I wanted to see with all the news of maybe adding a plus one what other people thought of it? I'm one of the few that love all the bowl games from the smallest one to the BCS Title game so I would say don't change it just add a little change to the BCS part. I would hate to see the day we have a 8-16 team playoff in the FBS but living close to NSU I've seen how much the people there hate it so I guess that's why I hate the playoff format. If they want to do a plus one why not give a clear #1 like LSU this year a bye( 1.000 BCS no reason to play that extra game) and let 2 vs 3 play the week after conference title games winner goes on to BCS title game loser goes to who cares. In the years you don't have a clear cut 1(no one has a 1.000 in BCS) 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 same weekend winner to BCS title game loser to BCS tie in game. That's my thought's ready to hear what other people think.
I like Gary Danielson's idea of a 6 team playoff. There would be 2 brackets of 3 teams each. The no. 1 and 2 teams would be the top seed in each bracket and would get a bye in the first round. There would be rules, however. In order to be a top seed you would have to win your conference. The 2 and 3 seeds in each bracket would play and the winner would then play the 1 seed. I don't remember how the 4-6 rankings went this past season but the brackets would have looked something like this. A. LSU Wisconsin Stanford B. Okie St, Alabama Oregon The winner of Bracket A and Bracket B would then play for the National Championship.
In the end, I think any playoff format that emerges will have to address the problem of conference championship games. More conferences are doing them, and they're not going away. Money aside, those games have to count for something in the NC picture, otherwise they're a liability. In the meantime it could be something as simple as a rule stating that only conference champions are eligible for the NC game, regardless of the final BCS standings.
Danielson's idea is probably the best out there at the moment. The Big 10 now wants to do a plus one, which is easier to set up in the short term within the current bowl structure. In the meantime, the logistics of a multi-round playoff have to be straightened out as they figure out how to squeeze it in along with a 12-game regular season and conference championship games. The only thing I'm not a fan of is Danielson's selection committee that would replace the BCS. Putting seeding power in the hands of a few NCAA insiders just invites even more charges of corruption. For all its faults the BCS has some level of objectivity and would probably be good enough for seeding.
They would have to if people want something different to happen than what happened this year. Alot of people seem to think that the rematch wouldn't have happened with a playoff... and they would be mistaken.
I do think that only Conference Champ's should be allowed to play for the BCS Title. It's not fair to any team to play a 13 game season and in some cases beat a top 5-10 team twice(reg season and title game) and still have pray that the voter's like you more than another team.
There's no guarantee a rematch WOULD have happened with the 6 team playoff. In my example Alabama would have had to earn a rematch by beating Oregon and Okie St. As it was, they actually won by losing to us. In order to win the National Championship we had to beat them twice. They only had to beat us once.
So, if and when a playoff system emerges for 2012, we can say that the gumps stole a Natl Championship this past season.
The Gumps didn't steal anything. They benefited from their official PR machine in Tuscaloosa and their branch office in Bristol, CT to get in. That's the system, and it stinks. And in Danielson's plan, politics would be just as involved in seeding Bama to make sure they got home field advantage through the championship game. The NCAA could end the rematch problem today by issuing a rule stating that only conference champions are eligible to compete for the NC, regardless of final BCS rank. Under that scenario Okie State would've gotten its shot at #3 even with Bama finishing at #2. It would make conference championships meaningful to the NC picture, rather than assume a risk of injury or loss that a division runner-up doesn't have to worry about, and can't get in through the media/voter back door.
