Proposal for a Division 1-A playoff

[Jetstorm]

I posted this idea on another board and I'd like to see what Bulldog fans think. My idea, which draws on a lot of other playoff proposals, is a 16 team playoff, utilizing the current bowl system as sites for the playoff games, with the national semi-finals and final rotating between Rose, Sugar, and Orange. The 16 team field is made up of 12 automatic bids, given to the 11 conference champions and the best independent, plus four wild cards, determined by a power rating system, like the BCS formula. I would prefer to use last year's BCS formula, since that system gave far more weight to computer polls and strength of schedule, but I'll use this year's formula to keep my representation simple. The power rating system would also be used to seed the bracket 1-16. My 12 auto bids this year would go to the following champions...

ACC- Virginia Tech
Big East- Pittsburgh
Big Ten- Michigan
Big 12- Oklahoma
C-USA- Louisville
Indy- Notre Dame
MAC- Toledo
Mtn. West- Utah
Pac 10- Southern California
SEC- Auburn
Sun Belt- North Texas
WAC- Boise State

My four at large teams, using the current BCS formula...

Texas
California
Georgia
LSU (We would be the last team to get in under my system )

The bowl sites for the first round Regional Playoff would be minor bowls, and the sites would be neutral but the site would be slanted more in favor of the higher seed (ie., #1 seed USC gets to play their first round game at a bowl within reasonable distance of Los Angeles, and so on). Here's how my seeding would look...

Pacific Life Holiday Bowl (San Diego)

1 Southern California (12-0)
16 North Texas (7-4)

Continental Tire Bowl (Charlotte, NC)

8 Virginia Tech (10-2)
9 Boise State (11-0)

Emerald Bowl (San Francisco)

5 California (10-1)
12 Michigan (9-2)

EV1.net Houston Bowl (Houston)

4 Texas (10-1)
13 Pittsburgh (8-3)

GMAC Bowl (Mobile, AL)

3 Auburn (12-0)
14 Notre Dame (6-5)

MPC Computers Bowl (Boise, ID)

6 Utah (11-0)
11 LSU (9-2)

Chik-Fil-A Peach Bowl (Atlanta)

7 Georgia (9-2)
10 Louisville (10-1)

Independence Bowl (Shreveport, LA)

2 Oklahoma (12-0)
15 Toledo (9-3)

My 2nd round bowls...

Tostitos Fiesta Bowl, Tempe AZ (1-16 winner vs. 8-9 winner)
SBC Cotton Bowl, Dallas TX (5-12 winner vs. 4-13 winner)
Capitol One Bowl, Orlando, FL (3-14 winner vs. 6-11 winner)
AutoZone Liberty Bowl, Memphis, TN (2-15 winner vs. 7-10 winner)

National Semi-finals

Nokia Sugar Bowl, New Orleans
Rose Bowl, Pasadena, CA

National Championship Game- Orange Bowl

One little amendment; someone suggested earlier that they didn't like the idea of giving the best independent an automatic bid. I can understand that, I just did that because I think 12 and 4 are such nice, round, even numbers that work better than 11 and 5. 10 and 6 would be better, if we could get the WAC and MWC to re-merge, but that's not happening anytime soon. If you like five wild cards, just throw out Notre Dame and plug in Iowa.


Your opinions please. I think it would be an awesome system, one that would give us some amazing games, make everyone some nice money, give a whole lot of schools some great national exposure, and give us a real undisputed national champion.

[T_Won]

I think this is the way to go. The only problem is how do you justify North Texas getting in and a team like Miami not? I don't mind it, but that is going to be the knock on it. The NCAA doesn't want to make a team like North Texas benefit from being in a poor conference and a team like Miami staying home because they play in a tougher conference.

Just think if Tech won the WAC and LSU didn't get an at-large spot. Then, think if it happened more years than not. Doesn't this increase Tech's recruiting ability against LSU?

[Tech XXIX]

I think this is the way to go. The only problem is how do you justify North Texas getting in and a team like Miami not? I don't mind it, but that is going to be the knock on it. The NCAA doesn't want to make a team like North Texas benefit from being in a poor conference and a team like Miami staying home because they play in a tougher conference.

Just think if Tech won the WAC and LSU didn't get an at-large spot. Then, think if it happened more years than not. Doesn't this increase Tech's recruiting ability against LSU?

I understand your point. The fact is that all D 1-A conferences have met the requirments to play at the highest level. All teams meeting these requirements deserve the chance to play for a national championship in a playoff system.

The fact is that the larger schools will always get the at-large spots, and most of the money will go to the schools that go deeper in the playoffs, which will likely be the larger schools. The smaller conferences just get what they derserve, a chance to prove that they can compete.

I truly feel like Boise and Utah can play with anyone in the country. They deserve the chance prove it, and luckly Utah will this year. I hope they blow out Pitt and show that the Big East does not deserve a automatic spot in the BCS. If there were three at-large spots, Utah would be playing Texas and Cal would be in the Rose bowl.

[weunice]

Here is something I wrote a few weeks ago detailing my ideas for a 1-A playoff ... no examples as of yet ... but I will throw that together soon ... (and make the assumption that it was a 10 game season)

Mine requires more changes ... but ones I think would make for a superior and FAIR playoff ...

OK, the BCS is bunk ... Most would agree with that so I am going to dish out my personal desire when it comes to an Division 1-A NCAA playoff. This is from the perspective of a fan of a non-BCS school but I try to keep in perspective the desires of the big boys, the current bowls and the money players involved.

1. Mandate a 10 game schedule. 8 conference and 2 to play with. One 1-AA game a year can be scheduled ... rather SHOULD be scheduled. Required 4 home games. I would prefer a fixed 5 home and 5 away with requirements that each conference have to visit every other conference on the road at least once every 3 years.

2. NO CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIP GAMES. Each conference should determine for itself a set of tie breaker rules to determine a champion in order that a designated playoff champion is crowned.

3. There will be a 32 team playoff consisting of 31 games.

4. The playoff will consist of "4 regions" NE, SE, NW, SW. Placements will be done similar to basketball. The winners in NE, SE play for the right to the NC game and the winners of the NW, SW play for the right to the NC game.

5. Prior to playoff selection (preferably before the season to facilitate planning) the CURRENT bowl committees will PURCHASE the slots they want. For example, X bowl buys SE, 1st round 4-5 game. That committee handles advertising and gets appropriate gate, cuts and whatnot. Naturally the higher up the ladder, the more the game will go for.

6. For the first 3 rounds, the higher seeds host.

7. The Final Four is played at host sites selected by the committees that win bidding for those games.

8. ALL ELEVEN CONFERENCE CHAMPIONS GET A BID regardless of their record.

9. At large bids are done by a selection committee similar to that of basketball.

OBJECTIONS:

-Big boys lose those 6th and 7th home games.
+not if they finish in the Top 16 nationally, which many, if not most, would on a regular basis. Besides, scheduling a 6th home game in not out of the question in the in-season rules.
You would have to earn those games. Seems fair .... right?

- We would lose the bowl tradition and fewer teams would make the postseason and get bowl payouts. Your plan hurts the little guy.
+ There is nothing in my plan that prevents a small collection of post season bowls or even something like a 16 team NIT-like tournament for teams that ended up just outside the 32 team cut. The playoff games can maintain SOME of the bowl tradition ...

- This is taxing on the student athletes because they have to play too many games
+ Myth. The two teams playing in the national championship game would play 15 games each. MOST teams would play 10-11 games. Why folks don't have a problem with 1-AA teams doing this but for some reason DO with 1-A teams is beyond me.

MY THOUGHTS: First off ALL Division 1-A teams now theoretically have access to the National Championship even in for all practical purposes they do not.
Second ... Can you imagine the kind of money the bidding process would bring in and better yet the ticket prices, corporate sponsorships and whatnot for playoff games at the home sites? This would benefit the program that is working hard to make it to elite status the most. The system very much benefits the Fresno States, Utahs, Boise States and good mid-majors that do not have the benefit of BCS money and TV time currently. ALL games would be sold out, without a question.
Third, could you imagine the corporate sporsorship money at the Final Four level. This would be March Madness on steroids.
Finally, we would have a REAL national champion.

[weunice]

If you toss the 1-AA game then those teams would not like this ... maybe you could compromise and say that you have to schedule one everyso often and that one will count in the numbers game ... I don't know. LIke I said, just my thoughts and I have gone off the deep end with no sleep here recently so it might read like gobbledey gook right now ... deal.

[dawgtired]

weunice,

I like your proposal. 32 teams is the way to go.

[weunice]

As much as I like Jets system, I do not think it will fly because the big boys will not be willing to reliquish such a high percentage of post season slots to the non-BCS. I think with a 32 team system the little guys play in and the big guys will, more often than not, fill the at-large slots and with 21 at large slots you can bet they will be happy with that.

Then again, my system won't fly because I do not think you can get the big boys to give up 6th and 7th home games. With 12 game seasons now and the revenue generated from that, I would think it would be next to impossible to get the top drawing teams in the nation to give that up in favor of a system wehre they have to compete to earn those games. The time to implement my system may have long passed ... sadly.

[johnnylightnin]

Eunice, I like it. But, why not championship games? Not fair for the at large's that don't have to play them? I think sponsors would love a championship game that would decide who gets the automatic bid to the final 32. Imagine how many more people would've watched Colorado & OU. Just my thoughts...like I said, I like it. If the corperate sponsors would push it, I think they could make it happen. The problem is the presidents.

[JAY]

what if they made everyone play a conference championship game. then take the 11 winners (pac10, big12, sec, big 10, acc, big east, cusa, wac, mwc, mac , and belt) + one at large team (highest rated team in the bcs poll, it gives independents a chance) , seed them based on the bcs poll, and play it off. incorporate the bowls to make them actually mean something.

first round (sometime between conference championships and christmas):

8 vs. 9 - music city

7 vs. 10 - sun

6 vs. 11 - peach

5 vs. 12 - outback

------------------
round 2:

4 vs. 5/12 - gator (christmas day or eve)

3 vs. 6/11 - cotton (christmas day or eve)

2 vs. 7/10 - capital one (christmas day or eve)

1 vs. 8/9 - rose (christmas day or eve)

----------------
semi's

1/8/9 vs. 4/5/12 - orange, fiesta, or sugar (new years day)

2/7/10 vs. 3/6/11 - orange, fiesta, or sugar (new years day)
--------------

finals: one week after semi's.

1/4/5/8/9/12 vs. 2/3/6/7/10/11 - orange, fiesta, or sugar

[Rickeydad]

The best independent should not be given a slot. Notre Dame should earn it as an at large.

[b_hoss_mac]

I posted this idea on another board and I'd like to see what Bulldog fans think. My idea, which draws on a lot of other playoff proposals, is a 16 team playoff, utilizing the current bowl system as sites for the playoff games, with the national semi-finals and final rotating between Rose, Sugar, and Orange. The 16 team field is made up of 12 automatic bids, given to the 11 conference champions and the best independent, plus four wild cards, determined by a power rating system, like the BCS formula. I would prefer to use last year's BCS formula, since that system gave far more weight to computer polls and strength of schedule, but I'll use this year's formula to keep my representation simple. The power rating system would also be used to seed the bracket 1-16. My 12 auto bids this year would go to the following champions...

ACC- Virginia Tech
Big East- Pittsburgh
Big Ten- Michigan
Big 12- Oklahoma
C-USA- Louisville
Indy- Notre Dame
MAC- Toledo
Mtn. West- Utah
Pac 10- Southern California
SEC- Auburn
Sun Belt- North Texas
WAC- Boise State

My four at large teams, using the current BCS formula...

Texas
California
Georgia
LSU (We would be the last team to get in under my system )

The bowl sites for the first round Regional Playoff would be minor bowls, and the sites would be neutral but the site would be slanted more in favor of the higher seed (ie., #1 seed USC gets to play their first round game at a bowl within reasonable distance of Los Angeles, and so on). Here's how my seeding would look...

Pacific Life Holiday Bowl (San Diego)

1 Southern California (12-0)
16 North Texas (7-4)

Continental Tire Bowl (Charlotte, NC)

8 Virginia Tech (10-2)
9 Boise State (11-0)

Emerald Bowl (San Francisco)

5 California (10-1)
12 Michigan (9-2)

EV1.net Houston Bowl (Houston)

4 Texas (10-1)
13 Pittsburgh (8-3)

GMAC Bowl (Mobile, AL)

3 Auburn (12-0)
14 Notre Dame (6-5)

MPC Computers Bowl (Boise, ID)

6 Utah (11-0)
11 LSU (9-2)

Chik-Fil-A Peach Bowl (Atlanta)

7 Georgia (9-2)
10 Louisville (10-1)

Independence Bowl (Shreveport, LA)

2 Oklahoma (12-0)
15 Toledo (9-3)

My 2nd round bowls...

Tostitos Fiesta Bowl, Tempe AZ (1-16 winner vs. 8-9 winner)
SBC Cotton Bowl, Dallas TX (5-12 winner vs. 4-13 winner)
Capitol One Bowl, Orlando, FL (3-14 winner vs. 6-11 winner)
AutoZone Liberty Bowl, Memphis, TN (2-15 winner vs. 7-10 winner)

National Semi-finals

Nokia Sugar Bowl, New Orleans
Rose Bowl, Pasadena, CA

National Championship Game- Orange Bowl

One little amendment; someone suggested earlier that they didn't like the idea of giving the best independent an automatic bid. I can understand that, I just did that because I think 12 and 4 are such nice, round, even numbers that work better than 11 and 5. 10 and 6 would be better, if we could get the WAC and MWC to re-merge, but that's not happening anytime soon. If you like five wild cards, just throw out Notre Dame and plug in Iowa.


Your opinions please. I think it would be an awesome system, one that would give us some amazing games, make everyone some nice money, give a whole lot of schools some great national exposure, and give us a real undisputed national champion.

I did the first part of my column for tomorrow on something VERY similar to this. I did not — and would not — give an automatic bid to the best independent. If Notre Dame wants to join the party, they can join a conference and earn their way there.

Also, I had the first round of the playoffs being hosted by the higher seed instead of at the minor bowls. Then the last seven games of the playoffs will be played at bowl games, rotating every year.

I also think there should be a committee formed to seed the teams ... and the BCS formula should be a piece of the puzzle (like the RPI in basketball), but not the whole puzzle.

Here's the exerpt from my column today....

The final Bowl Championship Series rankings are out, and we have yet another mess. We are getting No. 1 vs. No. 2 for the national title — but how can you have five undefeated teams with only two having a shot to play for the title?

It just doesn't make sense, and it won't be fixed until the NCAA gives in and establishes a playoff system in the only sport that doesn't have one.

It doesn't really matter how you do it — eight teams or 16 teams — but it needs to be done. There are so many arguments against it, but the playoff system seems to work just fine for Division 1-AA; it would work fine for 1-A, as well.

My plan would be to take the champion from each conference — yes, even the Sun Belt — and then choose five at-large teams according to the current BCS formula.

Have a championship committee seed the teams 1-16 using the BCS formula, strength of schedule, etc., much like the committees do to seed the NCAA basketball tournaments.

This year's seeds would go something like: 1. USC; 2. Oklahoma; 3. Auburn; 4. Texas; 5. Cal; 6. Utah; 7. Georgia; 8. Virginia Tech; 9. Boise State; 10. Louisville; 11. Michigan; 12. LSU; 13. Iowa; 14. Pitt; 15. Toledo; 16. North Texas.

The higher ranked team would host in the first round, with the final seven games of the playoffs being played at various bowl sites throughout the country.

There is no reason that a playoff system should not be instituted. The BCS was a great idea, but it has only worked once — when Ohio State defeated Miami for the title three years ago.

I really think we tried the BCS and it has just failed — through no fault of its own — almost every single year. We have to institute a playoff system if college football's champions are to have any credibility whatsoever in the future.

[weunice]

Eunice, I like it. But, why not championship games? Not fair for the at large's that don't have to play them? I think sponsors would love a championship game that would decide who gets the automatic bid to the final 32. Imagine how many more people would've watched Colorado & OU. Just my thoughts...like I said, I like it. If the corperate sponsors would push it, I think they could make it happen. The problem is the presidents.

I was trying to keep total games for the champs at 15. Adding championship games either takes away from the OOC giving only ONE OOC game or it adds a game.A 10 game regular season schedule is pretty tight to deal with as is.

Not that 16 isnt doable ... Another thing I considered is that 12+ team conferences get the winners in each division into the playoffs. That cuts down the number of at large slots though and it would really penalize 10 team conferences.

[johnnylightnin]

Also, I had the first round of the playoffs being hosted by the higher seed instead of at the minor bowls. Then the last seven games of the playoffs will be played at bowl games, rotating every year.

Don't we have to do something to keep the minor bowls happy? We know how politics is played in areas like this. I personally like your system, but I think that if we try to institute a system that disregards the minor bowls, it is less likely to be accepted. Just my 2 cents.

[b_hoss_mac]

Don't we have to do something to keep the minor bowls happy? We know how politics is played in areas like this. I personally like your system, but I think that if we try to institute a system that disregards the minor bowls, it is less likely to be accepted. Just my 2 cents.

Johnny,

Why can't we actually keep the minor bowl system as is? Right now, we have 50+ teams that make bowl games, and my system calls for 16 teams to make it into the playoffs. I'm also using seven bowls, which equals 14 teams in the normal bowl system. Under my new system, we can just add 2 teams to the postseason mix and keep the same number of bowls. It's just seven of them get bumped up to the playoffs instead of the "normal" bowls.

[johnnylightnin]

Johnny,

Why can't we actually keep the minor bowl system as is? Right now, we have 50+ teams that make bowl games, and my system calls for 16 teams to make it into the playoffs. I'm also using seven bowls, which equals 14 teams in the normal bowl system. Under my new system, we can just add 2 teams to the postseason mix and keep the same number of bowls. It's just seven of them get bumped up to the playoffs instead of the "normal" bowls.

Like I said, sounds good to me. I think, however, that the minor/mid-level bowls would lose a sizable chunk of their corperate (excuse my spelling...if it's spelled wrong) sponsorship. This would decrease pay-outs and over-all bowl popularity, which will once again recieve a no vote from presidents and bowl-chairs.