Fixing the BCS

[TIME TO MAKE $$$]

First off, I favor the current bowl system over a playoff. For all the well-known reasons: tradition, a meaningful regular season, etc. Also, I don't think a playoff system would solve all the complaints that people have. If we had an 8-game playoff system, instead of complaining about USC or Notre Dame in a BCS game, people would be complaining about which one deserves a playoff spot. Same complaints, just a different format.

Remember, every year there are teams on the bubble that complain about not getting a bid to the basketball tournament, and that tourney has 65 spots! Anybody remember teams that have refused NIT bids because they thought they deserved NCAA bids. I remember it happening in the past, but I can't remember which teams and which years. Anyway, I say keep the bowls but keep tweeking the BCS until they get it right. Here are my suggestions.

First, add two of the other New Year's Day bowls to the BCS mix. The problem is all the other bowls have TV contracts with other networks besides ABC which has the rights to the BCS games. That's all negotiation. Remember kids, one the basic rules of life: Everything is negotiable.

One of my picks would be the Cotton Bowl. The game would probably have to be moved to the Cowboy's stadium in Arlington or involve renovating the Cotton Bowl, but both of those have been discussed in the past. I also read the annual Texas-Oklahoma game is considering moving from the Cotton Bowl to some sort of football setup at the Texas Motor Speedway. Something could be done.

My other pick would be one of the other bowls in Florida. The stadiums for the Gator and Outback Bowls are home to NFL teams and have hosted Super Bowls. The two new BCS bowls could be "second-tier" BCS bowls that wouldn't be in the title game rotation. Still it's a New Year's Day bowl. In fact, you could kick all the non-BCS bowls off of New Year's. Make New Year's a BCS holiday.

So now you have four more BCS spots. I say two of spots should be guaranteed to the highest ranking of the minor conference champions and independents. This year, Notre Dame would take one spot and the other would go to Boise State, Colorado State, Marshall, TCU, South Florida or whoever. Give a little guy a shot. And the other two spots would be more at-large spots, this year for Kansas State, Texas, or Michigan.

Another suggestion, drop the computers from the ranking. Nobody likes the computer rankings, so let's get rid of them. Another basic rule of life: Keep it simple. I say 40% for each of the polls and 20% for strength of schedule. And keep the quality win bonus.

So that's my plan.

I have a feeling a few of you will say you disagree with me on getting rid of the computers....

 

[dr. freeze]

to be honest, i LOVE the computer rankings.....they are the most objective thing in the system.....well, at least the ones which considered margin of victory.......but then they threw those out.....the most objective tool we had to generate power ratings obviously had to include margin of victories......BUT....now they are gone.....

 

[TCSN]

There is no system that would be more fair then a playoff system not based on bias voting but on the field of play. We have a successful playoff formula in other levels of college football & you earn your way to them so the big boys can do the same thing.

 

[dawgball]

I do disagree with you, but I appreciate your opinion.

What would adding more unimportant BCS bowls serve? Except the money, what do the other six teams get because they're in a BCS bowl that the other bowl teams do not? That is something I may not have read up on enough.

Second. I do think that major conferences should get automatic "important" bowl bids. FSU is a good example of when it doesn't work, but FSU could still probably kick the hell out of most teams from mid-major conferences and their record would reflect that if they were in one of those conferences. I do think there are very high-quality teams in mid-majors but not as heavily packed.

Third. If we could set up a playoff system with 16 teams. An automatic bid going to the major conferences and maybe a couple of the mid-majors. Then the remaining spots are filled by the teams that finish in order in the BCS system--no questions asked. The problem with the basketball system is that it is humans choosing the teams for the final spots. If the BCS rating system is worth its weight in salt, then why couldn't they fill the remaining spots that were not filled by automatic bids. The teams that don't get in the playoff would play in other small bowls just like they do now. It's still a bowl win for the school and players. You might say these would be meaningless, but isn't the Continental Tire Bowl a waste of valuable time for another showing of Merry Christmas, Charlie Brown?

Fourth. For the BCS system, I think quality win points should be stretched to the top 20.

I don't think a playoff system takes anything away from regular season games. Teams such as Tennessee would still not make it to the playoffs this year because of their losses. I also don't think the National championship game is the reason why Georgia-Florida or Marshall-Toledo or Texas-Texas A&M, etc are big games. These games are big BECAUSE of the tradition. Tradition many times supercedes the season results. Was the Alabama-Auburn game worth any less this year just because Alabama was on probation--I think not. Both teams still wanted to kick the other guy's teeth in.

I am not passionate about hating the BCS, but I do feel there are better options. Who wouldn't want to watch the 16th seed take on Miami for a chance to knock them out? I think more people would tune into that than the Diamond Walnut San Francisco Bowl. The money would still be there for all of the schools and conferences.

I also think Georgia would fare well in a playoff this year. But that's just my biased opinion and weighs very little on my opinions above.

Good luck to all this Bowl Season!

 

[Stuman]

Keep 15 bowl games. Why 15? Let me explain:


16 team playoff system

Week 1:
Have all eight first round games on the same day at the traditional sites of eight minor bowls. (GMAC, etc.) Seed them just like the basketball touney. (16-1, 15-2, 7-8, etc.)

Wait two weeks - (Injuries, travel, etc.)

Week 3:
Have all four second round games on the same day at the traditional sites of four semi-major bowls. (Cotton, etc.)

Wait two more weeks...

Week 5:
Have both third round games at the traditional sites of Major bowls (Sugar, Fiesta, etc.)

Wait two more weeks...

Week 7, one week before the Superbowl:
Have the championship game at the traditional site of a major bowl. (Rose, etc.)


Of course, we could continue to rotate which bowls get which games to keep all the bowls happy. (Only rotate the seedings, not which round they get to host) With this method, even the minor bowls get to host a championship team every few years and serve a very large crowd. The bowls can continue to generate a lot of money, and, the smaller bowls have an opportunity to make MORE money. On top of this, I remember a few years ago when CBS or ABC (can't remember which) offered the NCAA 100 million dollars for the rights to televise the playoffs, should they become a reality. I absolutely love this system. Anyone have any suggestions to make my system better? Do you see any potential problems? What do you think?

Stuman

 

[taoist]

...love the idea of a playoff and the 16 team playoff system.

Here's one change that I would love to see implemented. Force every conference to have a Conference Championship Game like the Big 12 and SEC...and force Notre Dame to join a freaking conference such as the Big 10 (and leave the selfish bastids out of any Bowl Games until they do!!!).

This format will lend itself to the playoff system. Winners of all major conference championship games get automatic bids with the remaining spots going to either mid-major conference champions or "at large" bids for highly ranked teams that didn't win their respective conference.

Sets up kinda like this with the seeds being determined by the ranking of the BCS poll.... (I don't have time to get all the seeds perfect...this is just an example with a few guesses as to conference champions.)

1. Big East Champion - MIAMI
2. Big 10 Champion - OHIO ST
3. SEC Champion - GEORGIA
4. PAC 10 Champion - USC
5. At Large - IOWA
6. At Large - WASH ST.
7. Big 12 Champion - OKLAHOMA
8. At Large - K. STATE
9. At Large - TEXAS
10. At Large - MICHIGAN
11. ACC Champion - FL. ST
12. WAC Champion or At Large - BOISE ST.
13. Mtn West Champion or At Large - COLORADO ST.
14. MAC Champion or At Large - MARSHALL
15. Conf USA Champion or At Large - TCU
16. Sun Belt Champion or At Large - N. TEXAS


...leaving out Notre Dame until they join a freaking conference!!!

...granted that the Miami vs N. Texas or Ohio St vs TCU games wouldn't draw a big television audience, but how about Oklahoma vs Michigan?? or Wash St. vs Fl. St?? or Texas vs K. St rematch?? or even Iowa vs Boise St. on the smurf turf?? hell, even Marshall vs Georgia wouldn't be a bad game, would it?

...can we all agree that these teams in the format mentioned above by Stuman would be one hell of a nice playoff? :shrug:

 

[dawgball]

I hate to see only one SEC school in this, but if that's the way it pans out, then so be it. I do like this idea, but I wouldn't put as much time in between games. These kids have to get back to school, and the coaches have to start recruiting. Too many weeks between games is the only flaw that I see.

I like your idea about Notre Dame, but you know they would never do that. If you allow Notre Dame, Michigan is the school that would be crying in their cereal about being left out. That is the argument some people use about the playoff system. Aren't there teams left out no matter what system that you use?:shrug:

 

[taoist]

...well, you could cut it down to one week between games, like every saturday in December and then two weeks off before the National Championship game.

...and as for the SEC, although it happened to work out that way this year, I'm quite sure that there would be plenty of years when we (SEC) put in three teams like the Big 12 would this year...or you could even give at large bids instead of some of the minor conferences, but I'm a David vs Goliath kind of guy...that's why I did it like that.

...sure there will always be some team crying, but hey, I'd much rather have a team crying about being 17th instead of 16th rather than crying about being 3rd instead of 2nd.... It just doesn't seem nearly as tragic, does it?

 

[Valuist]

I predict there will be a playoff within 5 years but don't expect to see more than a 4 team playoff, at least at first. But, realistically, there usually aren't more than 4 teams who should be playing for the national championship.

 

[Got5onIt]

The conferences must align to an equal schedule & independants would have to join a conference.

1. All teams would have to play 12 games. Season starts at the same time for everyone.
2. Each conferance would hold a title game with the conference champ getting an automatic bid to the playoffs.
3. Merge the Sunbelt & WAC, thus taking the conference total to a nice round figure of 10.
4. Playoffs would consist of 16 teams. 10 conference champs & 6 at large teams taken from the AP/Coaches/BCS Rankings.
5. Rotate playoffs in different BCS Bowls & Non BCS Bowls with the National Championship rotating among BCS Bowls.

A team who plays for the national title would play 16 total games.
College Football would last 17 - 18 weeks depending if the NCAA schedules 1 bye per regular season & 1 bye before the national title game. The season would've only extended by a couple weeks.

Conference Title games would mean MUCH more since they gaurantee playoff berths. The 6 other spots would be at the fate of pollsters.

Of course, teams will always whine about being left out and an argument could be made about the MAC, WAC&SunBelt's validity in the playoffs...would their Conference champ be better than the 3rd or 4th team in the Big 12, PAC 10, or Big 10?? Possible stipulations such as being ranked in the top 15 regardless of conference championship or not could be implemented.
But I agree with the earlier comment that I'd rather hear about teams whining about being 15th or 16th than 1st,2nd & 3rd.......

 

[Stuman]

A revised system

A revised system

OK, I think I've got a revised system that could make most people happy. There will always be bickering, in every tourney/sport. College football on the other hand, will always have this same argument every year until a tourney is produced.

Currently, there are 28 bowl games. Adding 3 more bowls could enable us to add one more round to the playoff system and no bowls would be left out. In other words, hold a 32 team playoff instead of a 16 team, and more teams could have a legitimate shot at the title. Respectively, each bowl would hold one tourney game per year. With 32 teams in the mix, we would need to divide the tourney into two groups, just as the basketball tourney is divided into 4 groups. That way, we would have two 1-16 matchups instead of a 1-32 blowout matchup. This method will also ensure that the top 25 teams at least get a shot at the title, as the top 25 marker is often used to denote a "good team".

The different bowls would be divided into 4 groups, based on the revenue they are accustomed to generating. There will be a "group" for each round of the playoffs, with the final two rounds counting as only one group (the top 3 bowl games). For example, on the first round of the playoffs the "group" of the smallest 16 bowls would host a game. And of course, those 16 bowls would rotate which seed matchup game they would host each year. (The GMAC bowl might host a 1-16 matchup one year and a 2-15 matchup the next, and so on and so forth.

Round 2 of the tourney would be the next largest "group" of 8 bowls, and those 8 bowls would likewise rotate yearly. This pattern would continue until we finally reach the championship game, and the top 3 bowls (last two rounds of the playoffs) would rotate hosting the title game.

I figure it would work something like this:

Week 1:
32 teams playing in 16 different small bowls.

Week 2:
16 winners playing in the next 8 larger bowls.

Week 3:
8 winners playing in the next 4 semi-major bowls.

Week 4:
4 winners playing in two major bowls.

Week 5:
Championship game held at major bowl.


Again, weeks 4 and 5 bowls would rotate the title game. This system should place the title game on the first weekend in January, not much later than the game is held now. And, there's still that 100 million per year deal that ABC is willing to pay for the rights to the playoff games. And just like Taoist mentioned above, teams like ND would be left out until they joined a damed conference! Shouldn't be too difficult, as most conferences would shit themselves at the opportunity to get ND added to their conference. Sounds great to me...comments welcome.

Stuman

 

[taoist]

Well Stuman, brother, I think you had a better system the first time around.... First of all, we already have too damn many bowl games.... I mean, did we really need to add a bowl game in freaking San Fran this year? I would be absolutely opposed to adding any more bowl games and I don't think that there would be enough revenue to support any more.... Actually, we should probably get rid of a few of the little shitty bowl games currently in existence if you ask me....

Also, like someone else mentioned, there probably are only a handful of teams that even deserve a shot at the National Title, but I would say that smaller schools like Boise St. and the like should get the chance to get into the tourney even if they have scant chance of winning it.... Hell, if they win their conference, let them in...just like the ncaa basketball tourney...but let's be honest, they've got a snowball's chance in hell of knocking off the Miami's and Ohio St's of the world. However, since I'm a David vs Goliath kind of guy, I say let them in...at least they can brag that they at least got invited to the Big Dance, even if they had an early exit.

I agree with much of what Got5onit said, although I don't see any reason to merge the WAC and Sunbelt conferences.... But all of the independants would have to join a conference...any conference...and I would refuse to allow them to participate in the tourney until they did.


...the bottom line is that no matter what format, the National Champion of college football should be decided like every other National Champion.... ON THE DAMN FIELD!!!