i heard people talking about how if the NCAA were to sanction it the winner of the Rose Bowl could play the winner of the Sugar Bowl

I think a four team playoff is the way to go.

8 team playoff is the way to go. Or even 16 teams (like d-1aa). It's perfect.

 

As for the reasons for not having a playoff yet? It isnt because of money. I forget where I read the article, but in fact, money has nothing to do with it. It was proven (and NCAA officials verified) that NCAA and colleges, and even bowls would make more money in a playoff system, than in the BCS. It has more to do with being afraid to change up the history of the college football system.

 

Unfortunately, until there is a playoff system, the National Champion will not be the National Champion, but the Mythical National Champion. Even if Oklahoma had won against KSU, they would be the Mythical champion.

Go 16-team playoff! The Terps will always be national champions. They can beat anyone from November on.

they didnt fare well against the Gators in the Orange Bowl

Bah. As any smart college football fan knows the season ends on New Years's Day and anything past that should be restricted to all-star games.

d-1aa somehow figures out a way to end their playoffs in december. In fact. And they play 11 games a season.

d-1aa somehow figures out a way to end their playoffs in december. In fact. And they play 11 games a season.

EXACTLY.

 

Cut all schedules to 11, take all the conference champions (yes, even the Sun Belt, MAC, etc.) add in the at-large (we could keep the BCS forumla for that, I don't have a problem with it when it's used THAT way, or form a committee). Seed them up, play the first rounds at highest ranked sites. And then the final 3 rounds (7 games) can be played at the 7 most prestigious bowl sites (Rose, Sugar, Orange, Fiesta, Capital One, Cotton, and Gator? Maybe?). Rotate the semi-finals and finals between the 4 major bowls (1 would get the quarterfinal that the #1 seed would persumably play in) each year. Then you've got your bowl games and you've got your playoffs.

 

Keep the rest of the bowls and let the teams that don't make the playoffs play in them, NIT-style. People would still go, hell, they'd mean as much as they do now.

 

This SHOULD happen...but it never will.

here's what they should do every year:

the pac 10 champion should play the big 10 champion in the rose bowl. Another bowl game will involve the top two teams not from that conference. And the winners play each other a week later

no. Why not have all the conference champs. What makes the pac 10 and big 10 special? What about ACC, SEC, Big XII, ACC.

you have to love the bias

no. Why not have all the conference champs. What makes the pac 10 and big 10 special? What about ACC, SEC, Big XII, ACC.

because the big 10 and pac 10 shouldn't be excluded from this and the big 10- pac 10 champions should always play in the rose bowl, so that's the only possibility. Also, more than a 4 team tournament would be too long, so have the pac 10 champ play the big 10 champ in the rose bowl and the top 2 teams not from those conferences play each other in another bowl game and the winners play each other for the championship

here's what they should do every year:

the pac 10 champion should play the big 10 champion in the rose bowl.

Because the Pac 10 and Big 10 is SOOOO much better than the Big XII, SEC, ACC, Big East, etc....

 

 

right?

 

 

Hell starting next year the Big XII, SEC, ACC and Big 10 will be the top 4 conferences easily.

 

 

 

The Pac 10 would be on the outside looking in, in your little world......

so to get this straight: pac-10 and Big 10 contenders can go straight to the "national" semifinals every year just by winning the conference but everyone else has to win their conferences and then pray that the polls or BCS or whatever gets them in the other semifinal?

 

 

yeah there is absolutely no bias involved :plain

i think furman and maggs suggested an 8 team tournament, i forgot how maggs plan went but how about you keep the BCS system, the 6 conference champs and the top 2 remaining BCS teams go to the 4 BCS bowls which would be the quarterfinals, then the semifinals, then the final. also i think it would be a good idea to get rid of the conference title games or make every conference have a title game to make it more fair.

and still the smaller schools would get screwed.

 

 

there has to be a way to enable non-BCS schools to have a real chance at a championship.

Really what was so wrong with the old system? Do you really need to finish the season with a consensus number one?

Is there even an official NCAA-sanctioned trophy? Has there every been? Why do we need one now? For consideration for the Sears trophy ratings? I say just let the teams play their games and let the bowls choose who they want, and fans of the #2, 3 and 4 teams in the polls have a body to blame instead of some sort of complicated formula. That's coming from a Penn State fan who has seen the pollsters take #1 bragging rights away from me atleast once in my lifespan.

 

Just think.

Pac-10 vs. Big-10 in the Rose.

ACC vs. SEC in the Peach.

Channel flipping on New Year's Day.

 

Perfect enough for me.

I actually proposed a 16 team playoff system, like d-1aa, d-II, d-III, and NAIA. In fact, there is a mock 16 team playoff on ESPN.com. There would definitely be enough time for it, as d-1aa finds a way to play 11 games and get their championship over with in mid-December. Plus, 16 teams gives small schools a chance.