What if the playoff system utilitized the bowls as playoff games? Also, I think there'd be more excitement overall, rather than less excitement. I would be more interested in following other teams, because I'd want to follow the teams that LSU would be likely to play in the playoffs. So I'd be more likely to watch a Purdue/Michigan State game than I probably otherwise be, for example. And yes, with 117 teams it would seem that just a 16 team playoff system would always leave out one or more teams that would think themselves deserving, but since conference champions would get in (at least in the big conferences) it could legitimately be said that they had a chance and blew it. So if Florida finished up just out of the playoffs, it's their own fault for not winning the SEC title.
That stuff is all true BrettStah, which is why I was saying it was a personal thing. For me, a guy out of college for 5 years . . . I enjoy the entire season, as well as other conferences. It's just more interesting to me. But to use your example. A 3, 4, or even a 5 loss team could make the playoffs, over teams with 1 or 2 losses because of the conference title games. Why schedule tough out of conference games since they will mean nothing, only your conference schedule will be important. In fact, teams will be less willing to play other out of conference powers b/c of how it could affect their chances at getting to the playoffs, by injuries ruining their conference games. No system will ever be fair, but atleast the rankings and bowls are unique. Something different to offer football fans. Pro football is just not as interesting to me, the regular season really means nothing. So, I follow pro football more closely during the playoffs. But the college game I follow all season, b/c each week is a playoff. It just not that important to me to see a playoff btw all these schools when I am happy with the bowls. My only gripe would be that undefeated non BCS schools deserve a spot in one of the BCS games. Other than that, I am happy. I also agree that a playoff would bring in more fans. But at what price. Just to have a playoff so it is like the other sports? I don't think it is that big of a problem. I know it will happen some day, it's just sports. But I like the bowl system and personally would hate to see it go away in favor of a playoff. An undefeated season wouldn't mean as much with a playoff, and that is the essence of college football.
I asked this earlier... does anyone know how often a team wins their conference with more than 2 losses?
Come on folks, don't make this harder than it is. The new conference realignment will kill at least one conference (it'll be either the WAC or Sun Belt), leaving ten conferences. So let's do a 16 team playoff system along the lines of the NCAA Tournament. -10 automatic bids, to the ten conference champions -6 at large bids, to go to the six highest rated teams in the D1-A NOT conference champions -Seed the bracket 1-16 -Set the playoff matches at neutral bowls. 1st round at lower tier bowls (Tangerine, Alamo, Music City), Quarterfinals at major bowls (Cap. One, Peach, Cotton, Fiesta), and the Semifinals and national title game rotate between three bowls; Rose, Sugar, and Orange. Geography should make sense (ie., if Florida is a #3 seed, they should be matched with a reasonably close #14 seed, say, C-USA champion UAB) in a reasonably close bowl for the first round (Outback?) -PLAY BALL! And no, under this system, the regular season does NOT lose it's meaning. If you are in the WAC or the MAC, you go into the year knowing you have to win your conference to get in to the playoffs, same as basketball. If you are in a major conference like the SEC or ACC, you know don't have to win all your games to have a shot at the national title, but you had better not have more than 3 losses, otherwise, you are screwed. The regular season will still be exciting and meaningful, it just won't be do or die every week. If that isn't big enough to ensure all the quality major conference teams get in, fine. Let's go to a 32 team, five round playoff. But then, you will have to shorten the regular season.
No, 32 is too many, in my opinion. 16 teams is just enough to allow the conference champions and a handful of highly ranked teams in.
Why NOT schedule tough out of conference games under this scenario??? They won't impact your conference race and, win or lose, should help your team to be better. This would be even better for the fans! Imagine getting to watch LSU play the likes of Oklahoma, Texas, Miami, Florida State, Ohio State, Michigan, etc., instead of Louisiana (and other "directional" patsy) schools! I doubt that there are any statistics that would indicate that injuries are more common against higher ranked opponents, so I don't buy that portion of your argument, either.
I agree with NOT having a play-off. For many reasons. Mostly because it would make the regular season boring. Argue all you want, but it is true for me. B-O-R-I-N-G. Take away the goal of a bowl game for a team that starts out 3-3 and that pretty well ruins the season for those fans and the players. This season, the AU fans still have hope for a decently successful season after they lose to Ole Miss. They can make it to the Independance bowl and run the ball down some Big 12 team's throat. And don't give me that stuff about bowl games for those that don't make the play-offs. Those games struggle enough as it is. Stimatize them further and they collapse. And I just don't see a play-off system increasing the strength of our out of conference schedule. Quite the opposite. If you pick that magic number at 16 teams making a play-off, the big time teams would pick EASY out of conference games to ensure that if they did not win their conference, they would have a chance to end up in the top 16. If a team like LSU plays 2 tough out of conference games and loses, they pretty much have no chance of getting in the top 16. But if they play pansies and drop a couple of conference games... That would make the polls even harder to judge because the tough conferences would never play each other until the play-offs. You would have Notre Dame joining the WAC to ensure themselves a play-off spot (a 10-2 ND is in the top 16). Crazy stuff like that would happen. Miami join the ACC??? No way! What is the solution to enticing schools to have tougher OOC games. I don't know, that is another thread. But I don't think that a play-off system can claim to help that problem, it can only hurt it.
Do I get my phd? Just call me Doctor Football. I like this plan posted by BrettStah http://cf16.org/initiative.asp I would be fair to everybody. 16 teams is just right. 32 is too many for football and 4 or 8 would still leave out too many deserving teams. If it happens this year that LSU gets screwed by the BCS I wonder if the Tiger fans who oppose a playofff would change their tunes.
