College Football Playoff Brackets

[JoeChalupa]

http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/sp/tools/med/2007/11/ipt/1196153818.jpg

What say you?



The Wetzel plan (http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news?slug=dw-playoff112707&prov=yhoo&type=lgns)

Go Buckeyes!!

[Holmes_Fans]

I like it. Gives the weaker conference atleast a small fighting chance to win the NC.

[kingsfan]

I like it, if this year's craziness doesn't get rid of the BCS bullshit, nothing will. There's no clear cut winner this year and a playoff system would eliminate all doubt.

[scott]

I think an 8 team playoffs would be incredible, but any more teams than that is lame. Especially if one of them is a 7-5 MAC team.

[Thunder Dan]

my final four is

Ohio State
LSU
Oklahoma
Georgia

tOSU over Georgia

total points 41

[samikeyp]

I like it.

[spursRgay]

top 8 in the bcs have a playoff for the NC. no need to include the weaker conferences b/c it is pretty much accepted they aren't close to being good enough.

[SrA Husker]

I don't like it.

Here's a suggestion for an 8 team playoff:

1) Only Teams in the BCS Top 15 are playoff eligible

2) Eligible conference champions receive automatic invites

3) Eligible teams with fewest losses will receive any remaining invites

4) Seeding of the final teams will be done by BCS rank.

This would protect the regular season as much as possible and still make every game worth something - The weaker conferences have incentive to schedule tougher OOC games to boost their ranking up. As well, by allowing at-larges in based on rank AND loss amount, it means that the fewest number of multiple-loss teams possible will be included - and those that did have multiple losses probably won their Conference Championship and proved they belonged that way.


1 Missouri* BIG 12
2 West Virginia* BIG EAST
3 Ohio State* BIG 10
4 Kansas 1-LOSS AT LARGE
5 Virginia Tech* ACC
6 Louisiana State* SEC
7 Southern California* PAC 10
8 Hawaii* WAC




1 Missouri
8 Hawaii
1/8 ________
4/5 ________
4 Kansas
5 Virginia Tech
__________
__________
2 West Virginia
7 Southern California
2/7 ________
3/6 ________
3 Ohio State
6 Louisiana State

[K-State Spur]

The problem with "protecting" the regular season is that it weakens the regular season.

As long as fewest losses are important in determining the champion, games between top 10 teams in the non-conference schedule will continue to be a rarity instead of the norm.

There are numerous OUTSTANDING college basketball match-ups taking place over the next month. They wouldn't be playing those games though if a loss put a serious hurt on one of those 2 teams.

[K-State Spur]

I think an 8 team playoffs would be incredible, but any more teams than that is lame. Especially if one of them is a 7-5 MAC team.

Why even have the lower conferences then? If they're going to be ineligible for the title game because of the size of their school/conference, what's the point in allowing them to play games?

1/16 match-ups in the basketball tournament aren't lame despite the foregone conclusion.

[K-State Spur]

Personally, I HATE the idea of a playoff. Actually I HATE the idea of a season at all.

I think we should just have spring practice, then let the voters determine the next fall's national champion right then and there. It makes as much sense as the current system, then we don't have to worry about the student-athletes missing ANY class time, playing too many games, or getting fatigued by not getting 60 days off between their final conference game and their bowl.

[SrA Husker]

The problem with "protecting" the regular season is that it weakens the regular season.

As long as fewest losses are important in determining the champion, games between top 10 teams in the non-conference schedule will continue to be a rarity instead of the norm.

There are numerous OUTSTANDING college basketball match-ups taking place over the next month. They wouldn't be playing those games though if a loss put a serious hurt on one of those 2 teams.

You know, that makes sense. So we can take the loss part out of it, and that way seeding will matter, which means Kansas is punished for their weak OOC. That's fair enough.

This basically sums my entire thoughts up from above, which was getting so complicated I couldn't understand it (and I wrote it!)

All conference champions in the Top 15 get first dibs at the 8 available slots. If 9 or more conference champions happen to be in the Top 15, then the lowest ranked of those gets left out. Sorry, Sun Belt. But in reality, the chances are there will never be more than 8 conference champions in the Top 15. Usually, none or one - which leaves room for an at-large such as Kansas or Georgia.

[K-State Spur]

sounds good to me.

once we break down the barrier of a playoff to start, it will expand quickly.

look at fast the basketball tournament jumped to 32 then to 64 and now to 65 (with talk of 68) teams.

[BeerIsGood!]

I like a top 10 playoff with a straight to semifinals bye for the #1 and #2 BCS teams. No automatic bids unless every conference can guarantee equal strength and either all have conference championship games or none have them. Since that will never happen, leave that out. The BCS does a good job of picking the top 10 teams, and if you're number 11 chances are you could have done something during the season to guarantee being in the top 10, but fucked it up. Also, it rewards the two teams who managed to finish the season at the top of the heap.

[jochhejaam]

I think an 8 team playoffs would be incredible, but any more teams than that is lame. Especially if one of them is a 7-5 MAC team.
I live right outside a MAC team city (Toledo) and trust me, they wouldn't deserve a playoff spot this year if there were 32 teams involved.
Down year for the MAC. Other than that an 8 team playoff is a great idea.

[Extra Stout]

Personally, I HATE the idea of a playoff. Actually I HATE the idea of a season at all.

I think we should just have spring practice, then let the voters determine the next fall's national champion right then and there. It makes as much sense as the current system, then we don't have to worry about the student-athletes missing ANY class time, playing too many games, or getting fatigued by not getting 60 days off between their final conference game and their bowl.
I think it should be determined by TV ratings.

[Ignignokt]

I think it should be based on "classiest fans in the world" status, and "tradition", so that da order can be restored.

[Ignignokt]

oh yeah... scoreboard huskerfan!

[NoMoneyDown]

Anyone catch Herbstredt on Good Call/Bad Call re: PO's? 77% of those polled said this year was indicative of a need for a PO system in CFB. Herbstredt responded with "bad call". I understand many of those who like things the way they are and are not inclined to go with a PO system, but things evolve over time and several times this decade the point has been brought up at the end of the season due to the rankings.

[BeerIsGood!]

Anyone catch Herbstredt on Good Call/Bad Call re: PO's? 77% of those polled said this year was indicative of a need for a PO system in CFB. Herbstredt responded with "bad call". I understand many of those who like things the way they are and are not inclined to go with a PO system, but things evolve over time and several times this decade the point has been brought up at the end of the season due to the rankings.

Herby's been on the record on the no playoff side of things for quite a while now. I'd be shocked if he said anything else. As far as I'm concerned, he's dead wrong in his opinion.

[K-State Spur]

Honestly, most of the time I can see the other side of an argument, even if I don't agree with it.

But to those who don't want playoffs, I don't understand their thinking.

There reasons are:

a) The regular season is a playoff: This is just bullshit. If that were true, everybody would be eliminated this year except Hawaii.

b) The season is too long as is: They used to make this argument a lot...and then the NCAA added a 12th game. Do they think we're freaking stupid?

c) Too much class time missed: College football players already miss FAR LESS class time compared to volleyball, basketball, and baseball players.

d) The bowls are great tradition: This used to be true, but they lost the right to make this argument when they started selling sponsorship on every aspect of the game that wasn't nailed down.

e) It would diminish the importance of the bowls that aren't involved in the playoff: This would be true if the bowls that aren't the title game were important now. But outside of the national title game, the only people who live and die with the other bowls are the fans of the teams playing in them.

I'm probably forgetting a couple of reasons off the top of my head, but they are just as easily refuted.

[rr2418]

http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/sp/tools/med/2007/11/ipt/1196153818.jpg

What say you?



The Wetzel plan (http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news?slug=dw-playoff112707&prov=yhoo&type=lgns)

Go Buckeyes!!

I like it! I've always thought that this PO format was the way to go. I read about a format like this a while back but instead of the 5 at-large teams, it called for the next 5 teams with the best records. I think I like the "Wetzel's Plan" better. I like the idea that the higher ranked team would get homefield through out except for the Championship game. I really can't understand why people don't like this format or any kind of playoff for that matter. Just think of the excitement a PO would bring, not to mention a "true national champion". Would I like to see a 12-0 Hawaii team vs. 11-1 Ohio St. ? YOU BET I WOULD!!!!! :clap

[BeerIsGood!]

If they go to that proposed 16 team with the ridiculous automatic bids is there any way we can petition to get UT moved into the MAC?

[NoMoneyDown]

16 would probably be a bit too much ... probably more like 8 teams and some of the "lesser" bowls could pick up teams 9-???

[rr2418]

Hell, why not make a "new" division for the Big Six BCS Conferences so only they could compete in the BCS bowls. The 5 mid-major conferences could go the playoff route or continue on with the non-BCS bowls.

[NoMoneyDown]

A smaller pool (8-10) for the PO's would mean a lot of those "smaller" schools (e.g., Hawaii, Boise St.) would have to start scheduling tougher OOC opponents. I'm sure if that were to happen, we'd see less 10-0 records from some of these schools. In essence, the RS would be like a pre-PO as schools would HAVE to start competing more in order to make the top 8-10 slots. Therefore, if Hawaii were to go 12-0, but play a very weak schedule, it'd be their own fault for not scheduling tougher OOC opponents. Subjectivity would still occur, but to a lesser extent, and there would need to be a structure much like the BCS today where different "polls" would be combined to field the top 8-10 slots. And definitely no preferential treatment clauses a'la Notre Dame.

[Extra Stout]

Honestly, most of the time I can see the other side of an argument, even if I don't agree with it.

But to those who don't want playoffs, I understand their thinking perfectly.

Their reasons are:

a) We make a lot of money now, and change brings uncertainty.

b) We have a nice crony relationship with the existing bowl structure, and don't want to ruffle feathers.

c) In a playoff system, people outside our close-knit circle of cronies might get some of the money and/or power.

d) Our boosters are corrupt good ol' boys who resist change, and we don't want to risk angering them.

e) We have to make up phony reasons other than money because "officially" we are non-profit institutions in the business of educating people, rather than franchises in a sports league where we get away with not paying the players and get to keep all the lucre for ourselves and our friends.

f) We don't really care about competitive integrity anyway; it's all about $$$$$.

I'm probably forgetting a couple of reasons off the top of my head, but they are just as obvious.
FIFY

[K-State Spur]

A smaller pool (8-10) for the PO's would mean a lot of those "smaller" schools (e.g., Hawaii, Boise St.) would have to start scheduling tougher OOC opponents. I'm sure if that were to happen, we'd see less 10-0 records from some of these schools. In essence, the RS would be like a pre-PO as schools would HAVE to start competing more in order to make the top 8-10 slots. Therefore, if Hawaii were to go 12-0, but play a very weak schedule, it'd be their own fault for not scheduling tougher OOC opponents. Subjectivity would still occur, but to a lesser extent, and there would need to be a structure much like the BCS today where different "polls" would be combined to field the top 8-10 slots. And definitely no preferential treatment clauses a'la Notre Dame.

Uhhh, it's not the smaller schools who prevent match-ups with the BCS powers. Name teams view a Hawaii match-up as a lose/lose, and they certainly don't want to enter into any agreement that forces them to play a road game.

[Thunder Dan]

http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/sp/tools/med/2007/11/ipt/1196153818.jpg

What say you?



The Wetzel plan (http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news?slug=dw-playoff112707&prov=yhoo&type=lgns)

Go Buckeyes!!


See the Buckeyes/USC/Troy are under my plan to solve some of the problems with the BCS. Ohio State plays both Troy and USC in 2008, and in my plan teams woul have to do just that.

You might be wondering what my plan is, let me explain:

The problem with the BCS is that teams create their own schedules, yet are still given the same chance to make the big pay-day. I won't hear or discuss arguments about what conference is weak or which is better because frankly conferences all go in cycles. The SEC and Pac10 might be the best now, but a couple years ago the Pac10 was nothing, and the ACC was the cream de la creme. We will never change the conference games, but the NCAA can change who teams play OOC. Under my plan, teams will be matched during 2 open weeks in September. The teams will be matched by the NCAA off of the previous year's results. I know that using prior year's results doesn't solve to problem of 'out of nowhere' teams, and that prior years shouldn't decide current times. But it's better than the alternatives. Ohio State could get paired to play USC and Troy, and say Oklahoma might have to play LSU and South Florida. This would just knock out teams and level the playing field. It would also limit the number of cupcake games. So right after the season those dates can be filled.

[Horry For 3!]

It is pretty gay that Ohio State doesn't play anymore big games like other teams, so they get to the National Championship.

[jochhejaam]

It is pretty gay that Ohio State doesn't play anymore big games like other teams, so they get to the National Championship.
The moral of the story is "don't lose your big games". Especially against a 4-7 team.

[Horry For 3!]

The moral of the story is "don't lose your big games". Especially against a 4-7 team.
I just don't like seeing a team who hasn't played the last like week or 2 go to the Championship game. A lot of people are gonna be pissed off that aren't Ohio State fans.

[jochhejaam]

I just don't like seeing a team who hasn't played the last like week or 2 go to the Championship game. A lot of people are gonna be pissed off that aren't Ohio State fans.
I understand, but you have to close out with a win, which we did.

Definitely would have been a perfect year for a playoff.

[rr2418]

I understand, but you have to close out with a win, which we did.

Definitely would have been a perfect year for a playoff.


I agree, if the Division 1 had a PO, then college football wouldn't be in this mess. Of course BCS fans would argue that not having a clear #1 v #2 is what the BCS is all about.

[j-6]

How about this:

The winners of the BCS conferences (SEC, B12, B10, Pac 10, ACC, and Big East) getting auto bids.

The WAC and the MWC champs play for one bid, and the Sun Belt and CUSA champs play for another, the week before the rest of the playoffs start. Think of it like the NFL wild card round or the NCAA hoops tourney play in. They're automatically seeded #7 and #8.

1- Ohio State v. 8- UCF
4- USC v. 5- Virginia Tech

2- LSU v. 7- Hawaii
3- Oklahoma v. 6- West Virginia

[scott]

How about this:

The winners of the BCS conferences (SEC, B12, B10, Pac 10, ACC, and Big East) getting auto bids.

The WAC and the MWC champs play for one bid, and the Sun Belt and CUSA champs play for another, the week before the rest of the playoffs start. Think of it like the NFL wild card round or the NCAA hoops tourney play in. They're automatically seeded #7 and #8.

1- Ohio State v. 8- UCF
4- USC v. 5- Virginia Tech

2- LSU v. 7- Hawaii
3- Oklahoma v. 6- West Virginia

I like that a lot of a proposed system, except I would tweak it only slightly.

6 BCS Conference Champs get automatic bid.

1 At large Bid

1 Bid for the highest ranked non-BCS conference school, provided they are in the top X (12? 10?) otherwise its another at-large.

[scott]

ESPN is reporting that the SEC Commissioner is on record saying something to the effect of "This season may provide us insight as to whether or not #1 vs #2 is enough to decide the national champion" and there is speculation a 4 team playoff may be discussed!