| College Football Playoffs Anyone?WRDW Blog Listing | |||||
|
Recent Blog Topics
|
||||
Save
Email
Print
|
Another regular season is over in college football (excluding Army-Navy on News 12 this Saturday at 2:30pm) and again, another year where the BCS proves it is simply not right for college football. Is the BCS an improvement from the previous system? Absolutely. Without it, who knows what bowl games the undefeated teams end up in. But is the BCS the right system? Absolutely not. In what other sport can a team go undefeated and not get a chance to play for the national championship? If you're looking for the answer to that question, the answer in none. Every other sport has some sort of playoff system, allowing teams to determine it on the field, court or ice. But not college football - or should I say, Football Bowl Subdivision. You see, in the Football Championship Subdivision, they have a playoff. 16 teams, 4 weeks, 1 champion. But the FBS has refused year after year to not adopt a playoff system. Every year, they have an excuse. Whether it be travel costs or academic worries, none of them are enough for me (and many others) to change my mind. If the FCS can do it, so can the FBS, where the majority of fans and money are. Of course, there are all kinds of playoff proposals out there. A plus-one version involving 4 teams. I've read about 12 or 16-team versions, that include bye weeks and such. My proposal is a bit more simple and wouldn't involve too much change to the current system. It involves just 8 teams, keeps intact the bowl system AND keeps the current BCS formula to determine the teams. Just like the current system, the power conferences receive an automatic bid. That leaves two at-large spots, which would be given to the two teams who are ranked highest in the BCS standings and did not win their conference unless there are undefeated teams who are not from the power conferences. So this year, this is how my system would pan out. #1 Seed: Alabama (13-0) - SEC Champion Using my system, that would leave out Florida (#5 in the BCS). That's because TCU and Boise State both finished undefeated. For the sake of argument, let's just say there were three or more non-power conference team that finished undefeated. My tiebreaker would simply be to use the BCS formula to determine the 2. As far as the playoffs, they begin the week after Championship Week. When it comes to the locations, the Capital One Bowl (Orlando) and Cotton Bowl (Dallas) would always be first round locations. Meanwhile, the four BCS bowls now would rotate between first round, second round and title game. The location that holds the title game will host a first round game to give it ample time to get the field in shape. The other first round location will be at the site of the previous year's title game. The 4 sites would be predetermined before the season begins. So this year, it would be as follows: Sat. Dec. 19: Alabama vs. Georgia Tech (Capital One Bowl), Texas vs. Ohio State (Cotton Bowl), Cincinnati vs. Oregon (Orange Bowl), TCU vs. Boise State (Rose Bowl) That's it. What do you think? Too complicated? Too simple? Or perfect? |
| Post Your Comments |
|
|
| Read Comments |
|
Posted by: George Location: Augusta
As long as the major conference has to agree to a change in the bcs it will never happen. They are gauranteed a school from their conferece will get the bigger payout for them. If a playoff system is good for every other sport in college in all levels then division one should have one too. There are plenty of good teams that can fill the rest of the bowls or some of the bowls could be earlier playoff sites. Posted by: corey Location: flushing great Posted by: Dan Location: Athens Actually Todd, the Rose Bowl next year could feature a team outside the Big10 and Pac 10. If the winner of either of those conferences ends up in the national championship next year then the Rose Bowl will select an at large team and not the 2nd place team from the conference. Posted by: Todd Location: Macon This would give us Oregon v. Ohio State in the Rose Bowl, with the winner playing the winner of the Fiesta Bowl (Texas v. TCU). The winner of the Sugar Bowl (Alabama v. GA Tech) would play the winner of the Orange (Florida v. Cincy). These are, obviously, my best guesses as how these bowl matchups would play out. Is this system perfect? No. Boise State would have the right to be upset about how they would be shafted this year. But in my opinion, there is no way that we will ever be able to get a college football playoff approved by the current bowl power structure that doesn't directly incorporate the bowls and allow them to pick their "traditional" matchups. Posted by: Todd Location: Macon Would this work? Sure. But it's never going to happen. There's too much money behind the bowl structure as it currently stands. And the Rose Bowl is never going to agree to anything that doesn't give them a Big 10 v. Pac 10 matchup. My proposal, to appease the bowl system, is to use the bowls as they currently stand. Allow the bowls to pick when teams are in -- using guidelines that the BCS currently has in place. This would mean two less spots in the BCS, which would have eliminated Iowa and Boise. I would NOT impose a rule that would state that an undefeated team must get an at-large, because I feel it would encourage teams like Boise and TCU to dumb-down their schedule. (continued below) Posted by: Howard Location: Texas It would work. I mean, good grief, anythings better than what we have! There could be some fine tuning. For example: Selected teams come as champs from 2 division conferences. So Big 10, Pac 10, WAC, MWC would have to split. Army, Navy and ND would have to join a conference. That way championship Saturday would in effect be the 1st round of the playoffs. In fact, if you could get all the conferences aligned that way, why not just let all the conf. champs go? You don't win your conf., you take pot luck on the at large bids! Posted by: Jeff Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana I think it should be the top 10 teams in the BCS, and give the Top 2 a bye opening week..but dont take away from the non-BCS bowls like you have above with the (capital one, and cotton..etc.) Posted by: Steel Location: Texas It is perfect. It actually includes champions from the WAC and the MWC, which could be a formula for future years |
