So... after months of playing games, who is the champion of the 2008 College Football Season ?Florida won the BCS game, but they lost to Mississippi. Utah went undefeated, but they don't play in the right conference. USC looked like they would could beat anyone, but they lost to Oregon State. Mack Brown says Texas is the best team. I could go on and on... But quite frankly I am sick of the circular conversation.
I want to hear what you think. Let's start with this:
(You can see the number of total votes if you hit the "comments" link in the poll)
During the BCS game on Thursday Night T9 and I were texting (mostly about how Thom Brennaman makes me want to become a cricket fan) about how we should do a "playoff post" -- but neither of us got to it yesterday. And honestly, I think that neither of us wanted to jump into the details of how a playoff should be structured.This I believe:
1) The current system stinks
2) Division I College football needs a playoff system
3) The current bowl system should be included in the structure of the playoff system
4) The structure needs to account for teams outside the "big conferences" when warranted.
Everything else are details that can be decided and/or modified.
In the comments of my Tebow wallpaper post our friend Shorty the Beachcomber took the leap and typed his ideas on a playoff system. I don't agree with some of his details (going to a playoff game in Michigan Stadium in January is a logistical nightmare to me) -- but I appreciate his effort and felt it was as good of a starting point as any.
 Shorty's Playoff: We must keep bowl traditions, the importance of the bowl season, and have a playoff lead to the crowning of a real, undisputed National Champ. So here it is.The bowls are played with traditional alignments (Pac-10, Big Ten in the Rose Bowl etc). We must also take into consideration that the bowls may and should take a couple of days after the New Year so the Orange, Fiesta, and or Sugar can have primetime slots all to themselves. After the bowls are over there is a final poll and the top eight from that poll are then advanced into the playoff. 1 hosts 8, 4 hosts 5 etc. Two Saturdays after the last bowl game the playoff begins (so as to negate a serious advantage for New Year's Day or prior bowl winners who end up in the top 8 as they would have a significant rest advantage... no short week should ever lead a Sugar, Fiesta, or Orange Bowl winner into the playoffs) and continues for the next three Saturdays. That would place the title game by itself on the bye weekend before the Super Bowl at the end of January(which may become the Pro Bowl weekend) so that it does not compete with the NFL playoffs. The teams play a single elimination just like the Elite 8 in March with the top ranked team hosting in the quarter and semifinal rounds to award those with a "better" regular season/bowl performance. The National Championship will be at a neutral site and have all the built up festivities of a current title game, but this time the winner would be the undisputed champ (barring interference by refs). You keep the traditional alignments and rivalries in bowl games, and have them mean something more than before as a win or loss could be the difference between staying at home or going to the playoffs. |
Discuss.
Posts
Visitors
10 comments:
Subwaydomer.blogspot.com has the Youtube video of the Michigan fan who sold his allegiance on ebay. The final team is as I suspected... one that will suffer much more mediocrity and blowout defeats than we ever will. Puzzling as that was the very reason he sold his allegiance and yet the outcome was indeed predictable.
i know i'm very much in the minority, but who really cares?
did anyone really lose any sleep over USC maybe being left out?
we've had a century of DI football w/out a playoff. bowls are great. why the sudden fetish w/ a "real" #1?
it was only 25 years ago that no one really cared. BYU was #1 in the polls, UW #2, and OU #3 at the end of the regular season. because of the PAC tiebreakers, the Dawgs were free from the Rose Bowl and could be an at large bid anywhere. the Holiday Bowl offered a match up w/ #1 BYU (and a "clear" MNC) but UW passed, took the bigger money AND greater of the Orange Bowl, and played for #2.
and nobody thought it was a bad decision. i was there. no one thought that 6-5 Michigan playing BYU in the Holiday was some sort of national tragedy requiring the restructuring of college football. certainly not the folks in Seattle that passed on the Holiday Bowl. being #1 was "nice", but not the end of the world.
i have to ask the same questions about this now. we have a #1. FLA is as good as pick as any- how is USC "getting their shot" really going to make the world better? and at what price?
now, 60+ teams go bowling. it's fun for them & fans. let's not kid ourselves that much, if any of the existing structure would long survive the adoption of a 8 or 16 team (or any sort of plus one, for that matter) format. the other 45 teams would in time, end up staying home as the bowls died (which they are already doing).
further, it wouldn't be the same for the teams that did not make it. going to pasadena for the "semis" would never have the same attraction that the rose bowl does. and w/ only a week between play off games, the finals would lack so much of the existing fun, travel, and pagentry.
we're talking about tossing decades of tradition, and tons of current fun for what? at the end of the day, so what if the Utes feel cheated? at the end of the year, there are maybe one or two programs that feel "left out" and the other 115 are pretty much where they're supposed to be.
an there's no promise that a playoff would avoid any of these problems. if you go w/ anything but a 16 team format, you are going to be leaving out really good one or two loss top ten/fifteen teams that have as much claim on paper to be "in the dance" as the last 2 or 3 of the 8 that make it.
and you'd also have debates about seeding, home field advantage (if'd we'd have drawn ___ in the first round @ home, we'd have gone on to ___). you get this level of complaining w/ the b-ball format, which everyone agrees is pretty fair. football would have to have at least a 16 team field to solve ANY of the problems we have w/ the BCS (i.e.; the Utes, today's poster child for BCS evil, would have missed a 4 team format, and would have barely made an 8 team field).
i guess, the bcs is a tranny mess ONLY if you really care who's #1, and let's face, any given year, that's only one or two programs.
Agree, I didn't post anything because to me the point is moot. There's no way you can keep college football going into January.
I get a headache thinking about all the permutations involved.
Here's a crazy thought---let's get rid of the National Champion idea all together and just go back to conference champs and bowl winners....
silly girl....
Well, I don't lose any sleep, but I do care. I think plenty of people do. I don't think the goal is to have a system that is free of debate or argument, just one that isn't such a total farce.
My preferences FWIW, in order:
1. Playoffs, six to eight teams, though 16 would be even better - This doesn't have to be as complicated as it's made out to be. Arguements at 8, 9 and 10 aren't quite as gut wrenching as 2, 3, 4 (except for the schools involved).
2. The old system. Top bowls have traditional conference alliances, the rest go for best match-up. Let the AP vote on a champ. The coachs' pole is another farce.
3. College football ceases to exist. Replaced with collegiate eating competitions (formerly known as "training table")
4. BCS. Seriously, this is the last year I think I can muster any interest in this system beyond seeing individual bowl match-ups. The title is utterly meaningless.
It is all about money and big business getting involved. The big businesses weren't around as sponsorship for the bowl games until they became the BCS bowl games. Mostly the networks are largely to blame. I blame the media for almost everything wrong with our society and will continue to do so into the future. The media is a dog that eats it's own tail and spits on it's own kind daily and needs to be put down. In that respect I agree that we should eliminate all playoffs and BCS games in general and go back to the way it was. The Rose bowl will climb back to being the grandaddy of them all and no one will give a crap. I'm glad it's over for one and am tired of watching and reading the drama.
As of now, we have 96 votes and the "Yes" has an overwhelming lead with over 84% of the vote. No surprise.
T9: The cat is already out of the bag on the National Champ idea. College football is not going backwards (towards the Ivy League) on this issue. The challenge now is how do you make it better ?
I love the fact that 60+ teams get to go to bowls. I think that ought to remain. These games are essentially exhibitions anyway. They will remain exhibitions and fun trips for the teams that qualify. But that does not eliminate the need for a playoff to determine a champion.
It isn't that I care that Utah (or USC) got screwed, but given the falling prestige of the B10, that could be Michigan someday on the outside looking in. We got a small (yet bitter) taste of the power of superior marketing after the 2006 SEC championship game. It is only going to get worse.
One thing that seems crazy and logical at the same time... rather than extend the playoffs through January -- why not take advantage of the tremendous time gap that happens in December ? The 8 (or 12) teams that qualify for the playoff play some rounds during Decemeber.
If the basketball teams and DI-AAA, DII, and DIII can come up with a playoff system that crowns a definate champion -- DI football ought to be able to do it too.
Andy,
Completely agree with ALL of your points. It's not about wishing it to be one way, but how we can realistically make it better. The December idea was also the alternative that was floating around in my largely empty cranium. Nice commentary.
Sic, buddy, you need help... I think you've been stuck in Columbus too long.
Part of the December thing is finals. Although it's an obvious chunk of time to fill, it'll always be one of those specious points the presidents will make in opposition to a playoff so any solution wouls have to work around it.
And while it is about money, it's more about the distribution of money, not gross amounts. I don't think anyone argues that there is plenty of money in a playoff system.
P.S. The media is only a reflection of society, not the cause of its ills.
boys & girls,
i don't doubt that a play off is the best way to arrive at a MNC. but to solve the problems w/ the current BCS, you'll have to go to a 16 team format and pretty much end the bowls- don't kid yourselves that it'll be anything other than a 16 team format in the end for the same reason b-ball now has a 65 team format. and that will kill the bowls.
and that's my gripe w/ the proposal. Bowls, even second & third tier bowls, are effing great fun. how many of you guys have actually been to a bowl game(s)? i've been to a Rose, a Citrus, a couple of Outbacks, and a couple of Motor City Bowls (friend from high school went to Marshall).
they were all a blast. the pre games were fun. the games/half times were great. the trips to FLA & California were great vacations wrapped around a football game. the "team" at the beach day/trips to Disneyland/New Year's Eve rallies, were all a lot of fun. even the pregame pep rallies/beer tents for the Motor City Bowl were fun (the Herd fans know how to rock).
and all of that is going down the toilet w/ a playoff. look at the NFL playoffs/DIA/DII- the play offs are just another game until you get to the finals.
and for what? to solve a problem that wasn't a problem for the first century of the game?
i'm sure a playoff is the best way to decide a MNC, but it's going to come at a huge cost- not to the NCAA, but to fun loving, beer drinking fans like me.
I would be a bigger fan of going back to the pre-1997 format. The BCS did not solve the problem that led to the Big 10 and Pac 10 joining the Bowl Coalition folks. It's funny how teams from that Bowl Coalition still end up in the BCS bowl often at the expense of either a Big 10 or Pac 10 team.
Hmmmmm...
Post a Comment