11 conference champs, 5 at-large births. I include ALL Division 1 conferences because its just silly to continue to diminish the value of Div 1 conferences come post-season time, when teams still obtain value for playing those teams in their noncon games at home. I roughly seeded them off the top of my head glancing at the AP/BCS polls. There is an emphasis on conference games (because I hear its so important to some of you guys) For example, in the Big10 Michigan would get the #2 nod behind Ohio State because they beat Illinois and had the same overall and in conference record. That doesn't mean they get in but that's how it would be split. 11 automatics would be: LSU, VTech, WVa, Ohio State, OU, UCF, Central Michigan, BYU, USC, Florida Atlantic and Hawaii. At-large grouping: BC, Clemson, VA, UConn, Michigan, Illinois, Missouri, Kansas, Texas, Tulsa, Miami (OH), Bowling Green, Air Force, Utah, Arizona State, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, Auburn, Troy, Boise st and Fresno State) 1. Ohio State 2. LSU 3. OU 4. VTech 5. Georgia 6. USC 7. Missouri 8. Kansas 9. West Virginia 10. Hawaii 11. Tennessee 12. Arizona State 13. BYU 14. UCF 15. Central Michigan 16. Florida Atlantic That would give you Florida Atlantic @ Ohio State Arizona State @ Georgia Hawaii @ Missouri UCF @ OU in one bracket BYU @ VTech West Virginia @ Kansas Tennessee @ USC Central Michigan @ LSU in the other bracket And I used a heavy handed gifting toward the Big12 and SEC that I'd see playing out in reality. Teams like Michigan, BC, Texas etc could complain they didn't get in, but there are all regular season reasons that are solid that could be pointed toward which negate their claim for a birth. That gives you some fair 1st round matchups with others that are 'rewards' for good seasons against teams talented enough to make it interesting. From the 2nd round on, its blockbuster central. How is that not better than the bowls?
I'm on board! Everybody else gets a bid to the minor bowls as they exist today. The big question is what do you do for the second round? Do you play on campus sites again, or try to use the BCS sites?? That Hawaii vs Mizzou game could last 12 hours!!
OK where do you play these games? In basketball they have predetermined sites that are theoreticaly neutral. You've got to have accomodations and travel plans for both teams and fans. Just how much lead time do you get? A week, two weeks? Looking at your games just how many ASU fans do you think could get to Athens with a week or two notice? And it's bad enough that Fla. Atlantic has to play the Bucks but to make them play in Columbus in December is really cruel. Do you play all 8 first round games on saturday, play some on sun. (NFL) day or do you spread them out during the week? Coming up with the pairings is the easy part.
I vote for the NFL model....the number 1 seed gets home field advantage throughout. I think Fl Atlantic and any of the rest of our southern friends would love to play the Buckeyes in Columbus in January! Seems to work fine in the NFL, why not?
First of all they don't play all the way through since the Super Bowl is at a "neutral" site. Second, some teams like Ga. probably don't have a travel agent. They probably go to their away games on the bus.
I personally would go with an 8 team playoff, and play the games at the higher seed's home for the first round, and then bowl sites for the final two. 16 teams would be preferable, but brings up the questions gip is throwing out.
I like the idea Corey. However I wouldn't give 11 births. The SEC, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 10 for sure and probably the ACC. Although I'm waiting for the ACC to become as good a conference as we thought they would become. The Big East ???? Not automatics to the other conferences, through them in with the wild cards to fill out the field with the strongest teams. 16 teams is the best number in my opinion but 8 would be acceptable. Maybe some sort of a play in like the Big Dance.
well Gip <r>how in the world do Div 1aa, 2m 3 and NAIA do it? (which btw, I'm not sure about 1a and 2, but I know D3 is much larger than D1 and does it without anywhere near the resources that D1 program possess.<br/> <br/> There's a number of ways you can work this. High seed hosts.. include the caveat that if you played on the road last week, and your opponent played at home, then you get the home game.<br/> <br/> A team's lack of preparation (or lack of travel agent) is not reason to blow up the bigger picture. Georgia, to use your example, fans can use all that money they've been saving by not travelling.<br/> <br/> Most teams only cough up between 5 to 10k tickets to their home games. You're not moving 45k, you're moving a small number. Travel plans are not any sort of problem.<br/> <br/> You get 1 week lead time. No crying, no saying it can't be done, I see it done every year.<br/> <br/> I wouldn't go neutral site until the semi-final rounds.. which is really no different than what the super conference is asking you to do (play a +1 conference title game and a bowl game at a neutral site). Honestly, I'd just as soon leave them on campus until the final game but that's just me.<br/> <br/> Scott,<br/> <br/> Yes it could <E></E> That would be part of the fun.. At this stage, you can't get any of these mega-powers to play without all sorts of guarantees. The proposed situation leaves every single 'tradition' of college football untouched in terms of annual rivals.<br/> <br/> For all I care, the teams that don't make it can play out the bowl format in a reduced scale. Will it really damage college football to have ESPN NOT own 10 bowl games? <br/> <br/> People may whine about the band not going to every game, or whatever, but for teams that regularly travel nationally (ND for case) that's always been the case. <br/> <br/> There is a staggering amount of money being generated by this sport that isn't going to athletic budgets and isn't going into building academic facilities.. the 'cost' of moving your program would be less than you'd think.</r>
So now the home team not only gets the home field but gets almost all the tickets? Do the visitors get to wear helmets?
I don't understand your complaint <t>This same format has been in existence for years in the other divisions. Why not give the home teams the most tickets? I'll skip your rhetorical question and move on with the subject.<br/> <br/> The only people who don't want this, are the people afraid of playing the games. Bottom line. <br/> <br/> Its funny to me watching the anti-playoff cases this year because the #1 reason I see tossed around on other sites is that 'USC would win and how can we have an NC who lost to Stanford and Oregon?' I can't stop laughing. <br/> <br/> We're trying to put square edges on a wheel and make this much harder than it need be.</t>
Oh, I can think of a few more. Like the thousands of people who work on bowl committees, own businesses in bowl destinations, TV execs, bowl sponsors to name a few.
no <t>the same money is there and I'd bet you'd draw larger TV audiences to the games as well..<br/> <br/> The bowl destinations? Boo hoo. So we're now playing college football to keep the economy of Shreveport afloat? They can still have their bowl games with the teams that don't make the Tournament.<br/> <br/> In fact, taking the 'other' DI conference champs frees up room for some top 25 teams who don't make the tourney to play in fun bowl games.. You can hit all the water parks and drink all the $10 pina coladas while hitting every Outback restaurant that you want.</t>
Every other division in the NCAA manages to do this. Fan travel and tickets, locations are all details that have been worked out by the rest of the member institutions in the rest of the NCAA.
First of all, you never answered my question about when the early round games would be played. In fact you brush aside all of my questions with the simple response "well the other divisions in NCAA do it." The way you set up the championship is not the way it's done in the other divisions. They teams are grouped regionally. The prevents teams traveling across country. If also done that way, only one team would come out of the southeast. See a problem there? Do you have any idea how much TV money is being generated this week with all the BCS bowls.? The bowl sits now support all the expenses associated with these games. With a playoff like the other divisions have, the NCAA would have to lay out the costs. And if you think that a playoff game in Lawrence or Eugene would generate anywhere near the revenues gathered by cities like Phoenix, New Orleans, Miami etc. you're kidding yourself. People take week long expensive vacations in conjunction with the bowls since they have weeks to put their plans together. Being a road team fan in one of these playoff games would be a real pain in the ass. You wouldn't be hurting minor bows with this format but you'd be killing a bowl system that's poured millions of dollars into school coffers for years. It's not nearly as simple as some think.
We are only talking about 16 teams. That's 4 games including the championship, right (3 games for 8 team playoff). Use the current BCS bowl sites. I would venture to say that between the locals and the school's fans these games would all be sold out and the TV ratings would be strong also. I agree it's not simple but its doable and if it's based on the BCS rating (just an example) the season games are all important.
not brushing you off at all <t>I thought the answer was so obvious that you were asking rhetorical questions.<br/> <br/> You start the playoffs with the end of the regular season. As it is now, some of these teams aren't playing for a MONTH before their bowl game.<br/> <br/> I am well aware of the TV revenue being generated, but you are looking at this awfully short-sided if you don't see the potential tv revenue that is to be generated in a playoff format. The ratings for the Sugar Bowl were down this year. Maybe that's an ND factor, maybe its not...but they were down.<br/> <br/> As I stated, you can keep your bowls as a sideshow for those not in the tournament. People can take their week long vacations..and just where is this money that is 'pouring' into the schools? In the big bowls, yes, in the smaller bowls.. no. I remember when ND went to Shreveport seeing stats showing that ND actually lost money playing the game, but the 'exposure and practice' were worth it.<br/> <br/> BTW, you are comparing apples and oranges.. as you said yourself, a week long family vacation to Phoenix, Miami, New Orleans etc or a trip to Eugene or Lawrence... but if you think people won't flock to Lawrence to support their team in a playoff game, you're turning your back on reality. Also, you'd be pouring money back into the communities that have been supporting these universities a hell of a lot longer than the cities of Miami, New Orleans or Orlando..What's wrong with them picking up the travel dollars?<br/> <br/> I live in the city where the DII title game is held (Florence, AL). The stadium is about 5 blocks from me. One of the restaurant/bars that's become a 'regular stop' for ALL visitors to this game is the Smokehouse. I live on top of the Smokehouse. In the past 2 years, I've spoken to hundreds of fans from places like Grand Valley State, NW Missouri State and Valdosta State. That's on top of the fans who come to town during the season for regular season games. To a person, they also follow (rabidly) DI football and all seem to agree.. the bowls are 'nice' but the playoffs are better.<br/> <br/> No one thing has turned my opinion on this matter more than actually speaking to the people who experience it.</t>
I should stay out of this. I really like the idea of playoffs...but 'twill not happen. The money will not be there...you are talking 16 games...not 30. The other bowls will be completely devoid of interest. They will die like the NIT did when the NCAA expanded March Madness. You make your arguments well...but you are also comparing apples to oranges when you talk about the lower divisions pulling it off. They don't pack their meger stadiums eash week, and the increased interest in their playoffs allow the "hundreds of fans from Grand Valley and NW Missouri State" to go to the playoff sites and actually increase the attendence. Will tens of thousands of the most rabid of fans travel to four different playoff sites for the final two teams? The bowl system provides us with a lot of pagentry, interest, fun, and argument...and then there is the money. Maybe it would work as you see it, Corey, but I am skeptical.
Fair enough Stu <r>but then its all ice dancing with a jazz hands finish <E></E><br/> <br/> its not about a national title. its not about 'finding a real number one' or any of those things that the bcs claims to be.. <br/> <br/> which begs the question, why did we junk the old bowl system? that was WAAAY more fun and made jan1 a bonafide national holiday with family and community rituals that are slowly going to the way of the dodo.<br/> <br/> watching this turd parade is like crowning Miss America at a goddamned strip mall beauty pageant..<br/> <br/> oh well, at least I got to see Fran Tarkenton's monster mullet again.<br/> <br/> as for the 'will they travel'.. you know your Buckeye fans, what do YOU think?<br/> <br/> I know SEC fans would.</r>