Does this B1G idea have a chance of taking off? Take 4 teams from the BCS pool, play semifinals at the home of higher seeded teams, bid out the champ game? What do you think the effect of this would be on the BCS overall and would it be good for college football?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/col...7499.story
OMG that is the same proposal that has been going around for like four years and now they are saying it like it was their idea! Plus the line about they have heard 50 to 60 proposals but they lacked details! So much bullsh!t it's nauseating.
This quote from the article sums up my feelings about the situation:
"This whole notion of a playoff is ridiculous. I don't care what you come up with, it's not going to be a fair playoff. You've got a bunch of teams that don't play one another and play different competition and in different time zones in different conferences in different stadiums in front of different crowds and different weather and suddenly … you are trying to arbitrarily decide which one deserves to be in a four-team playoff or a six-team playoff. No matter where you draw that line, you're going to have controversy and people who are honked off because their team got cut off."
However, of any playoff proposal, the one proposed in the article is the best because the SEC will finally stop being able to hide behind home field advantage for every bowl game.
It works out perfect. the Sec and B10 fill 3 spots most years, the B12 gets one 1/2 of the time and the ACC gets a team in every 5 years or so, and The BE will sneak one in every 15 to 20 years, everyone else is totally out. More exclusion and circling of the money wagons.
Not so hyped up on the reasoning of why he has come out with this statement. To me it is being done for the wrong reasons but I am still glad to see idea's begin to gain traction.
To see them say that they are paying attention to what fans want now is slightly bull**** because lately it seems like their ideas have come entirely from fans. These guys arent even having to think about it anymore since there are so many places for people to congregate and combine their thoughts into great ideas. All guys like this have to do is have someone read what is being written and just pull an idea they like and roll with it.
I suppose that is not a bad thing, in the end, the change is what matters.
This type of playoff system will naturally lead to discussion and debate about how to pick the Four teams. You will have those who have positions in the media, coaching and polling that will want to have all the say and then you will have those that want a more defined method of bringing the four together.
Four 16 team conferences each holding their own conference playoff for whom to send to the national playoff would be a wonderful solution that would involve the entire country in the National Championship playoff. Guess we will see if realignment moves in a direction that could provide that system.
(02-06-2012 09:07 PM)He1nousOne Wrote: [ -> ]Not so hyped up on the reasoning of why he has come out with this statement. To me it is being done for the wrong reasons but I am still glad to see idea's begin to gain traction.
To see them say that they are paying attention to what fans want now is slightly bull**** because lately it seems like their ideas have come entirely from fans. These guys arent even having to think about it anymore since there are so many places for people to congregate and combine their thoughts into great ideas. All guys like this have to do is have someone read what is being written and just pull an idea they like and roll with it.
I suppose that is not a bad thing, in the end, the change is what matters.
This type of playoff system will naturally lead to discussion and debate about how to pick the Four teams. You will have those who have positions in the media, coaching and polling that will want to have all the say and then you will have those that want a more defined method of bringing the four together.
Four 16 team conferences each holding their own conference playoff for whom to send to the national playoff would be a wonderful solution that would involve the entire country in the National Championship playoff. Guess we will see if realignment moves in a direction that could provide that system.
If FBS actually starts a playoff, even a small 4 team one, it will eventually snowball into something bigger. Especially if they use the home field for higher seeded teams. That's the key to great attendance. The money will be there or they won't do it.
I'd like it, though it's obviously a B1G- friendly plan b/c it would get warm-weather teams into cold B1G stadiums in January occasionally, and, by bidding out the title game, would get some title games into northern domed facilities like Indy. Call it the "get these games out of the sunbelt" plan.
(02-06-2012 08:59 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ]This quote from the article sums up my feelings about the situation:
"This whole notion of a playoff is ridiculous. I don't care what you come up with, it's not going to be a fair playoff. You've got a bunch of teams that don't play one another and play different competition and in different time zones in different conferences in different stadiums in front of different crowds and different weather and suddenly … you are trying to arbitrarily decide which one deserves to be in a four-team playoff or a six-team playoff. No matter where you draw that line, you're going to have controversy and people who are honked off because their team got cut off."
However, of any playoff proposal, the one proposed in the article is the best because the SEC will finally stop being able to hide behind home field advantage for every bowl game.
Arbitrarily decide? What do they think is going on now? And what do they think happens with the very lucrative ncaa basketball tournament? Of course there will always be someone thinking they should have been included. So what?
Early in the article is mentions removing “the top four teams from the BCS bowl pool” to be placed into the 4 team playoff. I really don’t see how this is necessary. Have the 2 games the week after championship Saturday (it can’t be much later than that anyway if you are talking home games in the north in December) and then announce the BCS bowl bids on that Sunday. The losers of the two games would still be eligible for the BCS bowls.
Edit: Doing like that even preserves the idea of what a bowl game is supposed to be while also allowing a playoff. It's a reward for a good season. Every team would still only have one bowl they'd have the possibility to with that set-up.
Few other random thoughts on who I think these should be:
1. They should be the week after championship week. Since that's already the 2nd week in December and we are talking games in the north, I think that's as far off as it should be pushing it.
2. They should wait on announcing the big bowls until after the semi-finals. If a conference champ loses a semi-final, they still should be eligible for a BCS bowl.
3. Not necessary, but I hope the rule goes something like this. Highest 3 conference champs and 1 highest at large (whether conference champ or not). It might not make a huge difference, but if we are going to have 4 team playoffs, I want more than 2 conferences involved and that's possible without a rule like this. The 1 at large would allow for one great team who lost in a CCG to make still.
They must read these boards...now i don't like bidding out the title game, just rotate it among the bowls.
4 team playoff
2nd week of december, 2 games at higher seed campus
winners go to rotated bowl
losers go to rotated bowl
everybody else in bowl system
(02-06-2012 10:10 PM)bluesox Wrote: [ -> ]They must read these boards...now i don't like bidding out the title game, just rotate it among the bowls.
4 team playoff
2nd week of december, 2 games at higher seed campus
winners go to rotated bowl
losers go to rotated bowl
everybody else in bowl system
I know right?
I agree with MinerInWisconsin. If this gets implemented it will eventually snowball. Fans all over the country want a playoff. Once there's a 4-team playoff, they'll agitate for an 8-team playoff. Once it becomes an 8-team playoff, they'll lobby for a 16-team playoff. I doubt it will expand further than that, but the networks will pay enough to make it happen because the TV ratings for playoff games will be far higher than for bowl games.
(02-06-2012 11:12 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: [ -> ]I agree with MinerInWisconsin. If this gets implemented it will eventually snowball. Fans all over the country want a playoff. Once there's a 4-team playoff, they'll agitate for an 8-team playoff. Once it becomes an 8-team playoff, they'll lobby for a 16-team playoff. I doubt it will expand further than that, but the networks will pay enough to make it happen because the TV ratings for playoff games will be far higher than for bowl games.
I honestly don't think it will snowball, or more to the point, it won't snowball to any level where the power conferences don't maintain control over the system. *That's* where the Big Ten, SEC, et. al will draw the line. They will absolutely, positively, never, ever let the NCAA take control of the college football postseason no matter how much the TV networks provide to them. This is a threshold issue since the NCAA has said a plus-one/4-team playoff is acceptable under the bowl system, but anything further than that would require NCAA intervention.
(02-06-2012 11:44 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote: [ -> ] (02-06-2012 11:12 PM)HawaiiMongoose Wrote: [ -> ]I agree with MinerInWisconsin. If this gets implemented it will eventually snowball. Fans all over the country want a playoff. Once there's a 4-team playoff, they'll agitate for an 8-team playoff. Once it becomes an 8-team playoff, they'll lobby for a 16-team playoff. I doubt it will expand further than that, but the networks will pay enough to make it happen because the TV ratings for playoff games will be far higher than for bowl games.
I honestly don't think it will snowball, or more to the point, it won't snowball to any level where the power conferences don't maintain control over the system. *That's* where the Big Ten, SEC, et. al will draw the line. They will absolutely, positively, never, ever let the NCAA take control of the college football postseason no matter how much the TV networks provide to them. This is a threshold issue since the NCAA has said a plus-one/4-team playoff is acceptable under the bowl system, but anything further than that would require NCAA intervention.
And risk losing thier cash cow? The NCAA will do just as they have done forever, they will give in to the demands of the power universities. The last thing the NCAA wants is for the cash cow to break away from the NCAA and form thier own governing body. If an 8 team playoff is what the UT's, Michigans, and Oklahoma's of the world want, in the end, that is what they will get. The NCAA will not stand in the way. The dirty little secret is that the NCAA cant afford to cross the big money schools.
I disagree with it snowballing. The conference know the value of the regular season in college football, that that's where most the money comes from, and that almost no other sport replicates the kind of attention it gets on a national level (where even games far away not involving a team you care about matter because of national title implications). If they let it snow ball to anything much bigger at all, they will lose that a piece at a time and they know it.
I still fear that will happen, but I think most the powers that be understand the risks and are risk averse.
The claims that the regular season would somehow be diminished if there was a playoff are bogus. There are only 12 games in a season. If teams are playing for a chance for a four team, 8 team or even 16 team playoff-you are talking about only a few teams from each of the top conferences having any sort of chance if they can win enough games to get to their conference championship--exactly which games will be diminished in that scenario? Every game will have more meaning because any loss or slip will diminish the chances of being ranked high enough to make it in whereas now you just have to be 6-6 to make a bowl game.
Reading the B10 wishes they obviously want games to be played on their campuses rather than bowl sites and also still want guarantees they get to play in the Rose Bowl as well. So for everyone else-no guarantees of anything--for the BIG guarantees of the Rose Bowl no matter what, guarantees of playing on their home fields (if they can get ranked high enough-no doubt they'll be voting themselves there), and a championship can be anywhere-meaning in BIG country as well.
When it's all said and done, the Big 10 is tired of being criticized for only winning 45% of its bowl games, when 3/4 of them are home games for the opponent and the other 1/4 are neutral-site.
Look at this year's bowls:
Purdue v WMU in Detroit
TAMU v NW in Houston
Houston v Penn State in Dallas
MSU v Georgia in Tampa
Nebraska v South Carolina in Orlando
Ohio State vs Florida in Jacksonville
Wisconsin v Oregon in LA
Michigan v Va Tech in New Orleans
4 out of the 8 were in-state games for the Big 10's opponent. Three more are much, much closer to the opponent than to the Big 10 school. The only game that is a true neutral-site game in Michigan vs Va Tech.
Changing this situation is the only carrot that will get the B1G to consider a playoff. In fact, I'd say that it's the only way to guarantee a competitive playoff, because any other way of doing a playoff is grossly unfair to Northern teams.
(02-07-2012 09:20 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote: [ -> ]When it's all said and done, the Big 10 is tired of being criticized for only winning 45% of its bowl games, when 3/4 of them are home games for the opponent and the other 1/4 are neutral-site.
Changing this situation is the only carrot that will get the B1G to consider a playoff. In fact, I'd say that it's the only way to guarantee a competitive playoff, because any other way of doing a playoff is grossly unfair to Northern teams.
I guarantee you that the Big Ten (and every other power conference, for that matter) cares little about the results on the field here. It's about making the most money possible BUT not giving up control of the postseason to the NCAA and non-power conferences while preserving the value of their regular season TV contracts and the Rose Bowl. So, it's about finding the right balance to all of those interests. In fact, the entire reason why the Big Ten gets such high bowl payouts is that they are actually willing to travel to warm weather locales. The Rose Bowl itself is in the heart of Pac-12 territory, and it's clear that the Big Ten cares the most about that game, as well.
My thoughts are this.....
4 team playoffs are pointless. The SEC will always get 2 teams even though the Big 12 (Which I think has been the best football conference the last 2 years), Big 10, and PAC 12 would lose out on a bid they would deserve. Who would of got left out this year? Oregon? Oklahoma State? Wisconsin? Stanford? Any of those teams would of beat the LSU that showed up in the BCS championship this year.
The only way a 4 team playoff would be fair is if the BCS conferences just played each other instead of playing national powers like Jacksonville State, Western Carolina, and Cal State Northridge. Play a real schedule in different time zones at different times of the year. Have Bama play Oregon, TCU, Iowa, and NC State. Have someone like Michigan play Washington, Florida St. Iowa State, and South Carolina. See what I am saying? Add an extra game to the schedule (13 game season plus a conference championship game) and the BCS conferences can just play each other. The Alliance, MAC, Sunbelt, and BYU gets screwed but technically they have been getting screwed for years.
I am pretty sure doing it this way will weed out those pretenders real quick who steal bowl slots from teams who were actually worthy....Sorry Michigan, Clemson, and VA Tech, But Boise, Houston, and Kansas State were better than you. And you know it.
Also- Why does every major Bowl Game have to be in the South or in the desert? Teams that play in the Big 10 and Big 12 gets screwed because of their location every year in bowl games and teams get home field advantage simply by location.