Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

BCS Officials to consider plus-one format

I am truly sickened by the Big Ten's myopic position that they are entitled to the most money and the most exposure when they have been putting an poor-to-average product on the field/court. It sounds so much like the position that Notre Dame has taken for years.

If you really want to make them squeal:

1. Lessen the impact of the media polls on the BCS calculation in favor of the computer calculations.

2. Put the bowls and tournaments in tiers and then make the payouts consistent for all teams in each tier.

3. Place the teams -- without regard to conference affiliation -- in the tiers based on the modified BCS poll.
 
Big Ten commissioners Jim Delany and Pac-10 commissioner Tom Hansen have said the university presidents they work for are opposed to moving the BCS to a plus-one, in part because it could make the Rose Bowl less attractive.
Click to expand...

I didn't know it was possible to make the Rose Bowl less attractive after pitting a crappy Illinois team everybody knew would lose against USC.
 
Maybe the big 10 and the pac 10 can form their own football league, and take the rose bowl with them. That would solve alot of problems.
 
BryceC said:
I didn't know it was possible to make the Rose Bowl less attractive after pitting a crappy Illinois team everybody knew would lose against USC.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I was thinking. Then again, how can the Big 10 be for a playoff system. Somehow, they end up in the game more-so than others probably do. Basically, they know this assures them of 2 teams in the BCS, without having a Championship game. Obviously, no matter how underserving their second place team is, they still get a nostalgic trip to the BCS by having the current system where the rose bowl is always played. A lot of that rides on my assumption that obviously, the team that wins the big 10 will be in the NC game, because we know they are so deserving of that after making it through that rigorous schedule.:biglaugh:

Anyways, I say we let them go back to the old way it was. Let them have their precious Big 10, Pac 10 matchup. The rest of us will work out a system without them.
 
Seems like there are a few complaints about the Big Ten and PAC-10 but honestly I was simply pleased to see that they are going to finally take a serious look at it, seems to me like a step in the right direction.
 
IMO This is a Bad Idea

This solves nothing. There will still be schools/conferences that feel they have been slighted because they are outside the top 4 teams. Who would the top 4 teams have been this year? OSU, LSU, Georgia and USC? It would seem to me that schools like Oklahoma WVU or Va Tech would argue they should be the 4th team over Georgia or each other.

IMO the solution is straight forward:

1) Allow schools only 3 non-conference games if the conference has 10 or more members. I'd rather see ISU play Baylor than NDSU or UNI.

2) Get rid of conference championship games. Each conference would establish their own rules for determining a regular season champion. The regular season champ in the ACC, Big East, SEC, Big 10, Big 12 & Pac 10 would get an automatic playoff berth. The 2 top ranked teams which are not conference champs would also get a playoff bid.

3) The Friday/Saturday before Christmas would be round 1 at the higher seeds home:
  • Game 1 Fri - Ohio State vs. Kansas
  • Game 2 Sat - Georgia vs. West Virginia
  • Game 3 Sat - LSU vs. Va Tech
  • Game 4 Sat - USC vs OU
3) The Saturday before New Years have round 1 winners play at the Orange, Rose or Sugar Bowl sites.

4) The Friday after New Years the championship game is held at the location not used for the 2nd round.

The bowls would continue as today. Teams in the 8 team playoff cannot play in a bowl game.
 
Re: IMO This is a Bad Idea

isucy86 said:
This solves nothing. There will still be schools/conferences that feel they have been slighted because they are outside the top 4 teams. Who would the top 4 teams have been this year? OSU, LSU, Georgia and USC? It would seem to me that schools like Oklahoma WVU or Va Tech would argue they should be the 4th team over Georgia or each other.

IMO the solution is straight forward:

1) Allow schools only 3 non-conference games if the conference has 10 or more members. I'd rather see ISU play Baylor than NDSU or UNI.

2) Get rid of conference championship games. Each conference would establish their own rules for determining a regular season champion. The regular season champ in the ACC, Big East, SEC, Big 10, Big 12 & Pac 10 would get an automatic playoff berth. The 2 top ranked teams which are not conference champs would also get a playoff bid.

3) The Friday/Saturday before Christmas would be round 1 at the higher seeds home:
  • Game 1 Fri - Ohio State vs. Kansas
  • Game 2 Sat - Georgia vs. West Virginia
  • Game 3 Sat - LSU vs. Va Tech
  • Game 4 Sat - USC vs OU
3) The Saturday before New Years have round 1 winners play at the Orange, Rose or Sugar Bowl sites.

4) The Friday after New Years the championship game is held at the location not used for the 2nd round.

The bowls would continue as today. Teams in the 8 team playoff cannot play in a bowl game.
Click to expand...


Couldn't agree more ! This sure looks better then the present format.
 
cytech said:
Maybe the big 10 and the pac 10 can form their own football league, and take the rose bowl with them. That would solve alot of problems.
Click to expand...

I believe something somewhat similar to this actually happened with TV in the mid/late 80s.

isucy86 said:
This solves nothing. There will still be schools/conferences that feel they have been slighted because they are outside the top 4 teams. Who would the top 4 teams have been this year? OSU, LSU, Georgia and USC? It would seem to me that schools like Oklahoma WVU or Va Tech would argue they should be the 4th team over Georgia or each other.

IMO the solution is straight forward:

1) Allow schools only 3 non-conference games if the conference has 10 or more members. I'd rather see ISU play Baylor than NDSU or UNI.

2) Get rid of conference championship games. Each conference would establish their own rules for determining a regular season champion. The regular season champ in the ACC, Big East, SEC, Big 10, Big 12 & Pac 10 would get an automatic playoff berth. The 2 top ranked teams which are not conference champs would also get a playoff bid.

3) The Friday/Saturday before Christmas would be round 1 at the higher seeds home:
  • Game 1 Fri - Ohio State vs. Kansas
  • Game 2 Sat - Georgia vs. West Virginia
  • Game 3 Sat - LSU vs. Va Tech
  • Game 4 Sat - USC vs OU
3) The Saturday before New Years have round 1 winners play at the Orange, Rose or Sugar Bowl sites.

4) The Friday after New Years the championship game is held at the location not used for the 2nd round.

The bowls would continue as today. Teams in the 8 team playoff cannot play in a bowl game.
Click to expand...

You just left the ONLY undefeated team during the regular season out of your playoff. It's entirely conceivable that Hawaii COULD have beaten, say, Missouri soundly, and finished the season undefeated, while you would possibly have a team that lost to Pitt the week before the playoff win the "championship".

I don't see that as any less controversial.

I like the idea of a +1 game, but I don't want a tournament bracket. Play out the bowl games, and then take the two top teams and put them in a championship game. It'd be tough this year, with Georgia, USC and LSU all staking a claim, but I think it gives teams like Utah, Hawaii, BYU etc. a fair shot at the national championship if they go undefeated, which is something that almost no playoff system will ever give them.

Replace the BCS championship game with the Cotton Bowl to keep 5 BCS games, and then play a BCS championship game after all the BCS games have been played. You'll get a lot of good bowl games, and a chance for teams to make their case in those games for the NC game.
 
A plus one format wouldn't have worked this year either. If they went plus one the final four would have been Ohio State, LSU, Virginia Tech and Oklahoma. Arguably the best two teams are still left out.
 
It's ridiculous to argue that a "playoff system wouldn't solve anything either." Instead of arguing over who WON THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP we would be arguing over who the 8TH BEST TEAM IN THE COUNTRY IS. I'll take that trade-off any day of the week!!!
 
wonkadog said:
It's ridiculous to argue that a "playoff system wouldn't solve anything either." Instead of arguing over who WON THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP we would be arguing over who the 8TH BEST TEAM IN THE COUNTRY IS. I'll take that trade-off any day of the week!!!
Click to expand...

You can only say that you had a legitimate championship if you say you had a legitimate field of all the contenders for that championship. Any playoff system I've seen doesn't include all the legitimate contenders, or at least enough of them that the n-1 team can't make the argument that they could have won the championship had they had a chance to.
 
If the Big10 and Pac10 want their Rose Bowl so exclusive why did they include it in the BCS in the first place? Knock that one out and replace it with some other bowl (the holiday bowl for example). That way they can still have their Rose bowl and not bother the rest of us.
 
jumbopackage said:
You can only say that you had a legitimate championship if you say you had a legitimate field of all the contenders for that championship. Any playoff system I've seen doesn't include all the legitimate contenders, or at least enough of them that the n-1 team can't make the argument that they could have won the championship had they had a chance to.
Click to expand...

With all due respect you sound illogical here. If a team is not in the top 5 then they've put themselves at risk to be left out and you won't see anyone feeling sorry for them for being on the bubble. I understand you're probably talking about "mid-major" conference champs like Hawaii this year. That's why I think that any undefeated team should be included in the tournament, it'd have to have a little flexibility.
 
wonkadog said:
With all due respect you sound illogical here. If a team is not in the top 5 then they've put themselves at risk to be left out and you won't see anyone feeling sorry for them for being on the bubble. I understand you're probably talking about "mid-major" conference champs like Hawaii this year. That's why I think that any undefeated team should be included in the tournament, it'd have to have a little flexibility.
Click to expand...

Yes, but the whole problem with the current system is that it "isn't decided on the field". If you're not making the qualifications black and white to get into the tournament, it's really no different than the "grey" system we have now. I don't see how it's any different than the current system to take 8 teams arbitrarily just because someone or some system thinks they are the 8 best teams. How is that any different than taking just the top 2 teams?
 
jumbopackage said:
Yes, but the whole problem with the current system is that it "isn't decided on the field". If you're not making the qualifications black and white to get into the tournament, it's really no different than the "grey" system we have now. I don't see how it's any different than the current system to take 8 teams arbitrarily just because someone or some system thinks they are the 8 best teams. How is that any different than taking just the top 2 teams?
Click to expand...

It's not 8 teams arbitrarily, it's 6 conference champions and two at-large. What's arbitrary about that? If you didn't win your conference and you weren't picked for either #7 or #8, what's so arbitrary about that? We don't shed too many tears for teams that were left on the NCAA MBB Tourney bubble, why should teams that are #9-#12 have tears shed for them?
 
jdoggivjc said:
It's not 8 teams arbitrarily, it's 6 conference champions and two at-large. What's arbitrary about that? If you didn't win your conference and you weren't picked for either #7 or #8, what's so arbitrary about that? We don't shed too many tears for teams that were left on the NCAA MBB Tourney bubble, why should teams that are #9-#12 have tears shed for them?
Click to expand...

You are picking the 6 conferences arbitrarily, and then the 2 at large teams arbitrarily based on nothing but opinion, and perhaps some computer polls.

In the NCAA MBB tourney, ALL the conference champions get in, so that's not a concern. In addition, you get a large enough sample that any team with a legitimate chance at winning the tournament is in it, as evidenced by an 8 seed being the lowest to ever win it.

It's entirely conceivable that a #9 in college football could win the tournament, especially if you're giving an automatic pass to conference champions, as opposed to trying to put the 8 strongest teams at the end of the year in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back