Comments on: What would a college football playoff look like this year? (Part 3)

By: T-Bone

T-Bone — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 03:27:41 +0000

I don’t quite understand the argument that 12 teams would make the regular season meaningless when you’re only allowing 10% of all Division I teams to play for the championship. If you don’t win during the regular season, you won’t be playing, and only a top 12 birth gets you in. No team in the top 12 has more than 2 losses this year and you could make an argument for any of them to have a shot (well, except maybe Ohio State). Since only a few of the big boys have the balls to schedule real non-conference games, it’s virtually impossible to tell what teams are the best and what teams are pretenders (See: the SEC) and a larger sample gives you a better shot that the true best team will win the tournament.

However the change I would make is the top 4 teams receive a bye week and the bottom 8 play-in to make the final 8.

There are a lot of ways you can do it but with the way teams schedule non-conference patsies you need a larger sample of teams if you want to find the true national champion.

By: pittsburgh kid

pittsburgh kid — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 21:22:20 +0000

Is part IV up yet? I want to see the final brackets.

By: John Paulsen

John Paulsen — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:33:38 +0000

I have two issues with going larger than 8 teams. 1) at what point do the playoffs become too inclusive? the BCS-apologists main argument is that a playoff would make the regular season less meaningful, and while I don’t agree with that argument when you’re talking about an eight- (or 12-team) field, it does hold water as you get bigger. 2) it adds an extra game to the schedule, but those teams that don’t have a bye are less likely to be playing four extra games. Most teams in the playoffs would play three or fewer games. (i.e. the only team that would play four games would be one that didn’t have a bye in the first round and made it all the way to the final game.)

By: Pittsburgh Kid

Pittsburgh Kid — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 19:09:50 +0000

I like the plan…especially with the provision that if a conf. champ is out of the top 15, they are out of the playoffs.

For the NON BCS playoffs, I think that the 4th team should be Tulsa (if they win Conference USA).

I look forward to the final standings.

It still stinks that Texas Tech would get left behind. But that will always be the battle: including non deserving teams or excluding deserving teams.

The one plan that I saw last year had 12 teams in the playoffs. The 6 BCS champs, the 2 highest ranked non BCS champs and 4 at large teams. As of now, this plan would have(in no particular order); PSU, BC, CINCY, USC, OKLAHAMA,ALABAMA, UTAH, BOISE, TEXAS, TEXAS TECH, OHIO STATE AND FLORIDA

I can’t think of any deserving teams being left out (except for maybe Ball St. over Ohio State)

Too bad none of these plans would ever happen.

By: John Paulsen

John Paulsen — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 06:19:32 +0000

I don’t think it’s that simple, Brad. What about USC? Utah? Boise St.? Ball St.? Penn St.? Who’s to say that those teams aren’t amongst the top four in the nation?

Anthony – I just mentioned a non-BCS playoff to allow those teams to compete. Throw four of them together (Utah, Boise, Ball and maybe TCU) and the winner gets to play in the Show. It would be fun.

By: Brad Bradford

Brad Bradford — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 05:11:38 +0000

It is simple: #1 plays #4 in the host bowl of #1.
#2 plays #3 in the host bowl of #2. The exceptions are 1. swap #3 and #4 if it means a game from the same conference 2. swap #3 and #4 if the game means a rematch. Today’s playoff would be #1 Alabama hosting #3 Texas in the Sugar Bowl (swap #3Texas with #4 Florida to avoid conference game). #2 Oklahoma would host #4 Florida in the Fiesta Bowl. the BCS game would be the next week. Easy to understand with no drawbacks. Same as a Final Four.

By: Anthony Stalter

Anthony Stalter — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 01:44:23 +0000

“Since it looks like Boise St. and Ball St. will miss the playoffs, and a Boston College win might push Utah out, it might be interesting to have a four-team playoff amongst the best non-BCS teams to see who has the right to make the playoffs.”

Two different playoff formats?? BCS supporters just crapped themseleves at the thought. (As did non-BCS supporters.)

You’re a greedy, greedy man John Paulsen.