BCS Playoff and how to do it

Send that idea to the NCAA!

Like your idea, but really do they need 16 teams. I'd be happy if they had an 8 team playoff. That would get rid of most of the problems about who is deserving of being the National Champions. (I think?)

Sacre Bleu! You want the BCS teams to share the revenue with all those other insignicant mid major football programs. I love how the NCAA came up with the term 1-AA when they kicked half of Div 1 to the curb. It kept them from calling it Div 2 and knocking everyone else down one level. Then the major conferences came up with BCS and non BCS programs. Pull out the "C" and the situation is aptly named.

If there every becomes a playoff system it will be held among the greedy BCS teams with one invite to an outsider if they qualify. No sleepers allowed. Why have the excitement that is college basketball?

In a foolish, selfish, must be inebriated, frame of mind I whipped out this formula from the top of my head. Don't be too critical because there's no way any intelligent person would accept in real life....

Teams are assigned a certain number of points for their performance. These values are then totaled to produce a team's final score. The team with the lowest point total gets the No. 1 spot for the week. There are two subjective polls, The Associated Press and the Coaches Poll. Members of both groups cast their votes based on what they think about a team's performance.

A national board of sports writers and broadcasters participate in the AP poll. A select group of coaches vote towards their poll. The BCS incorporates their input by averaging team rankings from these polls. There are eight computer programs that make up this variable.

Most of these programs were designed by people with backgrounds in math or statistics. Their formulas factor in a diverse mix of variables, from who won to where a game was played. To get a team's point total, the lowest ranking is excluded, and the remaining seven are averaged to produce the team's score. This prevents any one computer's results from ruining a team's chances at No. 1 or No. 2. A team's strength of schedule compares to other teams nationally. The cumulative win/loss record of the team's opponents and their opponents' foes are included in this calculation. This makes squads think twice about lining up a horde of teams they know that they can trounce on the field. The computer produces a numerical value representing the strength of the opponents schedule and also those opponents' foes. The opponent's scheduled strength is merited twice as much as their opponents' schedule. Once they have been placed in order, this list is then divided by quarters. Each loss equals one point, and is added precisely to a team's total score. A lower point sum means a higher rank.

coach, I like most of it but I have one problem...

Your schedule screws up Army-Navy. Sure, you could force them to change just like all the conference championships, but I don't like the idea of messing up tradition. The conferences did that awhile ago when they moved to playing games the same weekend as Army-Navy.

Army-Navy used to be a BIG DEAL. I realize neither has competed for a National Championship in a long time (last National Championship for either of them was Army in 1946) but contrary to what sports writers believe, Army-Navy is still a BIG DEAL!!

Army-Navy will be the 2nd Saturday in December starting next season. I am pretty sure it becomes the only game that day and CBS is going to cover the ENTIRE thing from the March On through the game all the way to the very end including the Alma Mater for each school.


Sorry.. only flaw I find in your schedule

I remember as a kid growing up the Army-Navy game was as big as any game that year. My dad being in the Air force probably had a little to do with it, but Nationally it was a big game.

quote:

Originally posted by Danny Boydston:
I remember as a kid growing up the Army-Navy game was as big as any game that year. My dad being in the Air force probably had a little to do with it, but Nationally it was a big game.

After I took my son to the Army-Navy game and had him read "A Civil War: Army Vs. Navy a Year Inside College Football's Purest Rivalry," he was gung ho to attend one of the schools. Then he saw a multi-part show on Discovery on being a plebe.

"Dad, compared to them I'm a puss."

RJM, that is a great book! Also, National Geographic had "Surviving West Point" a few years ago which was a pretty good show but they only had a few episodes. Another good book about the United States Military Academy is "Absolutely American: Four Years at West Point" by David Lipsky.

I found this interesting the other day...a viewpoint on why not to do it that I hadn't heard before.

Argument for college football playoff doesn't fly

Or maybe the seats are empty because the fans realize how little many of those bowls actually mean?

Bulldog - Do you really think fans/alums/students of all but 3 or 4 schools will travel on 3 consecutive weekends to see this? Sure, some will...but the 20,000 or so to make it worthwhile?

Not likely.

It works in the NFL because the fans only have to plan for 1 trip...the Super Bowl. Unless of course, you'd want to have the quarter and semi finals in cold snow-packed stadiums?

I thought it was an interesting point.

quote:

Originally posted by justbaseball:
I found this interesting the other day...a viewpoint on why not to do it that I hadn't heard before.

Argument for college football playoff doesn't fly

jbb - your link does not work - I'll remove this post if you can fix it. Thanks!

quote:

Bulldog - Do you really think fans/alums/students of all but 3 or 4 schools will travel on 3 consecutive weekends to see this? Sure, some will...but the 20,000 or so to make it worthwhile?

Not likely.

It works in the NFL because the fans only have to plan for 1 trip...the Super Bowl. Unless of course, you'd want to have the quarter and semi finals in cold snow-packed stadiums?

I thought it was an interesting point.

Well I think there is a point to be made, but it leaves out the point that I made too. I've read that there are several bowls who didn't make any money because of the empty seats. People don't care who plays in the Thisgameispittingtwobadteams.com Bowl played in Nowhereland for some meaningless trophy.

And yes, I have no problem watching football in "cold snow-packed stadiums." Football is an all-weather sport.

And why not play games at home sites? It's not like these bowls are exactly neutral sites or anything...

CD, here is the commentary/article (San Jose Mercury News):

Purdy: Argument for college football playoff doesn't fly

By Mark Purdy
Mercury News Sports Columnist
Posted: 01/03/2009 09:06:54 PM PST

Never fails. College football always begins the new year on an all-beef diet.

This time, it is Utah beef. And I totally understand.

By winning the Sugar Bowl impressively Friday night, the University of Utah team ensured that it will finish with the only undefeated record among America's top-tier programs.

Also, under the current system, the mighty Utes are assured of not being able to win the Bowl Championship Series national championship. Probably ever. That is the penance paid by a team from the Mountain West. Or from any other non-BCS conference.

Hence, the beef. And it really is legitimate. It would be fun to see Utah play the winner of Thursday's BCS title game between Florida and Oklahoma. It would be the fair thing to do. And it would be logical, in broader terms, to set up a simple eight-team postseason tournament that would guarantee no such beefs.

It also would be the most impractical, counterproductive and risky thing the NCAA could do. I became more convinced of that than ever, watching the bowl schedule unfurl the past two weeks.

I should note that this contention is unrelated to the quasi-religious verbal war that constantly rages between the Playoff-Reformites and the Bowl-Orthodoxists.

Frankly, that aspect of the BCS debate has become tiresome. The arguments are set in stone. The Playoff-Reformites believe in a playoff because it's the best way to determine the best team. The Bowl-Orthodoxists believein the current system because it is profoundly traditional and preserves the importance of the regular season.

I won't go anywhere near those arguments. I am an agnostic when it comes to playoff-vs.-bowls theology. But if I am a college president or administrator and am thinking pragmatically, I would run away and hide from any playoff proposals.

Maybe you were like me. You watched a lot of the bowl games. And you looked closely at the crowd shots. And you saw many unoccupied seats.
Not at the Rose Bowl or Sugar Bowl, maybe. But at the Orange Bowl, definitely. Also at the Capital One Bowl, Outback Bowl and Alamo Bowl, among many others. And the rotten economy isn't the entire reason. Last year, West Virginia had to eat a million dollars' worth of Fiesta Bowl tickets that the school was supposed to sell. Even the most loyal fans of the most successful programs must think long and hard about the expense of traveling far to see their teams.

Why, then, is there such a passionate demand by the Playoff-Reformites to create so many more vacant bleachers?
Here's what I mean: The most common football playoff proposal is for an eight-team field. That would create four quarterfinals, two semifinals and one championship game. Under virtually every projected format I've seen, these seven games would be played at current bowl sites. And that would require the dedicated fans of the two finalists to attend three games in three cities on three consecutive weekends.

Gary Cavalli, who knows much about the college football landscape, can tell you how absurd that idea is.

"You would definitely have empty seats, particularly those early round games," Cavalli said. "It's tough enough for fans to make travel arrangements on three weeks' notice for bowl games right now. How could they do it on just one week's notice? How many could afford it?"
I should acknowledge that Cavalli has a significant dog in this hunt. As executive director of the Emerald Bowl — which is played each December at AT&T Park — he likes the current setup just fine. Cavalli just packed his stadium for a Cal-Miami matchup, mostly with Golden Bear folks who "traveled" less than an hour to the kickoff. They went home happy. Cal won.

But let's say the game had been a playoff quarterfinal. What if those Cal fans would have had to scramble for tickets to Miami or Phoenix the following week for a semifinal? How many would do that? See the problem?

The alternative would be to utilize home sites for the quarterfinal and semifinal games. That's how the NFL works. But good luck getting coaches and athletic directors to agree with the home-site concept for a college playoff. Does anyone actually believe that Texas would want to play Ohio State in Columbus this time of year, in a playoff game?

"If you did do home sites, it would give one team an incredible advantage," Cavalli said. "And you've also basically eliminated the current bowls."
If we were talking about a national security issue, my opinion might change. But this is college football. I can live with the current January all-beef diet. Or do you really want to see the NCAA set the table and have nobody show up to eat?

quote:

"If you did do home sites, it would give one team an incredible advantage," Cavalli said. "And you've also basically eliminated the current bowls."

Can we decide that BCS really stands for Boring Change System? Why are they the only ones where the "home sites" do not work? Football Championship Series playoffs games are played at home sites, DII playoff games are likely played at home sites, DIII playoffs games are played at home sites, as noted NFL playoff games are played at home sites!!

But only in the BCS are "playoff games" not played at home sites. But some of them come real close!

Bulldog good point about the Army / Navy game and the only solution I could come up with would be play it on Thanksgiving Day. I think that set up would bring a lot of the luster back to the game and keep the NFL from having to put the Detroit Lions on TV.

I couldn't get the link to open up either JBB but from what I have read what you put and Bulldog's reply the article talks about if people would follow teams on consecutive weeks.

If that is what you are talking about then think about it like this - what are the chances a team actually making it through all the rounds as the visiting team? In any playoff scenario there has to be an away team and there is the possiblity of a team making it all the way through going on the road all the time. If that does happen then the team is likely not to be favored to win and the fact they keep winning will create the support needed.

Look how many people drove / flew to Louisiana from Utah just to watch one game. As a team gets deeper into the playoffs as a visiting team there will be more and more support. The first round the seats might not be sold but by the third round they will be sold.

All the other divisions in football have a playoff and the road teams fans travel. I don't have any numbers to back this up but if they weren't making any money from playoffs they wouldn't be doing it.

Coach, I wouldn't mind seeing that but that means that the Eagles could never have a home game on Thanksgiving. I don't know much of a problem that would be, but there is potential to be an issue there since the Army-Navy game is played at Lincoln Financial rather than at one of their respective stadiums. I don't really see the Academies being too interested in it though..

Another question.. why do the playoff games need to be played on consecutive weeks?

quote:

Originally posted by Bulldog 19:
Coach, I wouldn't mind seeing that but that means that the Eagles could never have a home game on Thanksgiving. I don't know much of a problem that would be, but there is potential to be an issue there since the Army-Navy game is played at Lincoln Financial rather than at one of their respective stadiums. I don't really see the Academies being too interested in it though..

Another question.. why do the playoff games need to be played on consecutive weeks?

You could still have Army / Navy on Thursday and Eagles on Sunday couldn't you? I'm not real sure though.

As for your playoff games on consecutive weeks in my scenario just get rid of the conference championships and play the first round then. Take a week off and play the 2nd round games.

I'm not a fan of taking time off because the current set up with the BCS bowls is ridiculous. When Florida and Oklahoma take the field Thursday it will be 33 days since they last played. The past two years when Ohio State was in the NC game they were looking at being off around 40 some days because they didn't have a conference championship game. I don't think one week would be bad but once you start

As for the article I'm going to have to say tough when Ohio State has to play on the road against Texas. The way the bowls are going they are setting up home fields anyway - Cal played in SF; UNC played in NC; Vanderbilt played in TN; Hawaii always plays in Hawaii; Central Michigan in Detroit; South Florida in Florida; Rice in TX; USC in CA.

Plus the article only discredits the play the games at current bowl sites scenario. I agree that is terrible situation for a playoff. To do a playoff you got to have home sites.

The empty seats issue is tricky. Some bowls are "sell outs" because the schools are given so many tickets to sell and if they don't then the school has to pay the bowl for the tickets. So the number of tickets sold is not even close to the number of people in seats. If you do a playoff and use home sites I really doubt you will find that many empty seats.

Coach - I like your points...so don't take anything I say as argumentative.

Last season we followed our son's college baseball team all the way to the CWS. It was a HUGE drain on us financially and professionally (our jobs). There is no way, simply no way I would follow that path (3 weekends in a row) as a fan or alum or student.

If my team were (this year) Oklahoma or Florida, I'd wait it out until the final game hoping they'd make it. If my team were Utah, I'd travel for one game only and probably the first one.

I'd love to see a playoff system...but practically speaking, I see the author's point.

Coach, yes I think they could play Army-Navy on Thursday and the Eagles on Sunday.

I agree with what you say about having a ton of time off, but I don't see playing every 10 or 12 days or something like that.

As far as "home" bowl games, let's not forget the National Championship game is being played in Florida!

quote:

Coach - I like your points...so don't take anything I say as argumentative

No problem at all JBB and I see your point. You don't have to answer this and I apologize if this offends you but would you consider your family - upper, middle or lower class?

Reason I ask is I understand completely about how much of a financial burden it can be to follow teams. I doubt you will find middle or lower class people making that trek a lot. I think if they did a playoff after a couple of years you would see hotels, airplanes, tour busses and schools start to put together travel packages to help people start to get there.

In my scenario using current BCS standings Florida and Oklahoma would not go on the road until the semi and championship games. That is just two weekends and I think people could find a way to pay for that. Whoever the Sunbelt champ is would be on the road one time as a lower seed and get beat (usually) so that is their one trip.

Honestly in my scenario I think the most a team would travel is three times. And this would be rare.

It doesn't offend me, but I'd still rather not answer directly. Lets just say it didn't send us into bankruptcy, but I sure wouldn't do it (again) without a family member involved.

I was at the Orange Bowl this year...traveled from California to see the two teams of my childhood. I sat in the Cincinnati section (nearly full). Most of those around me were young folks...students? Yes, some high rollers were surely there...but not 20,000 of them. And I wouldn't have gone at all if somehow either team was the 7th/8th team in a playoff system...I would've waited until the finals if they were somehow still involved...which was not likely at all. Further, I would've never traveled to say, Gainesville, to watch them likely get crushed.

The current bowl system provides a giant party for fans/alums/students to get together (usually in warm weather) and have a lot of fun for a few days. Thats my experience at the Orange Bowl and I'm darn glad it was that way, at least this year.

I agree...the Florida, Oklahoma, USC fans would find a way to make it out of town for 2 weekends...maybe even 3? But enough of them? Would Utah? Should it all be set up for the 3-5 schools who travel well?

I like your format. But I think this commentator has some valid points that I hadn't considered previously. Thats all, nothing more.

I agree that the author makes some good points and it does make you think about early rounds not selling well. I wonder how the first weekends of the NCAA basketball sell because I have never paid any real attention to that. Any playoff scenario probably won't have sell outs in the first round so what is the line (or standard) of sold / filled seats to say a game was a financial success? I think if someone can come up with that answer of what a financially successful game is we could get a clearer picture of if a playoff would work.

Agree with your post completely.

I do think its easier to sell out a 15,000 seat basketball arena (with at least 4 teams participating on a given day) than an 80,000 seat football stadium.

And while I haven't paid attention in the past 5 years or so, before that I saw plenty of empty seats on TV even in the basketball arenas for 1st/2nd round games.

Who says that a fan has to travel all three weekends? Those that are likely to be in multiple games are most likely powerhouses who have literally millions of fans all over the country.

Sure if some smaller FBS school was travelling across the country, they might be hard-pressed to find 15-20 thousand fans to show up for more than one game.

But I got news for you... if Texas, Ohio State, USC, Florida, Oklahoma, LSU all played in multiple games, I'd almost guarentee that they'd have plenty of fans at each one even on th road. Sure, that's 6 powerhouses but guess what? Those six teams are probably more likely to be fighting for a National Championship more years than not!

And if a Utah, Fresno State, Missouri, etc were to be fighting for a National Championship, I think you'd see quite a few fans for the "once in a lifetime" opportunity.

So you want a system that keeps the top-6 or so firmly entrenched there? Will the invitations to the national championship series be based on who will bring the most fans? Will Utah get left out for sure?

Yes, yes...current system (BCS) is already somewhat that way. But you're (bulldog) advocating entrenching it as best as I can tell.

I was 100% an advocate for a playoff system a week ago. After my experience at the Orange Bowl and reading this article...I'm down to about 40/60. With your argument about the big-6, I'd be down to 0/100.

JBB, I would LOVE to see other schools win a National Championship. Seriously I would because I hate all of the schools I mentioned!

Tell me this... who would you expect to see if you went to the College World Series this year? I'll bet they'd be teams who have been there multiple times before. Did you predict Fresno State to win the College World Series last year? How about basketball? Is Podunk U gonna win it all? Do they have a chance to win it all?

In other sports, ANY school has a CHANCE. FBS football that is not the case.

quote:

Originally posted by Bulldog 19:
RJM, that is a great book! Also, National Geographic had "Surviving West Point" a few years ago which was a pretty good show but they only had a few episodes. Another good book about the United States Military Academy is "Absolutely American: Four Years at West Point" by David Lipsky.

Just as an aside...

The book "Absolutely American", is probably the best, most unbiased and enjoyable read I have ever seen on a service academy. David Lipsky was granted full access to West Point for 4 years, with 9/11 falling within that timeframe. Lipsky is neither pro Army or pro Service Academy, but a journalist with a keen eye for observation and a wit and way that makes this book enjoyable while giving a good look into the life of an academy cadet. If you ever wanted to know more about a service academy, I highly reccomend this read...

...and now, back to our regularly scheduled programing.

The system is fine as it is. There's too many bowl games anyway and eerybody claims they're #1 anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by coach2709:
Bulldog good point about the Army / Navy game and the only solution I could come up with would be play it on Thanksgiving Day. I think that set up would bring a lot of the luster back to the game and keep the NFL from having to put the Detroit Lions on TV.

The down side is that cadet attendance at this game is mandatory, which means that they don't get to come home for the first time since mid August. In addition, they only get 14 days over Christmas. For spring sport athletes, that means that the only time they would come home all school year is those 14 days. As an example, my son will only be home for 8 days this summer with summer military training. That means that he would only get 22 days per calander year at home. I can't ever see the Academies agreeing to this one. IMHO

Army/Navy moved to the open weekend at ESPN's request. It was because the game currently falls on conference championship weekend and they were going to drop Army/Navy if they didn't move. I don't think the NCAA or television would hesitate for a split second to kick Army/Navy to the curb to facilitate a playoff...and who could blame them.

quote:

Look how many people drove / flew to Louisiana from Utah just to watch one game.

Utah and BYU fans travel. Try driving on I-15 when BYU or Utah are playing in southern California. You'll be in a thousand car caravan. I remember driving northboard to go skiing the night before BYU was in a Holiday Bowl. The stream of cars was constant from Barstow, CA (north of San Bernadino) to Provo, UT.

quote:

The way the bowls are going they are setting up home fields anyway - Cal played in SF; UNC played in NC; Vanderbilt played in TN; Hawaii always plays in Hawaii; Central Michigan in Detroit; South Florida in Florida; Rice in TX; USC in CA.

This is done intentionally with the lesser bowl games to fill the stadium. In the case of USC they just happened to be the Pac 10 champion. However, I've always felt the Pac 10 has an advantage in the Rose Bowl. The Pac 10 teams are in LA every year between SC and UCLA. The "wow" factor/distraction isn't as applicable.

Bulldog 19 - I happen to agree with your take on things. They can always find a reason for NOT doing something. You have come with practical reasons for doing SOMETHING.

They will first have to come up with a seeding system. Walla! They already have one with the BCS poll that includes all the other national polls.

There should be no automatic bids for a conference - you are either ranked in the top eight or you are not.

The top four seeds play at home and continue to play at home as long as they win. Only the national championship is played at a neutral site. This format works just fine for the NFL.

After the top 8 teams are decided, the other remaining 56 teams are sent to their respective bowls as they always have been. The national championship can rotate between the four major bowls each year as it currently does.

What is so controversial about that? No one gets frozen out and it is decided on the field. Sure there will be some complaining by the 9th and 10th best teams but who cares?

Everyone still makes lots of money and people like justbb who enjoy the bowl experience can still participate in that - if their team is one of the top 64. Thus, the regular season is still meaningful.

Why won't they do it? The present system generates lots of publicity for the NCAA. The old saying is that even bad publicity is good publicity. Keeping it the way it is will always keep the paying public interested imho by keeping the present controversy brewing.

quote:

they were going to drop Army/Navy if they didn't move.

Army-Navy isn't on ESPN... and I don't think I've ever seen it on ESPN.

quote:

This is done intentionally with the lesser bowl games to fill the stadium. In the case of USC they just happened to be the Pac 10 champion. However, I've always felt the Pac 10 has an advantage in the Rose Bowl. The Pac 10 teams are in LA every year between SC and UCLA. The "wow" factor/distraction isn't as applicable.

Did you just call the Rose Bowl a "lesser" bowl game? Or the National Championship a "lesser" bowl game?

I understand what you're saying with the Thesetwoteamsarebad.com bowls but... And I also understand it's not something USC or Florida or the National Championship committee can do much about. The National Championship site is chosen long before we know who is going to be in that game.

quote:

This format works just fine for the NFL.

I hate it when others do this to me...take one sentence out of a longer post and pick it apart...so CD, I am NOT taking a shot at your post...just wanna use one sentence to make a point. Sorry.

And that point is...I don't want it to be like the NFL. I love college sports MORE precisely because it is NOT like the pro sports. The bowl system is unique, it is flawed (somewhat seriously), it does not produce a clear national champion...but I like it...a lot!

quote:

Tell me this... who would you expect to see if you went to the College World Series this year? I'll bet they'd be teams who have been there multiple times before. Did you predict Fresno State to win the College World Series last year? How about basketball? Is Podunk U gonna win it all? Do they have a chance to win it all?

Bulldog - same apology to you upfront. My answer is that despite everything unfair the NCAA tried to do to Fresno State (e.g. seeding 4th in a tough regional and super-regional), they still won. So no, I don't trust the NCAA anymore than the BCS to pick the right 8 teams. As you yourself point out, the 'big-6' will have a tremendous advantage just in the selection...let alone home fields where there stadiums are bigger. If, by some chance...2-3 years from now my Cincinnati is a top-8...or even top-4 team (OK, just imagine with me )...do you really think the NCAA would let them host a quarter-final game in their 35,000 seat stadium...but with as good an atmosphere as anywhere? How about Fresno's 41,000 seat stadium? Or in the mountains of Utah? Not a chance!

In the current bowl system (which there are too many bowls)...64 teams get to go somewhere and have a party...32 of them get to end their season on a win. That is good for college sports IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by justbaseball:

quote:

This format works just fine for the NFL.

I hate it when others do this to me...take one sentence out of a longer post and pick it apart...so CD, I am NOT taking a shot at your post...just wanna use one sentence to make a point. Sorry.

And that point is...I don't want it to be like the NFL. I love college sports MORE precisely because it is NOT like the pro sports. The bowl system is unique, it is flawed (somewhat seriously), it does not produce a clear national champion...but I like it...a lot!

No need to apologize - I did it to you ONCE so turn-about is fair play

Seriously, my only comment about the NFL was that the only time a neutral site is required is for the championship. We have seen NFL wild card teams win the whole thing so to me that wipes out the "home field" is everything argument. You don't like playing on the road, then earn a top 4 seed (in my hyothetical system).

I like the bowls too! I love New Years Day and they seemed to have ruined that experience somewhat by causing two games to be played this week. Under my hypothetical system, the bowls reamin in tact including the NC. The only games that fall outside the bowl system are the preliminary playoff rounds (two weekends). Not sure we are disagreeing on all that much actually

Well, all I know is that the current structure got me to the Orange Bowl which got me to lunch with TPM.

HA! Take that! That alone resolves the issue.




Current bowl structure = Lunch with hsbaseballweb friend (and a famous one at that!).

quote:

Originally posted by Bulldog 19:
Army-Navy isn't on ESPN... and I don't think I've ever seen it on ESPN.

I misspoke, it's CBS. Point is still the same.

Either way I like that it'll be on its own rather than being the same weekend as everything else. I've heard though that it is going to have some sort of effect on the Academies' Finals weeks. Going from Army-Navy week straight into finals..