CougCenter CFB playoff system update

by Grady. on Nov 30, 2008 12:30 PM PST Comment 5 comments

The system I've always been in favor of for a college football playoff is an eight team format composed of

-The six BCS conference champions
-The two highest-rated mid-major conference champions or independents as determined by an average of the AP and Coaches' polls.

Can't win your conference title? Tough. Two weeks of playoffs in December with home-field advantage, and then the BCS bowls resume as normal (no rematches from the playoffs, though). Here's how the bracket would look at the moment (assuming the favorites win conference championship games).

8. Boston College (ACC)
1. Alabama (SEC)

5. Utah
4. Penn State (Big Ten)

6. Boise State
3. USC (Pac-10)

7. Cincinatti (Big East)
2. Oklahoma (Big XII)

And if the seeds hold, you could still have a Penn State/USC Rose Bowl. There's no reason - well, no good reason, why this system wouldn't work.

Yes, you'd still have the Big XII south controversy, but what everyone is forgetting is how much of a flipping joke the Big XII's tiebreak procedure is. And Ball State is left out, but 9 out of 10 years you won't see three unbeaten mid-majors. And it's not like the Cardinals are a threat to any of the top four teams in this bracket.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of CougCenter's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of CougCenter's writers or editors.

0 recs | Comment 5 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Im confused

So they would play an entire 8 team playoff and then those teams would still play in a bowl? That does not make much sense. So If Oklahoma runs the table and wins the Championship, they would then play in the Fiesta bowl after already playing 16 games (13 regular season, 3 playoff games)? And wouldn’t it handicap the bowls if they could not duplicate match ups? Maybe I am missing something here.

by peaty411s on Nov 30, 2008 4:33 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I'll clarify

If the seeds hold – Oklahoma and Alabama would play in the national championship game, the same that #1 and #2 play in now. The rest would be eligible for all the other bowls, with their original tie-ins, as long as there are no rematches. It would look something like this:

Rose Bowl – USC vs. Penn State
Fiesta Bowl – Boise State vs. Utah
Orange Bowl – Boston College vs. Texas
Sugar Bowl – Cincinnati vs. Florida

Avoiding rematches would handicap the bowl matchups, but not as much as you’d think.

And the max games a team could play is 16 (including the national championship game)… which is equal to the NFL regular season, so I don’t have any issue with that.

by Grady. on Nov 30, 2008 7:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Here's my idea

Its a bit similar; An 8 team playoff. But, instead of having teams play bowl games after the playoff, instead the first round games ARE the current BCS bowls (minus the NC, of course.) That’d keep the bowls and their financial constituents happy, and afterwards we’d have what amounts to a final four setup with the winners of each BCS bowl that extended for a mere two weeks afterwards.

I’m not sure that I would set it up with two mid-major champs automatically getting in, as it would be hard to argue this year, for example, that Boise State, although undefeated, is a better team than Texas. However I would put in some sort of stipulation that would keep a deserving mid-major from getting screwed over in favor of a power conference team.

by jj_fekl on Dec 1, 2008 12:58 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

I agree

This is the type of format I have advocated for the last few years. This year, it would look something like this:

Rose Bowl: USC vs. Cincinnati
Fiesta Bowl: Florida vs. Texas
Orange Bowl: Oklahoma vs. Boise St.
Sugar Bowl: Alabama vs. Utah

Then you would have 2 games a week later at the same sites as two of the bowls say Rose & Fiesta this year then Orange & Sugar the next year. Then a week later, you have a true national championship that can either be at one of those sites again or like the Superbowl where it rotates from year to year. The only problem with this idea is that if you play the bowls when they are now, the championship won’t be until like Jan. 16th or so. You could move the bowls back a week to adjust but I imagine there would be huge opposition from the bowls. All-in-all, this idea does more right than the BCS does. More games, and more revenue.

by peaty411s on Dec 1, 2008 3:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs