tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12143188.post5782706708946479203..comments2023-11-05T04:31:45.159-08:00Comments on "Brevity is... wit.": The 8-PLUS college football playoffNeel Mehtahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11286549029037039134noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12143188.post-84332517685929250342007-12-06T11:33:00.000-08:002007-12-06T11:33:00.000-08:00Good idea, Neel, but I think they can accommodate ...Good idea, Neel, but I think they can accommodate a 16-team playoff the way I-AA does. However, I think to make it work, the Big 10 would need to add one more team so they can move to two six-team divisions:<BR/><BR/>1) Cap season games at 11, including conference championship games.<BR/><BR/>2) Go to 16-team playoff format.<BR/><BR/>3) Top 1-6 seeds are reserved for BCS conference champs, ranked in order of BCS rank.<BR/><BR/>4) Remaining wildcards are ranked by BCS rank.<BR/><BR/>This way, only a handful of teams play 14-15 games. The reduced regular season would eliminate some early out-of-conference matchups, but the playoffs would more than make up for them.Brandohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10484284471046027179noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12143188.post-40191510350937399462007-12-05T17:52:00.000-08:002007-12-05T17:52:00.000-08:00I can't agree with a system that rewards teams for...I can't agree with a system that rewards teams for scheduling a weak non-conference schedule. The reason Hawaii went undefeated was that they played easy teams their whole season, and even then they struggled.<BR/><BR/>Hawaii was banking on the fact that their wins would out weigh other teams attention to respectable opponents. They got burnt this year, and they will again if they try to 'trick' the system into giving them a big bowl game.<BR/><BR/>I agree that we need a playoff system. I am for a straight up 8 or 16 team field decided completely by the computer rankings, non of the biased BS that we have right now with the AP voting to get the championship that they want to see.<BR/><BR/>We don't need to lose any bowl games, they can be played along with the playoffs for the other teams, and the playoff games themselves can be bowl games.<BR/><BR/>I think everyone can agree that playoffs need to happen, but until the NCAA can figure out how to make more money than the current Bowl system we are stuck with the BCS. But we must recognize that the BCS is a big step above the old system in place before it.Ookami Snowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10396649763195640076noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12143188.post-72896461144932840882007-12-03T10:40:00.000-08:002007-12-03T10:40:00.000-08:00I see a problem with your "plus 8 configuration".....<I>I see a problem with your "plus 8 configuration"... the off chance that you would have two undefeated teams from non-BCS schools (2004 comes to mind).</I><BR/><BR/>No, I address this directly. It's an 8-PLUS format, which means at least 8 teams would make a playoff, and many more could. If, as you say, a WAC team and an MWC team were both undefeated, they'd both be in. 9 or 10 teams or more, it doesn't matter. If you're undefeated, you're always in. <BR/><BR/>I'm glad you brought up 2004. That's the year I started playing around with the idea of a college football playoff, and eventually came up with this. (I was going to write this post last year, but never got around to it.)<BR/><BR/><I>I see that you're assuming that anything more than 8 teams would be too much and I agree with you. So here what I propose: the "New BCS Champion's Series" or "all champions are eligible but only 8 can go" system.</I><BR/><BR/>I agree; the issues of location and time get weightier with a 16-team playoff.<BR/><BR/>I like your system because it's even more subversive than mine, in that you get to stick it to The Man better. In fact, what you're doing here is exactly what I do when I rank college basketball teams: put the undefeated ones first, no matter how small, and then follow them with the best of the rest.<BR/><BR/>Also, I appreciate how you graciously applied your system to 2004 (a great year for playoff proponents) and this season as well. It's so much easier to listen to a sports fan who's willing to take the time and break it all down.<BR/><BR/>The problem, as you might expect, is that your format is too wildly different for the powers that be (many of whom represent those slighted BCS conferences) to swallow. My plan, while revolutionary in its own way, gives them more concessions and handles their egos with kid gloves. <BR/><BR/>But, hey, you've got my vote.Neel Mehtahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11286549029037039134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12143188.post-28819526634702716192007-12-03T07:02:00.000-08:002007-12-03T07:02:00.000-08:00I see a problem with your "plus 8 configuration".....I see a problem with your "plus 8 configuration"... the off chance that you would have two undefeated teams from non-BCS schools (2004 comes to mind). As history shows, there were two other times a non-BCS school made the BCS and won those games (Utah, Boise State), showing they can keep up with the BIG BOYS.<BR/><BR/>I see that you're assuming that anything more than 8 teams would be too much and I agree with you. So here what I propose: the "New BCS Champion's Series" or "all champions are eligible but only 8 can go" system. In this system every champion from every conference would have an OPPORTUNITY to go to the BCS Playoff. There are presently 11 conferences (Big 11, Big 12, Big East, ACC, SEC, Pac-10, WAC, Conference USA, Mid-American, Mountain West and Sunbelt). For the ND fans that are going to "cry" about this system, I consider the independent schools (Notre Dame, Army, Navy, Western Kentucky) as a "conference" as well.<BR/><BR/>Now out of these 12, all undefeated champions get an automatic bid. Out of the remaining bids, the highest ranked champions will go to the playoff. The playoff seeding will be based on their BCS rankings. The higher ranked teams would play the lower ones at their home for the first two weeks. Then, the tourney would move to the bowl sites for the "final four". <BR/><BR/>This system will take into a teams regular season as well as give us the fans a reason to watch championship games with more enthusiasm.<BR/><BR/>So let's see the New BCS Champion's Series in action. Let's look at the 2004 season... in '04, the conference champions were: Oklahoma, Auburn, Virginia Tech, USC, Iowa (Michigan is also considered the champion but by virtue of a better BCS ranking Iowa's in), Pittsburgh, Louisville, Navy (for the Independents), Utah, North Texas, Boise State, Northern Illinois. There were 5 teams that were undefeated and automatic bids -- Utah, Boise State, Oklahoma, Auburn, USC. Out of the remaining champions: VT, Louisville and Iowa makes the tourney. No team lower than 12 that year would have made the BCS. And the three "at-large" bids are conference champions with every right to be there.<BR/><BR/>If we were to look at this year, the teams eligible would be: VT, Oklahoma, Ohio State, West Virginia, Navy, USC, Central Michigan, BYU, UCF, Troy, Hawaii, LSU. The Great 8 would be Hawaii, Ohio State, LSU, VT, Oklahoma, USC, West Virginia and BYU. Then no one could say that they weren't the "real" champion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12143188.post-22903008336076527762007-12-02T21:55:00.000-08:002007-12-02T21:55:00.000-08:00Agreed. They manufacture some fine men over at the...Agreed. They manufacture some fine men over at the Jon Stewart mill.Neel Mehtahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11286549029037039134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12143188.post-52197329134253335692007-12-02T21:53:00.000-08:002007-12-02T21:53:00.000-08:00Second favorite Jon Stewart out there.Second favorite Jon Stewart out there.Courtneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03792779327477619787noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12143188.post-89743962145139963592007-12-02T20:18:00.000-08:002007-12-02T20:18:00.000-08:00Oregon: Beg to differ. You still have a Jon Stewar...Oregon: Beg to differ. You still have a Jon Stewart on your team! <BR/><BR/>Notre Dame: Yes, I thought it struck a nice balance between politeness and snark.Neel Mehtahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11286549029037039134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12143188.post-52712843724864779722007-12-02T20:07:00.000-08:002007-12-02T20:07:00.000-08:00But, but, college football hasn't mattered since D...But, but, college football hasn't mattered since Dennis Dixon tore his ACL. At least, not in my neck of the woods.<BR/><BR/>ps. <I>This is how independent Notre Dame would likely make the field, were they having an exceptional year.</I> High snarkily goodness in that line.Courtneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03792779327477619787noreply@blogger.com