Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

College Football Playoff Format


  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#1 DirtyMagic97

DirtyMagic97

    YNWA

  • ALL-PRO
  • 6,377 posts

Posted 19 April 2012 - 11:38 AM

Since nearly any fan of college football would like to see a playoff system instituted, what format do you prefer?

The "Plus-One" Format:

1 seed vs. 4 seed

2 seed vs. 3 seed

This system is probably one of the more likely scenarios, but it still leaves a comparison of one-loss teams a lot of the time. The bitching will continue.

The Eight Team Format:

Similar to most professional sports playoff system (1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, 3 vs. 6, 4 vs. 5).

One argument against playoff systems that start to grow to this size is attendance. Will fans travel with the exorbitant ticket prices? Should the games be on an neutral site or on the higher seed's him field?

The Sixteen Team Format:

This is probably the least likely of the potential scenarios. I have heard seeding one through sixteen, or seeding 1-8 on two separate sides. Something like the NCAA basketball tournament, but with 16 instead of 64.

What format do you guys like? Feel free to create your own. I have an idea for one similar to the Eight Team format, but I haven't finalized it. Will post when I do.

#2 Jesse

Jesse

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,314 posts
  • LocationVirginia

Posted 19 April 2012 - 10:25 PM

I'd love to see the 8 team format. If we could just imagine the hype of the month that would lead up to that type of national championship. It would honestly be just as big as the NFL playoffs.

#3 DirtyMagic97

DirtyMagic97

    YNWA

  • ALL-PRO
  • 6,377 posts

Posted 20 April 2012 - 09:25 AM

So, with an Eight-team format we'd have something like this from last season...

Round One

January 1st, 2012
1. LSU
vs.
8. Kansas State
Sugar Bowl: New Orleans, La

December 31st: 2011
2. Alabama
vs.
7. Boise State
Orang Bowl: Miami, FL

December 31, 2011
3. Oklahoma State
vs.
6. Arkansas
Fiesta Bowl: Glendale, AZ

January 1st, 2012
4. Stanford
vs.
5. Oregon
Rose Bowl: Pasadena, CA

Round Two:

January 8, 2012
1. LSU
vs.
4. Stanford
BCS Championship Final 4: New Orleans, LA

January 7, 2012
2. Alabama
vs.
3. Oklahoma State
BCS Championship Final 4: New Orleans, LA

Championship Game:

January 16, 2012
1. LSU
vs.
3. Oklahoma State
BCS National Championship Game: New Orleans, LA

All rankings will be based on the final BCS rankings going into bowl season. There is still the issue of fans traveling to these games. I'm not sure how you could do that without just giving the higher seed home-field. Then you lose the BCS Bowl names.

Another potential solution could be to have the first round be at the higher seed's home field and then have the later rounds be the BCS bowls, but you'd have to end up cutting some out. Any solutions from you guys?

#4 Jesse

Jesse

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,314 posts
  • LocationVirginia

Posted 20 April 2012 - 01:29 PM

The games could be played at a neutral site in the middle of both teams?

Seating can definitely be a problem (VT & Michigan, 2011). There could also be a Final 4 type atmosphere at one single area.

#5 DirtyMagic97

DirtyMagic97

    YNWA

  • ALL-PRO
  • 6,377 posts

Posted 20 April 2012 - 01:32 PM

The games could be played at a neutral site in the middle of both teams?

Seating can definitely be a problem (VT & Michigan, 2011). There could also be a Final 4 type atmosphere at one single area.


Neutral site between the two teams seems ideal. The only problem with a neutral site in the middle of the teams is venue reservation. It'd be a little tough to decide and there wouldn't be much time.

And I agree with the Final 4 atmosphere. I liked the idea of having the Final 4 and Championship in New Orleans.

#6 Jesse

Jesse

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,314 posts
  • LocationVirginia

Posted 20 April 2012 - 02:01 PM

Neutral site between the two teams seems ideal. The only problem with a neutral site in the middle of the teams is venue reservation. It'd be a little tough to decide and there wouldn't be much time.

And I agree with the Final 4 atmosphere. I liked the idea of having the Final 4 and Championship in New Orleans.

Exactly. Finding a venue, deciding who plays where, who gets the revenue, when it will be played is a lot to plan on a large scale in a matter of weeks. :\ I hope it can get figured out within the next 3 - 4 years. My school was in the FCS playoffs and it was a blast. FBS could just follow that schedule?

#7 DirtyMagic97

DirtyMagic97

    YNWA

  • ALL-PRO
  • 6,377 posts

Posted 20 April 2012 - 02:17 PM

I think the best way to get it done is to appease the BCS Bowls. Have to keep their revenue, or they will continue to block it. That problem arises almost regardless of how you set a system up, unfortunately. Even in my system with keeping the BCS bowls as the first round, they will lose revenue. They will either have to lower ticket prices or expect lower attendance.

I'm with you, though. I hope they can figure it out in the next 3-4 years. It would be extremely exciting. I will look later, but Mark Cuban reportedly had a good idea for maintaining revenue in a system he created a while back.

#8 theyhateme45

theyhateme45

    360 GT = Shino45

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,371 posts

Posted 21 April 2012 - 10:58 AM

Neither option.... I would like to see a 6 Team format.

#1 and #2 Teams in the BCS ranking get a first round bye (So finishing one and two is still very very meaningful).

First round #3 vs #6 and #4 vs #5. Lowest seed remaining plays the #1 ranked team.... Then continue with 4 team playoff format.

#9 Seamonk

Seamonk

    kekekekekeke

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,058 posts
  • LocationRichmond, Va

Posted 21 April 2012 - 01:08 PM

I would like all BCS conference teams to send their conference winner and then have a lottery to decide who plays who. Completely random. If the best teams are really the best teams, they will end up playing against each other at some point. Also have room for At-Large berths for non-BCS teams or wildcards.

I really don't trust talking heads and BCS committees to decide who plays who because they will go for ratings and often times overrated teams will play other overrated teams for a lackluster game.

#10 cavic7585

cavic7585

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,127 posts

Posted 22 April 2012 - 01:30 PM

8 team for sure maybe 9. Let a guy on the outside have a chance to get in. Houston this year couldnt have won it but man they could Have done some damage with Case Kenum. How fun would it be to watch a cinderella team make a mini run in the playoffs.

I would like all BCS conference teams to send their conference winner and then have a lottery to decide who plays who. Completely random. If the best teams are really the best teams, they will end up playing against each other at some point. Also have room for At-Large berths for non-BCS teams or wildcards.

I really don't trust talking heads and BCS committees to decide who plays who because they will go for ratings and often times overrated teams will play other overrated teams for a lackluster game.


They do it for the money and its sickening sometimes.

#11 Nicbsbll2

Nicbsbll2

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,513 posts

Posted 22 April 2012 - 04:28 PM

I would like all BCS conference teams to send their conference winner and then have a lottery to decide who plays who. Completely random. If the best teams are really the best teams, they will end up playing against each other at some point. Also have room for At-Large berths for non-BCS teams or wildcards.

I really don't trust talking heads and BCS committees to decide who plays who because they will go for ratings and often times overrated teams will play other overrated teams for a lackluster game.


This is what I want:

ACC #1
Big 12 #1
Big East #1
Big 10 #1
Pac 12 #1
SEC #1
At-Large (highest ranked non-champ)
At-Large (second highest non-champ)

Conference Champs are ranked 1-6 based on BCS/Coaches/Media whatever rankings. Both At-Large teams are seeded 7 and 8 (want a higher seed, then win your conference). Top 4 seeds host the lower 4 seeds at their home stadium. Same thing goes for the second round. The Championship will be played at a neutral location. This year could have played out like this:

Friday, December 23:
1) LSU vs. 8) Stanford
3) Oregon vs. 6) West Virginia

Saturday, December 24:
2) OK State vs. 7) Alabama
4) Wisconsin vs. 5) Clemson

Friday, December 30:
1) LSU vs. 3) Oregon

Saturday, December 31:
2) OK State vs. 4) Wisconson

Monday, January 9:
1) LSU vs. 2) OK State

#12 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,943 posts
  • LocationDark Side of the Moon

Posted 23 April 2012 - 02:03 PM

This is what I want:

ACC #1
Big 12 #1
Big East #1
Big 10 #1
Pac 12 #1
SEC #1
At-Large (highest ranked non-champ)
At-Large (second highest non-champ)

Conference Champs are ranked 1-6 based on BCS/Coaches/Media whatever rankings. Both At-Large teams are seeded 7 and 8 (want a higher seed, then win your conference). Top 4 seeds host the lower 4 seeds at their home stadium. Same thing goes for the second round. The Championship will be played at a neutral location. This year could have played out like this:

Friday, December 23:
1) LSU vs. 8) Stanford
3) Oregon vs. 6) West Virginia

Saturday, December 24:
2) OK State vs. 7) Alabama
4) Wisconsin vs. 5) Clemson

Friday, December 30:
1) LSU vs. 3) Oregon

Saturday, December 31:
2) OK State vs. 4) Wisconson

Monday, January 9:
1) LSU vs. 2) OK State


I would absolutely HATE that format.

The playoff shoudl be the best teams in the country (no matter whether that is 4 teams...6 teams...8 teams...etc). To tie them to the major conference winners does not fulfill that.

Use the BCS ranking system (best we have...using polls, models, etc) and have the top teams compete. Screw the conf champions.

I jsut don't think that a 15th or 20th ranked team from a conference should be in over a 6th or 7th ranked team.

#13 DirtyMagic97

DirtyMagic97

    YNWA

  • ALL-PRO
  • 6,377 posts

Posted 23 April 2012 - 07:01 PM

Yea, I am 100% against the conference auto-bid format.

By that system, you legitimately put Clemson as a higher seed than Alabama. That is more flawed than the current system.

#14 cavic7585

cavic7585

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,127 posts

Posted 23 April 2012 - 08:19 PM

Yea, I am 100% against the conference auto-bid format.

By that system, you legitimately put Clemson as a higher seed than Alabama. That is more flawed than the current system.



I am 100% for it. You give to much power to the media. What makes the current system flawed is that teams like MIchigan VT get a sugar bowl bid when both honestly had very deceptive records. How different would the NFL playoffs had been different if there wasn't an auto bid system. If Alabama is better than Clemson then they will prove it on the field and advance. We are talking about a 8 team playoff formatt not march madness.

The whole lets just have the top BCS teams play if off doesnt fix the problem you just extend a psuedo band aid.

#15 Johnny Kilroy

Johnny Kilroy

    Kilroy Kicks Butt

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,648 posts

Posted 23 April 2012 - 08:21 PM

But with that system it's not always the top 8 teams.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com