MY BCS playoff system

.......great Buckeye minds think alike.

I'll just save you the trouble and pick Ohio State to sweep the field...even beating "Bronco Nagurski" and the Florida Gator's.

Only problem with a playoff like that is the timing of everything. Personally I love your idea.

"Stitches wrote:

Only problem with a playoff like that is the timing of everything. Personally I love your idea.

Very true I think thats 1 reason why its keeping from a playoff that and Money. I'm sure they could work on the dates for it to work hell the whole month January can be Bowl Championship month.

Thanks :hi5:

"BuckeyeKing wrote:

Very true I think thats 1 reason why its keeping from a playoff that and Money. I'm sure they could work on the dates for it to work hell the whole month January can be Bowl Championship month.

Thanks :hi5:

People will argue the money aspect, and that these kids are actually students and this set up would interfere even more with their schooling.

Really it's the $ though.

PS: Would you still have other bowls during december?

"Stitches wrote:

PS: Would you still have other bowls during december?

I guess you would have to. But the playoff should start Jan 1st and conclude on the 24th it extends the season another 2 weeks.

But I would throw out the actual BCS bowls but have the actual playoff be played at the BCS bowl venue. If that makes any sense. Maybe add 2 more like the Capital One and Outback bowl.

"BuckeyeKing wrote:

I guess you would have to. But the playoff should start Jan 1st and conclude on the 24th it extends the season another 2 weeks.

But I would throw out the actual BCS bowls but have the actual playoff be played at the BCS bowl venue. If that makes any sense. Maybe add 2 more like the Capital One and Outback bowl.

I would still like other bowls is all. :lol:

"Stitches wrote:

I would still like other bowls is all. :lol:

:lol: Well you get what I give you :tongue2:

The only problem I see is the seeding of the 12. I like the 6 Conf winners, and love adding anywhere from 2 to 6 top teams that didnt win the conf, etc.

However, taking a conf team and seeding them higher than a non-conf winner that has a better record or realistically from the polls voted on as a better team is a bad idea.

I think you take the total number of teams either 8 or 12 - however many you want. and Seed them based on their perceived talent and not Conf. Conf winners are in, but seeding them incorrectly is not a good idea.

The reseeding makes all the sense in the world, I like that.

As far as time, I still think you get the first round games started as soon as possible and not wait for Jan 1st. Get the college season over by mid Jan the latest, not Feb 1.

"BigDogsHunt wrote:

The only problem I see is the seeding of the 12. I like the 6 Conf winners, and love adding anywhere from 2 to 6 top teams that didnt win the conf, etc.

However, taking a conf team and seeding them higher than a non-conf winner that has a better record or realistically from the polls voted on as a better team is a bad idea.

I think you take the total number of teams either 8 or 12 - however many you want. and Seed them based on their perceived talent and not Conf. Conf winners are in, but seeding them incorrectly is not a good idea.

The reseeding makes all the sense in the world, I like that.

As far as time, I still think you get the first round games started as soon as possible and not wait for Jan 1st. Get the college season over by mid Jan the latest, not Feb 1.

Yes but you will have a out cry from the Big East and ACC because their not as strong as the other conference teams. The way I did it includes the 6 Conference winners and the top 6 BCS teams which it may not be fair for the the winners of the ACC or Big East but thats how it is since they didn't finish in the top 10 so since they finished below the top 10 they get the pleasure in playing the top school that is at the highest in the BCS.

I just want to see a Playoff in College Football

looks good but i dont like the re-seeding after each round

"vmarcilfan75 wrote:

looks good but i dont like the re-seeding after each round

Reseeding has to happen to see who gets a bye.

ESPN purposed playoff system I heard today is to let everyone that is in a BCS bowl game play then whoever is 1 and 2 play for the national title. I don't like that because it isn't a true playoff you would get the same BS.

The re-seeding seems a bit sketchy. Even if Ohio State beat Oklahoma, I'm not sure how they climb to the #2 seed. If that was how things worked, it would be much more favorable to be a 12 seed than a 3 seed. If a 12 seed wins, they get a bye. If a 3 seed wins, they have a small chance at a bye?

The only way I could see it working is if the top two remaining seeds get a bye, and the bracket is adjusted accordingly. Kind of like how they do it in the 2nd round of the NFL playoffs (except there is no bye involved there).

Using your example it would work out as such:

1 Florida: Bye
8 Utah v 9 Alabama

3 USC: Bye
7 Texas v 12 Ohio State

The bracket would then play out accordingly. You could also change it so the highest seed always plays the lowest seed. That way if Ohio State beat Texas, Florida would play Ohio State.

Oh yes thats my mistake I didn't even notice that USC would get it. Thanks for catching that :lol:

Edit-Fixed it

Wow you guys suck for not pointing out my mistake :tongue2:

"Stitches wrote:

People will argue the money aspect, and that these kids are actually students and this set up would interfere even more with their schooling.

Really it's the $ though.

If March Madness doesnt affect basketball players academics, why would football playoffs? I never really understand that.

"Stitches wrote:

PS: Would you still have other bowls during december?

I would keep all the bowl games, just turn some of them into a playoff. That way you arent losing any money by getting rid of bowls, but increase money cause you have more good games.

"BuckeyeKing wrote:

Oh yes thats my mistake I didn't even notice that USC would get it. Thanks for catching that :lol:

Edit-Fixed it

Wow you guys suck for not pointing out my mistake :tongue2:

Switch Alabama and Ohio State in your 2nd round bracket, and I think you're set.

"DonShula84 wrote:

If March Madness doesnt affect basketball players academics, why would football playoffs? I never really understand that.

I would keep all the bowl games, just turn some of them into a playoff. That way you arent losing any money by getting rid of bowls, but increase money cause you have more good games.

Finals aren't in march, neither do new classes start then.

"Stitches wrote:

Finals aren't in march, neither do new classes start then.

Basketball players still have several more road trips a year and miss alot more class than any football player would because of a playoff

"Skeet84 wrote:

Basketball players still have several more road trips a year and miss alot more class than any football player would because of a playoff

Football games are still on the weekend and they travel at most a couple days early. So may miss one or two days of class a week at MOST. Where basketball routinely plays in the middle of the week and usually travels a day or so early also.

I think the missing class excuse is just that an excuse.

I still say the NCAA Football Championship should be crowned no later than Jan. 15th.

"BigDogsHunt wrote:

I still say the NCAA Football Championship should be crowned no later than Jan. 15th.

I would have to agree. There are too many other dates. Needs to be right around this time frame