Best College Football Playoff System
Ever since Mark Cuban got us all talking about getting a playoff in college football, the Internet has been buzzing about the best college football playoff system. Of course there are several ideas out there, some with merit, some just nonsense. Anyone who has read “Death To The BCS” knows some of the hurdles to a playoff. So it is with that in mind that I’ve decided to stop thinking optimistically or ideally about the situation and think realistically.
So let’s be realistic about a couple of things that should change but won’t.
1. The NCAA will not step in and create a mega-realignment of the conferences to balance them out and make them fair.
2. The NCAA will not be changing requirements for FBS or FCS anytime soon. The teams we have in the FBS are the teams we have in the FBS. We’re not getting rid of any of them.
3. The NCAA will never prohibit FBS vs. FCS games, as this is a requirement to move up from the FCS to FBS.
4. No playoff proposal will survive that doesn’t have some kind of contingency plan for the bowls.
These are four realities that I will just have to deal with. I would love to realign conferences to be more balanced. I would love to just drop about 40 FBS teams back to the FCS. I would love to cease all FBS vs. FCS games. I would love for the bowls to go away. Such is not the world in which we live. So the playoff system I’m going to suggest here is simply the best college football playoff system we can have within those circumstances.
Now that we have that out of the way, let’s talk about a few common misconceptions and clear them up:
1. Playoff games at bowl sites will never work. Read “Death To The BCS” for more information on this. Travel expenses, loss of home game revenues, logistics and plenty of other obstacles make it entirely impossible to set up a playoff system that uses bowl locations for playoff games.
2. Anything less than 12 teams in a playoff cannot work. You will still be creating unequal access to the postseason. All conference champions get in. No way around it. Every team needs to have a clear path to the playoff.
3. The season cannot go on past the current date of the BCS championship game. Universities would throw a hissy fit.
Ok, so without further delay, here is the best college football playoff system. First, the NCAA is obviously going to have to get involved if a playoff is going to happen. The NCAA runs the other playoffs in college football, so they will have to run this one too. A few ground rules will have to take place in order for the timing of everything to work. Here are the rules the NCAA must set in place:
1. No regular season game can be played after Thanksgiving weekend. This means conferences with championship games must have those played before December. It’s the only way timing can work here.
2. No bowl games will be played before the second weekend of December. Bowl games and playoff games cannot be simultaneous or would each detract from one another.
With these ground rules in place, the rest is pretty simple. Let each team in each conference make their schedules as normal, with the understanding that no game is to be played after Thanksgiving weekend. Let each conference decide on its own how it wants to crown a champion. At the end of the regular season, all 11 conference champions get an automatic invite to the playoff, regardless of rankings, records or anything else. This way all teams have equal access to the playoffs.
Five at large bids will be determined by a committee, the same way at large bids are done for March Madness. BCS rankings can be used here or any other criteria. The committee selects the five at large selections and then seeds all 16 teams, 1 – 16.
Bowls are then given the opportunity to invite teams that are eligible. Playoff teams and sub-.500 teams are not eligible. This will naturally cut out a few of the bowls, but that’s fine since a majority are just causing teams to lose money anyway. This forces them into more efficiency so that teams carefully select their options and which bowls they want to attend. If Notre Dame gets 4 bowl invites, they will go to the one that gives them the best opportunity to make money. That’s not how it is now, where teams take what they can get. This gives the benefits to the teams, not the bowls and their executives.
The first round of playoffs is the first weekend of December. Matchups are 1-16, 2-15, etc. Higher seeds get the home game. The second round of playoffs is the following weekend. Winners advance in the bracket and play whoever comes next. After this weekend, there are four teams left.
At that point, bowl games are allowed to begin and run through January 1. No bowl game is allowed to be played after New Years. If a lack of bowl eligible teams limits a bowl or two from being able to host a game, then teams eliminated from the playoff can participate.
The weekend after New Years, the semi final games are played. Higher seeds still host the games. Winners advance and play each other for the championship at a neutral site. This can rotate between the big bowls: Rose, Fiesta, Sugar, Orange and maybe even Cotton. A true champion is crowned in exactly the same time frame a BCS champion is currently crowned. A few teams play some extra games. The most a team could play would be 17, and that would be 12 regular season games, a conference championship and 4 playoff games. Most teams would still play 13. Only 8 teams could possibly play more than that.
This preserves the importance of the regular season. Seeding is all important. Every conference game matters a whole lot more. Rivalries take on new meaning if a playoff berth is on the line. This gives everyone equal access to a fair postseason that lets the teams play it out on the field. If this system were in place today, our playoff would have been:
1. Auburn
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Stanford
5. Wisconsin
6. Ohio State
7. Oklahoma
8. Michigan State
9. Arkansas
10. Boise State
11. Virginia Tech
12. Nevada
13. Uconn
14. UCF
15. Miami (OH)
16. Florida International
So let’s run a simulation. Auburn beats down Florida Internationa. Oregon cruises past Miami (OH). UCF is killed by TCU. Uconn gives Stanford a game but goes down. Nevada loses a shootout to Wisconsin. Virginia Tech upsets Ohio State. Oklahoma loses to Boise State. Arkansas slides past Michigan State. In the next round, Auburn loses the rematch with Arkansas in a shocking upset. Oregon loses to Boise State in another shocking upset. TCU handles Virginia Tech. Stanford goes down to the wire with Wisconsin and wins in OT.
Now the bowl games go on as before with no one caring. Semi-finals roll around and Stanford gets Arkansas at home and TCU gets Boise State at home. Stanford and TCU advance to the championship in two excellent games. The Fiesta Bowl hosts this years championship and Stanford edges TCU in 2OT. Wouldn’t that be something?
So tell me, is this the best college football playoff system ever or is there something you would change?
Comments
I completely agree that there should be a cap set on no more than 3 teams per conference (conference champion and no more than 2 at large teams.) My only concern with allowing a 3 loss team into the playoffs was the potential for a Non BCS school to get robbed of participating in the playoffs by a 3 loss team from a BCS Conference. However, by setting a 3 team maximum per conference, a 3 loss BCS Conference team (such as Alabama) would not be considered because the SEC would already have Auburn, Arkansas, and LSU in the playoffs.
I was also wondering if there should be a “Special Rule” for Independent teams such as Notre Dame and Navy. Normally I am against these teams receiving special treatment, but I had an idea that I think could work. What about setting up a rule that states, “An independent team can not be considered for a spot in the playoffs without having accumulated 10 wins.” The way that the rule would read, it does not guarantee a playoff spot for an independent team with 10 or more wins, just to be considered. This will also stop a potential 9-4 Notre Dame from participation just because of the name.
I completely understand what you are saying about the way that I had proposed to seed the teams. I still believe in the way that I proposed because I think the games would be more entertaining but I also completely understand what you are saying as well. What about this for a possible compromise…the 6 BCS Conference Champs are assured a home first round game (meaning a top 8 seed.) This would allow teams like Stanford and TCU to jump ahead of a BCS Conference Champion such as UCONN and Wisconsin while still rewarding the Champions of the 6 BCS Conferences.
The other point that I am making is about setting a 2 losses maximum for any team to be considered for an at large spot. This would completely eliminate having 4 or 5 SEC schools in the playoffs and not having any at large spots available to other deserving teams and conferences. For example, if College Football had a playoff system installed this season without the 2 loss maximum, Alabama would very likely be considered for an at large spot which if you ask me is completely and totally wrong, unfair, and goes against everything that a playoff system is supposed to bring to College Football!
I understand what you are saying about the giving automatic home games to the conference champions. But I actually think that having the 6 conference champions get home games would make for more interesting and exciting first round games. Furthermore, in some cases it would give the better at large teams a better shot at advancing. For example if the 6 champs of the current BCS conference were given home first round games then the new first round matchups would look like this:
1. Auburn vs. 16. Florida International
2. Oregon vs. 15. Miami Ohio
3. Wisconsin vs. 14. Central Florida
4. Oklahoma vs. 13. Nevada
5. Virginia Tech vs. 12. Arkansas
6. UCONN vs. 11. Boise State
7. TCU vs. 10. Michigan State
8. Stanford vs. 9. Ohio State
This to me would make the first round games a little bit more entertaining. But I also understand your point. Another idea that I had was to install a rule that states that no at large team can get into the playoffs with 3 or more losses. This would eliminate any debate about Alabama entering the playoffs this past season.
I absolutely love your playoff system. It is well thought out and will basically solve most if not all of the problems with the BCS system. I do have a couple of modifications though in terms of seeding.
1. I believe that the winners of the 6 BCS Conferences (ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Big East, SEC, and Pac 10) should be awarded the top 6 seeds in the playoffs assuring that they receive a home first round game. Doing this will also make for some more interesting first round matchups, and as Seattle proved this season winning a weak division should still be rewarded with a home game.
2. After the first round of games, I think that the teams should be repositioned, just like the NFL does. For example, if a 16 seed somehow upsets a 1 seed, the 16 seed should then have to play on the road against the highest remaining seed, and not just against the winner of the 8/9 game. Repositioning the teams after the first round will make it more interesting, and will also force the regular season games to be more relevant.
Other than those two minors changes I would not change anything else about your proposed system. It is fair to the lower conference schools and rewards good teams. With the changes that I have proposed I firmly believe that this is the Best College Football Playoff System!
While it’s not a real big point of contention, I must point out that Idaho, Syracuse, and Tulane play their games indoors.
Now, 2 of those 3 teams (Tulane and Idaho) have no realistic shot of winning their conference AND having home field advantage in a playoff, I just thought I’d bring that up to prove I have no social life and can obsess over what C-USA and WAC teams play indoors…
I also disagree with Ray. Homefield advantage is the perfect way to keep meaning late in the regular season for those teams that are pretty much a shoe-in for the playoff. Every team will try their hardest to win right to the end.
Plus, with homefield advantage, you don’t have to worry about your first concern. Auburn vs. FIU would make plenty of money for Auburn in ticket sales if it’s at their home field. Plus people love a cinderella story, so they’ll watch to see if FIU can pull off a huge upset (although unlikely).
Yes, the bowl system is all about money, but not like you think it is. If you’ve read “Death to the BCS,” you’ll find that a playoff would make around 4 times the money that the bowls currently make — and that’s a conservative estimate! So if money itself were the only issue, we’d have a playoff, no doubt about it. The BCS is all about keeping the distribution of the money biased toward those in power so they can keep that power.
Plus, remember that the bowls are still staying intact. While they would only make half under a playoff system of what they otherwise would have, they’re still there. So they don’t have to “scrap” the system at all; they’re just adding to it and making it better.
You know I have to throw my hat in the ring when it comes to the BCS. Your format is awesome. One thing, though — don’t use the BCS rankings for anything meaningful. “Death to the BCS” does an excellent job of proving why the BCS rankings are so meaningless. If you want to keep them, fine, but don’t use them in any way to determine playoff placement or seeding. You’ve got it right when you mention a selection committee, I just worry when I see you say “BCS rankings can be used here or any other criteria.”
I’m also torn on another issue: including teams that lost in the first two rounds of the playoffs as being eligible for bowl games. If you make these 12 teams eligible, then there are only 4 teams (the top 4) that don’t get the “bowl experience” that otherwise would have gotten one under the old system. This would completely nullify any argument (even though it was weak to begin with) for keeping the bowls as a reward for teams with a good season. Everyone except the top 4 (who probably have other things on their mind) would still get their beloved bowl experience. However, I can also see the flip side — if you wait for the second round of the playoffs to end before selecting teams for bowls, that may not give teams enough time to prepare or give them the “full” bowl experience that they had before (a 2-3 week vacation). I lean towards the first option, but I can see both sides of the coin.
Everything else is great. Good work, Sloppy!
We’d have to work on some of those locations, Ray. ACC Champs or not, most fans from the conference aren’t going to go to Miami. It’s too dang far. I’m a fan of the ol’ home field advantage, myself.
I imagine, for example, that an Ohio winter would be bad enough without having to go into the Horseshoe to face the Buckeyes. Teams should be rewarded at least a little in a playoff system: no reason to have a neutral site game in the first round. Make the lower seeded teams travel. I’d love to see some of those pretty little west coast passing attacks try and perform in a Midwestern snow storm. Then again, I’m a bit sadistic…
I just read your system, and I have to say I like it, except it has two glaring problems.
Every conference is an automatic bid? – This would set off a serious chain reaction in college sports, and while it would probably be for the better (TCU wouldn’t be a Big East team anymore) I think you have to stick with the BCS system of AQ conferences. Award the Conference Champs of the AQ schools and then go with BCS, AP, or Coaches Polls. If the BCS has told me anything, its that the Bowl system is all about $$$. They aren’t going to scrap this system to have FIU blown away by Auburn. That game would make no money. However, Auburn vs. a team like Alabama (this works out too well this year) would make some money, and be an exciting game to watch.
Home Fields – As we’ve seen with the Minnesota Vikings recently, not every stadium in college football is equipped to handle games in late December. I think that instead of home field advantage for every team, that you have to have regional games, or at least designated stadiums. For example, the Big East Champion would play in the Meadowlands. The ACC Champion could play in Miami, the Big 12 at Cowboys Stadium, and etc. etc. Of course, this would cause scheduling problems if two teams from the same conference made it in.
Otherwise, its good…
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
How about this? Don’t rid the bowl system COMPLETELY. As some traditional bowls aren’t held on the same dates, maybe you can work WITH the bowl schedule to accomodate a playoff:
First Round
New Mexico Bowl (Mountain West/At large)
Champs Sports (Sun Belt/At large)
Alamo Bowl (WAC/PAC-10)
Liberty (Big East/Conference USA)
Quarter-finals
1) Capital One Bowl (Winner of New Mexico Bowl/SEC)
2) Rose (Big Ten/Winner of Champs Sports Bowl)
3) Fiesta (Big 12/Winner of Alamo Bowl)
4) Orange (ACC/Winner of Liberty Bowl)
Semi-finals
Sugar (Winner of Capital One Bowl vs Winner of Rose Bowl)
Cotton (Winner of Fiesta Bowl vs Orange Bowl)
BCS Championship Game: Winner of Sugar Bowl vs Winner of Cotton Bowl)