Dr. Saturday's Playoff Plan

[Enhance]

LINK

 

We're coming off the second weekend in March, which means America is beginning to display the most severe symptom of its annual case of "March Madness": Bracketitis. In fact, if you're an American and you're reading a sports blog of any stripe today, odds you're already infected.

 

If you happened to have come here in search of refuge in the notoriously most anti-bracket corner of the sports world, you've come to the wrong place — Dr. Saturday is a longtime, consistent advocate of an NCAA-style tournament in college football for just about any reason you can imagine: It's more profitable, it's more fun, and it makes infinitely more sense for crowning the champion of a sport that's been plagued by the inconsistencies, snubs and hypocrisies of opinion polls from time immemorial. The basketball version is a little unwieldy, but it's heart is certainly in the right place.

 

The one step I've never taken in that advocacy, though, is to propose any particular playoff system of my own. Mainly, that's because the specifics are secondary (and possibly even counterproductive) to the main goal of getting something in place of the clearly cracked status quo: Frankly, any playoff pitch that stands the slightest chance of being feasibly implemented is an improvement on the creaky (and occasionally corrupt) bowl system that can barely justify its own expense. The most important step to implementing a playoff is the decision to implement a playoff, whatever its form.

With that in mind, inspired by the beautiful basketball bracket, I've decided to lay out for the first time the official Dr. Saturday Playoff Plan for college football.

 

His system is laid out in the link. It's similar to other ideas I've seen. The thing to remember about a college football playoff system is that you won't be able to please everybody. Keep that in mind while reading his idea.

[Saunders]

Meh... too many teams. 6 BCS conference winners (If you aren't the best team in your conference, you aren't the best in the country, period.) and the top 2 non-AQ or independent teams. Easy, boom, done.

[Enhance]

Meh... too many teams. 6 BCS conference winners (If you aren't the best team in your conference, you aren't the best in the country, period.) and the top 2 non-AQ or independent teams. Easy, boom, done.

The only counter I make to that is in many other forms of college tournaments, the team that wins the conference isn't necessarily the only team represented by the conference. The NCAA basketball tournament is set up that way, just for example. I agree with what you're saying in concept, but I don't in application.

 

Just another way to look at it.

[Saunders]

Meh... too many teams. 6 BCS conference winners (If you aren't the best team in your conference, you aren't the best in the country, period.) and the top 2 non-AQ or independent teams. Easy, boom, done.

The only counter I make to that is in many other forms of college tournaments, the team that wins the conference isn't necessarily the only team represented by the conference. The NCAA basketball tournament is set up that way, just for example. I agree with what you're saying in concept, but I don't in application.

 

Just another way to look at it.

It's how March Madness does it, but I'm not the only one who hates it. Sure the tournament does well, but at the expense of the regular season. The majority of people who follow "March Madness" lost interest once their brackets are toast, and they don't even follow the regular season. I would hate to see CFB ruined due to a bloated tournament. The problem with including all the "also-rans" is that it doesn't tell you who the best team is, but who the "hottest" team is.

[n.e.husker]

Just cause you arent the best team in your confrence/division, doesnt mean that you cant be a better team than your opponent on any given day. Thats the beauty of a playoff, anything can happen and it will pit the best two teams against eachother at the end of the day to determine a champion.

[Saunders]

Just cause you arent the best team in your confrence/division, doesnt mean that you cant be a better team than your opponent on any given day. Thats the beauty of a playoff, anything can happen and it will pit the best two teams against eachother at the end of the day to determine a champion.

The two hottest teams, not necessarily the best.

[RedDenver]

I'll take the unpopular stance of NOT wanting a college football playoff. Every other sport has it - including the NFL. Why do we think being the same is better? If you want a playoff, watch the NFL. If you want passion, watch college football.

[n.e.husker]

Just cause you arent the best team in your confrence/division, doesnt mean that you cant be a better team than your opponent on any given day. Thats the beauty of a playoff, anything can happen and it will pit the best two teams against eachother at the end of the day to determine a champion.

The two hottest teams, not necessarily the best.

They would have had to prove it as does the other team through the feild, as opposed to being selected into the big game.

[mmmtodd]

as far as the hottest team argument...

 

you'd rather leave it to the hottest media and computer darlings?

 

rather than on the field?

[mmmtodd]

on top of that, since people want to make basketball tourney comparisons... HOT teams, like George Mason in 06, make it to the final four at most, and that is an extreme case. they dont win the title

 

 

not to mention, the basketball vs football angle is ridiculous as far as comparison to begin with. the number of games is one, and the bigger two is how many undeafeated basketball teams have you seen not get their shot at the title?

[Hercules]

I'll take the unpopular stance of NOT wanting a college football playoff. Every other sport has it - including the NFL. Why do we think being the same is better? If you want a playoff, watch the NFL. If you want passion, watch college football.

 

I love the passion of college sports, but the bowl games don't add anything to that, and a playoff wouldn't take away from it. There's no real reason you can't have passion and a playoff in college football.

[mmmtodd]

most of the so called passion is gone once bowl season comes around anyways. a bowl vacation for half of total teams involved does not equal passion. it equals excuses. we saw that the last two years from both sides of the fence. who is to say a playoff wouldnt enhance the passion that is conference football?

[Saunders]

on top of that, since people want to make basketball tourney comparisons... HOT teams, like George Mason in 06, make it to the final four at most, and that is an extreme case. they dont win the title

 

 

not to mention, the basketball vs football angle is ridiculous as far as comparison to begin with. the number of games is one, and the bigger two is how many undeafeated basketball teams have you seen not get their shot at the title?

We've had like what, 3 undefeated teams that didn't win the title? Like I stated above, each BCS conference champ, and top 2 Non-AQ or independents. That's plenty of teams, and everyone gives a chance. It makes the regular season matter, and the CCG for each conference (which each needs to have for a playoff to work) acts as part of the playoff as well.

 

This system is near perfect, and the most fair and balanced. There is no human bias, and no room for whining. You are the only one that can keep your team out of the playoffs, not a selection committees or politics.

 

Add any more teams, and you defeat the purpose.

[okaive]

So if the top non-aq team is 6-7, they should have a shot at the title?

 

Personally, I think they need to revamp all the conferences and force the teams go into them if they want a shot.

[Enhance]

Meh... too many teams. 6 BCS conference winners (If you aren't the best team in your conference, you aren't the best in the country, period.) and the top 2 non-AQ or independent teams. Easy, boom, done.

The only counter I make to that is in many other forms of college tournaments, the team that wins the conference isn't necessarily the only team represented by the conference. The NCAA basketball tournament is set up that way, just for example. I agree with what you're saying in concept, but I don't in application.

 

Just another way to look at it.

It's how March Madness does it, but I'm not the only one who hates it. Sure the tournament does well, but at the expense of the regular season. The majority of people who follow "March Madness" lost interest once their brackets are toast, and they don't even follow the regular season. I would hate to see CFB ruined due to a bloated tournament. The problem with including all the "also-rans" is that it doesn't tell you who the best team is, but who the "hottest" team is.

Yes, but this system (like many others similar to it) doesn't degrade the regular season entirely.

 

Let's face the facts - a playoff system is going to diminish the importance of the regular season regardless of how you slice it. There is absolutely no way to avoid it and have a legitimate playoff system. Therefore, we need a system that keeps the regular season important and saves bowls, but also finds a more legitimate champion than the way we have of finding one now.

 

I know this guys system doesn't specifically mention anything about bowl games other than the games the losing teams in the 10-team playoff will play in. Therefore, I naturally have to assume he would be in favor of keeping the bowls for teams that don't make it into the playoff system. Because, as he mentioned, the bowls are already a consolation prize in many cases.

 

And as I said, not everybody is going to be happy with whatever system is chosen.

 

Just cause you arent the best team in your confrence/division, doesnt mean that you cant be a better team than your opponent on any given day. Thats the beauty of a playoff, anything can happen and it will pit the best two teams against eachother at the end of the day to determine a champion.

My thoughts, as well.