Death to the BCS- What this year's playoff would have looked like!!!

[HT721]

I would go with 10 spots,bcs conferences each get an auto bid, 4 at large bids (1 guaranteed for a non automatic bid league), top two teams get a first round bye.

[gchs_uk9]

I would go with 10 spots,bcs conferences each get an auto bid, 4 at large bids (1 guaranteed for a non automatic bid league), top two teams get a first round bye.

 

If it's 10 spots, top 2 getting byes, then you have six teams left after the first round. Who get's byes next?

 

If you go with 10, then six teams would avoid first round, or play-in, type games. Basically the last four teams would be playing to get into the last 8. But I can't imagine a situation where an NCAA playoff for D1 football would have any byes.

[RockPride]

I read today that 96% of the NCAA's annual budget is funded from revenue generated by the Man's Basketball tournament. Imagine what would happen if they got their hands on the football money?

[BleedBlue12]

I read today that 96% of the NCAA's annual budget is funded from revenue generated by the Man's Basketball tournament. Imagine what would happen if they got their hands on the football money?

 

That's crazy!! I really wish the NCAA would get rid of the bowl system and just have a playoff like this. That would make me like college football more than the NFL.

[leatherneck]

A 16 team playoff creates 4 additional games for the final two teams. Is there any legit safety concern about having college kids play that many additional games, or would the regular season be shortened by a game or two to dimish the impact? The NFL players are certainly opposed to adding two games due to safety/health concerns (although that may be nothing other than negotiation posturing).

[Randy Parker]

I would go with 10 spots,bcs conferences each get an auto bid, 4 at large bids (1 guaranteed for a non automatic bid league), top two teams get a first round bye.

 

I like 8 teams or this idea you proposed.

[mexitucky]

A 16 team playoff creates 4 additional games for the final two teams. Is there any legit safety concern about having college kids play that many additional games, or would the regular season be shortened by a game or two to dimish the impact? The NFL players are certainly opposed to adding two games due to safety/health concerns (although that may be nothing other than negotiation posturing).

 

I'm a fan of the 11 game regular season. The NFL season would go from 16-18 regular season games. 15 games for the college champion and runner-up is no more than they would play in high school.

[CincySportsFan]

A 16 team playoff creates 4 additional games for the final two teams. Is there any legit safety concern about having college kids play that many additional games, or would the regular season be shortened by a game or two to dimish the impact? The NFL players are certainly opposed to adding two games due to safety/health concerns (although that may be nothing other than negotiation posturing).

 

How many games does a high school kid whose team makes it to the championship game have to play? How many does a college kid at DIII play in if he's in the national championship game? Those kids are already playing 14-15 games a year. The Packers last year played in 19, which would be the high for the NFL.

 

To me, if you want to limit the regular season to 11 games...plus a conference championship game...and the possibility of 4 playoff games...you're not asking those players to do THAT much more in those 16 games, than a lot of others are already doing at other levels/divisions. To use the safety "issue" as a reason to avoid a playoff system is just silly to me (not directed at you, LN).

[BaseballIsLife]

A 16 team playoff creates 4 additional games for the final two teams. Is there any legit safety concern about having college kids play that many additional games, or would the regular season be shortened by a game or two to dimish the impact? The NFL players are certainly opposed to adding two games due to safety/health concerns (although that may be nothing other than negotiation posturing).

 

You could shorten the season to roughly 10 games or so if the number of games were a concern. Have about 7 conference games and 3 non-conference. Or if you didn't want to shorten the number of games, just start the season earlier so we aren't playing into February.

[CincySportsFan]

I'm a fan of the 11 game regular season. The NFL season would go from 16-18 regular season games. 15 games for the college champion and runner-up is no more than they would play in high school.

 

You said what I was trying to say....much, much quicker (and shorter)!

[gchs_uk9]

You could shorten the season to roughly 10 games or so if the number of games were a concern. Have about 7 conference games and 3 non-conference. Or if you didn't want to shorten the number of games, just start the season earlier so we aren't playing into February.

 

That's 1 or 2 less home games. 1 or 2 less amounts of ticket sales. 1 or 2 less amounts of hotel rooms sold. 1 or 2 less amounts of dining at restaurants. Not sure communities and schools want to give that up.

[BaseballIsLife]

That's 1 or 2 less home games. 1 or 2 less amounts of ticket sales. 1 or 2 less amounts of hotel rooms sold. 1 or 2 less amounts of dining at restaurants. Not sure communities and schools want to give that up.

 

I completely understand that but I was just offering a scenario to leatherneck to reduce the number of games if the health and safefty of the players because of the long season was a concern. I'm sure all the schools would be fighting hard to keep the same number of games intact so as to keep the same revenue they are getting now.

[westsider]

Every other level of college football, I believe, has a 16-team tournament to determine its champion.

[leatherneck]

How many games does a high school kid whose team makes it to the championship game have to play? How many does a college kid at DIII play in if he's in the national championship game? Those kids are already playing 14-15 games a year. The Packers last year played in 19, which would be the high for the NFL.

 

To me, if you want to limit the regular season to 11 games...plus a conference championship game...and the possibility of 4 playoff games...you're not asking those players to do THAT much more in those 16 games, than a lot of others are already doing at other levels/divisions. To use the safety "issue" as a reason to avoid a playoff system is just silly to me (not directed at you, LN).

 

I was just throwing the question out there for discussion. Do you think that the level of play makes playing more games much more difficult on the players? The hits in the pros and at the BCS college level are much, much more intense and fierce than at the high school level and D-III level. So I can foresee someone saying that playing 15 games on the high school level is something completely different than playing 16 games at the BCS level. Any validity in that line of thinking? For the record, I couldn't care less whether they leave it the same or change it. Admittedly the playoff concept would be more fun to watch, but I'm not going to get lathered up either way.

[mexitucky]

I was just throwing the question out there for discussion. Do you think that the level of play makes playing more games much more difficult on the players? The hits in the pros and at the BCS college level are much, much more intense and fierce than at the high school level and D-III level. So I can foresee someone saying that playing 15 games on the high school level is something completely different than playing 16 games at the BCS level. Any validity in that line of thinking? For the record, I couldn't care less whether they leave it the same or change it. Admittedly the playoff concept would be more fun to watch, but I'm not going to get lathered up either way.

 

16 games at the BCS level is different in terms of hits, but that would only affect 2 teams. So 2 teams would play what accounts to an NFL regular season. Playoffs make the most sense from a competitive and financial perspective. Competitively you have a definitive champion, well as feasibly as one can be found. Financially, you still have bowl season and the money that that draws. If you schedule the playoffs the proper way, those teams that lose in the first round can still play in a bowl game later, your quarterfinalists would fill the void of the meaningless BCS games, and now, after that you have THE FINAL FOUR. How much money would that bring in???

 

The argument that puts a stick in my crawl is that a playoff somehow makes regular season games less meaningful??? Say what? You would stil have to win your conference, or go through the season with 2 or fewer losses to qualify for the playoffs.

 

Additionally, the system as set up now, punishes teams for losing game 10 as opposed to game 2. I don't understand the thinking behind finding a team that went 11-1 and lost in week 3 is somehow a better team than the 11-1 team that lost in week 10. At least w/ a playoff, the best teams get a chance to decide it on the field. Each 11-1 team gets to prove themselves.

 

The BCS is the perfect example of greed and corruption ruining true competitive spirit.