Goodbye BCS, Hello Playoffs

#77
#77
GAVol said:
If you effectively added 5 weeks to the end of the season with a 32 team field, it would most definitely add an element of attrition by injury. The last two teams would be playing an 18 game season. That's flat out crazy.
Click to expand...


Thank you...It will eventually expand to 16-18 teams after the money starts rolling with just 4 teams...but with all the bellyaching from fans and experts PRAYING for doomsday scenarios "to force a playoff"...you knew that no scenario would satisfy everyone...in for another decade of Rick Reilly articles
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#78
#78
When I first heard about the playoff I assumed they would keep the BCS and the BCS bowls. You could have a 6 team playoff and still keep the 5 current BCS bowls (with the #1 and #2 seeds getting a first round bye).

I like getting rid of the BCS but I would love for there to be 6 or 8 teams in the playoff.
 
#79
#79
Start of a new era. Dawn of a new age in college football. Opinion, it will take 3-4 seasons to make it work correctly. I am looking forward to it, for better or worse.
 
#80
#80
terrypedigo said:
When we play our Championship game the team that loses will not in most years get a spot like this year.
Click to expand...

First off, more times than not, the conference championship game hasn't had both teams in the top 4. If I let it go all the way back to both teams ranked in the top 5 (rather than the top 4), it's only happened 5 times out of 22. (6 out of 22 if I just say both teams have to be in the top 6)


Secondly, they're going to be factoring into their decision an extra conference game as a positive relative towards a strength of schedule factor (so it would most likely help those that win it in a final decision, with their being a possibility of it hindering someone that doesn't play one…especially if they're still only playing 8 conference games).


Third, they're apparently not weighing conference champions as not required but it's still having weight in their decision. Having 2-3 teams tied as "co-champs" for the reason alone of they don't play that 13th game that every other conference champion does wouldn't somehow magically get them all in by any means at all.
 
#82
#82
terrypedigo said:
When we play our Championship game the team that loses will not get in like this year SC WITHOUT THE GAME would have got in this year if we had a playoff.
Click to expand...

No they wouldn't have, nor should they have. Here were the final pre bowl selection rankings:


1 Florida State (56) 13-0 1496
2 Auburn (4) 12-1 1444
3 Alabama 11-1 1376
4 Michigan State 12-1 1278
5 Stanford 11-2 1217
6 Baylor 11-1 1185
7 Ohio State 12-1 1130
8 South Carolina 10-2 1099
9 Missouri 11-2 1066
Click to expand...


1 Florida State (62) 13-0 1550
2 Auburn 12-1 1486
3 Alabama 11-1 1414
4 Michigan State 12-1 1342
5 Baylor 11-1 1275
6 Ohio State 12-1 1211
7 Stanford 11-2 1188
8 South Carolina 10-2 1108
9 Missouri 11-2 1088
Click to expand...


A two-loss South Carolina wouldn't have even sniffed the postseason playoffs. Nor should you even think they would.


You would have been better arguing about Missouri's playoff chances and missing out on it because of the conference championship game.
 
#83
#83
Morpheus said:
I'm guessing the next round of expansion talks will start shortly after the scandal at UNC is resolved. They are the first domino that will determine where others end up, IMO.

UNC and VT to the SEC.
Virginia, Duke and ND to the B1G.
NCSt, Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami to the Big12 East along with a few others.
No idea who the PAC will add.
Click to expand...

Nobody is leaving the ACC in the immediate future. All the universities signed their TV rights away if they left the conference. Meaning no other conference wants to take a team that they won't be getting any TV revenue from.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#84
#84
Morpheus said:
I'm guessing the next round of expansion talks will start shortly after the scandal at UNC is resolved. They are the first domino that will determine where others end up, IMO.

UNC and VT to the SEC.
Virginia, Duke and ND to the B1G.
NCSt, Clemson, GT, FSU, Miami to the Big12 East along with a few others.
No idea who the PAC will add.
Click to expand...

Short answer: No


Long answer: Nooooooooooooooooooooooo




(unless you think it will take until 2026 for UNC's resolution)
 
#85
#85
burntorangeVOLffle said:
Nobody is leaving the ACC in the immediate future. All the universities signed their TV rights away if they left the conference. Meaning no other conference wants to take a team that they won't be getting any TV revenue from.
Click to expand...

It would require more than half the teams leaving en masse, which is exactly what Morpheus and I have been speculating. If the majority of the teams vote to disband the conference, then the grant of media rights is void.
 
#86
#86
bamawriter said:
It would require more than half the teams leaving en masse, which is exactly what Morpheus and I have been speculating. If the majority of the teams vote to disband the conference, then the grant of media rights is void.
Click to expand...

As a fan of multiple sports, I would hate seeing the ACC disband because of basketball. Duke and UNC would really need to be in the same conference.
 
#87
#87
By the way, I love how everyone always puts Notre Dame in the Big 10 despite a) it being one of the only places where they couldn't keep their independent television rights (a thing they want to preserve above most else) and b) how badly the talks fell through the one time it was actually tried, to the point where Notre Dame would entertain almost anywhere else.



Do people just think Notre Dame plays Michigan and then lump them into that conference?
 
#88
#88
bamawriter said:
It would require more than half the teams leaving en masse, which is exactly what Morpheus and I have been speculating. If the majority of the teams vote to disband the conference, then the grant of media rights is void.
Click to expand...

Speculation as in "I believe there are signs that this could or will happen" or speculation more like theorizing possibilities?
 
#89
#89
how long does everyone think it will take to go from 4 to 8 teams? this year for instance people would do the whole "stanford deserves a chance" thing because they were a 1 loss team ranked 5th. i dont think the argument is quite the same for the #9 team though
 
#90
#90
TrueOrange said:
Speculation as in "I believe there are signs that this could or will happen" or speculation more like theorizing possibilities?
Click to expand...

I think it's not far off from happening. In about 10 years, I believe either the ACC or the Big XII will be gone. For numerous reasons, I think it's the ACC.
 
#91
#91
zreeves said:
how long does everyone think it will take to go from 4 to 8 teams? this year for instance people would do the whole "stanford deserves a chance" thing because they were a 1 loss team ranked 5th. i dont think the argument is quite the same for the #9 team though
Click to expand...

I don't think the argument is quite valid past team number #5 or at most maybe #6.


Then again, you'd also be looking at college football teams playing as many games as an NFL team does in the regular season.
 
#93
#93
TrueOrange said:
Do explain further. Television contract variance reasons?
Click to expand...

In part. The other big reason:

Shrinking to four power conferences further consolidates power. It shifts authority away from the NCAA into the hands of the major programs. That shift means more money that has to be split fewer ways.

As to why the ACC loses out:

Interestingly enough, they are in a weaker position than the Big XII BECAUSE they have more valuable programs. The Big XII only has two programs that anyone really values (Texas, OU). But Texas and OU only make up 1/5 of the conference, so they can't get out from under the grant of rights. The ACC has 10 or 11 programs of varying value. That's more than enough to disband the conference and take off with the money.
 
#94
#94
GAVol said:
Why don't they just eliminate subjectivity and make everybody get into a conference, play a conference championship game, seed the 6-8 conference winners and go play it off?
Click to expand...

I like this idea. A four team playoff won't do it, but once it inevitably expands to 8 or 16 teams, it's going to make the regular season just like the NFL where teams just play a long series of largely meaningless games. As long as you play in a major conference and don't lose more than twice, you'll be fine in a 16 team format. Forcing conferences to play a championship game that serves as the only avenue of qualification will go a long way to protecting the integrity of the regular season.

College football has the best regular season in all of sports, and I think people will miss it if we just sell it down the river in exchange for 2-3 weeks of entertainment at the end of the year.
 
Last edited:
#95
#95
GAVol said:
Why don't they just eliminate subjectivity and make everybody get into a conference, play a conference championship game, seed the 6-8 conference winners and go play it off?
Click to expand...

That is too smart and simple of a solution, where's the fun in that?
 
#96
#96
bamawriter said:
In part. The other big reason:

Shrinking to four power conferences further consolidates power. It shifts authority away from the NCAA into the hands of the major programs. That shift means more money that has to be split fewer ways.

As to why the ACC loses out:

Interestingly enough, they are in a weaker position than the Big XII BECAUSE they have more valuable programs. The Big XII only has two programs that anyone really values (Texas, OU). But Texas and OU only make up 1/5 of the conference, so they can't get out from under the grant of rights. The ACC has 10 or 11 programs of varying value. That's more than enough to disband the conference and take off with the money.
Click to expand...

That'd still pretty much require forming another division/level of football first, wouldn't it?

Otherwise, while their power might be consolidated a bit, they're still dealing with the same overall number of FBS votes on issues they desire to be changed, would they not be?


Also didn't Texas's Longhorn Network rights somehow escape being filed under what was covered by the conference's grant of rights, or something like that?
 
#97
#97
TrueOrange said:
That'd still pretty much require forming another division/level of football first, wouldn't it?

Otherwise, while their power might be consolidated a bit, they're still dealing with the same overall number of FBS votes on issues they desire to be changed, would they not be?
Click to expand...

Exactly. There would be no FBS anymore. At least, not like there is today.


Also didn't Texas's Longhorn Network rights somehow escape being filed under what was covered by the conference's grant of rights, or something like that?
Click to expand...

Yes. TLN isn't governed under the conference's media contracts.
 
#98
#98
bamawriter said:
Yes. TLN isn't governed under the conference's media contracts.
Click to expand...

So Texas could leave whenever it got an offer, which would seemingly destroy that conference a lot quicker.



bamawriter said:
Exactly. There would be no FBS anymore. At least, not like there is today.
Click to expand...

If they're already creating a separate division for the 5 conferences, why even realign the conferences after that again then? In this case it seems like it would already be their way on any issue they voted on…why would there be a further (for lack of a better word at the moment) consolidation?
 
#99
#99
TrueOrange said:
No they wouldn't have, nor should they have. Here were the final pre bowl selection rankings:








A two-loss South Carolina wouldn't have even sniffed the postseason playoffs. Nor should you even think they would.


You would have been better arguing about Missouri's playoff chances and missing out on it because of the conference championship game.
Click to expand...

Lol, I was thinking the same thing.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top