NCAA Football Playoff Question

[WClax17]

i completetly agree with the idea of having a playoffin NCAA football, i think that would help settle a lot of contreversy, like the whole boise st. thing this year. however, what about all the small schools that use the small bowls as a stepping stone to bigger and better things. here in tampa we have USF how won the papajohns.com bowl this year. so, do we keep the small bowls and just take all the bcs teams and put them in a playoff, while keeping the small bowls the same? what do we do with all those medium teams and those not as prestigous bowls?

[pshwarriorlax17]

You keep all of the bowls except for 8 or 16 teams, and then use a tournament format for the rest of the way to find the real champion.

[PBlax]

You keep all of the bowls except for 8 or 16 teams, and then use a tournament format for the rest of the way to find the real champion.


that would be dumb because the 16 teams playing would the best 16 so you wouldnt get the fan crowd around the other few. Plus the ammount of time it would take their wouldnt be much time for other bowls.

[lax21goalie2008]

take all the conference winners...have a tourney to see truly who is the best team.
then the teams who werent conference winners but still are bowl eligible can still go to a bowl game.

[Jugthug42]

take all the conference winners...have a tourney to see truly who is the best team.
then the teams who werent conference winners but still are bowl eligible can still go to a bowl game.

Can't do that. Some conferences are stronger than others.

A tournament is needed. I definately agree.

Honestly I think that the top 16 teams in the current ranking system should go to the tournament. Than it can last 4-5 weeks...who really cares? Its more football.

And anyone who thinks that Boise State, who barely beat OKLAHOMA...deserved a chance to be in the national championship...I don't know. They wouldn't have lasted against either team that was in there.

[jedimasterPIMP]

I am no fan of the BCS, I think its a pretty flawed system, but I am also not completely for a playoff system. The one thing I am against is the absolutely unnecessary amount of bowl games there are. I mean really I think we can do with out the Gaylord Hotels Music City Bowl. Bowls are not even that big of a deal anymore because teams like FSU who were a .500 team made one.

The one reason I do like the BCS and the system of the main bowl games now is because it gives teams like Boise State a chance to keep their momentum rolling. If there was a playoff system, every team but one would end their season with a loss, which doesn't do anything good for the team or school.

I just think there needs to be a change because having a team like ohio state go 57 days without playing a football game and then telling them to play in the national championship game is just wrong to me. The NCAA needs to take a serious look at the BCS and post season football and come up with something much better.

[libertyvillelax]

You keep all of the bowls except for 8 or 16 teams, and then use a tournament format for the rest of the way to find the real champion.
This is how you would do it. PBlax- Yea you would get the crowd. Every team has its share of fans that would watch the bowl game just like they would any other game plus some people that just like football.

[libertyvillelax]

And anyone who thinks that Boise State, who barely beat OKLAHOMA...deserved a chance to be in the national championship...I don't know. They wouldn't have lasted against either team that was in there.
What do you mean barely beat "OKLAHOMA" Oklahoma is a very good team. Boise State won every game on their schedule. They did everything they had to do to get to a NC, but they got left out because they aren't a big powerhouse school.

edit- sorry about the double postt i was going to copy paste and edit, but forgot before posting this.

[WClax17]

what he is saying is bsu barely beat them number seven team in the nation, the number one team in the nation is six spots better than them, and is therefore probably good enough to beat them. bsu had an amazing year, but to compare them to usc, lsu, uf, osu or even mich. i think this is the biggest difference between the top five and 6-10 i've ever scene.this supports why we need a playoff however, b/c with so many teams evenly matched there needs to be more than one deciding game

[lax21goalie2008]

it wouldnt really matter if some conferences are stronger than others...look at the NCAA basketball tournament...if conference strength mattered, there would be only ACC and Big 10 teams in the final four. But look at Butler, Wichita State, and George mason. Teams from bad conferences can still win big games. Look at Boise State. The WAC is despicable. But Boise beat a team from the prestigious Big 12, but in your argument, there's no way that can happen.

[homeskillet313]

it wouldnt really matter if some conferences are stronger than others...look at the NCAA basketball tournament...if conference strength mattered, there would be only ACC and Big 10 teams in the final four. But look at Butler, Wichita State, and George mason. Teams from bad conferences can still win big games. Look at Boise State. The WAC is despicable. But Boise beat a team from the prestigious Big 12, but in your argument, there's no way that can happen.

he was saying that the conference winners idea go to playoffs only wouldn't work because that would've left teams like michigan out of the playoffs this year. and wisconsin who finished in the top 10 before they lost. personally, i think it should be played like the ncaa tournament, with the top 25 teams. 24-25 play to determine who gets the last #12 spot. like the ncaa tournament where the 64-65 teams determine who get the last spot

[Mad-Max]

that would be dumb because the 16 teams playing would the best 16 so you wouldnt get the fan crowd around the other few. Plus the ammount of time it would take their wouldnt be much time for other bowls.

You would get the fan crowd, look at the NCAA Basketball tournament, you draw fans to each and every game, and there are like 64 teams. But a big part of it would depend on where you have the games held. In the earlier rounds, home field advantage? or a neutral field? If you set up where you play like the NFL Playoffs I could see something like that working, or with a set number of fields where the games are played. I think the way ESPN had the playoffs set up was a GREAT way to have it. But I really dont see any change in the system in the near future, I see at least 3-5 more years of the BCS' current set up, but it may just be me.

[SeanO39]

Can't do that. Some conferences are stronger than others.
And anyone who thinks that Boise State, who barely beat OKLAHOMA...deserved a chance to be in the national championship...I don't know. They wouldn't have lasted against either team that was in there.


Although I agree with the two teams in the Championship game. The way Ohio State played, Boise could have easily handled them, but then again, so could've a high school team. A playoff would settle all of this dispute.

[chuckzuck]

You have a tournament to decide who gets to the biggest bowl after that the teams that didnt make it play in consilation games and those would be the other bowl games.

[BwineLAX42]

The problem is, the BCS has been producing the right two teams lately. You have to root for blow outs in the title game every year. Whenever the # 2 team beats the #1 then the BCS got it right. These last two years have supported the use of the current format.

[Pitibear]

16 bowls, 32 teams, 4 weeks, biggest thing on the planet (sort of)...money that the NCAA never even dreamed of...all they have to do is do it.