NCAAF Playoffs

[Swatcat27]

Intersting read...http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news;_ylt ... &type=lgns

[Popeye_Card]

They honestly need to either go to this system, or place non-BCS conferences into Division I-A (or "Playoff Eligible" or whatever it's called now). If you don't think that the Sun Belt, WAC, MAC, Mountain West, and Conference USA conferences belong with the big boys, then don't put them on the same championship track as the big boys.

I had promoted an 8 team playoff, but I do like his system. Fill out the bracket with:

1.) Conference champs
2.) Any undefeated teams
3.) The best remaining teams based on a BCS-style ranking system.

And have that system do the seeding. Home teams host the first round. The rest are played at the major bowl sites.

I don't see how this CAN'T be more popular (i.e. more profitable) than the current system. I only watch a couple of bowl games each year, because most of them are less thrilling than a pre-season NFL game. But I would watch most of the games of a playoff system.

--P--

[jim]

To me, the last two years have spelled out why they do NOT need a playoff system in college football. Look at what is going on during the regular season, you lose that drama with a playoff system.

[Popeye_Card]

To me, the last two years have spelled out why they do NOT need a playoff system in college football. Look at what is going on during the regular season, you lose that drama with a playoff system.

I hear this all the time, but it's BS. You'd have to play your arse off to win your conference championship, otherwise it's pretty hard to crash the party. Right now, there's little incentive to even win your conference. Oklahoma and Nebraska have both played in the national championship game (and got blown out) despite losing their conference championship game. Last year, Michigan nearly got invited to the championship game since their only loss was to the #1 team. Then we got to the bowls and found out that maybe the Big Ten was a bit weaker than we thought.

And it's BS that Hawaii will get no chance to play in the championship game, despite going undefeated, while two teams with at least 1 loss duke it out. How can a coach in a non-BCS conference even recruit? "Hey, come play for us. You'll never have a chance to win a title because of the conference we're in, but you can't beat the Boise weather in the fall."

--P--

[clake]

Too bad the sponsors will never let it happen... The NCAA makes too much money to from these stupid meaningless bowl games to let a playoff happen.

[jim]

To me, the last two years have spelled out why they do NOT need a playoff system in college football. Look at what is going on during the regular season, you lose that drama with a playoff system.

I hear this all the time, but it's BS. You'd have to play your arse off to win your conference championship, otherwise it's pretty hard to crash the party. Right now, there's little incentive to even win your conference. Oklahoma and Nebraska have both played in the national championship game (and got blown out) despite losing their conference championship game. Last year, Michigan nearly got invited to the championship game since their only loss was to the #1 team. Then we got to the bowls and found out that maybe the Big Ten was a bit weaker than we thought.

And it's BS that Hawaii will get no chance to play in the championship game, despite going undefeated, while two teams with at least 1 loss duke it out. How can a coach in a non-BCS conference even recruit? "Hey, come play for us. You'll never have a chance to win a title because of the conference we're in, but you can't beat the Boise weather in the fall."

--P--

Why stop at 16, why not 32? Or 64? Where do you stop?

Adding 3 games on to an 18 year old kids plate is not responsible. They should go back to 10 regular season games if you ask me.

[Popeye_Card]

Why stop at 16, why not 32? Or 64? Where do you stop?

Adding 3 games on to an 18 year old kids plate is not responsible. They should go back to 10 regular season games if you ask me.

That's a slippery slope argument.

If it's too many games, then pare down to 1-2 non-conference game, and 8-9 conference matchups. Then up to 3 games in the playoffs (only for two teams--other teams would have 1-2 extra games). A lot of teams with conference championships play 13 games already.

And it's not like we don't have schedule flexibility. After this weekend, the college season basically dies until late December.

--P--

[mikechamp]

And it's BS that Hawaii will get no chance to play in the championship game, despite going undefeated, while two teams with at least 1 loss duke it out. How can a coach in a non-BCS conference even recruit? "Hey, come play for us. You'll never have a chance to win a title because of the conference we're in, but you can't beat the Boise weather in the fall."

--P--

I'm no college football fanatic. I typically don't pay much attention until Thanksgiving (baseball plus mourning period delays my interest). But, for me, this might be my biggest beef about college football to date. How can Hawai'i be ranked lower than a 3-loss team (Florida)??? Weaker schedule or not, it makes no sense to me when both teams play D1-A teams. What is Hawai'i supposed to do, move? Or join the Big 10 or Big 12 or some other "BCS" conference? Neither are practical, so why penalize them for where they are located and who they have to play?

I might become Hawai'i's biggest temporary fan over these next 5 weeks.

[robbotis]

Too bad the sponsors will never let it happen... The NCAA makes too much money to from these stupid meaningless bowl games to let a playoff happen.

I think they'd profit more from playoff games that acually mean something, in addition to the rest of the bowls. You'd lose some bowls, but oh well. You'd make more on playoffs than you would on the PapaJohns.com Bowl.

[mikechamp]

And it's not like we don't have schedule flexibility. After this weekend, the college season basically dies until late December.

--P--

Well, the kids do have to take finals.

Or, at least their tutors do.