A few arguments against a CFB playoff

[SandyD]

I don't know that you can completely eliminate the bowls without effectively admitting that roughly 70% of the D1-A programs exist for no purpose other than to be tune-up games for the BCS squads and give students something to do on a Saturday other than sit in bed with a hangover.

Under a 16-team, no bowls, system you'd have entire D1-A conferences effectively eliminated from postseason play by week 2 or 3 (assuming that voting continues to banish mid-majors to the hinderlands once they pick up a loss).

The lesser bowls might not be talked about, but for a lot of schools (like my own alma mater Tulane), it's really all they have to play for each season. I'm not certain it's a good idea to get rid of them entirely, especially if the "playoff" is going to be 16 teams.

Actually, I'd give automatic bids to all conference champs. Just like hoops. That would be 11 automatic bids/ 5 at large bids.

I don't think it's feasible to have 3 rounds of football playoffs at neutral sites. The travel cost alone would be almost prohibitive. Each school's allotment for the Sugar Bowl is 17,500. Even the cheapest tickets go for a few hundred dollars, I believe. Not many schools could have that many fans who could/would travel 3 weeks in a row to neutral sites.

The NCAA tourney early rounds do not always sell out. I've bought walk up tickets on game day on a couple of occasions ... for $35, IIRC, for 2 games.

[Caveat Emperor]

March Madness is at the end of the season, its not the sports regular season. No other sport has as much weight on the regular season as CFB, its not even close. You lose one game and you lose control of your own destiny for the NC game. No other sport has what is essentially a single elimination tournament that starts from opening day and goes the entire season.

Talk to Auburn or USC about "controlling your own destiny."

As long as the system is based on people voting, there will always be problems -- be it as a result of preseason polling, which can give a top-ranked team an inside track to move back to the top when they lose, or as a result of the natural bias of voters which reward early losses over late ones.

[Marc D]

Talk to Auburn or USC about "controlling your own destiny."

As long as the system is based on people voting, there will always be problems -- be it as a result of preseason polling, which can give a top-ranked team an inside track to move back to the top when they lose, or as a result of the natural bias of voters which reward early losses over late ones.

I never said it was perfect.

I simply pointed out that no other sport has as much emphasis on the regular season and as soon as you introduce any type of playoff you start to lessen that emphasis.

[Hap]

Everything boils down to economics and the almighty dollar. Too much money is already being made doing it the way it is being done now.

[*BaseClogger*]

One of the most intriguing proposals to me is this "plus-one" thing. Keep your conference bowl tie-ins (Big 10 v. Pac 10 in the Rose Bowl i.e.). And after the bowls have been played then re-rank the teams and the top two play for the national title. This doesn't add any extra bowl games and surely fans would travel another week to a national title game. Sure, you're still going to have controversy (which will happen regardless of how it works) but a lot of teams show their true colors at a tough bowl game.

Me too. It preserves tradition, the flow of cash the big bowls bring in, and it would still have a National Championship game...

[*BaseClogger*]

But the 2005 team at the end of the season could have played with anyone. I would have LOVED for a playoff that year. I'm not suggesting they would have won, but they very well could have. The second half of the season Tressell finally wised up and put Troy Smith in the starting role. But the end of the season, he was playing great every week. And that defense with AJ Hawk is the best defense they've had in the Tressell era, maybe even better than the National Championship team.

I think so too. That was probably the best team Tress has fielded. They had a dynamic offense and a defense to match it...

[*BaseClogger*]

Yeah, but they could prevent teams from playing 1-AA opponents for the cheap easy payday.

Teams in less prestigious conferences such as the MAC need those games to survive and to host home games...

[cumberlandreds]

Wouldn't it be nice to an eight team playoff involving these eight teams:

Alabama
Florida
Texas
Oklahoma
Penn State
USC
Texas Tech
Ohio State

A 16 team playoff would be best though. That way you could include the ACC,Big East champs and Boise,Utah and Ball State. But that 8 team would be just terrific and I guarantee you it would make more $$$$ than the all the bowls combined.

[Sea Ray]

Wouldn't it be nice to an eight team playoff involving these eight teams:

Alabama
Florida
Texas
Oklahoma
Penn State
USC
Texas Tech
Ohio State

A 16 team playoff would be best though. That way you could include the ACC,Big East champs and Boise,Utah and Ball State. But that 8 team would be just terrific and I guarantee you it would make more $$$$ than the all the bowls combined.

How'd Ohio State make that list? They've lost two while playing in an easy conference. If you open it up to two loss teams then the list must go far beyond OSU. I can think of a lot more deserving teams to go in that #8 slot than OSU, namely Utah and Boise St.

[IslandRed]

To me the issue isn't with the playoff, it is with the scheduling of the regular season. The NCAA should step in and regulate the schedule in and out of conference, and even the playing field. Force teams to play better out of conference games that would weed out some of the pretenders and would create a more equitable situation.

The NCAA couldn't do anything of the sort, because the NCAA is a voluntary organization comprised of the schools, and the schools will never vote to turn over their football scheduling. If a coalition of smaller schools ever managed to pass such a thing -- and I'm not sure why they would, your plan basically eliminates their paydays -- the big schools would simply leave and form their own organization.

[Caveat Emperor]

If a coalition of smaller schools ever managed to pass such a thing -- and I'm not sure why they would, your plan basically eliminates their paydays -- the big schools would simply leave and form their own organization.

One could argue they already have, in forming the BCS as a bizarro kind of "D 1A+" -- but I digress.

Honestly, I'd just let them leave and then ban any school who left from competing in postseason play in any other D-1 sport. See how excited schools like Duke, North Carolina, Maryland, Michigan State, Indiana and Kentucky are to follow their football-factory confrence counterparts out the door if it meant cashing in their opportunties to participate in March Madness.

It's time for the NCAA to take back control of football. They might not ever need to write up everyone's schedule for them, but they could start by at least requiring that every team play at least 2 non-confrence games on the road every year.

[Danny Serafini]

Honestly, I'd just let them leave and then ban any school who left from competing in postseason play in any other D-1 sport. See how excited schools like Duke, North Carolina, Maryland, Michigan State, Indiana and Kentucky are to follow their football-factory confrence counterparts out the door if it meant cashing in their opportunties to participate in March Madness.

March Madness without Duke, North Carolina, Maryland, Michigan State, Indiana and Kentucky is nothing but a pale imitation. Put together an "outlaw" tournament with those schools while the NCAA tournament is filled with mid-majors and CBS (and all those dollars) would jump ship in a heartbeat.

[IslandRed]

Honestly, I'd just let them leave and then ban any school who left from competing in postseason play in any other D-1 sport. See how excited schools like Duke, North Carolina, Maryland, Michigan State, Indiana and Kentucky are to follow their football-factory confrence counterparts out the door if it meant cashing in their opportunties to participate in March Madness.

I'd bet that North Carolina and Kentucky don't want the NCAA controlling their football scheduling any more than Texas does. My guess is, if such legislation was ever passed, the big conferences would go out as a bloc. And March Madness would go with it.

Of course, without the big conference schools' votes, I'm not sure if it's even mathematically possible to pass such a thing, which is why it's probably a moot point.

[*BaseClogger*]

It's time for the NCAA to take back control of football. They might not ever need to write up everyone's schedule for them, but they could start by at least requiring that every team play at least 2 non-confrence games on the road every year.

So, basically you are either forcing BCS conference teams to play in stadiums that hold less than 30,000 people, or you are not allowing the lesser conferences to play the big boys. Which is it?

[*BaseClogger*]

I'd bet that North Carolina and Kentucky don't want the NCAA controlling their football scheduling any more than Texas does. My guess is, if such legislation was ever passed, the big conferences would go out as a bloc. And March Madness would go with it.

Of course, without the big conference schools' votes, I'm not sure if it's even mathematically possible to pass such a thing, which is why it's probably a moot point.

Yup, even those "basketball schools" make more money off their football programs...