Your Thoughts on a College Football Playoff

One interesting comment by Dan Wetzel is that if the semifinals are still played at the home of the top-ranked team (just like in the NFL), the schools themselves will make the money, not the bowl. That’s the only controversial area of your proposal from my viewpoint. Everything else makes complete sense.

Ok, the top six bcs teams. One and two get a bye and 3 vs 6 sugar, 4 vs. 5, rose. then 1 plays higher seed, fiesta. Then 2 vs lower seed, orange. Then winners play in the cotton bowl, texas stadium and rotate the games each year! Go Canes………

Though I have not read all replies, I feel there is no need to have a dual
system of playoff and bowl games. There are currently about 34 bowl games. Simply take the top drawing 31 and use them for the playoffs. Week 1- 16 games a d so on. Each year the revenue and attendance would determine which venues had what game at each playoff round, thus an incentive to work to improve the venue and draw. So 32 teams and 31 games.

I had previously worked out a system similar to this one that could be a transition to the 16 team format. The rules are almost identical except that this tournament has 10-12 teams depending on what the conferences are willing to accept.

With 10 teams, there would be 6-8 auto-bids depending on whether the MWC or WAC became BCS eligible and the rest at-large. With 12 teams, the same conferences get auto-bids but two more at-large spots would be open.

The format for the 10 team tourney would be the same as a 16 team format except that the top two seeds would get byes in the first round. With 12 teams, the top 4 seeds get byes in the first round. This format allows for most teams to end up playing only 1-2 extra games at the end of the year.

Since the top teams are more likely to win their first matchup, the semi finals will usually field teams that have only played one postseason game that year to that point.

I love these ideas but I think you need to keep your New Years Day Bowl games. That is a tradition that needs to be kept alive and well. Play the next games the weekend after the New Year. The championship game the following Monday.

Who ever started this site your a genius..which make me a genius cause all of your ideas are exactly what i think..except i think 32 teams. but i can live with 16 teams. i didnt even read of your other about the timeline until after i posted and you are so right!!!! about everything. having no playoffs is really joke to fbs football..NASCAR has a version of a play off. I ve read the arguements about the mid majors and the weak conf schedules…but the bigger boys dont want to risk losing or wont give a mid major a home and home series. notre dame i hear wanted was gonna play boise..but the first game would have been in denver at invesco field and the second would have been in southbend. i think in the future the mid majors will align themselves into a formidable conference..if boise and fresno state went to the mountain west conference that would make them a bcs conference. fresno state will play anybody anywhere any time. boise we ve already seen what they can do. with utah,byu and tcu..makes them a tougher conference than the big east. although the big east is going to get tougher if cuse can get back to being a legit team and couple c-usa teams that got there programs going in the right direction and by them joining a larger conference it will only help them. just incase u didnt know some fcs schools and d2 schools will be making the jump to fbs after 2012. 2 that im sure of are appalachian st who would make agreat big east team. and montana grizzlies who would be great for the mwc. other schools that i heard about that might or want to make the jump are youngstown state, georgia southern, texas state. they meet the ncaa requirements the most important is putting 15000 fans in the seat. but the ncaa has freeze on teams moving up to fbs. this gives them time to allocate funds to improve facilties

I love the proposal made for a playoff. I was thinking the exact same thing. I think it should be expanded to 32 teams. here are my reasons. say for instance fla and bama play for an sec title bama wins they re automatically in. fla gets the at large bid in to the playoffs, but what if uga and lsu only losses were to those respective teams and they dont get in due to something crazy like 2 big 10 teams running the table that happened not to play each other. there would be more than 16 teams worthy. especially non bcs conf. if utah wins the mwc and byu only loss is to them they would probably miss the playoff because bcs conf school would get in. I Think one thing that would help is no more playing fcs schools. that way teams are knocked off during the regular season and more mid major conf teams get to make there case for the playoffs. to those that say it will taint the regular season thats hog wash. to those that say it will ruin the historical importance of bowl games. that was thrown out the window as soon as we let corporations but their name in front of historically important bowl games and then added 10 more bowl games. 2 6-6 teams regardless of conference have no right in the post season. to those who say the kids will be out of class to long most of the games will be over xmas break. to those who say thats to many games.over 80 % of these kids will never play a down of football after college they wont mind and they want to play in meaningful games and a shot at being a true champion. and to those kids that do go on to play in the pros it will only acclimate them to a 16 game reg season in the nfl I’m truly sick of people and some coaches saying a playoff is not the answer to prove the best most think bama was a way better team than boise..but boise should have the chance to prove us wrong

I do think that teams in the lesser conferences should have to schedule much more difficult nonconference matchups to make up for their weak conference schedules. Teams that play in BCS conferences have to play 3-4 tough games each year (usually 1 in the nonconference schedule and 2-3 during conference play), so why wouldn’t a team like Boise State have to? Do you really want to compare the road that Alabama will have (SOS) with Boise State’s to go undefeated? Seriously?

Boise State has gained a lot of respect over the past few years, but are still not able to schedule many of the big boys… yes they are trying and I’m sure there’s a lot to it like you were saying that I don’t fully understand. What I do understand is that Boise State is demanding that people treat them like a big boy, except they want to get the deals that the small, no-name schools get. They want to be respected as a great team, but want to get paid to play places like a weak Sun Belt team, WAC team, etc…
Can’t have your cake and eat it too!

Honestly, I think that Alabama could have scheduled another small nobody nonconference game to replace their 1 big game against Penn State and Ohio State could do the same thing with their matchup with Miami and they would still be WAY more impressive to go undefeated because of their Conference schedules. Now, if Boise State schedules 3-4 nonconference games like their matchup with VaTech… they have an argument when they go undefeated.

I don’t think this debate can end with either one of us agreeing 100% with the other… I think you were right when you wrote something about fans feeling passionately about this topic 1 way or the other. You have some very good arguments and I appreciate your open mindedness to try to understand others’ thoughts. BUT let the debate continue!!!

There are many big name schools scheduling tough competition in their nonconference schedules… I’ll just site the Big 12 for an example…
9/4 Kansas State vs UCLA (possibly top 25)
9/11 Colorado @ California (possibly top 25)
9/11 Iowa State @ Iowa (possibly top 15)
9/11 Oklahoma vs Florida State (possibly top 25)
9/11 Kansas vs Georgia Tech (possibly top 15)
9/18 Nebraska @ Washington (possibly top 25)
9/25 Oklahoma @ Cincinnati (possibly top 15)
9/25 Texas @ UCLA (possibly top 25)
10/2 Colorado vs Georgia (possibly top 25)
10/9 Iowa State vs Utah (possibly top 25)
10/9 Texas A&M vs Arkansas (possibly top 20)
11/27 Texas Tech vs Houston (possibly top 25)

That’s just some “high profile” games for the Big 12 and other conferences have some even better matchups… So to say, “there are very, very few high profile non conference matchups anymore” is just plain untrue. Typically a BCS Conference school has 1 top tier team in their nonconference schedule, 1 average school, and 2 cupcakes. This is fine, though, because these teams have quite a few more top tier schools in their conference schedule.

In your response you wrote ” I’m sure Boise would love to make a name for themselves, and they’re doing a good job with some big games coming up. but I don’t see how proving you can beat a big school one year means you should therefore get a better shot at the championship years later.” That’s not what I was showing when comparing to Florida State playing at LSU all them years in a row. My point was, they scheduled them all them years in a row without getting to play LSU in Tallahassee. They swallowed their pride, year after year, to get recognition and to be respected nationally. Boise State should follow learn from that. Florida State did what they had to do to get those types of teams scheduled without complaining about fairness of getting to play in Tallahassee or getting the big money that Boise State is after.

Nebraska and Boise State probably won’t come to an agreement, unfortunately, because Boise State wants big name school money, big name school recognition, big name school rights, but they can’t swallow their pride the way Florida State did to get there. Please don’t get me wrong because I really do like Boise State (hate the smurf turf) but enjoy watching them… My argument here is dealing with the, “we already have a playoff in the regular season” and “every game matters the way it is now” arguments. Bottom line… stronger schedule=more respect… how a team gets there is up to them, but I think teams like Boise State should look to past teams who have earned it to make it as quick and painless as possible.

In reference to Boise State schedule…

In the late 70s and early 80s, Florida State built itself into a national power with a fairly open “anyone anywhere” theme, including one impressive run where they played LSU in Baton Rouge five years in a row (and the Noles went 4-1 in those games!).

They had to, because they were a college football nobody before that (Lee Corso and Burt Reynolds aside ). Of course, they also had the luxury of being independent at the time and could schedule more diverse games than teams that are bound by conference schedules.

The college football landscape has changed quite a bit since then, but I still think it’s going to take THAT kind of dedication on the part of Boise State before they’re going to be admitted to the upper tier in college football. The need to consistently beat some well-regarded BCS-conference teams in the OOC schedule.

Boise State is saying “anyone; anywhere,” just like those ‘Noles, but they really aren’t. For example, Boise State and Nebraska have been trying to schedule eachother for a little while now, but Boise State isn’t adhering to their “anyone; anywhere” talk. Whether or not Boise State has earned the right to ask for more money or a straight up home and away schedule is debatable. I, for one, believe they have, but that’s not the point. The point is that if they want to make believers of the nation and the pollsters, they have to earn it the hard way.

I would love to see a Nebraska vs Boise State home and away schedule plan, but I’m not able to make any of those decisions (unfortunately). Scheduling away games worked for Florida State and boy did it pay off big! I think Boise State should do the same thing. Swallow their pride and earn it the hard way! Most BCS Conference schools have 3-4 games against ranked opponents, so the way to “earn” it is to schedule nonconference games that hold more substance.

I realize how the schedules are created and it can be difficult to know where a team will be in 2-3 years or more, but Boise State and had their argument for how long now? Couldn’t they have these “top tier” teams on their schedule by now?

I do believe if Boise State goes undefeated this year they will be playing in the BCS Championship game. Look at their scheduling trends from the past say 5 years or so. They have scheduled tougher nonconference games and, if they win” it will pay off. They have Virginia Tech and Oregon State to try to help their fluff schedule during conference play. It will help, but it will still depend on who else is undefeated. It should too because if a team that plays 3, 4, or more ranked opponents is also undefeated then that team should get the go ahead. Boise State will schedule harder and harder nonconference games in the future and really they have to. But my point is that I think that they will be in the BCS Championship this year and then what will that do to most of the playoff arguments?

(Side note) I have to admit that as a Husker fan… it was nice having the whole country rooting for Nebraska against Texas in order to “completely screw up the BCS system!!!