Tag: college football playoff (Page 6 of 8)

      All I want for Christmas…

      December 25, 2008 /

      The world is a mess. Osama Bin Laden is still at large, the U.S. economy is in a recession and our country is still fighting two different wars on two different fronts.

      But I can’t control any of that. On the whole, 2008 has been a pretty good year for Team Paulsen. My wife and I had our first child, a happy and healthy son (97th percentile in height = future 6’10” power forward), and I still have a job and a roof over my head.

      I write about sports, so in the spirit of Christmas, which – let’s be honest – is really about getting, not giving, I scribbled down a few things that I’d like to see gift-wrapped underneath the tree.

      So, without further ado, all I want for Christmas…

      …is a college football playoff.
      This drives me nuts and I know I’m not alone. I’m a casual fan of college football and I only watch maybe 10-15 games the entire year, including one bowl game – the BCS title game. If there were an eight-team playoff, I would make a point to watch every single one of those seven games. Not only that, but I’d start watching more of those late-season games that feature teams that are fighting for a playoff berth. I know money is a big issue with the BCS, but if casual fans are going to increase the number of games they watch by 50-70%, how can this not bring higher ratings and more ad revenue? This whole situation is mind-boggling.

      …is Sunday Ticket for all fans.
      I live in a condo and my patio doesn’t have a view of the southern horizon, so I can’t get DirecTV. And since I can’t have DirecTV, I can’t get NFL Sunday Ticket. Whenever the package is up for sale, the NFL continues to sell the exclusive rights for Sunday Ticket to DirecTV. The cable companies are part of the problem – they can’t seem to join forces and get a combined offer together – but the NFL is mostly to blame for not doing everything in their power to bring as much NFL action as possible to their fans. The increase in the number of subscriptions would offset the loss in profit from selling the “exclusive rights,” or at least I think it would. I don’t really care. I just want to get Sunday Ticket in my condo that has no view of the southern horizon and I’m guessing there are millions of fans that are in the same boat.

      …is every game in HD.
      The NFL is on board. But there are still some sports that are slow to move to the HD format. The NBA Season Pass is a perfect example. Sure, I can watch any NBA game I want, but the picture is always crappy. Wouldn’t it be great if all the major sports – NFL, CFB, CBB, MLB, NBA and NHL – broadcast every game in high def?

      …is a NBA “Fourth Quarter Channel” that bounces around to the best action.
      DirecTV’s Red Zone Channel is great. Every Sunday, they jump from game to game and bring us all the scoring plays and red zone possessions. Why doesn’t the NBA Season Pass create a similar channel? It wouldn’t have to operate on days where the league has a light schedule – say, less than five games – but when there are five or more games, why not have a channel (in HD, of course) that brings us all the action, especially all the nail-biting drama in the fourth quarter? The NBA has an advantage over the NFL in that the start times are staggered due to the different time zones, so when there is a full slate of games, there should be plenty of good action and exciting finishes to choose from.

      …is a salary cap in Major League Baseball.
      I’m not asking for a hard cap, like the NFL, though that would be optimal. I just want some sort of a salary cap with a 50% luxury tax that pays the small-market, fiscally conservative franchises and allows them to be profitable. Say we have a cap of $100,000,000. That way, when the Yankees roll out their $250,000,000 payroll, they have to pony up another $75,000,000 to be divvied up amongst the small market teams. Maybe that would make them think twice before buying up every good player on the market. Before you throw the Tampa Bay Rays in my face, let’s see where they are in four or five seasons. Small market franchises can put together a competitive team for one or two seasons, but it’s impossible to keep it up over the long haul because the Yankees or the Red Sox are inevitably going to come in and sign all their good players.

      …are shorter MLB, NBA and NHL seasons.
      I know this is a moneymaker for each league, but these seasons are so long that they barely even matter. Long seasons are all right as long as the playoffs aren’t too inclusive, but the NBA and NHL have 82-game seasons and over half the teams make the postseason. This adds up to relatively meaningless regular season games. I’d cut the regular season for all three sports in half and eliminate back-to-back games, at least in the NBA and NHL. This would improve the quality of play and make the regular season important again. Anytime people refer to your regular season as a “grind,” it’s time to start thinking about paring it back.

      …are more Saturday NFL games once the college season is over.
      College football is pretty much dead the entire month of December yet the NFL is reluctant to schedule more than the occasional Saturday game. This seems like a missed opportunity to me. I know the NFL likes to own Sundays, but what’s wrong with scheduling a few of the better matchups on Saturday so the entire country can see them?

      …is a two-year minimum (or an age-limit of 20) before players can declare for the NBA.
      These “one and done” players are making a joke out of college basketball. It’s wreaking havoc for college recruiters and there is little continuity in many of the major collegiate programs. In a perfect world, this would be the rule: 1) high school players can declare themselves eligible for the NBA Draft immediately after graduation or 2) they can go to college (or the NBDL or overseas) for a minimum of two seasons before making themselves eligible for the draft. Almost two years ago, I wrote a column that went into great detail about how high school draftees have a better chance of making it in the pros than college or international players do. Almost two-thirds (64%) of high school players drafted in the first round went on to become superstars, stars or starters in the NBA. Compare that to the one-third (32%) of college and international players drafted in the first round that went on to have similar success. It’s clear that high school players are capable of being successful in the NBA, but I understand why the league would like these players to get a year or two of coaching and experience on the college level before making the jump. Under my proposal, if a player does not get drafted, he could still go to college for two seasons and make himself eligible again. If a high school player is drafted but is a bust, he can play in the NBDL or overseas until he’s seasoned enough to return to the NBA (and the league should have an office that helps these players find a new basketball home). The best players successfully make the leap, the fringe players have two years of college before the NBA and the so-called busts have the safety net of the NBDL and/or playing overseas until they’re good enough to return.

      But enough about me – what sports-related gifts would you like to see under the tree?

      College Basketball, College Football, MLB, NBA, NBA Draft, NFL, NHL

      What would a college football playoff look like this year? (Part 4)

      December 8, 2008 /

      (Be sure to check out last week’s version of the bracket as a comparison.)

      What’s done is done. That’s the…..um……great thing about the BCS system. Oklahoma jumped Texas last week in the rankings and now the Sooners are slated to face the Gators in the title game. As in years past, fans are supposed to just swallow this bitter pill and move on. Some lazy, narrow-minded sportswriters are happy to have the “debate” because their next few columns will essentially write themselves.

      The truth is that the current system is not only a slap in the face to the Longhorns and their supporters, but to all college football fans across the country. The vast majority of us (85%-90% if you believe the polls) would like to see some sort of college football playoff. So the last few weeks I’ve been summarizing a proposed playoff system.

      Here are my assumptions…

      1. There would be an eight-team playoff. The six BCS-conference champs get an automatic bid unless they are ranked outside the top 15.

      2. If a conference champ is ranked lower than #15 in the rankings, they give up their automatic bid and it becomes an at-large bid. (This rule is to ensure that the regular season keeps its meaning and only the elite teams make the playoffs.)

      3. Seeds and at-large bids are distributed based on the current BCS standings. Certainly, these rankings need to be tweaked to place more of an emphasis on head-to-head matchups, but they are fine for now. If an at-large team has a better BCS ranking than a conference champion, they will get a higher seed.

      4. There will be three rounds of playoffs. The first round will be held at the home stadium of the higher-seeded team. The semifinals and the final will rotate amongst the four BCS cities (Miami, Pasadena, Tempe and New Orleans).

      So how does last weekend’s action affect our playoff field?

      8-seed Cincinnati @ 1-seed Oklahoma
      Both teams did what they needed to do. The Bearcats sneaked by Hawaii and Oklahoma was convincing in its win over Missouri.

      5-seed USC @ 4-seed Alabama
      In this case, it looks like the BCS rankings work. Both teams have one loss, but Alabama lost to a better team. Who wouldn’t want to see the Trojans visit Tuscaloosa? The winner would face the winner of the 1/8 game.

      6-seed Utah @ 3-seed Texas
      This format works for the little guy, or at least it works for Utah. (Sorry Boise State!) In order to advance, the Utes would have to win in Austin.

      7-seed Penn State @ 2-seed Florida
      With the Hawkeyes’ recent play, suddenly the Nittany Lions’ loss to Iowa doesn’t look so bad. They would face a tough test trying to win in Gainesville against the surging Gators.

      This format would set up pair of semifinals that would pit Oklahoma versus Alabama and Texas versus Florida.

      ACC champion Virginia Tech gives up its bid because the Hokies are not ranked in the top 15. With four losses, few would argue that VT should be included. With a win over #17 Oregon and an undefeated record, Boise State has the biggest gripe. We would have to move to a 12-team format (or require the conference champs to be ranked in the top 10, eliminating Cincy) to include the Broncos.

      The other teams that are on the outside looking in — Texas Tech, Ohio State, TCU, Oklahoma State, Georgia Tech, Georgia — either have three losses or have lost to teams that made the playoff, so the regular season clearly still holds its importance. (If Texas Tech had beat Oklahoma, if Ohio State had beat Penn State, if TCU had beaten Oklahoma and Utah, etc.)

      The exclusion of Boise State is regrettable, but like March Madness, does anyone really think that the Broncos would be able to win three straight games against the elite teams in the country en route to a national championship? Unfortunately, in an eight-team playoff, we wouldn’t know for sure. It would be nice to have an option for a play-in game when there is an undefeated team from a non-power conference. In this case, Boise State could play Cincinnati for the right to play Oklahoma. However, if Ball State hadn’t lost to Buffalo, we’d be looking at two undefeated teams that would have been excluded. Then things get a little more dicey.

      Another option would be a 12-team playoff that includes all the BCS conference champions and six at-large bids. That way, in addition to Oklahoma, Florida, USC, Penn State, Cincinnati and Virginia Tech getting bids, at-large teams Texas, Alabama, Utah, Texas Tech, Boise State and Ohio State would also get bids. I’m warming up to the idea of a 12-team playoff because it would account for cases like Boise State. Critics say that it would add too many games, but the only teams that would potentially play four games would be teams ranked #5 through #12 that made it to the title game (which is an unlikely scenario). Otherwise, everyone would play three or fewer additional games.

      College Football

      Greg Cote supports a non-playoff format

      December 4, 2008 /

      Colt McCoyGreg Cote of the Miami Herald thinks the BCS format in college football is just fine and that a playoff wouldn’t be any better than the current system.

      Instead it looks as if we will be getting an Oklahoma Sooners team that would be 12-1 against either a 13-0 Alabama or a 12-1 mighty-hot Florida. Sounds like a legitimate championship game to me. Sounds like if you don’t agree, you are either insane or turning sour grapes into whine because your beloved Texas Longhorns just missed. The odd-team-out always claims an entitlement that does not exist.

      True, we should get a good game this year in the national championship. But nobody is debating that.

      A playoff is impractical because it would require a significantly shorter regular season, which would fail to win support from schools and conferences, if only for financial reasons.

      No problem. Take Michigan Technical School for the Blind off of Michigan’s schedule, Reading Rainbow Camp off of Texas’s schedule, ITT off of Florida’s schedule and every other no-name program that the bigger schools play twice a year and that frees up two weeks. Start conference play Week 1 or Week 2 if you’re worried about having enough time at the end of the year.

      If you had a four-team playoff based on the current BCS rankings, you don’t think No. 5 Southern California and No. 6 (and unbeaten) Utah wouldn’t be crying foul?

      Make it an eight-team playoff, and how do you think No. 9 (and unbeaten) Boise State would be feeling right now?

      An arguably deserving team always will be left out, whether it’s whatever playoff format you choose or whether it’s two teams in a championship game.

      The BCS works because, in effect, it is a playoff to reach the championship. Teams in the top six or so are in it every year, and it kicks in around mid-October, when the BCS rankings begin. The way the format works is, don’t lose late. Period.

      So if teams will be left out no matter what, why not give college football fans (essentially) two playoffs? Teams would be fighting to get into the eight-team playoff in October (which, in Cote’s words is like a playoff), and again when the actual eight-team playoff starts. What’s the harm in that? And at least teams that potentially could be left out (teams like Boise State and Utah) have a better shot to play for a national title in an eight-team playoff than they do in the current system where they have zero chance.

      The absence of precise black and white is college football’s unique, enduring asset. The BCS maintains the tradition of bowl games while ultimately deciding the champion on the field, not by polls.

      You get a recognized champion and you get the inevitable debate. That’s the best of both worlds — and that’s what the pro-playoff crowd never seems to get.

      The bowl games are a joke. And if crowning a champion and getting to bitch about the current BCS system is getting the best of both worlds, than I must be missing a few brain cells because it’s not fun to watch this mess take place every year. What would be fun is a damn eight-team playoff. What would be fun is watching USC come from a 6 seed and knock off a 5 seed and then a 3 seed and on and on.

      Cote’s idea that it’s fun to debate about this crap system every year is ridiculous. Debating isn’t part of the fun – it’s part of the frustration.

      College Football

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

      December 1, 2008 /

      (Be sure to check out Part 1 and Part 2 of this series.)

      With Oklahoma vaulting ahead of Texas in the BCS standings, it is a clear reminder that the BCS system is horribly flawed. Each team has one loss and Texas beat Oklahoma on a neutral field. Texas’ only loss was to a good Texas Tech team on the road, and it shouldn’t outweigh the Longhorns’ win over the Sooners. Oklahoma did have two great non-conference wins (Cincinnati and TCU), while Texas didn’t really play anyone out of conference. Still, should a strong non-conference schedule outweigh Texas head-to-head win over Oklahoma? Apparently, USA Today and the computer rankings think so. (For their part, Harris Poll voters had Texas #3 and Oklahoma #4.)

      This brings me back to my proposed eight-team playoff that I introduced a couple of weeks ago. Here are the assumptions.

      1. There will be an eight-team playoff, with the six BCS-conference champs getting an automatic bid.

      2. If a conference champ is ranked lower than #15 in the rankings, they give up their automatic bid and it becomes an at-large bid. (This rule is to ensure that the regular season keeps its meaning and only the elite teams make the playoffs.)

      3. Seeds and at-large bids are distributed based on the current BCS standings. Certainly, these rankings can be tweaked, but they are fine for now. If an at-large team has a better BCS ranking than a conference champion, they will get a higher seed.

      4. There will be three rounds of playoffs. The first round will be held at the home stadium of the higher-seeded team. The semifinals and the final will rotate amongst the four BCS cities (Miami, Pasadena, Tempe and New Orleans).

      So how does this weekend’s action affect the playoff field?

      8-seed Cincinnati @ 1-seed Alabama
      A 30-10 win over Syracuse puts the Bearcats at #13. Cincy still has to beat Hawaii to stay playoff-eligible. Meanwhile, Alabama has a date with #4 Florida in the SEC Championship Game this Saturday.

      5-seed USC @ 4-seed Florida
      Since the Gators still have to play Alabama, this matchup probably won’t happen since Florida will likely move up or down in the BCS rankings depending on how they fare against the Crimson Tide. A bad loss to Alabama might knock the Gators out of the playoffs since the #7 and #8 seeds are conference champions, and Boston College might very well move into the playoffs with a win over Virginia Tech. If that were to happen, and USC were to leapfrog Florida, the Gators could very well miss the playoffs.

      6-seed Utah @ 3-seed Texas
      Utah remains the only non-BCS conference representative. With wins over #11 TCU and #18 BYU, they have the best resume of the three non-BCS schools in contention. (Boise St. and Ball St. are the other two.) The Utes need to root for a Virginia Tech win over Boston College.

      7-seed Penn St. @ 2-seed Oklahoma
      OU still has to beat Missouri in the Big 12 Championship Game to remain the 2-seed. If Alabama loses to Florida and the Sooners are convincing in their win over the Tigers, they could move up. They could also fall completely out of the playoffs with a loss to Missouri.

      Since Cincy moved into the BCS Top 15, they earned a berth in the playoffs. The lowest ranked at-large team – Texas Tech – were pushed out of the playoffs. #17 Boston College could conceivably move into the Top 15 with a win over #25 Virginia Tech in the ACC Championship Game, and in that case, Utah would likely be the team to be knocked out of the playoffs. (And that would be a shame.)

      Of the teams that are on the outside looking in, only #9 Boise St. and #12 Ball St. don’t have losses to teams that made the playoffs. #10 Ohio St. lost to USC and Penn St., #11 TCU lost to Oklahoma, and #14 Oklahoma St. lost to Texas and Oklahoma. So, despite what the anti-playoff crowd says, the regular season still matters with this playoff system.

      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. Of course, this would add two games to the schedule and it might just be easier just to go to a 12-team field (though most of those extra slots could easily go to BCS schools like Texas Tech and Ohio St.)

      Check out Part 4 now.

      College Football, Television

      The bottom line to the BCS/playoff debate

      November 28, 2008 /

      I’m not afraid to say that I am a casual college football fan.

      During the regular season, I will watch a handful of games, usually those that feature matchups between two top 10 schools. I don’t get too invested in the college football regular season because I know that it’s probably going to come to a disappointing conclusion. There will be a BCS Championship Game that will pit the top two teams in the country against each other, but there is always a debate about who truly belongs in that game.

      That’s the only postseason game I’ll watch. At that point in the season, I only really care about teams that still have a shot to win the national championship, and that late in the game, it’s down to two teams. I couldn’t care less about the other BCS bowls because they have absolutely no impact on who will be the national champion.

      College football purists probably look down their nose at guys like me, but I don’t really care. Fans like me are the ones that could take the sport of college football to the next level.

      If there were an eight-team playoff, I would sit down and watch every single one of those seven games. If the BCS-playoff debate is about money, then I don’t see how doubling the number of games that the casual fan watches can do anything but increase ratings (and ad revenue).

      Also, knowing that the college football season would come to a solid, undisputed conclusion, I would find these late season play-in games a lot more interesting. Under the current system, I’m not going to watch #12 Oklahoma State try to knock off #3 Oklahoma. But if the Cowboys were to have a shot to make it the playoffs (and to knock the Sooners out), then I might tune in. The same goes for the Florida/Florida St. matchup.

      Suddenly, a casual fan that used to watch 5-10 games a year is now watching 20 or more. How is this bad for college football?

      College Football, Television

      « Older posts Newer posts »

      © 2026 The Scores Report – The National Sports Blog

      Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑