|
Post by atownbeaver on Dec 6, 2016 8:32:53 GMT -8
Thanks for that hard hitting analysis... It is fine to have an opinion, even a contrary one. but SAY WHY man. Why is 12, 16 or 24 nonsense as you said in your other thread? Why is 12 not the way to go? There are 128 D-1 teams in football. The top 10%, as the 12 represent, do not deserve to dual it out? Is literally every single other level of football wrong? why is a 12 game playoff wrong for D-1 but FCS can run a 24 team one with fewer resources and more travel? How can the NAIA level do it without scholarship players and a overall budget that consists of a pot too small to take a piss in? Why can Oregon High Schools run a 32 team 6A playoff and have 5 additional football games after their 10 game regular season yet it is some terrible curse for D-1 ball?I'm guessing that the travel cost and logistics of going from Eugene to Hillsboro a couple weeks in a row versus flying to Columbus, Ann Arbor, Norman or Pasadena in consecutive weeks isn't quite in the same ballpark.
And the 32 team 6A playoff is the most ridiculous thing ever. Blowout after blowout. 2-7 South Eugene (#31 seed) voluntarily forfeited their playoff game this year versus trying to play shorthanded versus Jesuit. That's right, 2-7 gets you in the dance and you're not even the lowest seed. Let's not use 6A football as a model. Now to be sure, I am not saying it is GOOD that Oregon runs a 32 team playoff. I am saying they do. they have up 5 additional games. The excuses that hit D-1 are always 1. extra games and player safety and 2. logistics. these are things every other level of football copes with. My only point is that every other level of football has a REAL playoff. one that covers a significant portion of the top teams. Maybe some have too many, I'd argue 32 and 24 is too many. But a 12 or 16? out of 128 teams? I mean, dare I point out NOBODY complains about march madness right? 64, not counting play-in games. sure that is out of more like 350 odd teams, but proportionally speaking, they let in more teams as a percent than a 12 team playoff would in football. For the sake of argument, going 16 teams deep adds 6 more 10 or more win teams to the pot and 4, 9 win teams, including USC, Florida State and Oklahoma St. Imperfect, but strong teams for sure. Right now, 16 teams deep using the "playoff rankings" only has one questionable team on it. 8-4 Auburn. Only one questionable omission, 10-4 Temple that beat Navy. something that is likely fixed with an auto-bid system. I think USC is an interesting example of why a deep playoff is good. They started out rough, made a QB change and then killed it, absolutely killed it, won 8 in a row and beat #11 Colorado and #4 Washington. None of those 8 wins were even particularly close. They basically started dominating teams. USC is a 9 win team that could go very far in a playoff. Anybody could say, woulda-shoulda-coulda with them and how the Coach handled the team early, but nobody can say they are not, right now, a dominate team. And here is the deal... The bowl system has been destroyed. Corporate interest and ESPN killed it. ESPN, the company, owns like half the bowls now. It is a joke. I get the want for tradition, I get that west coast people care about the "Grandaddy of them All" I do get that. But I also feel that we entered an era that killed it, as unfortunate as it is. If you are not going to count on the bowl system any longer, might as well make the new playoff system better and more entertaining.
|
|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Dec 6, 2016 9:01:50 GMT -8
The same way every level of high school, NAIA or other NCAA divisions do lol Arguably, D-1 players are bigger/faster/stronger and hit harder and blah, blah, blah. I believe you can mitigate this with allowing every team to have a second bye week in season, as well as a bye before playoffs and then a bye week in the middle and then one before the championship game Napkin math puts D-1 championship game at first or second weekend of February. Basically when it is now. Basically: Conference championship week bye Round 1 (8 teams, 4 games, top 4 have a bye) round 2 ( 8 teams, 4 games, top 4 playing winners of round 1) bye round 2 (4 teams, 2 games) bye championship (duh) Lets also not forget the NFL plays 16 then has the playoffs... An FCS team that wins the championship plays 11 regular games then have an up-to 5 game playoff!! D-1 would not have an unusual burden with a regular season and a shortened playoff. still at 16 or maybe 17 total games. Or just start the playoffs the week after conference championship games, higher seeded teams host the game in their crib. I'm not a big fan of byes in a college football playoff format, most of the power conference teams have quasi bye weeks vs. directional schools anyway. It could easily be 8 teams right now, starting this weekend, and it wouldn't disrupt the playoffs as already proposed one bit. There would just be 4 awesome football games this weekend. The losers this could still be bowl eligible. My personal preference is 8 teams, which still makes the conference championship mean something. That leaves 3 wildcard teams, no more than 2 per conference. 16 teams is too much IMO when you factor in the cost/benefit. Besides, the conference championship game basically serves as a play-in so in essence an 8-team tournament is really a 13 team tournament. 16 might be a bit more problematic but it could still work, and still finish it way before February. It's idiotic that they try to frame their argument around "player safety" or finals.
|
|
|
Post by blackbug on Dec 6, 2016 9:39:19 GMT -8
Arguably, D-1 players are bigger/faster/stronger and hit harder and blah, blah, blah. I believe you can mitigate this with allowing every team to have a second bye week in season, as well as a bye before playoffs and then a bye week in the middle and then one before the championship game Napkin math puts D-1 championship game at first or second weekend of February. Basically when it is now. Basically: Conference championship week bye Round 1 (8 teams, 4 games, top 4 have a bye) round 2 ( 8 teams, 4 games, top 4 playing winners of round 1) bye round 2 (4 teams, 2 games) bye championship (duh) Lets also not forget the NFL plays 16 then has the playoffs... An FCS team that wins the championship plays 11 regular games then have an up-to 5 game playoff!! D-1 would not have an unusual burden with a regular season and a shortened playoff. still at 16 or maybe 17 total games. Or just start the playoffs the week after conference championship games, higher seeded teams host the game in their crib. I'm not a big fan of byes in a college football playoff format, most of the power conference teams have quasi bye weeks vs. directional schools anyway. It could easily be 8 teams right now, starting this weekend, and it wouldn't disrupt the playoffs as already proposed one bit. There would just be 4 awesome football games this weekend. The losers this could still be bowl eligible. My personal preference is 8 teams, which still makes the conference championship mean something. That leaves 3 wildcard teams, no more than 2 per conference. 16 teams is too much IMO when you factor in the cost/benefit. Besides, the conference championship game basically serves as a play-in so in essence an 8-team tournament is really a 13 team tournament. 16 might be a bit more problematic but it could still work, and still finish it way before February. It's idiotic that they try to frame their argument around "player safety" or finals. What would you do about conferences that do not have a championship game?
|
|
|
Post by fumblerooski on Dec 6, 2016 9:40:57 GMT -8
I think expansion to 8 teams is inevitable but moving to 12, 16 or 24 team playoffs would be too much of a change to the established order of CFB. A 24 team playoff could add 5 games to a teams schedule. Anyone in a conference championship is playing 13 games already. That's an 18 game season and just unreasonable to ask of college students. And as much as the NCAA is a joke when it comes to the "student athlete" term, these kids are still college students that have homework and classes to go to. Also, attrition is a real problem when you play that many games. Hell, OSU barely had a linebacking crew to get through 12 games this year. We also barely had a secondary to finish 12 games last year.
People will naturally say the solution to this is to shorten the season to 11 games and maybe don't have a conference championship game. This is not going to happen because shortening the season means you give up money. Not just ESPN and the conferences but the schools too. Every home game we play provides money for other OSU athletic programs. To give up a home game means to forfeit a lot of money and the majority of schools that don't make the playoff (Given the last 20 years as evidence, OSU would be in this category more often than not) would suffer because of that.
A bigger playoff would drive a tremendous amount of revenue but changing the system means saying goodbye to a tremendous amount of revenue. The new revenue would have to outweigh the old and keep lining the pockets of people currently benefiting from the system.
I'm not saying I don't want a bigger playoff. I would have loved for OSU to have a shot in 2000 and I would love to see what USC could do this year but there is already an established flow of money from the system as is. And money rules everything here. If money weren't the ruler of all things CFB then we would still have the Pac-12 championship game at the higher ranked teams home stadium, which was great. But instead we have it at Sterile Levi stadium that isn't anywhere near full because that's where Larry Scott thinks the money is... I'll save that grievance for a different thread.
|
|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Dec 6, 2016 9:44:37 GMT -8
Now to be sure, I am not saying it is GOOD that Oregon runs a 32 team playoff. I am saying they do. they have up 5 additional games. The excuses that hit D-1 are always 1. extra games and player safety and 2. logistics. these are things every other level of football copes with. My only point is that every other level of football has a REAL playoff. one that covers a significant portion of the top teams. Maybe some have too many, I'd argue 32 and 24 is too many. But a 12 or 16? out of 128 teams? I mean, dare I point out NOBODY complains about march madness right? 64, not counting play-in games. sure that is out of more like 350 odd teams, but proportionally speaking, they let in more teams as a percent than a 12 team playoff would in football. For the sake of argument, going 16 teams deep adds 6 more 10 or more win teams to the pot and 4, 9 win teams, including USC, Florida State and Oklahoma St. Imperfect, but strong teams for sure. Right now, 16 teams deep using the "playoff rankings" only has one questionable team on it. 8-4 Auburn. Only one questionable omission, 10-4 Temple that beat Navy. something that is likely fixed with an auto-bid system. I think USC is an interesting example of why a deep playoff is good. They started out rough, made a QB change and then killed it, absolutely killed it, won 8 in a row and beat #11 Colorado and #4 Washington. None of those 8 wins were even particularly close. They basically started dominating teams. USC is a 9 win team that could go very far in a playoff. Anybody could say, woulda-shoulda-coulda with them and how the Coach handled the team early, but nobody can say they are not, right now, a dominate team. And here is the deal... The bowl system has been destroyed. Corporate interest and ESPN killed it. ESPN, the company, owns like half the bowls now. It is a joke. I get the want for tradition, I get that west coast people care about the "Grandaddy of them All" I do get that. But I also feel that we entered an era that killed it, as unfortunate as it is. If you are not going to count on the bowl system any longer, might as well make the new playoff system better and more entertaining. March madness is essentially 3 weekends. Or the same period of time required for an 8 team football playoff. Me personally, I don't see any reason for more than 8.. if we make it 8, teams 9 and 10 will argue that they were left out.. if you make it 16, teams 17-18-19 will argue they were snubbed, etc. I like that every week of the current college football season matters. You can't say that about basketball between conferences getting 7-8 bids, conference tournaments, etc. This gets me to care about a week 3 football game where a week 3 hoops game? Meh. 16 teams - now we're looking at teams with 3 and even 4 losses.
|
|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Dec 6, 2016 9:49:34 GMT -8
Or just start the playoffs the week after conference championship games, higher seeded teams host the game in their crib. I'm not a big fan of byes in a college football playoff format, most of the power conference teams have quasi bye weeks vs. directional schools anyway. It could easily be 8 teams right now, starting this weekend, and it wouldn't disrupt the playoffs as already proposed one bit. There would just be 4 awesome football games this weekend. The losers this could still be bowl eligible. My personal preference is 8 teams, which still makes the conference championship mean something. That leaves 3 wildcard teams, no more than 2 per conference. 16 teams is too much IMO when you factor in the cost/benefit. Besides, the conference championship game basically serves as a play-in so in essence an 8-team tournament is really a 13 team tournament. 16 might be a bit more problematic but it could still work, and still finish it way before February. It's idiotic that they try to frame their argument around "player safety" or finals. What would you do about conferences that do not have a championship game? I assume you are referencing the Big 12, which will have conference championship games starting next year. As for Independents they are all playing for a WC berth if they don't want to join a conference. There would have to be some automatic qualifier rules set for indys and Non Power 5 schools, but that's no different than what currently exists. Based on the CFP rankings, the games this week would be FSU at Bama USC at Clemson Oklahoma at Ohio State Penn State at Washington If you wanted to tweak the rules to require WC teams to be ranked in the top 10 and get rid of the 2/conference rule, the take out FSU and include Michigan.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Dec 6, 2016 10:23:45 GMT -8
They should have it so every team plays 8 league games, then have 2 massive 6 game 64 team tournaments, one featuring the "top" 64 and one featuring the "bottom" 64... winners play winners, loses play losers. Everybody plays 14 games. At the end you'd have the top two and the worst two teams left and they could have 2 special games to determine the best and worst teams in the country while having most of the rest of the order somewhat sorted out.
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Dec 6, 2016 11:46:20 GMT -8
They should have it so every team plays 8 league games, then have 2 massive 6 game 64 team tournaments, one featuring the "top" 64 and one featuring the "bottom" 64... winners play winners, loses play losers. Everybody plays 14 games. At the end you'd have the top two and the worst two teams left and they could have 2 special games to determine the best and worst teams in the country while having most of the rest of the order somewhat sorted out. This scenario is just as likely as any of the others to happen. 0% chance. I mean, I'd like to see a "real" 8-16 team playoff just as much as the next guy, but unless College Football decides to keep the Bowl system and the playoff system separate, it's NEVER going to happen. All the work they try to do to incorporate the Bowls into the playoffs just makes for a "compromise" system, which is NEVER ideal. With the conferences all set up with different #s of teams, with different #s of conference games, with different championship formats - it's a clusterf*$k.
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Dec 6, 2016 12:31:10 GMT -8
I'm giving two opinions which may add to the debate and plant a thought in some heads. The first opinion is that with a 12 team playoff, you either have two or four teams receiving byes. To see the "two", read my original post in this thread. The byes are a huge deal and help keep the importance of winning games in the regular season. For example, even for Alabama this year in a 12-team scenario - if they lost the SEC championship game, it's likely their bye would be gone (bye-bye).
The second thought is that I hate the selection committee. It reaks of self-selected grand importance. It's similar to the Olympic committee (or World Cup soccer) that selects where the games will be located. The committee is made of of old money European aristocrats, children of eastern European oligarchs, and African war-lords who want to look respectable. The selection committee is the American equivalent of that group. The committee can charter jets, eat, drink, and tell each other what magnificent humans they are to each other. Let the computers pick the teams. Allow the computers to use margin of victory in the computations. Cut off the maximum margin at four or five touchdowns.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Dec 6, 2016 13:18:04 GMT -8
I'm giving two opinions which may add to the debate and plant a thought in some heads. The first opinion is that with a 12 team playoff, you either have two or four teams receiving byes. To see the "two", read my original post in this thread. The byes are a huge deal and help keep the importance of winning games in the regular season. For example, even for Alabama this year in a 12-team scenario - if they lost the SEC championship game, it's likely their bye would be gone (bye-bye). The second thought is that I hate the selection committee. It reaks of self-selected grand importance. It's similar to the Olympic committee (or World Cup soccer) that selects where the games will be located. The committee is made of of old money European aristocrats, children of eastern European oligarchs, and African war-lords who want to look respectable. The selection committee is the American equivalent of that group. The committee can charter jets, eat, drink, and tell each other what magnificent humans they are to each other. Let the computers pick the teams. Allow the computers to use margin of victory in the computations. Cut off the maximum margin at four or five touchdowns. I agree wholeheartedly about eliminating a selection committee. Committee guarantees a big name makes it 9 times out of 10 when a spot is up for debate. I am against using margin of victory without serious controls or edits. Some games can look close on paper but never ever be in doubt. It encourages running up the score against inferior teams as well, which is poor sportsmanship. I think a good example of why it could be bad is looking at second half Oregon State during the Civil War. Last two drives: 11 plays 80 yards 6:32 seconds off the clock. nearly half the quarter. next drive: 9 plays 68 yards, 5:17 off the clock. Two TD drive, nearly one full quarter of clock. It is really possible to be completely dominate, have long, controlled drives... ball and clock control drives and not score a ton of points. Lets say that was us all game, every series was like the last two. Basically we completely dominate that game, but score maybe 28 points. Oregon for their part scores, 14 say. Nobody would argue OSU didn't dominate that game. Nobody would argue it was not an excellent, well executed game plan that Oregon state executed to perfection. Nobody would look back and say OSU did not exert complete control of that game. but OSU, would theoretically be punished because we didn't spin the scoreboard Madden style. Say we were good and sitting at 11-1 or whatever and some other team was 11-1. I'd hate the nod to go to the team that kept airing it out in the 4th quarter to go up 5 scores to look good on a computer. That is not good. It should always be first and foremost: Win the conference and you are in. 5 automatic P5 bids. After that it should be some measure of total wins with an SOS component. I would vote for something to the effect of 2 TD win... period. win by two touchdowns, you get a bonus calculation point, or however the math model works out.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Dec 6, 2016 13:46:59 GMT -8
On a more serious note, in any given year it's usually only 2-4 teams, on rare occasions 1 or 5, that seriously belong in the mix for talk abut a national championship after week 15.
This year it's fairly obvious since only 4 teams came out with 1 loss or better. I could see taking it to 8 teams in case you have a minor conference team or two running the table and/or 5 or more teams deserving a shot. After 8 we're really getting to where we're largely making space for obvious underdogs.
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Dec 6, 2016 13:54:20 GMT -8
They should have it so every team plays 8 league games, then have 2 massive 6 game 64 team tournaments, one featuring the "top" 64 and one featuring the "bottom" 64... winners play winners, loses play losers. Everybody plays 14 games. At the end you'd have the top two and the worst two teams left and they could have 2 special games to determine the best and worst teams in the country while having most of the rest of the order somewhat sorted out. This scenario is just as likely as any of the others to happen. 0% chance. I mean, I'd like to see a "real" 8-16 team playoff just as much as the next guy, but unless College Football decides to keep the Bowl system and the playoff system separate, it's NEVER going to happen. All the work they try to do to incorporate the Bowls into the playoffs just makes for a "compromise" system, which is NEVER ideal. With the conferences all set up with different #s of teams, with different #s of conference games, with different championship formats - it's a clusterf*$k. The radical solution ... that addresses concerns and gets to the best compromise for determining a D1 Champion in football:
1. Create 8 conferences with 10 teams each 2. Everybody plays everybody in conference - 9 conference games 3. 11 game regular season - no byes. Start 1st week in September. 4. 2 non-conference games for each team - 80 teams have to play among the 80 teams (no D2, D3, etc.) 5. Best conference record wins the conference. If two teams tie, best overall record wins the conference. Still tied, then modified Kansas plan playoff first week after end of regular season. each team gets four possession from 25. In at least two of the possession if they score a TD they must go for 2 point conversion. Competition to determine champ, no poll rankings or subjective guess. 6. 8 conference champions qualify for playoffs - no at-large teams. If Auto Zone wants to sponsor a bowl game with 2nd place teams from two conferences, great. 7. 3 rounds to find the champ, starting 1st or 2nd week in December. Top rank 4 conference champs host opening round game. 8. Semifinals on News Year Eve or News Year Day. 9. Championship game on Saturday evening 2nd Saturday after January 1.
Biggest problem - realignment to create the 8 conferences Secondary problem - scheduling non conference games
Additional thought ... revenue for home game ticket sales (SEC 4 ooc games now). Maybe provide an option for another non-conference game that does not count in the record for determining conference champion in ties; which means add a bye week for those that don't want the 3rd ooc game.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Dec 6, 2016 14:50:24 GMT -8
This scenario is just as likely as any of the others to happen. 0% chance. I mean, I'd like to see a "real" 8-16 team playoff just as much as the next guy, but unless College Football decides to keep the Bowl system and the playoff system separate, it's NEVER going to happen. All the work they try to do to incorporate the Bowls into the playoffs just makes for a "compromise" system, which is NEVER ideal. With the conferences all set up with different #s of teams, with different #s of conference games, with different championship formats - it's a clusterf*$k. The radical solution ... that addresses concerns and gets to the best compromise for determining a D1 Champion in football:
1. Create 8 conferences with 10 teams each 2. Everybody plays everybody in conference - 9 conference games 3. 11 game regular season - no byes. Start 1st week in September. 4. 2 non-conference games for each team - 80 teams have to play among the 80 teams (no D2, D3, etc.) 5. Best conference record wins the conference. If two teams tie, best overall record wins the conference. Still tied, then modified Kansas plan playoff first week after end of regular season. each team gets four possession from 25. In at least two of the possession if they score a TD they must go for 2 point conversion. Competition to determine champ, no poll rankings or subjective guess. 6. 8 conference champions qualify for playoffs - no at-large teams. If Auto Zone wants to sponsor a bowl game with 2nd place teams from two conferences, great. 7. 3 rounds to find the champ, starting 1st or 2nd week in December. Top rank 4 conference champs host opening round game. 8. Semifinals on News Year Eve or News Year Day. 9. Championship game on Saturday evening 2nd Saturday after January 1.
Biggest problem - realignment to create the 8 conferences Secondary problem - scheduling non conference games
Additional thought ... revenue for home game ticket sales (SEC 4 ooc games now). Maybe provide an option for another non-conference game that does not count in the record for determining conference champion in ties; which means add a bye week for those that don't want the 3rd ooc game.
Which 48 teams are now not D-1?
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Dec 6, 2016 14:59:19 GMT -8
The radical solution ... that addresses concerns and gets to the best compromise for determining a D1 Champion in football:
1. Create 8 conferences with 10 teams each 2. Everybody plays everybody in conference - 9 conference games 3. 11 game regular season - no byes. Start 1st week in September. 4. 2 non-conference games for each team - 80 teams have to play among the 80 teams (no D2, D3, etc.) 5. Best conference record wins the conference. If two teams tie, best overall record wins the conference. Still tied, then modified Kansas plan playoff first week after end of regular season. each team gets four possession from 25. In at least two of the possession if they score a TD they must go for 2 point conversion. Competition to determine champ, no poll rankings or subjective guess. 6. 8 conference champions qualify for playoffs - no at-large teams. If Auto Zone wants to sponsor a bowl game with 2nd place teams from two conferences, great. 7. 3 rounds to find the champ, starting 1st or 2nd week in December. Top rank 4 conference champs host opening round game. 8. Semifinals on News Year Eve or News Year Day. 9. Championship game on Saturday evening 2nd Saturday after January 1.
Biggest problem - realignment to create the 8 conferences Secondary problem - scheduling non conference games
Additional thought ... revenue for home game ticket sales (SEC 4 ooc games now). Maybe provide an option for another non-conference game that does not count in the record for determining conference champion in ties; which means add a bye week for those that don't want the 3rd ooc game.
Which 48 teams are now not D-1? Take current 64 power 5 conference teams and add 16. No independents - force Notre Dame and BYU into a conference
My other alternative is a 64 team group made up of 4 conferences with 16 teams, 8 teams in each division. Determining the champion is conference champions in semifinals, then championship game. Manage ooc as above (no D2 or other).
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Dec 6, 2016 15:13:21 GMT -8
Which 48 teams are now not D-1? Take current 64 power 5 conference teams and add 16. No independents - force Notre Dame and BYU into a conference
My other alternative is a 64 team group made up of 4 conferences with 16 teams, 8 teams in each division. Determining the champion is conference champions in semifinals, then championship game. Manage ooc as above (no D2 or other).
Again, these debates ALWAYS devolve into these ludicrous scenarios where it would take an NFL-style Overlord Commissioner to divide up conferences and impose (generally reasonable) controls over these D-I powerhouse schools. Then you realize that the Pac-12 couldn't even split Cal & Stanford into a separate division than UCLA and USC without having to make a compromise. Again, there is a 0% chance of even the most reasonable (but radical) ideas to come to fruition, because you'll never get even 50% of the 128 current D-I teams to agree to any of these scenarios. I'm sure people have total overhauls to the US education system, or the Military that make just as much sense, but would never happen because there's too much clout from individual interest groups to allow it to happen smoothly.
|
|