Should BCS Be Replaced By Playoffs? -- Guynemer's Proposal

[JohnT]

But they played the Holiday Bowl vs. Michigan on December 21st, 1984, the year they won the national championship. The New Years games for the 1984 season would've been on January 1st, 1985, which was a Tuesday.

The 1983 champion was Miami, who beat then #1 Nebraska 31-30 in the Orange Bowl on Monday, January 2nd, 1984. BYU also played in the Holiday Bowl on December 23rd, 1983 and ended up ranked #7 for that year. Both of their Holiday Bowl appearances occurred on Friday.

Also, BYU had to go to the Holiday Bowl as their conference (WAC) champion was locked into that bowl from 1978-1995. They had no choice in the matter and couldn't accept a better bowl if they wanted to. That, I believe, was the crux of the controversy.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Thanks, JohnT. I stand corrected.

However, regardless of why they played in the Holiday Bowl, it's accepted that the worthiest opposition for a #1 team would typically be in the Jan 1 bowls... thus, the controversy of a #1 playing long before the other top ranked teams.

That's one thing BCS is intended to prevent, I'd guess.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

double post

[DanS]

"That's one thing BCS is intended to prevent, I'd guess."

Yes. It's bad for business.

[Imran Siddiqui]

So it's only me, Guy, and Tuberski who see no problem with a 2 or 3 loss team winning the championship, eh?

I don't see what the big deal is. If a 10-2 Ohio State can beat a 12-0 BYU (for instance), I think the Ohio State should be able to be national champions. There is no indication that those teams would even play ONE of the same opponent during the year.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

My problem with a 2 or 3 loss team winning the championship, would be that the 2 or 3 teams that beat them would all argue that they were better. Sure, you can say that they're not better unless they win the playoff, but then you're devaluing the meaning of the regular season. If a 3-loss team can win the championship, why not expand the playoff to 32 teams (it's only 1 extra week, after all) and let a 5-loss team get a chance to win it. Or why not play a 7 week tournament with 128 teams...

Obviously the regular season is not a determinant of who's best in the NFL, where champions routinely lose 3-5 games in the regular season. But as has been said, CFB is not the NFL, and I don't want it more like the NFL.

The compromise that we're trying to reach is to keep the the regular season meaningful (so, a small playoff of elite teams) while still making sure that all the elite teams (the undefeateds and top ranked 1-loss teams) get a chance to win the title.

[Imran Siddiqui]

My problem with a 2 or 3 loss team winning the championship, would be that the 2 or 3 teams that beat them would all argue that they were better.

Isn't that what happens when a 1 loss team wins the Championship?

Sure, you can say that they're not better unless they win the playoff, but then you're devaluing the meaning of the regular season.

So? The regular season in College Football isn't FAIR! When you teams like Michigan having to play Ohio State, Wisconsin, Penn State, Iowa, Iowa St. ALL in conference play and then you have teams like Miami who play Virginia Tech, Syracuse, Rutgers, Temple, etc., how can you say the regular season means jack?!

[Ming]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui When you teams like Michigan having to play Ohio State, Wisconsin, Penn State, Iowa, Iowa St. ALL in conference play and then you have teams like Miami who play Virginia Tech, Syracuse, Rutgers, Temple, etc., how can you say the regular season means jack?!

Uhhhh... When did Iowa St. join the Big 10

[Imran Siddiqui]

Mistake (I ment Michigan St.)... but you get the point.

Nice to see you didn't answer the question .

[DanS]

Hmmm... Miami still ahead of ND by .3 points in BCS. ND moves to 4 in strength of schedule (likely lower over the coming weeks). Oklahoma edging out ND on more computer polls. Georgia starting to climb up too. Miami is tanking in the computer polls, though.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/college/polls/2002/bcs/

[Ming]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Mistake (I ment Michigan St.)... but you get the point.

Nice to see you didn't answer the question .

I was too busy laughing at your knowledge of College Football

You do raise a valid point about how a team with two or three losses could be better than an undefeated team...

So here is a solution that would give EVERY 1- A team a chance to win the 1 - A championship. And would still allow the money grubbing sleeze buckets that run the Bowl games and are trying to block a true national championship, to be involved.

While there are about 117 1 - A Schools, there are only 11 Conferences and 6 independents.

The winners of the 11 conferences and the best independent team qualify for the tournament, making a 12 team tournament.

The tournament would consist of four rounds. A similar ranking system to the BCS could be used to determine which of the Indies qualifies and how the 12 teams rank compared to each other. This way, the computer system is only being used to seed the teams, and to pick which of the 6 indies is the best. While one might complain about how the the teams get seeded, the rankings won't be used to keep somebody out. (yeah, the indies could get screwed if there are two great teams, but we are only talking 6 team in total, and that's what they get for not joining a conference)

The top 4 teams would get a bye in the first round while the lowest 8 ranked teams would play. These games could be played a week before Christmas at neutral sights during the week in primetime television so they wouldn't be going up against the NFL. (would help keep everybody happy)

The second round would then be played around a Christmas... also in prime time on nights not to conflict with the NFL. The major bowls could alternate which get which and rotate them every year to be fair to all..

The winners would advance to Bowl games on New Years day... with one game being in the late afternoon and another in the evening...

A week later, you could have the championship game.

This type of system would have a lot going for it...

First and most important... the champion would be a champion regardless of their record. As Imran pointed out, why should a team that plays in a strong conference be screwed. If you are your conference champion, you deserve and will get a shot at the national title. Any team that didn't win their own conference can't really whine that they deserved a chance at the National Championship. This would keep the regular season being REALLY meaningful and give EVERY 1 - A school a shot at the prize.

Second... MORE money for everybody... which means that there would be hope that this could actually work.
The Big Bowl people would still be involved, and while they might not like that their games wouldn't be on New Years day, they will take the money instead of risking lossing it all to a different system.

There would still be many good teams left for lesser bowls so that late morning and early afternoon games on New Years Day can be scheduled... giving fans their traditional football fix and deserving teams that didn't make the tournament there bowl bids on this high visibility day. Plus other meaningless bowl games can be scheduled as they are now long before the holidays so that many teams can still get bowl bids and still get their share of money.

And Notre Dame fans would probably be thrilled, because they would probably be the Indy Representative every year, and this would make the Networks happy as well

The only real negative is that this would add a few more games to the year for the best teams...

So what do you think?

[Jac de Molay]

So what do you think?

It doesn't sound bad except a few of those conferences(like the MAC?) are going to field their best teams but get stomped year after year in the "playoffs". People for good second-place teams in strong conferences might piss and moan.

[Ming]

Let em whine... my response would be... If you can't win your conference, you aren't a champion

These good second place teams would still have a chance to play in bowl games on New Years day... and get their money. Under the current system, these second places teams wouldn't have a chance at the championship anyway, so they have no basis to complain.

[Andrew1999]

There's usually some controversy over at least one conference championship. A few years ago Texas Tech was in a 5-way tie for champion of their conference. They won becasue the tiebreaker was who had gone longest without being champion.

[Ming]

That would be the conferences problem... This might even lead to some of the conferences having a playoff to determine which shool goes. They could cut down on their number of non conference games to allow for the extra games.

And one interesting thing that could happen is that we might have better non conference games. Powerhouses might be more willing to play other non conference powerhouses instead of trying to pad their record by playing "little sisters of the poor"...

Again... win your conference... go to the big dance. If you don't, you don't deserve a chance.