My thoughts...

[GSG]

This is, essentially, how Division II does it and I think it works great. There's a national playoff tournament, and a small number of bowl games for the top x teams that just missed the cut.

Are you talking actual Division II or FCS? (Just for clarification)

 

[Landlord]

This is, essentially, how Division II does it and I think it works great. There's a national playoff tournament, and a small number of bowl games for the top x teams that just missed the cut.

Are you talking actual Division II or FCS? (Just for clarification)

Division II. Nebraska-Kearney, Wayne State, Chadron State, etc.

 

[Lil' Red]

I'd like either this format or a playoff format that takes the top 8 teams. But even a plus 1 is a big step up from the BCS.

 

[ohiocornhusker]

Well here's about a third of your "legitimate contenders" right here...

Just like lower ranked teams or non top 25 teams make the basketball playoff--the teams that don't make it can still play in the traditional bowls. (Kinda like the NIT) Also I think this would work even if a Conf-USA or Sun Belt or Mid America gets in because that's one of the gripes, that the mid major conferences never will have a chance to play in the MNC. This way they have a "chance". (How big of one is debatable)

Also this will stop teams from jumping to BCS conferences and making stupid choices (I mean San Diego State in the Big East, really?!?)

 

[krill]

8 team "+2" type playoff..

Pac-12 vs. B10 // Rose Bowl

SEC vs. at-large // Sugar Bowl

Big 12 (if they get back to 12) vs. at-large // Fiesta Bowl

ACC vs. at-large // Orange Bowl

Then you have a championship week where the semifinals and championship are played at the same location, with the semifinal opponents reseeded high / low, mid / mid

One at-large bid guaranteed to the conference champion of a non-AQ above a reasonable threshold, with provisions for a wild card game if no teams meet the threshold.

So for instance this year would have played out--

TCU vs. Southern Miss // Wild Card

Oregon vs. Wisconsin

LSU vs. TCU or Southern Miss

OSU vs. Stanford

Clemson vs. Alabama

Then, assuming the favorites won those games--

LSU vs. Oregon

OSU vs. Alabama

I think a model like this is the only realistic way to provide a modicum of fairness working within the confines of the existing bowl structure (B10 will die before throwing away the Rose Bowl), and it enables all the existing non-BCS bowls to still exist for entertainment before the big show. It also encourages teams to schedule stronger non-conference opponents since there's always a path to the national championship with a conference title, and to raise the chances of an at-large bid with a conference loss.

 

[Notre Dame Joe]

It's kind of fudging to have a playoff but refer to some rounds as "bowls." The sponsors aren't going to want to cough up the same amount of cash and goodies when it isn't the team's last game of the year.

 

[Landomatic]

I'm definitely not saying the system we have now is perfect. I'm simply trying to illustrate that no matter what system we have, there will ALWAYS be flaws in it. Doesn't matter how many teams we include in a playoff, there is always going to be teams who have a legitimate complaint that they should have been in. And the only way to keep pacifying it is to increase the number of teams (see March Madness which STILL has teams complaining every year because they didn't get in even though it seems to grow every year). And no matter what anyone says, the more you increase the size of the tournament, the less important the regular season becomes. The reason for this and the reason you can't compare it to the NFL is because NCAA football does not have the same type of structure around it. There aren't equal divisions with parity spread evenly across each with the same number of teams. So mathematically, you can't get a fair result no matter how you structure it. These are just the facts that can't be argued.

So the real question becomes...what is the least flawed system we can come up with? Opinions on that vary...2 teams, 4 teams, 8 teams, 16 teams, etc. I think we can all agree that what we have now is better than what we used to have. At least #1 and #2 are going to play each other even if there is disagreement between who #1 and #2 should be.

My Solution: I'll be the first to admit this is completely unorthodox and has about as much of a shot of ever happening as "monkeys flying out of little red's a$$". But, I'll throw it out there anyway and let everyone tear it apart. I honestly believe the only way to ever solve the problem would be to design a playoff system that was flexible based on the circumstances of the given year. Why focus on putting something in place based on a predetermined number of teams? That shows time and time again that there are always going to be exceptions that make it flawed. Instead, why not focus on putting something in place based on a predetermined set of qualifiers? Everyone knows the rules going in at the beginning of the season and if you qualify, you're in...regardless of how many other teams qualify. This wouldn't be an attempt at allowing a ton of teams in to give everyone a chance. It would have very strict qualifiers which would still place a huge emphasis on the regular season. Keep the BCS as is then at the end of the regular season, use the existing bowl structure to backfill playoff games as needed given the number of teams that qualify within the BCS.

This may need some tweaking, but I'm thinking something along these lines...

1) The #1 and #2 teams are in regardless of record

3) Any team with the same number of losses as the #1 or #2 team is in up to the first team in the top 25 with more losses

4) All undefeated teams ranked in the top 25 are automatically in regardless of conference

If the number of qualifying teams is not a multiple of 4, the top rated team or teams as needed get a bye to work it out. If it happens to be a multiple of 4, no bye is needed. The currently rotating BCS bowls will serve as the playoff games and continue to rotate every year. If more than 4 games (BCS bowls) are needed, they go to the next biggest bowl (i.e. the Cotton Bowl, etc) to host the playoff game(s). Then the other bowls select teams just as they do now based on what is available from the teams that did not qualify.

There's really no issue with planning because the same number of bowls is going to be used no matter what so the same number of total games will be played. And the bowls and schools don't find out until early December on Selection Sunday when and who and where they are playing anyway. The only thing it really effects is that the very bottom of the teams who are currently bowl eligible may not make a bowl because they got bumped down due to one of the upper tier bowls needing to be used for a playoff game. So you're talking about an occasional 8 and 5 Utah State being left out of an ocassional Idaho Potato Bowl.

Problem...solved!!!

 

[GSG]

This is, essentially, how Division II does it and I think it works great. There's a national playoff tournament, and a small number of bowl games for the top x teams that just missed the cut.

Are you talking actual Division II or FCS? (Just for clarification)

Division II. Nebraska-Kearney, Wayne State, Chadron State, etc.

Just making sure cuz I know there are some people that think FCS is Division II

 

[ZRod]

1) The #1 and #2 teams are in regardless of record

3) Any team with the same number of losses as the #1 or #2 team is in up to the first team in the top 25 with more losses

4) All undefeated teams ranked in the top 25 are automatically in regardless of conference

I definitely think you're on to something with a dynamic playoff system. If the BCS has taught us anything it's that each year presents a new and different challenge. And just drawing up a playoff when I was bored one night it seems like there are so many variable that it would be just as complicated to make a static playoff as it would to make a dynamic one.

But using all 25 teams from the bowl games would take too long just imagine what would happen to B1G or SEC teams that played a physical schedule like we did this year, they would be decimated if they could even make it to the semifinals or championship. Not to mention you begin encroaching on the Superbowl

 

[Mavric]

My thoughts:

Eight Team Playoff

First round hosted by higher seed one week after CCGs

Winners and losers matched up in Rose/Sugar/Fiesta/Orange (rotating)

All other Bowls can take remaining teams

Winners of the winners meet in NCG one week later

Eight teams include conference champions as long as you're in the Top 10 (or maybe 12) of BCS

BCS standings used to fill out eight teams

This year it would be:

#1 LSU (SEC Champ)

#2 Alabama (at large)

#3 OK St. (Big XII Champ)

#4 Stanford (at large)

#5 Oregon (Pac-12 Champ)

#6 Arkansas (at large)

#7 Boise St. (at large)

#10 Wisconsin (B1G Champ)

You could possibly leave the two-teams-per-conference rule which would put #8 Kansas St. in and bump Arkansas out.

The only 1-loss team left out is Houston. The only two-loss teams included (Oregon & Arkansas) have both losses to other teams in the final eight. I think that's a pretty good arguement for the "deserving" teams getting a shot. Would there still be arguements? Of course. But you still have a pretty high value on the regular season (conference champ or very high in the BCS) while giving teams a little break for having one bad game (OK St., Stanford, Boise St.). Plus all the other bowls can stay.

 

[VectorVictor]

Actually just use the 11 conference champions, the top five BCS teams as wildcards, and seed in order of BCS rank.

I think you'll get a different outcome and some good regional matchups to boot.

Also, there would need to be a stipulation on stadium size--60k or more you're fine, but less than that, and the home team must either find another FBS or NFL stadium to play in, or forfeit home field advantage.

Otherwise, you won't get the bigger schools on board, lest they have to go on the road to play a Southern Miss or TCU (the later especially has piss-poor facilities, and still will after their ongoing renovations.)

You could always use the older and more prestigious bowls for the games since most of them are over 60,000 and all of them have at least a 50,000 capacity. And you could have wild cards or lower tier confrence play in those smaller stadiums as a trade off for the wild card

Good idea ZRod. Thanks!

 

[gratefullred]

It's kind of fudging to have a playoff but refer to some rounds as "bowls." The sponsors aren't going to want to cough up the same amount of cash and goodies when it isn't the team's last game of the year.

And exactly how do you get the fans to take a month long vacation traveling to two to four different locations? Play home games? Would VaTech fans and players rather end their season in Boise or Miami? Problem solved.

 

[Notre Dame Joe]

It's kind of fudging to have a playoff but refer to some rounds as "bowls." The sponsors aren't going to want to cough up the same amount of cash and goodies when it isn't the team's last game of the year.

And exactly how do you get the fans to take a month long vacation traveling to two to four different locations? Play home games? Would VaTech fans and players rather end their season in Boise or Miami? Problem solved.

Exactly, and some school's fans aren't up to fo taking two trips to both a CCG and a bowl