The BCS finally totally fails!!!

[Flosman]

I know the BCS has been proud as a peacock at not failing to crown a fairly agreeable national champion in the past, well this year I think it is almost certain they will not accomplish this.

Well guys it is time for a playoff and he is my proposal.

Cut the regular season back to 11 games. Have a 24 team playoff. Top eight conference champions get first round bye. All BCS conferences required to have championship game in order to get bye. 16 at large bids go to the top 16 remaining teams in BCS poll, 1st round games played at higher seeds home field. Re- seed after first round, 2nd round games played at conference champions home field or confernece staduim of choice. Remaining games played at 7 bowl sites that rotate for National title and semi games. If the CFA wanted to really increase revenue they could let bowls bid for title and Semi games. Sell TV rights for some amount exceeding most 3rd world country's GDP.

This just makes to much sense, IMO. I can think of no reason not to go to a system like this. Every game during the regular system will have huge meaning, winning the conference championship will mean more and some year some team will shock everyone. I really do not understand any logical or economic reason not to start this next year. On an aside what was the deal with TV guys this past weekend continually stating that it would simply never happen?

[Pedro Cerrano]

Wow, I like where your head's at but 24 teams is WAAY WAAAY too much. It completely devalues the regular season with that many teams. I like mweb's idea of 6 teams with the top two each getting a BYE.

[Flosman]

Wow, I like where your head's at but 24 teams is WAAY WAAAY too much. It completely devalues the regular season with that many teams. I like mweb's idea of 6 teams with the top two each getting a BYE.

Just how does it devalue the regular season? How is 24 too much? What makes it to much?

[glenn__davis]

Haven't we already had the BCS fail? I thought LSU won the BCS championship a few years ago, but the AP made USC their champion.

[geschinger]

I agree that 24 is too much. I'm also not a big fan of byes. Assuming that inclusivity would be a noble goal for a new system, I'd go with 16 teams - 11 conference winners and 5 at large teams.

With byes, 12 teams - 11 conference winners and one at large team. This would enhance the importance of the regular season.

But if it was decided that inclusivity isn't important, an 8 team playoff would be ideal. And it could probably be done w/o reducing the regular season which is something I don't see many teams being in favor of.

[Flosman]

Wow, I like where your head's at but 24 teams is WAAY WAAAY too much. It completely devalues the regular season with that many teams. I like mweb's idea of 6 teams with the top two each getting a BYE.

6 teams is not enough in some years, IMO. This year would be a prime example. I do not think Kansas, WVU, USC are less deserving than the top 6 teams, Do You? I also think the 24 team field gives up and coming programs a chance to compete against the power conferences. Why is it good for basketball to have mid majors compete but not football?

[square634]

I don't think this could happen because overall, revenues would still decrease. Most athletic departments only make money on basketball and football, and for a lot of schools that is largely dependent on the number of home games they have. While the top 24 teams might make more money under this system, every other Division I school would lose out by having fewer regular season games and no bowl berth.

[TGO]

I don't think this could happen because overall, revenues would still decrease. Most athletic departments only make money on basketball and football, and for a lot of schools that is largely dependent on the number of home games they have. While the top 24 teams might make more money under this system, every other Division I school would lose out by having fewer regular season games and no bowl berth.

There can still be other non-playoff bowls. If people watch meaningless bowls now, they'll continue to do so even if there is a playoff.

[geschinger]

Just how does it devalue the regular season? How is 24 too much? What makes it to much?

If that many teams get in there is a lot less importance in late games if win or lose you're still getting a slot in a playoff.

[DuffMan]

8 Team Playoff. No Byes and you can still have the championship game as a Bowl Game.

That said they definitely screwed up this year. I mean Mizzou beats Kansas and Kansas gets a BCS birth, but Mizzou doesn't??? Can somebody explain that one!

[Flosman]

If that many teams get in there is a lot less importance in late games if win or lose you're still getting a slot in a playoff.

I disagree with this. It will change which games have huge importance and actually make more games do or die affairs for teams. It is no different than it is in basketball. There would likely be 15+ bubble teams with three weeks to go. These teams now are playing for positions in the string of meaningless exibition games (Lower Bowls).

I think 8 is not enough teams. This year would HI get in or not and if they do who doesn't?

[Baltimoron]

An app. for how the vote went down from the below article

You may have seen this WaPost entry on the coaches final votes.

This poll is clearly a joke. Every year you have ballots that are clearly influenced by bias and/or complete incompetence. Or maybe its just the interns filling them out.

If you are the head coach of a big bad powerhouse football team, are you really following other teams/games? Hell, coaches hardly get to watch any games live other than their own. They see the scores and hear the recap.

Some excerpts:

"Tommy Bowden voted Oklahoma 10th, four spots behind Missouri... Bowden also voted Clemson, his team, 11th, three spots ahead of Boston College, which beat his team at Clemson three weeks ago."

"Bobby Bowden also put Oklahoma behind Missouri, 7th to 5th. Does the Bowden family have some sort of vendetta against Bob Stoops?"

"Maybe not -- Mike Bellotti also chose Missouri over Oklahoma, 5th to 8th. Is Bellotti still sour over all the complaining Stoops did over that replay incident last season?"

"Howard Schnellenberger says Missouri 4th, Oklahoma 7th!"

"Stoops's main competition for the title game figured to be LSU and Georgia. He voted LSU sixth, a spot behind where any other coach put them. He voted Georgia eighth, worse than only two other coaches. And those two coaches are crazies -- Wyoming's Joe Glenn (who voted UGA 10th) flipped off an opposing coach during a game, and Mumme, who voted Hawaii No. 1."

[BaltimoreTerp]

I believe in a 16-team system.

Every Division I-A conference champion gets an automatic berth (that includes WAC, MAC, Sun Belt, etc.), so that would be eleven spots taken.

The other five go to at-large teams. I would do some form of BCS-type system to get those five.

Make the NCAA Football Tournament work like the NCAA Basketball Tournament. Split the first round among four (two-game) or eight (one-game) neutral sites. Same with the rest of the games.

For each round, split the money into two halves: one half is split between the teams who play, the other is split between the entire subdivision. That way, everyone gets at least some money from the system.

I would return the bowls into a completely autonomus system where they can choose who they please, as long as those games do not conflict with the NCAA-sanctioned tournament.

So, all teams are guarenteed a certain share of money from the system, plus bowl money if they can get into one.

Good teams that go to the playoff get that share, plus playoff money, plus potentially bowl money if they don't go to the championship and are asked to a bowl.

The regular season is no less relevant then now; more so because more teams in more conferences have a shot at winning.

There is guarenteed money for all, and more money to be had through a playoff and bowls.

I cannot see a downside that cannot be worked out.

[RShack]

I believe in a 16-team system.

Every Division I-A conference champion gets an automatic berth (that includes WAC, MAC, Sun Belt, etc.), so that would be eleven spots taken.

The other five go to at-large teams. I would do some form of BCS-type system to get those five.

I think 8 is better. Make it 16 and you water down the importance of the regular season and all-the-sudden have 3-loss teams playing for the NC.

The only way I'd wanna do 16 is if you structured in a way to encourage smaller conferences and discourage this BS of conferences that are too big for everybody to play everybody. If you wanna keep big conferences, then leave it at 8, make all the conferences have a playoff game, and only let the conf champs get in. Flawed, I know, but it seems like the least-objectionable thing to me.

If people say that's no good because some teams are playing better at the end, then you gotta stop this goofy month-long layoff between the season and the bowls. After sitting around not playing anybody for a month, they're all basically starting over at bowl time anyway.

Make the NCAA Football Tournament work like the NCAA Basketball Tournament. Split the first round among four (two-game) or eight (one-game) neutral sites. Same with the rest of the games.

The problem with that is fan travel. Fans can only travel to so many bowls. They're not gonna fill up the seats for 3 or 4 of them in a row. The basketball tourney gets away with it because each weekend involves so many teams bringing some fans with them.

I would return the bowls into a completely autonomus system where they can choose who they please, as long as those games do not conflict with the NCAA-sanctioned tournament.

Nah. That would demote the famous bowls to NIT status. I think the big bowls need to be in as the sites for the final and the semi-finals.

[BaltimoreTerp]

I think 8 is better. Make it 16 and you water down the importance of the regular season and all-the-sudden have 3-loss teams playing for the NC.

The only way I'd wanna do 16 is if you structured in a way to encourage smaller conferences and discourage this BS of conferences that are too big for everybody to play everybody. If you wanna keep big conferences, then leave it at 8, make all the conferences have a playoff game, and only let the conf champs get in. Flawed, I know, but it seems like the least-objectionable thing to me.

If people say that's no good because some teams are playing better at the end, then you gotta stop this goofy month-long layoff between the season and the bowls. After sitting around not playing anybody for a month, they're all basically starting over at bowl time anyway.

Like I said, all 11 I-A conferences would get their champion in automatically. Then, the next top-five (supposedly) would be taken as at-larges.

The only way a three-loss team makes it to the championship would be the same as anyone else: winning three rounds of games. Unless you think NC State in 1983 lessened that year's regular season, it wouldn't happen here.

The problem with that is fan travel. Fans can only travel to so many bowls. They're not gonna fill up the seats for 3 or 4 of them in a row. The basketball tourney gets away with it because each weekend involves so many teams bringing some fans with them.

That's why I had two-game neutral sites as an option. That way, in the first two rounds at least there would be fans ffrom four different teams at the games.

Nah. That would demote the famous bowls to NIT status. I think the big bowls need to be in as the sites for the final and the semi-finals.

Who cares?

"Famous" bowls like the Cotton, former Peach, Sun, Liberty, etc. are already NIT bowls. And the Rose wouldn't care as long as they got USC/Cal vs. Michigan/Ohio State every year.