College presidents approve new four team playoff format

[Redsfaithful]

Sure, but traditionally the Big Ten has had an emphasis on running the ball and defense, things that are effective in poor weather. This is becoming less true lately I'm sure, but I'm sure that's where the idea originates.

[WMR]

Has there been a more smash mouth team the past few years than Bama?

[jojo]

Originally Posted by WMR

Has there been a more smash mouth team the past few years than Bama?

That's basically Les Miles too-get guys bigger and faster than everyone else and bully punch to a championship.

[improbus]

Originally Posted by Redsfaithful

Sure, but traditionally the Big Ten has had an emphasis on running the ball and defense, things that are effective in poor weather. This is becoming less true lately I'm sure, but I'm sure that's where the idea originates.

I think that strategy comes as much from the local high school style of play as it does the weather. Teams used to recruit a lot more from their local stae than they do today, so they had to play the same way their local talent played. Ohio has never been quarterback hotbed.

[Assembly Hall]

Originally Posted by jojo

That's basically Les Miles too-get guys bigger and faster than everyone else and bully punch to a championship.

I pretty sure the coach of Bama is Nick Sabin........it doesnt really matter, both Sabin and Miles have Big Ten ties. I dont believe a lot in that weather stuff either. However, I would imagine that those "southern" schools would not like to play in snow. But as WMR said......the Bowls are based on money, actually the northern schools prefer to go to a warm climate for their schools and take a vacation and dump money into the warm weather economy.

[jojo]

Originally Posted by Assembly Hall

I pretty sure the coach of Bama is Nick Sabin........it doesnt really matter, both Sabin and Miles have Big Ten ties. I dont believe a lot in that weather stuff either. However, I would imagine that those "southern" schools would not like to play in snow. But as WMR said......the Bowls are based on money, actually the northern schools prefer to go to a warm climate for their schools and take a vacation and dump money into the warm weather economy.

Who does like to play in snow and what team would actually be designed for such weather?

Neither Bama nor LSU would've been phased by weather conditions last season. A traditional Auburn team wouldn't have been slowed by weather either. I guess you could argue that a speed advantage could be nullified by weather conditions but it's not like the Big Ten purposefully recruits slow.

[gonelong]

Originally Posted by jojo

Who does like to play in snow and what team would actually be designed for such weather?

I doubt most people prefer it, but it's part of the gig. Teams are not specifically designed with that *only* in mind, but it is a consideration for those that face those challanges.

Neither Bama nor LSU would've been phased by weather conditions last season. A traditional Auburn team wouldn't have been slowed by weather either. I guess you could argue that a speed advantage could be nullified by weather conditions but it's not like the Big Ten purposefully recruits slow.

I agree, I don't think Bama or LSU would have been all that affected. I think Auburn the year before would have been, as well as Oregon.

I don't think the weather effect is overblown as much as the games are not often played in such adverse conditions. If you start playing them in late Dec/Jan in the northern areas, then I think it would come into play eventually.

Surely there is some difference between Team A playing in 10-20* warmer weather (+humidity) than they are acclimated to instead of Team B playing in 10-20* degree colder weather than they are acclimated to.

I have to believe the possiblity of a 20-40* temperature range would play at least some small factor.

GL

[RiverRat13]

It is less being built for the weather than the players being acclimated to it. The Packers with Brett Favre were a throwing team yet had an unbelievable record when the temperature was cold. You also had the Capital One Bowl a couple of years ago when the temps were low and Miami's sideline was huddled by the heaters while it was no big deal for Wisconsin.

But if the game is in a Northern city (which it should be on occasion), it will be Indy or Detroit where the game itself can be indoors. I can live with that. People aren't likely to spend the whole week for the Championship game in that particular city because they would have just spent the whole week at the bowl game site. People aren't going to travel that long twice. But it should be rotated. The Northern teams should not always have to travel out of their region like they do now.

[Todd Gack]

Not to sound like a pedantic, pontificating, pretentious bastard, a belligerent old fart, or a worthless steaming pile of cow dung, but I wish they'd just go back to the old pre-BCS format. Wasn't perfect, but that was the beauty of it. There was a certain romance about pouring a bloody mary at noon on New Years Day, scratching myself, and sitting on the couch for 12 hours while all the meaningful bowls played out on the same day.

[Todd Gack]

Originally Posted by cumberlandreds

It's a huge step in the right direction. Most likely after the schools see how much money they can make from a playoff system the tournament will increase. It will eventually go to 8 teams then most likely to 16. It took years for the basketball tournament to expand. But when they started making money from it, it expanded by leaps and bounds. From about 24 teams in 1974 to 32 to 40 to 48 to 64 and now 68 with a recent push to get to 96. Don't worry more teams will be involved in the very near future.

I cant wait for the year the two unbeaten teams ranked 1 and 2 lose in the first round of the SETTLE IT ON THE FIELD playoffs.

the nfl operates under a system where league members play common schedules and opponents so logical tie breakers to determine playoff teams can be established. In college football we have a bunch of people in a room deciding who the four best teams are. in the nfl you can point ot specific head to head, division and conference records to legitimately decide your tournament participants. What is it now in college football, who we think plays a tougher schedule or has better "wins?"

[Todd Gack]

This system would be a clusterfark for many years. I'll start with 1998.

1998:

1 Tennessee 12-0
2 Florida State 11-1
3 Kansas State 11-1
4 Ohio State 10-1
5 UCLA 10-1
6 Texas A&M 11-2
7 Arizona 11-1
8 Florida 9-2
9 Wisconsin 10-1
10 Tulane 11-0
11 Nebraska 9-3
12 Virginia 9-2
13 Arkansas 9-2
14 Georgia Tech 9-2
15 Syracuse 8-3

1 unbeaten and 3 1-loss league champs and one 1-loss Ohio State team which didn't play Wisconsin in the regular season.

[gonelong]

Ranking #1 or #2 means little, it's a flawed ranking to begin with.

This is why I favor only conference champions being eligible for the playoffs. Your conference determines how it will be represented. If you don't like the team your conference is sending, then fix your own process, it's nobodies fault but your own.

It is also why I am adamantly opposed to sending two teams from any conference before all (major) conferences are represented. The teams don't play head to head so evaluation of conferences is difficult at best.

I'd also like to see the playing field leveled a bit in regards to oversigning. Railroading a kid out of your program because he didn't pan out like you expected is horsecrap. Maybe the teams need a 2 per year exception in which they can remove a kid from the team for non-performance, but they get to stay on scholarship if they keep their academics in order.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showp...1&postcount=16

I'm for a playoff where the BCS conferences each send a representative, and the last 2 two teams are the highest ranked BCS teams that are not automatically sent. This allows a second school from a top conference to get in and also gives the TCU/Boise State/Houston a shot at getting in.

First round is a home game at the top 4 BCS ranked schools that are auto qualifyers. This means some games could be played in snow or very, very cold weather. (Yes!)

The semi-final is a rotation of the 2 of the 4 big bowl games, and the final is rotated amon the Big4 bowl games..

The odd-man-out of big bowl games gets their pick of the at large teams that year.

This makes the whole season a playoff. Win your conference championship and you go, otherwise it's off to a bowl game. If you can't win your conference, you don't get to go (unless you make one of the 2 at large bids). Each conference gets a shot at the big trophy and the little guys get a fighting shot at it as well.

If you are not of the top 8, you go play the bowls as we always have. People will still travel, people will still watch.

It's not a big burden on the kids, they would have played a bowl game anyways, only 4 school will play more than 1 post-season game.

The first 4 games would sell out no problem. I suspect it wouldn't be an issue to sell out the last 3 games (2 semi-final) either.

Not perfect, but does address some of the "deal breakers". The big losers might be the 4 big bowls, so this probably never happens.

GL

[gonelong]

1998 - If I had my way.

Round 1:
Syracuse @ Tenn
Wisc @ FSU
Tex A&M @ Kan St
UCLA @ OSU

1 Tennessee 12-0 (SEC Conf Champ)
2 Florida State 11-1 (ACC Conf co-Champ)
3 Kansas State 11-1
4 Ohio State 10-1
5 UCLA 10-1 (Pac10 Conf Champ)
6 Texas A&M 11-2 (Big12 Conf Champ)
9 Wisconsin 10-1 (Big 10 Cof Champ)
15 Syracuse 8-3 (Big East Conf Champ)

Tulane is the only team with *any* kind of argument.

GL

[improbus]

Originally Posted by RiverRat13

It is less being built for the weather than the players being acclimated to it. The Packers with Brett Favre were a throwing team yet had an unbelievable record when the temperature was cold. You also had the Capital One Bowl a couple of years ago when the temps were low and Miami's sideline was huddled by the heaters while it was no big deal for Wisconsin.

But if the game is in a Northern city (which it should be on occasion), it will be Indy or Detroit where the game itself can be indoors. I can live with that. People aren't likely to spend the whole week for the Championship game in that particular city because they would have just spent the whole week at the bowl game site. People aren't going to travel that long twice. But it should be rotated. The Northern teams should not always have to travel out of their region like they do now.

I am just ow reading a book called Scorecasting, which is a sort of a Freakonomics for sports. In the book, they attempted to figure out the reason that home teams win more by looking at the conventional wisdom.
1) Fans
2) Travel
3) Stadium/Arena itself (including weather)
4) Referees

They found that the stadium/arena/weather play almost no part in determining who wins. For example, Dome teams win on the road in cold weather environments just as much as other cold weather teams do. (Remember the Falcons at Lambeau).

BTW, in the end they found that referees make up almost all home field advantage. The book is a little dense, but worth reading. It certainly makes a lot of the basic sports truisms seem silly.

[gonelong]

Originally Posted by improbus

I am just ow reading a book called Scorecasting, which is a sort of a Freakonomics for sports. In the book, they attempted to figure out the reason that home teams win more by looking at the conventional wisdom.
1) Fans
2) Travel
3) Stadium/Arena itself (including weather)
4) Referees

They found that the stadium/arena/weather play almost no part in determining who wins. For example, Dome teams win on the road in cold weather environments just as much as other cold weather teams do. (Remember the Falcons at Lambeau).

BTW, in the end they found that referees make up almost all home field advantage. The book is a little dense, but worth reading. It certainly makes a lot of the basic sports truisms seem silly.

Interesting book, but I thought they were quite loose in some areas and didn't ask the right questions in others. It's been awhile since I read it so I can't cite specifics. I do remember them basically saying there is no Fan influence which is idiotic, especially in the NFL. We've all seen a team backed up into their endzone with the QB trying to audible and then needing to call a time out. As close as NFL games are, having one less timeout is often a differentiator in a game.

GL