How I would "fix" college football

[BuckeyeRed27]

I posted something similar to this in the BCS thread but it kind of got lost in the mix there. A lot of the talk in that tread and in most college football discussion is about a need for a play off and how unfair the system is to choose a national champion. I would argue that there is less wrong with the actual BCS selection process and more wrong with the regular season. Now don't get me wrong I love college football because the regular season matters so much, but I think it could use some improvement.

For example OSU took a lot of heat this year for having a soft schedule and many argue that is a big factor why they even got the play for the national championship. This argument pops up from time to time (USC a few years ago, Oklahoma) and could easily be fixed. In college basketball there is the Big 10/ACC challenge. I propose that a similar concept be adopted by college football except that the challenge would rotate. So for example the first year it would be the Big 10/ACC, SEC/Big 12 and the PAC 10/Big East. Then the second year it would all rotate and be something like ACC/SEC, Big 12/Pac 10, Big East/Big 10 and so on. This would guarentee that every school from a BCS conference plays a team from another BCS conference. If you win your conference one year you will play the conference champion of another conference the next year. If you finish second you will play the second place team, etc. From a logistical stand point you could say all of these games will be played the 3rd week of the season and set up the rotation a head of time so you know you will be playing a home or road game and just figure out the opponent at the end of the season. You would get some really exciting games and be guarenteed of having all conference champs from the previous season playing each other on the same day in the early season.

My second proposal would be the require all conferences go to 12 games and have a conference championship. Now I hate these games, but since some conferences have them and aren't getting rid of them we may as well make it fair and add it to all. I know the argument is that it will mess with tradition and rivalries. Well if it makes the overall sport better I think we can all deal with it.

With these two changes to the regualar season it would be very hard to say you had an unworthy opponent in the BCS title game. I'm not saying it would elminate controversy but it certainly beefs up the competition and adds a lot more exciting football games.

Thoughts?

[WVRed]

How I would fix college football:

Eight team playoff based on the BCS standings.

[Highlifeman21]

How I would fix college football:

Eight team playoff based on the BCS standings.

Two options for the 8 team playoff:

1. Take the 6 BCS conference champs and fill out the remaining 2 with the highest 2 teams that didn't win conference championships.

2. Get rid of conference championships and take the Top 8 BCS teams.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Under option 1, that would have given us:

OSU vs WVU
LSU vs USC
VaTech vs Missouri
Oklahoma vs Georgia

Under option 2, that would have given us:

OSU vs Kansas
LSU vs USC
VaTech vs Missouri
Oklahoma vs Georgia

--------------------------------------------------------------

Option 2, unfortuately would never happen due to conference championships being absolutes, like death and taxes. Option 1 has legs, albeit limited due to how do you determine the last 2 spots in the field of 8?

[15fan]

I say leave it as it is. The only change is that the bowl / post-season locations would rotate from year to year, like they do in pretty much every other sport. Make teams like USC, LSU, and Florida have to play a January bowl in a place like Cleveland, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, etc from time to time.

Most BCS schools are already scheduling out of conference games with teams from other BCS conferences, so I don't see how some sort of challenge really "fixes" anything.

(And for the record, the ACC / Big 10-11 Challenge really hasn't been much of a challenge...)

[bucksfan2]

I leave the season as it is. However, I give more weight to strength of schedule. I would also like to see a southern team play out doors in December or January. College football in the BCS era has become less about winning your conference and playing in a new years day bowl and more about winning a championship. I would have loved to see the Sugar Bowl played at PBS or in Cleveland in OSU's backyard rather than LSU's back yard. A Championship series which doesn't include a home game for the higher seeds would be giving the advantage to the southern teams. If you are going to reward teams for the regular season with a trip down south or out west then keep the bowls the way they are. If you are looking at a playoff you HAVE to give the higher seed an opportunity to play at home.

[will5979]

Well, usually it is the undefeated BCS teams that get the nod for the nat. title but we all know just how hard it is to go undefeated in ANY of the BCS conferences.

I agree that all 4 BCS bowl games should be the first round of the playoffs.

[RedsManRick]

How I would fix college football:

Eight team playoff based on the BCS standings.

11 game schedule and then this. Existing Bowl Games as hosts for the 7 game playoff with a rotation of what game serves what role. The rest of the bowl system can go on as is.

If you have to claim that you were the 7th or 8th best team and got gypped, you really don't have a case at all.

Lastly, no public polling until, say, the first week of November. Too much weight is given to where you were in the polls the week prior. Losses in game 10 shouldn't count more than losses in game 2.

[Yachtzee]

I would add Team GPA to the BCS rankings.

[BuckeyeRed27]

If college football does in fact go to a playoff you can't just use the current bowls. You would have to give the higher seeds home games to make it fair. I think this is yet another argument to beef up regualar season schedules. Wouldn't it be nicer to have these big games being played in September than the middle of December?

[Chip R]

If college football does in fact go to a playoff you can't just use the current bowls. You would have to give the higher seeds home games to make it fair.

Or at least run it like the hoops tournament and not have them have to go so far to play.

[Unassisted]

11 game schedule and then this. Existing Bowl Games as hosts for the 7 game playoff with a rotation of what game serves what role. The rest of the bowl system can go on as is.

If you have to claim that you were the 7th or 8th best team and got gypped, you really don't have a case at all.

What would something like this do to the bowls that weren't part of the playoffs? Would the public completely lose interest in them? Would the bowls have trouble getting a TV contract? If the payouts were dramatically reduced because of those factors, would the bowls have trouble attracting teams to play in them?

I think all of those factors are why some university presidents are reluctant to mess with the bowl system. It could kill the goose that laid the golden egg and leave no postseason game for BCS schools that finish second in their conferences and non-BCS schools that win theirs.

[Red Heeler]

If college football does in fact go to a playoff you can't just use the current bowls. You would have to give the higher seeds home games to make it fair. I think this is yet another argument to beef up regualar season schedules. Wouldn't it be nicer to have these big games being played in September than the middle of December?

I'd go to a 12 conference, 10 teams each system. All 12 conference champs plus 4 at-large make the playoffs. No cheating, Notre Dame, ya gotta join a conference. 11 game regular season. With 12 conferences, I'd split them by region into major and mid-major. Each region's major and mid-major would meet in the first round in a local bowl the first week of December. For example, Ohio State would meet Central Michigan in the Motor City Bowl. The 4 at-larges would meet in central location bowls. The two weeks later would be "Super Regional Bowls." New Year's day would host the semi-finals, with the national championship game two weeks later.

The Super Regional, semi-final, and finals bows would be selected from the highest bidders. Assignments would be on a rotating basis.

[Chip R]

I'd go to a 12 conference, 10 teams each system. All 12 conference champs plus 4 at-large make the playoffs. No cheating, Notre Dame, ya gotta join a conference. 11 game regular season. With 12 conferences, I'd split them by region into major and mid-major. Each region's major and mid-major would meet in the first round in a local bowl the first week of December. For example, Ohio State would meet Central Michigan in the Motor City Bowl. The 4 at-larges would meet in central location bowls. The two weeks later would be "Super Regional Bowls." New Year's day would host the semi-finals, with the national championship game two weeks later.

The Super Regional, semi-final, and finals bows would be selected from the highest bidders. Assignments would be on a rotating basis.

Aren't there only 11 conferences or are you counting the Ivy League?

I like that. I know it's not popular but I think it would be the best way to avoid an antitrust lawsuit by the schools and conferences that were left out. Although I'd only have 1 week between the semis and the final. You would finally have an NCAA Division 1-A champion. No split championships, no crying about not getting in a certain bowl. Of course it will never happen.

[Spring~Fields]

Make those top twelve teams from WOYS list on the other thread start scheduling at least 3 teams from the top twelve yearly in the future and work out some kind of rotation. Hopefully it will bring some credibility to the polls, bowl games and perhaps we will see who really is the best team more often. I also think it would weed out some of the pretenders each year.

After that go to a playoff system that is reasonable for the top 4-8 teams.

[Red Heeler]

Aren't there only 11 conferences or are you counting the Ivy League?

I like that. I know it's not popular but I think it would be the best way to avoid an antitrust lawsuit by the schools and conferences that were left out. Although I'd only have 1 week between the semis and the final. You would finally have an NCAA Division 1-A champion. No split championships, no crying about not getting in a certain bowl. Of course it will never happen.

My system would take some realignment because many of the current conferences have more than 10 members. There are currently 119 D-1a teams, so somebody would have to move up. Just to make things interesting, I would give the D-1aa champion each year the opportunity to move up with the lowest ranked D-1a in their region getting relegated to D-1aa.