Neuheisel warns against new playoff system
Comments
-
Four teams isn't enough. The outrage over someone getting left out will be stronger than ever. I would never expect the NCAA or BCS to do the smart thing.
8 teams would be okay, but the FCS has it right. Just copy their playoffs and make it 16 teams. Take out one or even two shitty non conference games and make it happen. -
This. Take all FBS conference champions, the best independent, and four at large bids chosen by committee. This would truly guarantee access to all conferences and nearly guarantee that the best team gets in. As it sits, it still comes down to a beauty contest.RoadDawg55 said:Four teams isn't enough. The outrage over someone getting left out will be stronger than ever. I would never expect the NCAA or BCS to do the smart thing.
8 teams would be okay, but the FCS has it right. Just copy their playoffs and make it 16 teams. Take out one or even two shitty non conference games and make it happen. -
The more teams you add to the playoffs the more it dilutes the bowl system. I don't think they can coexist without sizable controversies every year. I'm fairly convinced that they will take on this feel anyways with just four teams after a few seasons of intense playoff buildup and coverage. 16 teams would make a for a good playoff bracket but the remainder bowls would have an NIT feel to them.
-
That's because those bowls should be the NIT. It's old, it's dated. Nobody cares about the non BCS Bowls anyways. Those bowls are already the NIT. When LSU or Oklahoma or Texas A&M are in the Peach Bowl or the Gator Bowl, their fans already feel like it's the NIT. If anything, a 16 team playoff would make more games matter, not less. Traditionalists will hate it, but tradition has hardly mattered for awhile now.SpoonieLuv said:The more teams you add to the playoffs the more it dilutes the bowl system. I don't think they can coexist without sizable controversies every year. I'm fairly convinced that they will take on this feel anyways with just four teams after a few seasons of intense playoff buildup and coverage. 16 teams would make a for a good playoff bracket but the remainder bowls would have an NIT feel to them.
-
I agree with this. In fact I think one could argue that the BCS devalued the traditional major bowls, turning them into consolation prizes, at least to some degree. The problem is that, if the goal is to determine the best team, they're really not much closer to that goal with a four team playoff.SpoonieLuv said:The more teams you add to the playoffs the more it dilutes the bowl system. I don't think they can coexist without sizable controversies every year. I'm fairly convinced that they will take on this feel anyways with just four teams after a few seasons of intense playoff buildup and coverage. 16 teams would make a for a good playoff bracket but the remainder bowls would have an NIT feel to them.
Personally, I'd be fine with seeing this system either evolve into a real playoff or devolve into the old bowl system with all the major bowls played on New Years Day. The former essentially achieves the goal of determining a true champion, the latter restores the relevance of the major bowls and retains the controversy over "who's best", which has been a fun part of college football. In my opinion either is preferable to status quo. -
This.RoadDawg55 said:
That's because those bowls should be the NIT. It's old, it's dated. Nobody cares about the non BCS Bowls anyways. Those bowls are already the NIT. When LSU or Oklahoma or Texas A&M are in the Peach Bowl or the Gator Bowl, their fans already feel like it's the NIT. If anything, a 16 team playoff would make more games matter, not less. Traditionalists will hate it, but tradition has hardly mattered for awhile now.SpoonieLuv said:The more teams you add to the playoffs the more it dilutes the bowl system. I don't think they can coexist without sizable controversies every year. I'm fairly convinced that they will take on this feel anyways with just four teams after a few seasons of intense playoff buildup and coverage. 16 teams would make a for a good playoff bracket but the remainder bowls would have an NIT feel to them.
-
There won't be bowls. Anyone who thinks they will coexist in a real playoff system is an idiot. Teams that don't get into the playoff still might go to bowls, but the big bowls won't resemble anything thine they are now.SpoonieLuv said:The more teams you add to the playoffs the more it dilutes the bowl system. I don't think they can coexist without sizable controversies every year. I'm fairly convinced that they will take on this feel anyways with just four teams after a few seasons of intense playoff buildup and coverage. 16 teams would make a for a good playoff bracket but the remainder bowls would have an NIT feel to them.
-
All of the bowl games have already been knocked down a peg.
You can't have neutral site playoffs because the fans simply won't support it in person.
Make four regional conferences with North and South divisions. The winners of each division are a Top 8 seed. Have conference championship games for traditions sake and to determine the #1 seeds of each four team pod. Have a committee to select the Bottom 8. The higher seed is the home team.
Simple, regional, and finishes nationally. The only reason this isn't happening already is money has to change hands. -
What mosster said, except I would throw in promotion/relegation and have only 64 teams in the top division. 16 teams in each region. Drop the bottom 25% each year, and replace them with the teams from the lower division. You'd get a great playoff, definite champion, and no dreck games.
-
This too, it would make the D-1AA playoff much better quality. Having 8 teams in each division would cure the dreck and send Vandy, Kentucky, Syracuse, and the rest of those shit stains down to a level where they can compete.PurpleJ said:What mosster said, except I would throw in promotion/relegation and have only 64 teams in the top division. 16 teams in each region. Drop the bottom 25% each year, and replace them with the teams from the lower division. You'd get a great playoff, definite champion, and no dreck games.
I wouldn't make relegation a percentage, just the bottom team from each division. Cal would still be too high in D-1AA, so more like D-3 for them. Then take the top two D-1AA teams from each region and add them to the D-1A conferences.
Corporations could still sponsor the playoff games.
