College Playoff

[Cincinnatibuck]

My thoughts on the smaller conferences, play better competion if you don't want to get left out.

It easy to say play better competition, but you need a major conference school to be willing to play against you. Major conference teams don't play McNeese St. because that's the only team they can schedule, it's the only type of team they are willing to play.

Now for my take on playoff system. I don't think a playoff would take away from the regular season. You play the regular season to get seeded in the playoffs. I attended the University of Dayton and lived with football players in the last years that UD was Div. III. From my experience I don't buy the arguement that fans are less likely to go watch their team play because of the where the game will be played in December. I don't see how players can complain. Most players hope to make it to the NFL, are they going to refuse to go play Green Bay, Buffalo, New England, or Denver in late December. I also can't stand it when people start talking about not getting these players out of classes. You're looking at a couple Friday missed classes. Dayton and OSU's basketball team just got back from a trip to Maui where they missed a week of classes.

I would go with eight team playoff. Top eight in BCS. I don't care what conference you play in, if a conference gets more than one team, or a major conference doesn't get any team into the playoff. Top eight, everyone else go play in the I'm Not Good Enough.com Bowl. First round games could be played weekend before Christmas at a bowl that no one usually watches. Second round games could be played on or around New Year's at BCS bowl games. Championship game follows a week later at a National Championship Game, not a bowl, game can move to different location each year like the Super Bowl.

[diehardbuckeye]

Cincy- What I am trying to say is that if TCU was going to get left out would it have helped from them to go and play a school like UVA or GaTech, not a top flight program but a top conference school. I don't think that they wanted to play tOSU or vice versa but don't take the Kansas St. approach to it. I know that schools like the Buckeyes, Miami, Texas, Fla. St. have trouble finding other schools to play so if possible they might have to meet up in the begining of the season.
The players are not going to be the ones that are complaining about the time out of classes or the weather it is mostly going to be the media and the fans. I don't think that all that many people are going to travel to Columbus to watch a Buckeyes-Gators match up per say. Now if the game was in the Atl then it would be packed.
I think that it is the pagentry of the bowls that nobody wants to get rid of, and I think that is good. But also putting in a play off takes away a little from the regular season. Would people really be pumped if we "clinched" a playoff bearth in the 9th week? The real answer is what Cincy said it is the ALL MIGHTY $$$$ that will decide what is done

im all for a playoff.....but one thing ABSOLUTELY HAS to happen for it to be feasable.....

the teams (however many) need to be seeded and the higher team needs to play on their home field (at least until the final game)...

just like the nfl does it....

there is just no way fans can travel two, three or four straight weekends......having true home games is the only way it could possibly work....

and if the pansy asses from the south coast and west coast cant sit their wimpy asses through a columbus december day....the hell with em....

[MililaniBuckeye]

DiHard: Teams are indeed seeded, 1-16, and play subsequent games based on seeding (no regions). As for having games at home to avoid a bunch of road games, someone will always be a road team...you can't have a game where both teams are at home (except USC/UCLA). Also, YSU played three straight road games in the playoffs twice ('92 and '97) and won the national title both years.

mili...yes the div 1-aa format works well with home teams....

i was referring to those who propose to somehow keep the current bowls and use them as sites for the playoff games.....

the 1-aa method you are alluding to is time-tested and will work.....

[Happygobuckeye]

Oh8-

I was listening to ESPN radio and one of there announcers made this statement about the argument that a playoff with cheapen the regular season:

He felt that a lot of fans check out after there teams lose 1 to 2 games. At this point in the season (2 weeks ago) all anybody cares about and talks about are 3 teams-OU, USC, Ohio State and maybe LSU. Anybody that has two losses-people rarely pay attention too. Teams with 3 losses-forget about it.

His point was that people would be more interested if the last couple of weeks would be to determine who got higher seeds and who actually made the playoffs.

I don't know if I agree with it in total, but I do think he made some valid points. At some point in the season, if you are not undefeated or have 1 loss- what are you actually playing for?

[Saw31]

No Playoffs!!!

Of course it cheapens the season. With all due respect to YSU (I'm from Y-town as well), they don't have a huge, recruit affecting, season ending rivalry game to cheapen, as many D1A teams do. These rivalry games have built college football into what it is today (IMO), not playoffs or even BCS championship games.

BTW, I still would consider Marshall YSU's biggest rival and they only played a few times, but they were big games. They should've beaten them the last time they played when Marshall was already a D1A team dominating the MAC--damn turnovers.

I will give a scenario where a playoff system would certainly cheapen THE GAME. This could also happen in any number of great rivalries across the country.

tOSU or scUM comes into THE GAME undefeated and ranked #1 in the BCS (the system which has been advocated here to choose the playoff teams). The rest of the country has already lost a game or two. Therefore, tOSU/scUM knows they have wrapped up a #1 or #2 seed, win or lose (not unlike this years Sooners' situation), therefore gaining homefield throughout the playoffs until they reach, I assume, a nuetral site championship game. They will absolutely, without a doubt, sit their players in THE GAME. What has this just done to this rivalry? "Ya, you won, but the other team wasn't trying." <--That's what it has done and nothing more. This happens in EVERY sport that has playoffs. It is a byproduct of having playoffs. And if, as suggested, the playoff games are all at nuetral sites, then what's the point of playing for a better seeding? I have heard "Would you rather play a #5 Oklahoma or a #10 TCU? You play for a better matchup." , which I reply, "Would you rather play a #10 Oklahoma or a #5 TCU?" It works both ways. It could actually become advantageous to lose a game for a better matchup!!


Every time I've suggested this scenario, I've been told "There's no way they would sit players against scUM. It's the seniors' last game." Well, guess what. Your wrong. I would (and I bet you would also) be the first one asking for the coaches head on a platter if a star player were to get hurt in a meaningless game. Yes, tOSU/scUM game would be made meaningless in this scenario. You are trying to win championships (make the playoffs), not beat scUM per se, with a playoff system. In the system we have now, you have to beat scUM to win a championship and frankly, we don't deserve a championship if we don't beat scUM (IMO). Does anyone here honestly believe that this years matchup would have had the same importance if both teams were just playing for a certain seeding in the playoffs? No way. It is an absolutely false suggestion to say playoffs don't cheapen the regular season. Why do we call playoffs a "new season"? Because the previous season no longer matters, and therefore, didn't really matter to begin with. This is where the differences in D1A football and all other sports becomes apparent. The NFL plays enough games to weed out pretenders that a #5 TCU surely would be. They also have a system that requires parity over a much smaller amount of participants. College basketball has parity between the conferences that could not be achieved in football and basketball teams can play enough games that TCU being #5 in basketball would be a competition tested ranking. Testing by competition is crucial for any playoff system to make sense. We can't say that the BCS makes sense in one breath when talking about playoff seeding, and then say it doesn't make sense in the next breath when talking about setting Bowl games. (For comparison I only chose sports whose tournaments are one loss and your out)


I understand why there's the pressure to have a playoff system. I'm a college football fan. I understand the fascination of an OSU/Nebraska or an FSU/USC or a Miami/Texas semi final game for example. I just don't see the upside as outweighing the downside and I hope that they never submit to this pressure. I am not saying the BCS is perfect. It's not. The fact that TCU almost blew the system up proves that (thank you S. Miss). A 12-0 TCU/Tulane, etc. proves nothing to me when the majority of the top 25 would've also went 12-0 playing their schedule. So the BCS needs some more tweeks. I accept that, but I think it's better than a playoff and better than it was before.

I am, however, going to the Mount Union DIII playoff game tomorrow. I hope this doesn't make me a hypocrite.

And on an amusing sidenote--- Everyone at ESPN seems to want a playoff system for D1A, while at the same time, they market all their D1A games as "Every Game Counts!" At least the marketers understand.

[MililaniBuckeye]

DiHard: I think a system using existing bowls can definitely be implemented. My point was that playing up to four straight games on the road isn't as much of a hindrance as you may think.

Finding a way to utilize existing bowls would make a playoff system a much easier sell to the powers-that-be.