Alright, All you 16 team playoff Honks!!!

[mormonrasta]

Here's where we are. You can't justify a rational reason why we need FIVE "at-large" teams in a playoff. I can't justify a reason having an undefeated team excluded from the opportunity to play for a championship. So I have found a solution for both of us.

1. Extend the regular season to 13 games. Play from the last Saturday in August to the first Saturday in December. That allows for 13 games plus a conference championship if needed plus a bye week and maybe 2 depending on the year.

2. Create 4 regions

West- Pac10, WAC, MWC (28 teams)
Central- Big 12, CUSA, Big East (32 teams)
East- ACC, SEC, Sun Belt (33 teams)
North- Big 10, MAC, Independents (27 teams)

3. Regionalize the rankings. Have a coaches and media poll from each region. MWC coaches don’t have a clue about Big East teams, but they do have a clue about MWC teams as well as WAC and Pac10 teams if they are playing them all the time. Keep the ranking system local. Keep the national polls for fun.

4. Set aside the last three weeks of the season for regional nonconference play. The designation of home team will be assigned by conference on a yearly basis before the season begins. Example

2020 Pac-10 hosts MWC; MWC hosts WAC; WAC hosts Pac-10
2021 Pac-10 hosts WAC, WAC hosts MWC, MWC hosts Pac-10
2022 Same as 2020
2023 Same as 2021

5. Matchups will be determined by conference finish in that year. Rematches will not be played so next highest ranked team will play their next game. Example:

1st place Pac-10 (Oregon) hosts 1st place MWC (TCU)
1st place MWC (TCU) hosts 1st place WAC (BSU)
1st place WAC (BSU) hosts 2nd place Pac-10 (Arizona as they have already defeated Oregon)

2nd place Pac-10 (Arizona) hosts 2nd place MWC (BYU)
2nd place MWC (BYU) hosts 2nd place WAC (Nevada)
2nd place WAC (Nevada) hosts 1st place Pac-10 (Oregon)

And so forth.

The mismatched bottom feeders will be matched up with mismatched bottom feeders from other regions for example the 10th place Pac 10 team vs. 13th place MAC team.

6. The top ranked conference champion or independent team in each region plays in an UNSEEDED 4 team playoff to be played on a rotating basis between the Orange, Fiesta, and Sugar. The bowl game that gets “left out” gets to select any 2 teams for their game before any other bowl game.

So it would look like this:

2020 Fiesta gets national semi pick #1. Sugar gets picks #2 and #3. Fiesta gets pick #4. Orange is the nonfinalist bowl.
2021 Orange gets national semi pick #1. Fiesta gets picks #2 and #3. Orange gets pick #4. The Sugar is the nonfinalist bowl.
2022 Sugar gets national semi pick #1. Orange gets picks #2 and #3. Sugar gest national semi pick #4. Fiesta is the nonfinalist bowl.

7. The semifinal bowl games are played on Jan 1 (Jan 2 if Jan 1 is a sunday). The Holiday, Capital One, Chik-Fil-A, and Cotton Bowls are upgraded in status to BCS type bowls. They will have first pick of all teams after the 3 major bowls. They will rotate in terms of opportunity. Each game will be played in prime time in between the semifinal and final games. There will be no Sunday games so they don't have to compete with the NFL. Example:

Friday January 1- Fiesta and Sugar
Saturday January 2- Holiday Bowl
Monday January 4- Cotton Bowl
Tuesday January 5- Capital One
Wednesday January 6- Chik-Fil-A
Thursday January 7- Orange Bowl
Friday January 8- Rose Bowl

8. The Rose Bowl will be the championship game each year.
It is the best bowl by far. It's easy to get to. Many airports to fly into. People like going to LA. It has the biggest stadium so more people can watch the game live. Make it like Omaha for college baseball.

Summary: This solves all problems. If you go undefeated you will be your region rep because you beat the other 1st place teams in your region. However, if you don't go undefeated you are subject to the wrath of the polls this makes nonconference games important. It gives teams like BSU and BYU who have a hard time bringing top flight nonconference competition to play at their place a way to make that happen, but the big boy programs can still play their 7 or 8 home games a year. This preserves the relevance and tradition of the bowl system and experience. No scrub "at-large" teams allowed to be called champions. There is still a break for Finals. It would not create any greater travel burden for anybody other than 2 teams.

[craigoscarson]

Hell, I'd be happy with a plus 1 for now. That at least would be a start; it's certainly not the cure. The pie in the sky playoff scenarios are way beyond what the BCS will budge on.

If you took the top 4 teams and seeded them based on the BCS standings you'd have bama cincy - tcu texas - and then the winners for the nc.. I could get behind that big time, as would the rest of the country. All three of those games would be must watch tv, considering what was on the line.


(sorry Boise play someone on the road before you get your shot)

[Lawboy]

Why can't we have 5 at large teams? You telling me we can't find 5 teams that did not win their conference that are not good enough to win it all? That is pure silliness. Just look at the hoops tourney. And please, 11 auto bids? Really? Yeah, because the Sun Belt champ is a world beater. Come one. 16 teams, 9 auto bids, 7 at large.

2009 Auto bids:
Alabama(SEC)
Oregon (PAC 10)
Cincinnati (Big East)
Georgia Tech (ACC)
Ohio State (Big 10)
Texas (Big 12)
TCU (MWC)
Boise State (WAC)
East Carolina (C-USA)

At large:
Florida
Iowa
Virginia Tech
LSU
Penn State
BYU
Miami

No one would complain about the top 9, and most of the 7 at larges would be ok. It is maybe the last 3 in that would cause debate, but so what. Happens with hoops too, and the reality is that the last 3 in are long shots and debatable anyway.

[mormonrasta]

Hell, I'd be happy with a plus 1 for now. That at least would be a start; it's certainly not the cure. The pie in the sky playoff scenarios are way beyond what the BCS will budge on.

If you took the top 4 teams and seeded them based on the BCS standings you'd have bama cincy - tcu texas - and then the winners for the nc.. I could get behind that big time, as would the rest of the country. All three of those games would be must watch tv, considering what was on the line.


(sorry Boise play someone on the road before you get your shot)

I'd like a plus one right now too. However, in my solution BSU would have played a quality team on the road. If they proved worthy they would play for the NC.

[mormonrasta]

Why can't we have 5 at large teams?

Having 5 "at large" teams (or more) would undermine the accomplishments of the respective conference champions of the conferences that the "at-large" teams come from.

It puts champion and nonchampion on the same plane which should not happen in a playoff situation trying to determine the best team in the country.

[Mars]

[imuakahuku]

Here's where we are. You can't justify a rational reason why we need FIVE "at-large" teams in a playoff. I can't justify a reason having an undefeated team excluded from the opportunity to play for a championship. So I have found a solution for both of us.

1. Extend the regular season to 13 games. Play from the last Saturday in August to the first Saturday in December. That allows for 13 games plus a conference championship if needed plus a bye week and maybe 2 depending on the year.

2. Create 4 regions

West- Pac10, WAC, MWC (28 teams)
Central- Big 12, CUSA, Big East (32 teams)
East- ACC, SEC, Sun Belt (33 teams)
North- Big 10, MAC, Independents (27 teams)

3. Regionalize the rankings. Have a coaches and media poll from each region. MWC coaches don’t have a clue about Big East teams, but they do have a clue about MWC teams as well as WAC and Pac10 teams if they are playing them all the time. Keep the ranking system local. Keep the national polls for fun.

4. Set aside the last three weeks of the season for regional nonconference play. The designation of home team will be assigned by conference on a yearly basis before the season begins. Example

2020 Pac-10 hosts MWC; MWC hosts WAC; WAC hosts Pac-10
2021 Pac-10 hosts WAC, WAC hosts MWC, MWC hosts Pac-10
2022 Same as 2020
2023 Same as 2021

5. Matchups will be determined by conference finish in that year. Rematches will not be played so next highest ranked team will play their next game. Example:

1st place Pac-10 (Oregon) hosts 1st place MWC (TCU)
1st place MWC (TCU) hosts 1st place WAC (BSU)
1st place WAC (BSU) hosts 2nd place Pac-10 (Arizona as they have already defeated Oregon)

2nd place Pac-10 (Arizona) hosts 2nd place MWC (BYU)
2nd place MWC (BYU) hosts 2nd place WAC (Nevada)
2nd place WAC (Nevada) hosts 1st place Pac-10 (Oregon)

And so forth.

The mismatched bottom feeders will be matched up with mismatched bottom feeders from other regions for example the 10th place Pac 10 team vs. 13th place MAC team.

6. The top ranked conference champion or independent team in each region plays in an UNSEEDED 4 team playoff to be played on a rotating basis between the Orange, Fiesta, and Sugar. The bowl game that gets “left out” gets to select any 2 teams for their game before any other bowl game.

So it would look like this:

2020 Fiesta gets national semi pick #1. Sugar gets picks #2 and #3. Fiesta gets pick #4. Orange is the nonfinalist bowl.
2021 Orange gets national semi pick #1. Fiesta gets picks #2 and #3. Orange gets pick #4. The Sugar is the nonfinalist bowl.
2022 Sugar gets national semi pick #1. Orange gets picks #2 and #3. Sugar gest national semi pick #4. Fiesta is the nonfinalist bowl.

7. The semifinal bowl games are played on Jan 1 (Jan 2 if Jan 1 is a sunday). The Holiday, Capital One, Chik-Fil-A, and Cotton Bowls are upgraded in status to BCS type bowls. They will have first pick of all teams after the 3 major bowls. They will rotate in terms of opportunity. Each game will be played in prime time in between the semifinal and final games. There will be no Sunday games so they don't have to compete with the NFL. Example:

Friday January 1- Fiesta and Sugar
Saturday January 2- Holiday Bowl
Monday January 4- Cotton Bowl
Tuesday January 5- Capital One
Wednesday January 6- Chik-Fil-A
Thursday January 7- Orange Bowl
Friday January 8- Rose Bowl

8. The Rose Bowl will be the championship game each year.
It is the best bowl by far. It's easy to get to. Many airports to fly into. People like going to LA. It has the biggest stadium so more people can watch the game live. Make it like Omaha for college baseball.

Summary: This solves all problems. If you go undefeated you will be your region rep because you beat the other 1st place teams in your region. However, if you don't go undefeated you are subject to the wrath of the polls this makes nonconference games important. It gives teams like BSU and BYU who have a hard time bringing top flight nonconference competition to play at their place a way to make that happen, but the big boy programs can still play their 7 or 8 home games a year. This preserves the relevance and tradition of the bowl system and experience. No scrub "at-large" teams allowed to be called champions. There is still a break for Finals. It would not create any greater travel burden for anybody other than 2 teams.

Now that is serious lawyer speak. Can we "justify" with a "rational reason" a "need" for the five at-large teams? We don't "need" college football to begin with so your statement is true. And justifying with rational reason is very subjective.

But for the sake of arguement, I "prefer" having the 16 team playoff because I like the idea of 16 teams that still have a shot at the national championship after all the season and confrence championship games are done. I will however underline "my" reasons that I feel are rational for the five at large teams.

First things first however. What happens if a team goes undefeated in conference play but goes 0-4 in non-conference play including losses to a couple of fairly weak teams? Say one of your non-conf losses was a blow-out to one of the other division champs who then plays your division number two and loses. But you beat his division number two and the champ of the other division. By your example the four loss team should be the regional champion and thus be the regional rep to the championship tournament even if they happen to be 9-4 and the other team ends at 12-1. Another senario could be, the one conference champ is undefeated and loses in the round robin play to a 3 loss champion but demolishes the other champion who just barely loses to the three loss champ. So the three loss team goes 2-0, the one loss team goes 1-1 and the other champ goes 0-2. What happens now? Another playoff? The three loss team goes and the one loss team goes to a consolation bowl. Unless the rankings say the one loss still goes. So the three loss champ claims foul because they beat the other two champs. Repeat that senario in at least one of the other regions and you have a whole lot of unhappy people. (kinda like how it is now)

With the 16 team playoff every champ is in it until they lose and throw in the five at large teams to round out the field with the best teams from that season and you get very few cries of foul. I would easily imagine that most fans would feel the NC was decided on the field (provided they don't use pac-10 refs) and that pollsters had nothing or nearly nothing to do with it . And what happens if Nebraska had beaten OK in this senario? Neb plays the #1'S from the other confs and provided they win those two games, end up in the playoffs while Texas has been eliminated. In the 16 team playoff, Tx (and Fla for that matter) could have lost the conf champ game and still had a shot at the NC. I see this as a good thing because Tx and Fla will be judged on their body of work instead of on the last game of the season.

No thanks, I'll stick with the idea of all the conf champs going to a playoff and five at large teams getting an invite based on rankings and/or sos. Some pretty good teams lose early season games and are then penalized the rest of the season because of those losses. Teams grow and improve throughout the season so I like the idea of having an early season stumble not end up being a complete fall from any possible chance of playing for the NC.. If they are going to crown someone an NC then they ought to make it possible for every team to have a chance to play for it.

[imuakahuku]

Why can't we have 5 at large teams?

Having 5 "at large" teams (or more) would undermine the accomplishments of the respective conference champions of the conferences that the "at-large" teams come from.

It puts champion and nonchampion on the same plane which should not happen in a playoff situation trying to determine the best team in the country.

So Fla is lower than Texas? Or had Tx lost to Neb they should be lower than Neb? Too much wiggle room in that thought for me.

I really enjoy March Madness, and would be very dissappointed if they only included conf champs.

[mormonrasta]

First things first however. What happens if a team goes undefeated in conference play but goes 0-4 in non-conference play including losses to a couple of fairly weak teams? Say one of your non-conf losses was a blow-out to one of the other division champs who then plays your division number two and loses. But you beat his division number two and the champ of the other division. By your example the four loss team should be the regional champion and thus be the regional rep to the championship tournament even if they happen to be 9-4 and the other team ends at 12-1.

No. The matchups within the division are not playoff games. Rather, they are games that provide context for the rankings. The highest ranked conference champion represents the division. Your scenario greatly depends on how good the other conference champs are.

Another senario could be, the one conference champ is undefeated and loses in the round robin play to a 3 loss champion but demolishes the other champion who just barely loses to the three loss champ. So the three loss team goes 2-0, the one loss team goes 1-1 and the other champ goes 0-2. What happens now? Another playoff? The three loss team goes and the one loss team goes to a consolation bowl. Unless the rankings say the one loss still goes. So the three loss champ claims foul because they beat the other two champs. Repeat that senario in at least one of the other regions and you have a whole lot of unhappy people. (kinda like how it is now)

Once again, it would be the highest ranked team. If you have a 12-1 conference champ that played in a tough conference they would most certainly go over the conference champs with inferior records. However, if that 12-1 champ's only quality games of the year were against the other conference champs, it is very likely that the 9-3 team could get in over the 12-1 team. SOS has to still matter.

Bottom line, in my system if you go undefeated there is no doubt you will represent your division. If you don't go undefeated, you are subject to the polls. That way the high standard of the college football regular season is maintained.

With the 16 team playoff every champ is in it until they lose and throw in the five at large teams to round out the field with the best teams from that season and you get very few cries of foul. I would easily imagine that most fans would feel the NC was decided on the field (provided they don't use pac-10 refs) and that pollsters had nothing or nearly nothing to do with it .

Throw in 5 teams? Who determines these 5 teams? THE POLLSTERS!!!! So when you say the pollsters have nothing or nearly nothing to do with it that is completely false. 1/3 of the field is based on the arbitrary decisions of pollsters. That's substantial. Bottom line, it is impossible to take the subjectivity out of college football.

Few cries of foul? What about the teams who win their conference, but don't get a 2nd chance like the "at-large" teams do? How is that fair to them?

And what happens if Nebraska had beaten OK in this senario? Neb plays the #1'S from the other confs and provided they win those two games, end up in the playoffs while Texas has been eliminated. In the 16 team playoff, Tx (and Fla for that matter) could have lost the conf champ game and still had a shot at the NC. I see this as a good thing because Tx and Fla will be judged on their body of work instead of on the last game of the season.

Are you serious about Florida-Alabama? Wasn't that game decided on the field? Both teams went undefeated, but Alabama played a tougher schedule. They met in the SEC championship to determine the conference champion and therefore the best team in the conference. Alabama won decisively. End of discussion. Both teams are great teams, but we don't need a playoff to determine who is better. We KNOW who is better.

If Florida gets a 2nd chance beats Alabama in the playoff, does Alabama get a another chance to beat Florida? If the answer is no, then the system is completely bogus.

As far as your Texas-Nebraska example, once again it depends on how good the other conference champs are. It's hard to feel sorry for Texas if they lost because in my system if they win all their games they are in. Period.

No thanks, I'll stick with the idea of all the conf champs going to a playoff and five at large teams getting an invite based on rankings and/or sos. Some pretty good teams lose early season games and are then penalized the rest of the season because of those losses. Teams grow and improve throughout the season so I like the idea of having an early season stumble not end up being a complete fall from any possible chance of playing for the NC.. If they are going to crown someone an NC then they ought to make it possible for every team to have a chance to play for it.

Under my system every team would have a chance to play for a NC. Go undefeated you win the NC. Yeah, that's a pretty high standard, but that's what makes college football great and every game count. If you have an extended playoff you lower that standard and therefore decrease the meaning of games and the regular season as a whole. Games like BSU-Oregon, Florida-Alabama, and Alabama-Virginia Tech carry no meaning as win or lose all of those team get into a playoff.

If a pretty good team has an early season slip up and is denied playing for the National Championship, GOOD!!! Championships are for the great not the pretty good. The pretty good teams can enjoy their bowl game. The great teams don't slip up or slip up less than the pretty good.

[mormonrasta]

Why can't we have 5 at large teams?

Having 5 "at large" teams (or more) would undermine the accomplishments of the respective conference champions of the conferences that the "at-large" teams come from.

It puts champion and nonchampion on the same plane which should not happen in a playoff situation trying to determine the best team in the country.

So Fla is lower than Texas? Or had Tx lost to Neb they should be lower than Neb? Too much wiggle room in that thought for me.

I really enjoy March Madness, and would be very dissappointed if they only included conf champs.

What are playoffs supposed to do? The answer is find the best team in a given year. Florida MAY be better than Texas, MAY be better than Cincy, MAY be better than BSU, but we don't know for sure. What we do KNOW is Alabama is better than Florida. Since we KNOW Alabama is better than Florida we don't need Florida in the playoff because we KNOW they aren't the best team.

I enjoy March Madness too, but the tournament would have more integrity if it only included regular season conference champs (which it used to do, before they got greedy). Since they have opened it up to "at-large" teams the balance of power has gravitated to the 6 major conferences.

I would love it if they reduced the amount of "at-large" teams. I wouldn't miss the 8th place team in the Big East, or 3rd place team from the Big 10, or 4th place team from the ACC at all. I would like it even more if they had the top 16 regular season conference champs in the NCAA tournament and the other 17 conference champs and 47 "at-large" duke it out in the NIT.