My plan for a fair playoff!

by Huskermedic on Jan 4, 2010 4:14 PM EST Comment 11 comments

Everybody get's in a conf.

Everybody play's each team in there conf. once.

The one team with the most conf. wins after 12 games (each conf. must have no more then 12 teams. If less they have bye's.)

You don't have to have conf champ games doing this since each team plays each other. If by some small chance there is a tie and the win over the other team does not brake the tie the tied teams would have an extra game. This would be rare.

Take the ten conf. champs (yes we would have to drop the 11th conf and combine that conf. teams with the ten others.) and those ten teams play it off using "warm" bowls sites. Part of the agreement to host a playoff bowl game is to cover travel expense for team.

All other teams that finish 700 or more get picked for all the other bowl games just like we do now. Yes some bowl sites (ones with field turf) may get to host more then one game. (a playoff game and normal bowl game)

There are no wild cards, you can't win your conf. then you can't play for the title. That makes the regular season very important. Why, you have to win your conf. Look at how many coaches say the goal is to win the conf.

If you think it is unfair to see a one loss Florida team not get to play for the title over a 2 loss TCU then........Oh wait Florida has one loss and not in the title game.

For those of you that think a 2 loss team should not play for a title.....LSU 2 loss's and one the BCS title.

Yes the conf. are very uneven as far a strength goes but it is that way now because of the BCS. If this type of system is put in place over the years I think you would see a lot of teams jumping conf. But the more strong teams you have the more teams go to the other bowls games which means more money for your conf. so maybe not.

I have been debating this issue and plan on a BBS and so far no one has been able to say something that would not make it work or be fair.

0 recs | Comment 11 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

You really want me to break this idea I can.

I usually try to be nice and encourage the ideas of others. I will start with clairifications that appear to be needed.

How do you settle the infamous three way tie? Who would have won the Big 12 south in 2008?

by 700 do you mean better than 0.500?

On what baises do you make the assertion that conference alignments are fluid? I do not share that belief.

If you want me to, I can apply the real world constraints I am in the process of applying to common proposals to this design.

I like the eligance of your design, and most designs that involve conference realignment. I like the idea of a national championship involving the winners of regional play.

Any design that removes the opportunity for a team to go undefeated without being invited to an existing championship game is better than what we have.

BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter

by utesfan100 on Jan 4, 2010 4:56 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Not that I think this idea makes much sense, but ...

On what baises do you make the assertion that conference alignments are fluid? I do not share that belief.

Every conference in FBS except the Pac 10 has added at least one member since 1990. Four did not exist as football conferences in 1990 (or five if you take the Big 12 at its word and count it as a new conference instead of expanding the Big 8). None of the founding members of the WAC are currently members, and only one school that joined before 1990 is (Hawaii). Half of the Big East’s original football members are now in other conferences — and the league started playing football in 1991!

It seems very likely the Big Ten will expand to twelve within the next year or two; if, as is extremely likely, they choose a Big East or Big 12 school, this will cause another round of cascading changes in conference alignments.

by drothgery on Jan 7, 2010 2:24 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Ok, they are not static...

But the PAC 10, SEC and the core of the Big 10 and MAC have been static for decades and will not tolerate the kind of radical shuffling desribed above.

The Big 10 might take a team. The PAC 10 might go to 12. I plan to start a series shortly on the dominoes that might fall from these changes. These changes are far short of the kind of shifts described in the OP.

BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter

by utesfan100 on Jan 7, 2010 9:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not quite.

Arkansas and South Carolina joined the SEC in 1992 as a result of the SEC noticing an obscure rule put into place for a lower-division conference that allowed 12+-school conferences to hold a championship game. Six teams have joined the MAC since 1990, and two have left (although Northern Illinois had been a MAC member before; Marshall has joined and left the MAC twice).

by drothgery on Jan 7, 2010 10:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ideally the MAC needs to have one other team leave to drop to 12 teams. But where does that team go? I guess Temple could go back to the Big East, but doubtful. The WAC, MWC and SunBelt could expand by a team if they desired, although I think they like the 8 team setups they have.

by talonk on Jan 7, 2010 12:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think they like the 8 9 team

by talonk on Jan 7, 2010 12:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

C-USA?

C-USA will likely eventually lose a few teams to the Big East or even the MWC. MAC and Sun Belt teams will be the only real options and at least one MAC team would be likely to make the cut.

BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter

by utesfan100 on Jan 7, 2010 12:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I could see Tulane joining the MWC … they are close enough to TCU. Especailly if they could pair with LA Tech from thw WAC (moving as well?). But we’ll see.

by talonk on Jan 7, 2010 2:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I have never heard of Tulane or LA Tech to the MWC

until now.

Bosie State, Fresno, Nevada, San Jose St., Tulsa, UTEP, Houston, Rice and SMU are MUCH higher on the list.

I don’t see the MWC expanding to 20 :)

BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter

by utesfan100 on Jan 7, 2010 4:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ha …

No info or even rumors, was just stating that if a MAC team went to the C-USA, I could see one of the most Western C-USA schools like Tulane head to the MWC, or to the WAC so they could pair up with LA Tech.

I expect that if the Big 10/11 expands to 12, that if they pull a school from the Big 12, one of the MWC schools makes the jump to the Big12, creating a hole there, domino effect etc. If it is from the Big East, I see them expanding by 3 teams (most likely from C-USA), which would allow one of the MAC schools to defect to C-USA.

by talonk on Jan 7, 2010 5:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs