2013 NCAA College Football

[SloverUT]

And, hypothetically, Bama beats Auburn in the title game. Now what? They're "champions" cuz their win was in January and Auburns was in December?

I'm with Saevel and k-troop in the (minority) group that doesn't think that a playoff is necessarily better, by any means. It would, no doubt, be exciting, but it would also, no doubt, take away some excitement from the regular season games. Neither way is better, they're just different.

Sure.  Alabama won when it mattered most.  This is no different than the NFL and millions of people love to watch it.

Denver may lose to an NFC team in the regular season, but if they beat them in the Super Bowl that is what matters.

I personally don't find the regular season all that exciting.  What if the team that has the 109th Strength of Schedule goes undefeated but the team with the 2nd Strength of Schedule loses one game.  How would it not bother you that the team that played nobody may win the N.C. game?

I'd much rather them play and settle it on the grid iron any day.

Also, as I mentioned earlier this system to a degree is already used in NCAA Basketball and I don't think anyone can argue that people love March Madness.

However, the portion of what we enjoy most is not debatable because everyone enjoys things differently!

[MS256]

I'm sticking with:

I think four teams is going to be great.

Eight teams might or might not be better (but would most likely benefit my team).*

*My prediction is that with the expanded conferences, and fully expecting Tennessee and Florida to get back to "normal" like Auburn did, going undefeated in the SEC is going to be a very rare occurrence in the future.

[teamroper60]

And saevel and I say who cares? (Or at least that's what I say and I think what he's saying.) Crowning a "true champion" is one goal of a football season. I think it's not the only goal, and not even close to the biggest goal. College football has over 100 years of tradition and history that has nothing to do with a seeded playoff. Rivalries, conferences, and bowls are what college football is really all about.

The BCS is imperfect, but it does make football interesting. IMO a playoff would make the regular season much less interesting.

Then forget the consensus national champion and go back to the bowl system/polls.    You can't have a true championship without having a playoff system and you can't really have a fair playoff system if you skew the system to include some conferences and exclude others.     If you really want a true national champion, then set up a real playoff with conference champions and let them settle it on the field.   Anything else leaves open the door for discussions about whether the actual best team was left out.  Personally, if there is not going to be a real playoff system, then I would just as soon they went back to the old bowl/poll system.  That is the tradition you speak of and makes just as much sense as setting up a "playoff" where the teams invited are picked arbitrarily based on the whims of a handful of people who may or may not get it right.

Regarding the concept of a playoff making the regular system less interesting, I disagree.   If that playoff is made up of conference champions, then the regular season takes on even more importance, since you have no shot at the title without winning your conference.

[MS256]

If that playoff is made up of conference champions, then the regular season takes on even more importance, since you have no shot at the title without winning your conference.

And there is the problem. There is no parity in college football and a playoff of only conference champions wouldn't even come close to getting the best teams in the playoff.

All conferences are not created equal. A good 6A high school team could compete in some conferences (hyperbole but not much).

If that's what you want good luck, but you will never get it.

[teamroper60]

And there is the problem. There is no parity in college football and a playoff of only conference champions wouldn't even come close to getting the best teams in the playoff.

All conferences are not created equal. A good 6A high school team could compete in some conferences (hyperbole but not much).

If that's what you want good luck, but you will never get it.

One could argue that a good 6A school would have won some games in the Big 10 this year and yet it is possible their conference champion ends up in the national championship game.

A few years back, a playoff with conference champions gets Boise State into the picture at a time when they were capable of playing with anyone in the country and beating most of them.   They were kept out by rules set up to protect the big conferences.   While that might not matter in a year like this one, I don't believe for one minute that the people charged with picking the teams to play in the 4 team playoff won't do the same.  A champions only playoff also stops the kind of nonsense that led to the Alabama/LSU national championship game.

[MS256]

One could argue that a good 6A school would have won some games in the Big 10 this year and yet it is possible their conference champion ends up in the national championship game.

A few years back, a playoff with conference champions gets Boise State into the picture at a time when they were capable of playing with anyone in the country and beating most of them.   They were kept out by rules set up to protect the big conferences.   While that might not matter in a year like this one, I don't believe for one minute that the people charged with picking the teams to play in the 4 team playoff won't do the same.  A champions only playoff also stops the kind of nonsense that led to the Alabama/LSU national championship game.

It's a moot point because the way you want it is never going to happen. Not in a million years.

It would be like having Duke and North Carolina as obviously the best two teams in the country in basketball and Duke beating Little Sisters of the Poor by 60 points but losing by 1 point to North Carolina and putting Little Sisters in the tournament because they won the WELP conference and sitting Duke at home...Ain't happening.

[Golfingdad]

One could argue that a good 6A school would have won some games in the Big 10 this year

Yes they could ... if "one" wants to look like a moron and lose all credibility as having any knowledge on the subject of college football.  People always like to make these comments about teams like Alabama vs. the sucky NFL team du jour.  Earlier this year a Vegas odds man was asked what he'd set the line at on a Bama vs. Jacksonville game and he conservatively said it would be something like Jags -28.  Suggesting that a high school team could win games at the major college level is 10 times as absurd as that one.

What people forget is that in their best year, perhaps, what, 10 or 15% of the players on a team like Alabama is NFL caliber?  Whereas something like, oh I don't know, 100% of the players on the Jaguars are NFL caliber players.  The same thing is true about high school vs. college.

Sure.  Alabama won when it mattered most.  This is no different than the NFL and millions of people love to watch it.

But millions of people watch college football too.  And I don't think that the exact style of playoffs is necessarily why people watch the NFL anyway.

I personally don't find the regular season all that exciting.

Then you would be in the minority.  (But I think that you probably already knew that) ;)

What if the team that has the 109th Strength of Schedule goes undefeated but the team with the 2nd Strength of Schedule loses one game.  How would it not bother you that the team that played nobody may win the N.C. game?

Impossible.  If they win the National Championship under the current system they would have to beat, at the very least, the second best team in the country. ;)

I could also counter with something like:  What if the #1 team (FSU) loses in the second round of an 8-team playoffs in a 1-point game to the 4th ranked team (Bama), and the the 7th seed (Stanford), with 2 loses during the season (one to the second worst team in their league and the other to a team that fired their coach mid-season, goes on to win the title?

How, exactly, is Stanford a better, or truer, National Champion than FSU or OSU would be?  This is what I mean when I say that it's not better or worse, it's just different.

And don't get me wrong ... I think a playoff system will be fantastic, and very exciting, but I don't, for one second, think that it solves anything at all.

I'd much rather them play and settle it on the grid iron any day.

You can say this, and I can agree with you, but it doesn't really mean anything.  It can't be done.  There are something like 210 teams in college football, and teams only play 12 games a season.  That means nobody plays more than about 5% of the teams in their "league."  Further, this is an argument against the old, pre-BCS system where you'd have Florida State playing against Alabama in the Orange Bowl, Auburn against Oklahoma State in the Sugar Bowl and Ohio State against Stanford in the Rose Bowl ... then the next day, you'd have writers voting on who they thought was the best.  Now, they do decide it on the field.

Also, as I mentioned earlier this system to a degree is already used in NCAA Basketball and I don't think anyone can argue that people love March Madness.

Yes, we do love March Madness, but there is no question at all that it's almost all that matters in college basketball.  Nobody really gives a rats behind what happens during the regular season.  All that the games between ranked teams really are, are litmus test on what they need to work on come tournament time.  For the teams that have a realistic shot at the title, the regular season is just, basically, practice.

There is absolutely something to be said for a league where the regular season means something.  The NFL has a 12 team playoff tournament and it works for them.  But on the other end of the spectrum, the Premier League (which is only the most prestigious league of the most popular sport on the planet) has no playoffs at all.  Who's to say that their champion each year is less "true" than the Super Bowl champion?  And if you do, why?

There is no right or wrong here, there is just different. :)

[GaijinGolfer]

Lets also not forget Notre Dame last season.  They were ranked #1 because they were unbeaten, even though they didnt really beat anyone and when it got to the moment of truth in the BCS championship game, they got rolled.

IMO, Ohio this season is much like Notre Dame was last season.  Unbeaten, yes but who have they beaten who is really any good?  Northwestern?  Wisconsin?  Those are both quality programs but are no Alabama.  Until Ohio beats a team that is at least ranked in the top 10, they dont deserve to be any higher than #4.  IMO, a 1-loss SEC team is still better than an unbeaten B1G team.

If you are going to use the logic that unbeaten means you are the best, then I guess Northern Illinois should be #3.

[Augustabound]

Lets also not forget Notre Dame last season.  They were ranked #1 because they were unbeaten, even though they didnt really beat anyone

Stanford, Oklahoma, Michigan and Michigan State were all in the top 15 in the rankings when they played ND. USC wasn't ranked but had beaten ND in 9 of their last 10 meetings, usually pretty badly. Oklahoma was number 8 and ND were 9 point underdogs going into that game.

The college football "analysts" all had ND in their top 10 for SOS, Alabama wasn't even mentioned. (Yes I remember perfectly well how the NC turned out......................just as I knew it would )

And if ND and Bama had played 10 times last, ND may have lost all 10.

I'm starting to have some sympathy for Ohio fans..............just a little.

[k-troop]

I and a I think a lot of people will disagree with you that a playoff isn't for the better in regards to NCAA football.

I don't think it dampens the regular season, just as I don't think the NCAA tourney in basketball lessens the regular season.

Look at that kid's face below.  That look doesn't say "we just dropped from 1st seed to 4th or 5th."  It says "we just blew our entire season."   That's what the BCS does.  It demands perfection in every game.  If you're a tOSU fan, your expression at this moment was the exact opposite:  pure, unadulterated joy.  Not "we just went from third seed to second!" joy, but "WE'RE PLAYING FOR THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP!!!!" joy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by k-troop

I personally don't find the regular season all that exciting.

Well then that makes two of us, except yours is football and mine is basketball.  I love March Madness, but I might watch 2 regular season NCAA basketball games per year.

[David in FL]

Look at that kid's face below.  That look doesn't say "we just dropped from 1st seed to 4th or 5th."  It says "we just blew our entire season."   That's what the BCS does.  It demands perfection in every game.  If you're a tOSU fan, your expression at this moment was the exact opposite:  pure, unadulterated joy.  Not "we just went from third seed to second!" joy, but "WE'RE PLAYING FOR THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP!!!!" joy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by k-troop

Well then that makes two of us, except yours is football and mine is basketball.  I love March Madness, but I might watch 2 regular season NCAA basketball games per year.

All the regular season of NCAA basketball is for is to seed the tournament.  I agree......LOVE March madness, including (especially?) the upsets, but don't follow/watch at all during the season.  That's what hockey is for!

[teamroper60]

It's a moot point because the way you want it is never going to happen. Not in a million years. It would be like having Duke and North Carolina as obviously the best two teams in the country in basketball and Duke beating Little Sisters of the Poor by 60 points but losing by 1 point to North Carolina and putting Little Sisters in the tournament because they won the WELP conference and sitting Duke at home...Ain't happening.

You're right of course. It isn't gonna happen but the reason is because of people like Delaney who want to "protect" their conferences, not becaise it couldnt work. BTW prior to '75, your basketball scenario was possible in the NCAA tournament.

[MS256]

You're right of course. It isn't gonna happen but the reason is because of people like Delaney who want to "protect" their conferences, not becaise it couldnt work.

BTW prior to '75, your basketball scenario was possible in the NCAA tournament.

I never said it "couldn't work". Anything can "work". It would just be a crappy way to find a champion.

Not many want to see a 3 or 4 loss team that got killed in their non-conference games but won their conference playing in a playoff.

[teamroper60]

What people forget is that in their best year, perhaps, what, 10 or 15% of the players on a team like Alabama is NFL caliber?  Whereas something like, oh I don't know, 100% of the players on the Jaguars are NFL caliber players.  The same thing is true about high school vs. college........

You can say this, and I can agree with you, but it doesn't really mean anything.  It can't be done.  There are something like 210 teams in college football, and teams only play 12 games a season.

Yes, we do love March Madness, but there is no question at all that it's almost all that matters in college basketball.  Nobody really gives a rats behind what happens during the regular season......

While I agree that there is a huge difference between college and HS and I was being facetious, comparing the NFL to college is not exactly like comparing college to the good 6A schools.  First off in the NFL there are 32 teams, each with a 54 man roster.   In the FBS alone, there are 128 teams (not 210), each with 60 man travelling rosters not to mention the FCS.  In the NFL, those players are not limited to just 4 years of eligilibity either.  So the odds of a player from a good 6A school playing in college are far greater than the odds of a high schooler from a good 6A school making a college team.  (BTW, I'm not sure I think all 100% of the Jags should be in the NFL.  Their first team is horrible.  If that is the best on their team, just how bad are the worst?)

Regarding a playoff system..   Those 128 teams are currently divided into 11 conferences and 6 independents.    It would not be that difficult to make a playoff system with them and to ensure your Duke/NC/Little sisters of the poor scenario didn't happen, you could take those 11 champions plus the top 5 ranked who did not win their conference and create a 16 team playoff.   That is 4 games to win it all.  Eliminate a couple of lay-up games (which, IMHO should be done anyway) and the season isn't any longer than it is now.

Regarding March Madness, the regular season matters a lot if you are a true college basketball fan.  The conference tournament seedings are based on the regular season and the NCAA tournament automatic bids go to the conference tournament champs.   The biggest difference I see is, there are twice as many games in basketball as in football..

[saevel25]

Lets also not forget Notre Dame last season.  They were ranked #1 because they were unbeaten, even though they didnt really beat anyone and when it got to the moment of truth in the BCS championship game, they got rolled.

IMO, Ohio this season is much like Notre Dame was last season.  Unbeaten, yes but who have they beaten who is really any good?  Northwestern?  Wisconsin?  Those are both quality programs but are no Alabama.  Until Ohio beats a team that is at least ranked in the top 10, they dont deserve to be any higher than #4.  IMO, a 1-loss SEC team is still better than an unbeaten B1G team.

If you are going to use the logic that unbeaten means you are the best, then I guess Northern Illinois should be #3.

Of course ND did. They just beat 4 top 25 teams on their way to an undefeated season.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/schedule/_/id/87/year/2012/notre-dame-fighting-irish

I can see you must really hate Ohio State when your copying Brady Hoke by not using the word "State".

Here's the thing, you can n ot know for sure they are better. That is subjective. Can you say one team is more deserving, Yes. You can not say one team is BETTER. Until they play each other, you don't know. Even then, do you think Alabama is not a better team than Auburn. Of course Alabama is the better team, not on that night, but they are a more complete team. Loosing one game doesn't make a team better, it just means they were on that night. If we all assumed that beating a team makes them a better team, than there should be no underdogs.

Well Northern Illinois is ranked number 2 in one of the computer rankings. So someone thinks that their season has proven they should be considered a top 5 team, at least by the production on the field.

Look at that kid's face below.  That look doesn't say "we just dropped from 1st seed to 4th or 5th."  It says "we just blew our entire season."   That's what the BCS does.  It demands perfection in every game.  If you're a tOSU fan, your expression at this moment was the exact opposite:  pure, unadulterated joy.  Not "we just went from third seed to second!" joy, but "WE'RE PLAYING FOR THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP!!!!" joy.

Well then that makes two of us, except yours is football and mine is basketball.  I love March Madness, but I might watch 2 regular season NCAA basketball games per year.

Well that is what a lot of OSU players were saying on the bus back to Columbus. Then Philly Brown got up and shut them all up telling them they have one more game to go. Good sign for OSU, they got some leaders who don't let the team get carried away. That would have been bad if they let that simmer for a few days and got relaxed, but the had their 15 30 seconds of excitement and refocused.

I love college basketball. NBA can go rot for all I care, it's horrible. NCAA is the way to go. I'll watch every OSU game. I will try to catch all the Duke versus NC games as well. I watch as many March Madness games as I can.

[teamroper60]

Not many want to see a 3 or 4 loss team that got killed in their non-conference games but won their conference playing in a playoff.

Considering the way schedules are made with the cupcake out of conference games, that isn't likely to happen.

[teamroper60]

Well that is what a lot of OSU players were saying on the bus back to Columbus. Then Philly Brown got up and shut them all up telling them they have one more game to go. Good sign for OSU, they got some leaders who don't let the team get carried away. That would have been bad if they let that simmer for a few days and got relaxed, but the had their 15 30 seconds of excitement and refocused.

I love college basketball. NBA can go rot for all I care, it's horrible. NCAA is the way to go. I'll watch every OSU game. I will try to catch all the Duke versus NC games as well. I watch as many March Madness games as I can.

Somebody needs to remind Auburn of that as well.   They were lobbying for a #2 ranking before they even play in the conference championship.   If they don't beat Mizzou, they won't even be in consideration for #2....

[MS256]

Considering the way schedules are made with the cupcake out of conference games, that isn't likely to happen.

It's not that unlikely now and will become even more likely to happen in the future.

When teams fill their schedules they take calculated risks. If they play in a very strong conference they can schedule "cupcakes" (which BTW I hate) and still have a respectable strength of schedule at the end of the season.

If they play in a very weak conference and they want a shot at the NC or a major bowl game they must schedule up in the competition for their out of conference games to give them a respectable strength of schedule.

Teams in the PAC 12, Big 10, SEC, Big 12, and ACC don't normally have to worry too much about strength of schedule in their out of conference games. Some years when their conference is down that can backfire on them.

Teams in other weaker conferences don't have that luxury and will always pay a price for a weak out of conference schedule. Scheduling up in the competition for their out of conference games increases the chances of a multi-loss team winning a conference title.