College Playoff

[DaddyBigBucks]

Well, the poll thread on this topic has kicked off. It may eventually be merged with this thread.

It was borne of a stupid comment by Stewart Mandel HERE.

What gets me about SM @ SI blathering about everybody wanting a play-off is that he is just exhibiting human nature. But it is precisely that aspect of human nature that people in his profession should NOT allow themselves.

People tend to believe that more people agree with them than actually do. People tend to think other people know what they know and think as they think, and if those "others" don't agree with them, those "others" are stupid. Several times in my life I have seen Native New Yorkers make fun of people for not knowing specific aspects of New York City Geography. And all of those conversations occurred hundreds of miles from the Big Apple. This doesn't make New Yorkers different from everyone else. They think The City is the only place in the world, and they therefore think everyone else thinks so too.

Examples can also be drawn from elsewhere in College Football. Mike Golic famously sang our fight song after losing a bet to Spiels. He had to sing USC's recently after losing another bet. He noted that he had to refer to a lyric sheet for each of those humiliations, and then had the temerity to suggest that when he finally wins one of these bets that the loser won't have to look at a crib sheet because, "Everyone knows the lyrics to Notre Dame's fight song".

I don't know about you, but I have been a college football fan to a point that might wife calls a sick obsession for literally longer than I can remember. I have NO FLIPPING CLUE what the words to that over-rated assault on the ears might be.

But I do not fault Golic for believing what he believes. It's human nature, and he's just a jock.

And that brings us back at long last to Stewart Mandel. He's not just "the jock in the booth". He's supposedly a sports journalist. He should bloody well know how human nature affects him, and he should check the veracity of any assumptions he makes. If he misses it, his editor should call him aside and say, "Hey Stu, our polls don't support your claim here...".

I guess that's too much to ask.

 

[Buckeye86]

Well, the poll thread on this topic has kicked off. It may eventually be merged with this thread.

Pretty sure if you merge threads it will kill the poll.

 

[OCBucksFan]

This is always an interesting topic to me, and most of my thoughts have already been expressed in this thread.

The most common idea I have heard is an 8 team playoff, with the 6 champions of the major BCS conferences going in and 2 at large bids. In my opinion it's a nice idea, however, it still adds the human element into the conversation and brings us right back to this same discussion every year. How do we determine a true national champ in college football.

Personally, I hate the BCS, I think all it does is show bias towards a lot of teams that really don't deserve it, the Domers for example, go to a BCS bowl and get kicked around due to the fact that somehow the computers and the voters fail to see how horribly rated that program currently is. Also, no system really gives any consideration to any team from the MAC/WAC etc... Granted I realize they don't get the recruits that a major program does but it doesn't seem fair that they will never even have a chance at a national title.

Personally, I don't see an easy patch which is why I think we are where we are, but I do feel there needs to be some way to take the conference champs and do something better than this.

Perhaps the 8 team playoff solution is better, I realize that they discussions would be "well I deserve an at large bid" from everyone who doesn't win thier conference but at least for the major 6 conferences it provides an arguement. Why aren't the weasels in the tourney? simple, they didn't win thier conference.

The downside to this is that some conferences, the big 10 for example, have split champions all the time, but with the 12th game added in the regular schedule why isn't everyone playing everyone? Meaning that would be for each conference to address.

 

[CookyPuss]

What gets me about SM @ SI blathering about everybody wanting a play-off is that he is just exhibiting human nature. But it is precisely that aspect of human nature that people in his profession should NOT allow themselves.

People tend to believe that more people agree with them than actually do. People tend to think other people know what they know and think as they think, and if those "others" don't agree with them, those "others" are stupid.

Great post. I agree that he was wrong to state that the vast majority want a playoff. I am only recently warming to the idea, but it is only because I realize that we can't go back to the old system. I'm about to turn 33. I can remeber the old system quite vividly, when beating scUM and getting to the Rose Bowl was everything. The BCS has ruined that. I didn't mind the idea of a split NC. However, now that CFB has moved into this new era of "definitive" national championships (yeah right, just ask USC), I find myself moving on. The bowls are so commericial now that it ruins the special feel. I also hate the idea that a team can get into the NC game by another team losing. That just seems more wrong to me than a "wildcard" winning it all.

Mandel is not correct in asserting that everybody wants a playoff. I think he is correct that the vast majority of fans don't like the current BCS system. I think it boils do to the simple fact that the BCS created a "National Championship Game" but not a great method to determine who gets to play in that game.

One of the strongest arguments I have seen against a playoff system is that it would render the regular season games "meaningless." Someone asked would the OSU v. Texas games have been as meaningful had they not been "elimination" games for the NC. I say that I cannot answer that. I would not have enjoyed watching those games any less as a Buckeye fan. Maybe the wider audience would not have found those games as appealing.

I've also seen some arguements like Pittsburgh wasn't the best team in the NFL last year and how can you have a wildcard Super Bowl champ? I honestly don't think there is a solid way to refute this argument. You either except it or you don't. It all boils down to where you draw the line for who "deserves" a chance at the championship.

My argument for a playoff comes down to 2 main reasons:

1. I think it gives us the opportunity to see more great match ups both in the regular season non-conference and in the play offs.

2. The NC is decided on the field and not subjectively by voters (although I admit the criteria for who gets in and the seeds would have to be partially subjective)

Wow, I've at least narrowed my reasons from 6 to 2.

 

[Oh8ch]

The NC is decided on the field

This oft repeated single statement is the fallacy upon which all playoff arguments are based. It just isn't true. The best team that day wins the game - not the best team that year.

Villanova proved it. Wild Card teams in football and baseball have proven it. Contrary to what talking heads everywhere keep saying CFB is the one sport that comes closest to crowning the best team FOR THAT SEASON than any other major sport.

We are nearing the end of a 14 week playoff that has featured countless games with title implications. March Madness makes for a nice March. Only CFB makes for an exciting and meaningful season from August into January.

 

[akronbuck]

playoffs have to come.

All experts/fans thought USC was a sure win but, 98% were all wrong.

Now florida or scum. They all say florida but, fine the answer on the field.

herby/corso were saying playoffs will never come because, Presidents from all the colleges can just say no and don't have to give up why. Must be nice to have some pathetic people that probably never played sports making the decisions.

Most coaches and most interviews on espn want playoffs some how. All say BCS needs to be gone with it only being correct once.

 

[Jaxbuck]

This oft repeated single statement is the fallacy upon which all playoff arguments are based. It just isn't true. The best team that day wins the game - not the best team that year.

Villanova proved it. Wild Card teams in football and baseball have proven it. Contrary to what talking heads everywhere keep saying CFB is the one sport that comes closest to crowning the best team FOR THAT SEASON than any other major sport.

We are nearing the end of a 14 week playoff that has featured countless games with title implications. March Madness makes for a nice March. Only CFB makes for an exciting and meaningful season from August into January.

I've never been able to express this sentiment so concisely. Well said and obviously I agree 100%.

Given the overwhelming passion people have for CFB a playoff is just going to make the griping about something else, you'll never eliminate it.

 

[CookyPuss]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oh8ch
This oft repeated single statement is the fallacy upon which all playoff arguments are based. It just isn't true. The best team that day wins the game - not the best team that year.

Villanova proved it. Wild Card teams in football and baseball have proven it. Contrary to what talking heads everywhere keep saying CFB is the one sport that comes closest to crowning the best team FOR THAT SEASON than any other major sport.

We are nearing the end of a 14 week playoff that has featured countless games with title implications. March Madness makes for a nice March. Only CFB makes for an exciting and meaningful season from August into January.

I've never been able to express this sentiment so concisely. Well said and obviously I agree 100%.

Given the overwhelming passion people have for CFB a playoff is just going to make the griping about something else, you'll never eliminate it.

I have one problem with this. If we just ended a 14 week playoff, then why are we looking at the real possibility of a rematch with scUM? If it was a playoff, they were eliminated on Nov 18.

 

[crazybuckfan40]

I would love to see a playoff, and I think one major component of who gets in needs to be SOS. This will make teams start scheduling games like tOSU/Texas and make for a very exciting non-conference slate, and will also expose some teams that don't get exposed until they play some weak ass team in their conference and still get beat. See WVU for further refrence.

I know people say that the whole year is a playoff, well it can still be...When you only have a 8 team or a +1 system we are still talking about a select few teams, but what it also does is in a year like this where you have chaios you don't leave anyone out.

I know that if we were in Michigan's shoes right now there would be some crazy ass shit going on to lobby to get us to the NC game instead of Florida. In reality Florida has played one of the toughest schedules all year and might not get rewarded for it.

I am becoming more in favor of the +1 b/c with further thought if it was an 8 team playoff I wonder just how much "The Game" would of meant this year. Knowing already both teams were going to be in the playoff, would the emotions from players and fans of been as high as it was.

If there is a +1 this year I think you have Us vs. LSU/Louisville(here could be your debate, you are still going to have, between 4 and 5, but with SOS in place LSU gets the nod. It will make teams like the Big Least actually play someone worth a darn in non-conference and show if they belong with the big boys) then you would have scUM vs. Florida.

Play the first ones on Jan 1. and then the next week on Jan 8 the winners match up.

IMO this system does not take away from the regular season, and in fact should make it better if teams have to start scheduling tougher oponents, b/c at this point, I mean who is to say that teams that know they have a chance to go undefeated in their conference shouldnt just schedule a couple low mac teams or some teams like that and just worry abou their conferences.

I also like the 8 team playoff system, but I wonder if that would take away from the season too much...

 

[sandgk]

I have one problem with this. If we just ended a 14 week playoff, then why are we looking at the real possibility of a rematch with scUM? If it was a playoff, they were eliminated on Nov 18.

Guess it all comes down to the core question - now that USC is an X-2 team and Boise State remains a distantly disfavored X-0 team, who is the team that sports the best regular season record and resume?

The "14-week playoff" is a metaphor, not a reality - without a real playoff (which I personally do not wish to see happen) you are left with the core question above. Which question serves the intention of the old system, and that of the current BCS - to find out and crown the best team of that season.

If you want to find out the best team at the end of the season then go with a playoff. Otherwise we will be left with what we have, or something very much like it.

That is why I have no problem with Oh8Ch's sentiments, nor Jax's follow up to the same.

 

[CookyPuss]

Guess it all comes down to the core question - now that USC is an X-2 team and Boise State remains a distantly disfavored X-0 team, who is the team that sports the best regular season record and resume?

The "14-week playoff" is a metaphor, not a reality - without a real playoff (which I personally do not wish to see happen) you are left with the core question above. Which question serves the intention of the old system, and that of the current BCS - to find out and crown the best team of that season.

If you want to find out the best team at the end of the season then go with a playoff. Otherwise we will be left with what we have, or something very much like it.

That is why I have no problem with Oh8Ch's sentiments, nor Jax's follow up to the same.

I know it is a metaphor. My point is that I don't believe that the current system accomplishes what it is supposed to. scUM and Florida clearly are a step behind tOSU but one of them is going to get a shot at the NC. If the regular season is the most important factor, then I say we go way back to the old system where the NC is crowned prior to the bowls.

 

[Jaxbuck]

I think playoff proponents have many valid points, I just personally don't want one. here is all I would say to anyone who is wondering which side of the playoff fence they personally may fall.

If you had a playoff, both OSU and scUM would have had spots locked up going into The Game on 11/18. If your ok with the idea of one or both teams resting starters or feeling The Game was important but the playoffs are bigger so whatever happens happens...then you are a playoff proponent.

If you are not ok with the diminishment of The game or any regular season game then you are not a proponent of a playoff system.

A homefield advantage/first round bye/seeding system ala the NFL would help some but there would still be a diminishment. Regular season conference championships would mean about as much as they do in Bball for starters.

 

[CookyPuss]

I think playoff proponents have many valid points, I just personally don't want one. here is all I would say to anyone who is wondering which side of the playoff fence they personally may fall.

If you had a playoff, both OSU and scUM would have had spots locked up going into The Game on 11/18. If your ok with the idea of one or both teams resting starters or feeling The Game was important but the playoffs are bigger so whatever happens happens...then you are a playoff proponent.

If you are not ok with the diminishment of The game or any regular season game then you are not a proponent of a playoff system.

A homefield advantage/first round bye/seeding system ala the NFL would help some but there would still be a diminishment. Regular season conference championships would mean about as much as they do in Bball for starters.

Proponents of the bowl system have some valid points too. I just can't buy into any system that allows for a team to play in a National Championship game coming off a loss or because another team lost. For me, a playoff at least guarantees the teams win their way into the championship game.

I think the format of a playoff would have a lot to do with weahter or not regular season games would be diminished. For example, the UCLA-USC game wouldn't have meant much yesterday as USC would likely have wrapped up a playoff berth. The WVU-Rutgers game would have been elevated because it would have had implications for who made the playoffs and who still had a shot at the NC. But like I said, it would depend on the system. There are playoff systems I would not support.

 

[Oh8ch]

I think the USC-UCLA game underscored the point I keep trying to make about "proving it on the field".

USC was in an almost pure playoff scenario. Win and you go to the title game. They were healthy and played in good weather on a good surface in their home town. But they got beat by a five loss team.

So what was proven on that field on that day? Will a single voter place UCLA above USC on their final ballot?

Upsets happen.

If you had an 8 team playoff using the top 8 teams from today's coaches poll your field would include 3 teams with 2 losses. Any of those teams is capable of beating undefeated OSU if the breaks go right, or the weather is bad, or somebody gets hurt. They could pull an upset. But they have not earned the right to have that upset mean anything more than UCLA's upset of USC.

 

[buckeyegrad]

My only question to the people against a playoff system: If they are as bad and as degrading to the regular season games as you claim, why are there no calls in any other sport to have them eliminated?