a weak conference, I would just love to see some SEC or Big 12, or ACC teams on the schedule too. Now this year, they do play Alabama in the Cowboys Classic, and have Notre Dame & Air Force on the schedule. Which is a very respectable slate of opponents. Also with the Big 10 & Pac-12 conferences scheduling to face each other in the future, the outlook is bright for a good mix of games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 I have 2 big issues with this. First, who says that K-state wasn't "NC" material? You? Just because they aren't a traditional power? Any team that's in the top 8 in the nation deserves a shot at the title, to be determined on the field, not by some SEC-biased jackasses in a poll. K-state was playing some damn good football last season, and could have knocked off a top team. Going by the December BCS standings, the top 8 would have been LSU, 'bama, Ok St, Oregon, Stanford, Arkansas, Boise St, and K-state. All of those teams were playing great ball last year and its tough to argue that any of them didn't deserve a shot. Second, as for the "protect the sanctity of the regular season" argument, that's traditionally one of the most asinine arguements out there. If the regular season is so important, then why was 'bama in the title game? They showed they couldn't beat LSU, so why'd they get a rematch? What about 2003 when there were 3 unbeatens? So much for Auburn's great regular season, huh? The regular season in college ball is a joke, because it has only mattered WHEN you lose, not WHO you lose to. If the "regular season is like a playoff" then every team that isn't unbeaten should not have a shot at the title. Sorry but your wrong. The regular season is very important in Coillege Football. I don't want it to be modeled like the NFL where an 8-4 team could somehow be in the National Championship discussion. As far as Kansas State, any team that loses to a mediocre Oklahoma team 58-17 does not deserve to be in the NC discusion. There best win was against Baylor, although a decent team, there defense was one of the worst in the country. Their 2nd best win was against a below average Miami team by 4 points in Coral Gables. Other wins include a win against Easter Kentucky(which they won 10-7)& Kent State. You say they were playing great ball at the end of the season. Really? Their last 5 games the got pasted by Oklahoma, lost to Oklahoma St, won in ot against a horrible Texas A&M team 53-50, beat Texas by 4 & beat a bad Iowa St team by 7. & of course they lost Arkansas in the Cotton Bowl 29-16. So yes, I would be quite comfortable leaving a team like Kansas State out of the title mix. As far as Alabama, come on man you can't be serious. Anybody that watched this team play should realize they were one of the top 2 teams in the country. They lost to LSU because their FG kicker could not boot it thru the uprights. Even Urban Meyer before the game stated that Bama's defense was the best defense he has ever seen in all his years of College Football. The regular season is important in College Football, more important then any other sport imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 Even though I'm an SEC guy, I would have LOVED to see Okie St play for the title last season. I would have had no problem at all with Bama winning if they'd won it in a playoff system. But as you said, given the emphasis on the regular season, Bama shouldn't have had a 2nd shot at LSU, IMO. Who should of had a shot @ LSU in the NC? Oklahoma St who lost to Iowa State? Stanford who got pasted by Oregon, the same Oregon team that lost to LSU in the opener? Boise State who got beat by TCU on their home field? Or Alabama, who nearly lost to LSU in the regular season because their FG kicker could not make an FG attempts? The system got it right last year, & how could anybody argue with that after Alabama totally dominted LSU in the championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 The other thing I think they want to avoid putting a 8 or 16 team field in place is the ambarrassment of playing in empty stadiums when a USC as a one seed plays Arkansas State as a 16 seed in the Colliseum opening round. This just was not going to fly. I think there's a decent way to help that situation. In my dream scenario, there's eight, 16 team conferences with 8 team divisions. Division winners play in a conference championship, conf. champs go to an 8 team playoff. Those 8 teams play the traditionally named/sponsored Bowl games, and each year they are between the same two conferences. A perfect example is that the Rose Bowl would still be PAC 10 vs Big 10 (new names aside). Don't get me wrong, I don't think it negates every problem, but I think no matter the record of the two teams involved, that's a big game every year as it's the same conference knocking each other out of the playoffs every year. It builds a rivalry that would make those games more exciting, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 I think there's a decent way to help that situation. In my dream scenario, there's eight, 16 team conferences with 8 team divisions. Division winners play in a conference championship, conf. champs go to an 8 team playoff. Those 8 teams play the traditionally named/sponsored Bowl games, and each year they are between the same two conferences. A perfect example is that the Rose Bowl would still be PAC 10 vs Big 10 (new names aside). Don't get me wrong, I don't think it negates every problem, but I think no matter the record of the two teams involved, that's a big game every year as it's the same conference knocking each other out of the playoffs every year. It builds a rivalry that would make those games more exciting, IMO. That is not a bad idea but you said yourself. It is a dream. I mean this would mean that they would basically be blowing up the whole system & starting from scratch. Like I said, not a bad idea but it will never happen in our lifetimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Vader Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 Who should of had a shot @ LSU in the NC? Oklahoma St who lost to Iowa State? Stanford who got pasted by Oregon, the same Oregon team that lost to LSU in the opener? Boise State who got beat by TCU on their home field? Or Alabama, who nearly lost to LSU in the regular season because their FG kicker could not make an FG attempts? The system got it right last year, & how could anybody argue with that after Alabama totally dominted LSU in the championship. All good points. As unpopular a decision as it was by many, I think the BCS got it right last season. Alabama was the best team to face Louisiana State. What drove me crazy was everyone saying how boring the first game between the two teams was and that the National Championship game was going to be nothing but a bunch of field goal attempts. Are you kidding me!? That first game was amazing. The defense showed by both teams was outstanding, and it was an intense game. People have gotten so used to Big XII football, where you've got teams with 10th ranked offenses playing against 90th ranked defenses. That Kansas State-Oklahoma State game was a lot of fun to watch, but both of these teams would have been crushed by Alabama or Louisiana State. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted July 2, 2012 Share Posted July 2, 2012 All good points. As unpopular a decision as it was by many, I think the BCS got it right last season. Alabama was the best team to face Louisiana State. What drove me crazy was everyone saying how boring the first game between the two teams was and that the National Championship game was going to be nothing but a bunch of field goal attempts. Are you kidding me!? That first game was amazing. The defense showed by both teams was outstanding, and it was an intense game. People have gotten so used to Big XII football, where you've got teams with 10th ranked offenses playing against 90th ranked defenses. That Kansas State-Oklahoma State game was a lot of fun to watch, but both of these teams would have been crushed by Alabama or Louisiana State. Exactly. The fan in me wanted Boise State/Oklahoma State/Stanford playing in the National Championship if one of those teams ran the table just to look forward to the matchups. If one of those teams got in Les Miles would of been holding up the trophy down in the Super Dome Championship night last year. I guaranty if Miles was being honest, the last team he wanted to see was Alabama & Nick Saban across the sidelines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts