BCS Reform

[Christopherson]

So every year about this time, everyone starts bitching about the BCS standings and all. So, I am trying to find out what everyone thinks should happen to decide a national champion in college football. Here are my four suggestions.

1. Leave it the way it is

2. Plus one: that is, teams teams 1-4 play their bowl games against each other and the two winners play to decide a national champion.

3. 8 team playoff: have the top 8 seeded teams have a playoff NCAA hoops style with the winner being the national champion.

4. Do away with all conference affiliation (Pac-10 SEC, etc.). Rezone the country into 8 regions. Have one team from each region get a random seed in an 8 team tournament.

Personally, I think the plus one system is the best way to go, although I do like they way it is now. Everyone talks about the Auburn snubbing and how they should have had a chance to play for the title. My argument is that the more teams you add, whether its an 8 team playoff or a 4 team playoff, you are just adding more controversy. I think there are a lot of teams, maybe 20, that make a legit claim to be top eight, but even on a chaotic year, only 3 or 4 can make claim to be top 2.

What do you all think?

[dada]

Why didnt you make a poll?

[Christopherson]

What are you talking about???

[Cable]

I'm always up for playoffs. In this case, 4 teams might be better than 8, but I voted 8 anyway.

[dada]

What are you talking about???

Oh ok I didnt see the pole before.

To answer the question: I would go with #2.

[Christopherson]

LOL, no worries man, I added after you recommended it. I didn't include it originally because I wanted people to defend their answers, not just state them. So dada and cable, why?

[Cable]

I don't think the current system works so anything is better. Unless there's two clear top teams, picking two to play doesn't seem fair. I don't follow college football too close, but I know enough to understand that there's always at least 4 teams who could win it all. I said 8 over 4 b/c it gives the chance for an upset, but as I think about it again, it's probably better with 4. Traditionnally I don't think upsets are part of college football's idea of a championship. The best teams should play for the 'ship. Maybe they should take at least one team from each conference, and then the next best teams until they get 8. How many conferences are there?

[Christopherson]

Currently, each conference winner from the major conferences (Pac 10, SEC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12) is ensuraed a spot in a BCS bowl game. There is 4 BCS bowl games, so the remaining spots are decided by the BCS formula rankings. One is the nationaly championship game, the others are basically meaningless, although the teams all get HUGE payouts for playing in the games.

EDIT: I have alot more to say about this, and I'll add it later.

[KIG1]

I would love to see the 8 team playoff. It really wouldn't take that long, and would serve the correct way to determine the champ.

[Christopherson]

I have major issues with the whole top eight playoff idea. I included it because I knew most of you would pick it. Hell, its what most people think they want. However, before you make up your minds about it, consider a few things.

1. Everyone's main beef with the current system is that teams like Auburn from a few years ago get screwed. Teams like Boise State who go undefeated get screwed. (I mean what more do you want them to do? They try and schedule tougher games, nobody wants to play them!) This year there is likely to be a few one-loss teams who get screwed.

2. The only thing the plus-one and eight team playoff add is the possibility for more teams to complain. (Well I can definatley acknowledge the fact that it would also be emensly fun to watch) I mean, how do you choose the eight teams? Here is a list of teams this year who would currently be left out of an eight team playoff. (Using BCS standings) Notre Dame, West Virginia, LSU, Arkansas, Rutgers(although they are likely to move into the top 8 with thier win over then ranked #3 Louisville), Boise St., Wisconsin, Tenesee, Oregon, etc. All of these schools could definatley make an argument that they deserve to make it into the playoff. I could see a situation where any one of those teams could win the playoff as well.

My point is, as it is now, every once in a while we have a controversy like the Auburn shafting. The talk about it sometimes overshadows the championship game and leaves the national champ tainted. By adding 6 more teams to the mix, it gives even more opportunities for teams to claim they were shafted as well, meaning the only thing we end up hearing about is how teams should be playing who aren't.

The way it is now, the entire college football season is like a playoff. Single elimination, in fact. You lose once, you are done; at least as far as national champ aspirations go. If we went to an eight team playoff, the only thing that would happen is teams like Ohio State would take a game off here are there. I mean, if they lose a game, they still make top eight, so who really cares about their game vs. Michigan. (WOW, now that is increadibly hypothetical, but you could imagine a situation where it could be true).

Anyways, I am just trying to say that the system we have now isn't that bad. I could definatley handle a plus one, but if it ain't broke don't fix it. And I really don't thing it's broke.

[ixcuincle]

4) Other option
16 team playoff system



I created that bracket last year when discussing NCAA football with other people on another forum. Since I'm greedy and want to see more exciting football action , a 16-team playoff system sounds good to me. An 8 team playoff is acceptable but not enough.

Here is a list of teams this year who would currently be left out of an eight team playoff. (Using BCS standings) Notre Dame, West Virginia, LSU, Arkansas, Rutgers(although they are likely to move into the top 8 with thier win over then ranked #3 Louisville), Boise St., Wisconsin, Tenesee, Oregon, etc. All of these schools could definatley make an argument that they deserve to make it into the playoff.

Which is exactly why there should be a 16-team playoff. Those who don't participate in the playoffs (17-25 and below) don't deserve to be in the national championship in the first place and should be relegated to minor bowls.

You lose once, you are done; at least as far as national champ aspirations go.

The #2 team in the championship game will most likely have one loss this year.

Anyways, I am just trying to say that the system we have now isn't that bad. I could definatley handle a plus one, but if it ain't broke don't fix it. And I really don't thing it's broke.

You sure about that? How much more broken could it be? What other championship series in the world decides the championship game by #1 V #2? As for the outrageous notion that every single game in college football is a playoff , I address this issue by paraphrasing J.A. Adande of the LA Times. During "Around the Horn" , Adande questioned the preceding belief and stated "What kind of playoff do you know that has 12 games?" If you play 12 games you could trip up and lose 1 , it shouldn't mean you should be out of the championship game forever just because of one measly tripup.

The main issue here is having only 2 teams being eligible for postseason competition. Rutgers could hypothetically go undefeated , but since they didn't have the luck of being ranked 1 or 2 , they are not eligible for the championship! What kind of crazy championship game is this? The same with Boise State (despite Boise State not playing anyone). I would at least like to see 8 teams fight it out between themselves for the right to reach a championship game instead of a stupid computer determining who will go.

[dan_suth]

The only problem with your 16 team bracket is the way it's organized - it should be more like this:

1v16
8v9
5v12
4v13
6v11
3v14
7v10
2v15

The way you have it, the #1 team has to get past the #2 AND #3 (or #4) team before even making it to the championship. It's way too easy for the 8 or 9 seed to go all the way to the final too.

If there's a playoff system, there should definitely not be 16 teams. First of all, that takes 4 weeks to complete. Second of all, anyone outside of the top 8 (maybe even the top 4) don't deserve to be in the national championship game. The national championship game is supposed to be prestigious, it's not supposed to have a #16 seed "cinderella team" get lucky and make it to the final. It's the game between the two best teams in the land, and unfortunately the two best teams are meeting in the last game of the regular season. If Rutgers runs the table, I think they should be in the championship game against the winner of UM/OSU... but I don't know if that will happen. It's most likely going to be USC, assuming they win their remaining games. The system right now is kind of flawed, but really, I don't think there's a "right" way to do it. Maybe a 4 team playoff would be decent.