Are you for or against college football having some form of a playoff - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Murphy3 · 10-18-2003, 02:34 PM

vote please
College football is the only major sport that doesn't have some form of a playoff. Why? I don't know

grbh · 10-18-2003, 03:46 PM

Definately for it, and very frustrated more steps haven't been done to create it. Almost every excuse given is ridiculous.
Here si what you do. Winners of majot conferences get bids.
Big 12
Big10
ACC
SEC
Pac 10
Big East

Then have 6 at large bids giving deserving teams the opportunity to play, and a possibility of the Northern Illinois of the world to get in.

Top 4 teams have byes.

Use bowl stadiums to house events, and rotate finals just like no.

Arguments against:

You lose bowl games. Granted you would lose the income from bowl games, but the bowls that don't get invited are sorry anyway. Besides nothing is stopping those bowl organizations from inviting teams to a game it just won't be anyone from the top 12
Small Conferenceswill get screwed: With 6 at large bids the smaller conferences will have an opportunity to get the crap kicked out of them by the likes of Oklahoma.

Season would be too long: BS. Subtract a nonconference game, eliminate bye week, no bowl game. In this sytem the most additional games that could possibly be played (and that would only be by 2 teams) is 4. So you have only added one week to the schedule.

It would ruin the regular sesaon like College Basketball: In fact the opposite I believe is likely. After all one and maybe in some cases 2 losses doesn't kill your season. If OU wins out, but loses in the Big 12 championship game they are out of the picture. If there are to 1 loss teams behind them OU gets screwed just because they lost late in the season.

A playoff would be so great for college football.

Chiwas · 10-18-2003, 05:13 PM

Absolutely in favor of a playoff.

Drbio · 10-18-2003, 11:17 PM

I'm in favor if the Bowl games are incorporated somehow and secondary bowl games are not affected.

LRB · 10-18-2003, 11:39 PM

It's absolutely ridiculous that both High school and Pro Football can have playoffs and ever division of college football has a playoff except for division I. It's time for playoff's and to hell with the bowl games.

Drbio · 10-18-2003, 11:43 PM

You cannot...and WILL NOT....ever get rid of bowl games. There is too much money involved. Schools are well compensated, TV packages pay the NCAA and the member schools (including those not in bowl games), etc.

I am all for a playoff, but it should not affect the bowl games in any way. Let's let the Big Bowls like the Rose Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, etc be set up in a playoff but allow the other bowls like the Independence Bowl, etc to serve the other schools. It is great to have so many teams win their last game. It helps in recruiting, school pride, and of course....revenue. The bowls are here to stay and if anyone thinks otherwise they are just lying to themselves.

grbh · 10-19-2003, 01:23 AM

Obviously the bowls are here to stay,but can't they be the NIT

Drbio · 10-19-2003, 01:44 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by: grbh
Obviously the bowls are here to stay,but can't they be the NIT

They obviously wouldn't be. They would continue to be stand alone games. This is the only reasonable outcome. There will eventually bea playoff, but it will likely be among the top 4 or 8 ranked teams. The playoff games themselves may or may not be former bowl games, but I can guarantee yo uthat the other bowl games will always continue.

Murphy3 · 10-19-2003, 06:55 AM

doc, i'd be in favor of the bowl games being incorporated into it..
sure, it pretty much might be just in name only, but it would still be fine.

i'd be more in favor of a 16 team playoff...you could still have 15 bowl games incorporated into this.
plus, you could still have lesser bowls for some of the teams that did not qualify for the playoff

grbh · 10-19-2003, 10:30 AM

That is basically my proposal, granted I chose 12 teams.With sixteen teams you get 15 bowls. That leaves about 10 bowls to chase the scraps. Let em.

Dooby · 10-19-2003, 08:30 PM

If you are wondering who the sole "no" vote is. that would be me.

kingrex · 11-06-2003, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Dooby
If you are wondering who the sole "no" vote is. that would be me.

You're not alone Dooby. The mighty will rise to the top throughout the season. Even in a playoff it is not always guaranteed that the best team wins. No system is perfect. A playoff system will decrease the importance of the regular season, and overextend a football season for which many "uncompensated" athletes are already over-taxed physically.

Murphy3 · 11-06-2003, 12:43 PM

Quote:

You're not alone Dooby. The mighty will rise to the top throughout the season. Even in a playoff it is not always guaranteed that the best team wins. No system is perfect. A playoff system will decrease the importance of the regular season, and overextend a football season for which many "uncompensated" athletes are already over-taxed physically

Many teams are already playing 13-14 games... i don't think it would be difficult to devise a system that would have no more than a couple of teams playing 14-15 games

dallas_esq · 11-06-2003, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Murphy3

Quote:

You're not alone Dooby. The mighty will rise to the top throughout the season. Even in a playoff it is not always guaranteed that the best team wins. No system is perfect. A playoff system will decrease the importance of the regular season, and overextend a football season for which many "uncompensated" athletes are already over-taxed physically

Many teams are already playing 13-14 games... i don't think it would be difficult to devise a system that would have no more than a couple of teams playing 14-15 games

Easily done. The Bowl games can be mostly uneffected I believe also. It would be a vast improvement over the BCS system no matter what the outcome. Then everyone could play a soft schedule throughout the year and they could just gear up for the playoffs.

kingrex · 11-06-2003, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: Murphy3

Quote:

You're not alone Dooby. The mighty will rise to the top throughout the season. Even in a playoff it is not always guaranteed that the best team wins. No system is perfect. A playoff system will decrease the importance of the regular season, and overextend a football season for which many "uncompensated" athletes are already over-taxed physically

Many teams are already playing 13-14 games... i don't think it would be difficult to devise a system that would have no more than a couple of teams playing 14-15 games

So are you proposing a playoff system of 3 rounds (i.e. adding just 3 games at the end of the season)? That would mean only the top 8 teams would be included, right? Or are you stickin to the 16 team playoff which would add 4 more games per season? This would extend the football season way into January right? Unless you're not allowing some time to prepare for the "playoffs"? Please delineate your preference.

Murphy3 · 11-06-2003, 01:49 PM

Well, many teams already have 3-4 weeks off before the bowl season starts... that's entirely too long IMO.
I'd prefer a 16 team playoff... but, it would mean that teams would need to cut back to 10-11 pre-playoff games.

That would mean not allowing teams to squeeze in an extra game by playing in the kickoff classic/pig skin classic and whatnot and it might put an end to some Conference Championship games.

Or you could simply have a 10 game season with a conference championship + the playoffs..

that would mean that the most games that any team played in would be 15..two more teams could play in 14 games.

What would this mean? It would mean that most teams would play in pretty much the same amount of games as currently..many would play in less. At most, two teams would play in 15 games and two more would play in 14. I believe that's less than what currently occurs.

As for time off between the regular season and the playoffs..the schedules could be arranged to allow teams a week off before their first playoff game.

As for playing into January...well, look at it this way. When does the college season start? Late August?

Well, the teams would have 1 game in late August and 9 throughout September, October, and November AND could play a Conference Championship game in late November...

Then, you'd have three playoff games in December with the championship coming in January... hell, you could even extend it a little further out if you'd like..push the playoffs back so that the second round would fall on new years/new years eve. You'd have to have a maybe three more games extending two weeks into january if you did things this way though. but, why would that be a big issue? Players would have more off time during the regular season by having less games. Yes, they'd have more going on during their normal Christmas break...but hell, alot of the teams are already practicing throught their Christmas vacation while getting ready for the bowl games.

kingrex · 11-06-2003, 03:58 PM

I have to admit a playoff system is intriguing.

Would you play these games in the same stadiums every year of would you shuffle them like with the NCAA basketball tournament?
Would there be an issue of "home-stadium advantage" for some teams?

No doubt it would make a lot of money. Not bad, Murph. I may not be totally on board yet, but I am intrigued.

Murphy3 · 11-06-2003, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by: kingrex
I have to admit a playoff system is intriguing.

Would you play these games in the same stadiums every year of would you shuffle them like with the NCAA basketball tournament?
Would there be an issue of "home-stadium advantage" for some teams?

No doubt it would make a lot of money. Not bad, Murph. I may not be totally on board yet, but I am intrigued.

Personally, I'd have the games at different 'bowl' venues. You could rotate which site got the national champisonship game. With 16 teams in a playoff, you could incorporate the top 15 bowls into the playoff system.

You could even still have bowls for teams that didn't quite qualify..Or, you could have a playoff similar to the NIT..certain excluded teams could be involved if they'd like (not as sold on this part..just thought i'd throw it out there. I'd prefer that there would be only one tournament with other teams going to the lesser tier bowl games that aren't in the playoff loop)

kingrex · 11-06-2003, 04:21 PM

I like that plan, but I'm sure the same complainers about the current system will complain about how those 16 playoff teams are picked, or which venue is picked and so on, and so on, ad nauseaum. Which doesn't necessarily invalidate the playoff system, but it does show that no matter what system we have, some will always btch about it.

Dooby · 11-06-2003, 05:07 PM

Kingsrex is right about what they will complain about.

But I will tell you why that suggestion, which is often thrown out there as the logical link between the bowl system and playoff system. Silly, but college football it is about fans, alumni and students. it is about the band and the cheerleaders and the mascots, too. Ultimately, college athletics are about colleges. Otherwise, college football is just the minor leagues. While many fans, alumni and students can afford to buy tickets and travel to one game, they won't be able to travel to four sites for 4 different games over 4 or 5 weeks. Because they won't be able to afford to do that, schools won't be able to afford or will be hesitant to purchase their required allotment of tickets for playoff bowl games.

Now you may say that div. 1 AA and the lower divisions have playoffs and you are right. But those games are not played at neutral sites. So travel is not an issue. And college football will never accept playoff games to be played on a team's home field.

Now you may also say that the NCAA basketball tournament is played at neutral sites, but the difference there is obvious as well. A basketball arena holds 16-20,000. The national champiohsip is played in larger venues, but literally thousands of seats are taken up by the media and most others are sold before hand.

If you try a playoff format this way, alumni and students of a particular team by and large will be frozen out. And without the fans, alumni and students of a particular team, all you have is minor league ball.

It won't work. It can't work.

Murphy3 · 11-06-2003, 05:17 PM

Quote:

But I will tell you why that suggestion, which is often thrown out there as the logical link between the bowl system and playoff system. Silly, but college football it is about fans, alumni and students. it is about the band and the cheerleaders and the mascots, too. Ultimately, college athletics are about colleges. Otherwise, college football is just the minor leagues. While many fans, alumni and students can afford to buy tickets and travel to one game, they won't be able to travel to four sites for 4 different games over 4 or 5 weeks. Because they won't be able to afford to do that, schools won't be able to afford or will be hesitant to purchase their required allotment of tickets for playoff bowl games.

You do bring up a good point, Dooby.

Perhaps the first round or possibly first two rounds wouldn't be played at a 'neutral' site. First round or two, the team with the higher ranking would get home field.

As for, 'it can't work'... sure it can. It can work much better than the current BCS system without a doubt.

arsenalth9 · 11-06-2003, 06:31 PM

i'm in favor of the playoff system...But i would really hate to see the bowls go. Bowls are something special to college football, and i really enjoy them, so it'd be hard to let em go.

Just211 · 11-06-2003, 11:10 PM

IMO, it should be set up more like High School,

there should be 16 conferences
each conference would have a championshipg game
then the winner of each conference would play a winner from another conference, and so on, until one team was left. it would be set up geographically to ensure good fan support each round. Sure as it went on, the game would possibly get further away from a school, but the game would be SO important that you know they'd travel well.
And the formula would stay the same every year, so the same games(bowls) would have teams from the same regions every year to ensure some continuity.
And you cant say it would belittle the regular season, because everything would be based on your conference record(not the polls). Most teams would have a 2 out of 12 chance to make it to there conference championship, so they couldn't afford to lose.