Mark Cuban to try to fund/create BCS alternative

[Derwood]

if we could get all 6 BCS conferences to HAVE a championship game, that could be the first round of the playoffs

[UMFan83]

if we could get all 6 BCS conferences to HAVE a championship game, that could be the first round of the playoffs

 

I love the idea that only conference winners can participate in a playoff. It gives the traditionalists their season "that matters", which is not a bad thing at all. You lose a Big Ten conference game, that in some years could kill your shot of being in the playoffs.

 

It also kills the "should have been selected" argument. The lines are black and white. You win your conference, you go to the playoffs. You don't win your conference, you play a bowl game.

 

The only downside is that non-conference games will have almost no importance anymore. The only way you could make them important is to have overall record break 3 way ties for conference championship game opponents and help for seeding in a playoff. But if that were the case, the first 3 weeks of college football will suck because no one is going to schedule anyone dangerous.

Edited December 16, 2010 by UMFan83

[SouthSideRyan]

I'd be pretty [expletive] pissed if I was the 6th at-large BCS ranked team left out for some awful 7-5 FIU team.

 

Isn't that just an exaggerated version of UConn getting in the Fiesta Bowl?

 

It's a much worse version. And FIU went 6-6 this year, not 7-5, my mistake. UConn isn't getting a chance to play for a national title either.

 

WHAT NEXT? A LOSING RECORD GETTING AN NFL PLAYOFF BERTH?

 

Have at it Derwood. State the case for the Rams/49ers deserving a playoff berth.

[SouthSideRyan]

if we could get all 6 BCS conferences to HAVE a championship game, that could be the first round of the playoffs

 

And then the 2nd round could be 11 on 11 on 11!! Triangle football fields!

[Derwood]

I'd be pretty [expletive] pissed if I was the 6th at-large BCS ranked team left out for some awful 7-5 FIU team.

 

Isn't that just an exaggerated version of UConn getting in the Fiesta Bowl?

 

It's a much worse version. And FIU went 6-6 this year, not 7-5, my mistake. UConn isn't getting a chance to play for a national title either.

 

WHAT NEXT? A LOSING RECORD GETTING AN NFL PLAYOFF BERTH?

 

Have at it Derwood. State the case for the Rams/49ers deserving a playoff berth.

 

they won their division. Simple, right?

[NCCubFan]

If/when it happens I just hope to hell it's not something stupid like 16 teams or all conference champs are invited. 4 is plenty, but if you need 6 or 8 it's marginally acceptable.

 

Why would something like "all conference champs are invited" be a bad thing? 11 conference champions and 5 WC teams sounds fair to me. And if they're so bad they won't make it past the first round, now will they?

 

 

so they shouldn't be there.

 

then why are they even division 1-A?

They're not. They're FBS. :P

[erik316wttn]

If/when it happens I just hope to hell it's not something stupid like 16 teams or all conference champs are invited. 4 is plenty, but if you need 6 or 8 it's marginally acceptable.

 

Why would something like "all conference champs are invited" be a bad thing? 11 conference champions and 5 WC teams sounds fair to me. And if they're so bad they won't make it past the first round, now will they?

 

 

so they shouldn't be there.

 

You could say that for a lot of the 14-16 seeds in the NCAA tournament every year, too. Are you against a basketball playoff?

[erik316wttn]

if we could get all 6 BCS conferences to HAVE a championship game, that could be the first round of the playoffs

 

I love the idea that only conference winners can participate in a playoff. It gives the traditionalists their season "that matters", which is not a bad thing at all. You lose a Big Ten conference game, that in some years could kill your shot of being in the playoffs.

 

It also kills the "should have been selected" argument. The lines are black and white. You win your conference, you go to the playoffs. You don't win your conference, you play a bowl game.

 

The only downside is that non-conference games will have almost no importance anymore. The only way you could make them important is to have overall record break 3 way ties for conference championship game opponents and help for seeding in a playoff. But if that were the case, the first 3 weeks of college football will suck because no one is going to schedule anyone dangerous.

 

In my proposal it would be the 11 conference champs, which, as you said, keeps the importance of the regular season. The 5 "wild card" or "at large" (or whatever you want to call them) teams would be determined by BCS rankings... the five highest non-conference champion BCS teams. Strength of Schedule is part of that equation. And from there, overall BCS rankings could seed the playoff.

[SouthSideRyan]

Can we at least live in the real world while discussing this stuff? You don't get a playoff without getting the blessing of the BCS conferences, and you sure as [expletive] don't get the blessing from the BCS schools when you're guaranteeing them as many spots as the [expletive] Sun Belt and charred corpse of the WAC

[Derwood]

Can we at least live in the real world while discussing this stuff? You don't get a playoff without getting the blessing of the BCS conferences, and you sure as [expletive] don't get the blessing from the BCS schools when you're guaranteeing them as many spots as the [expletive] Sun Belt and charred corpse of the WAC

 

Why not? If the money is as good (or better) than the current system, they'll play anyone you ask them to

[SouthSideRyan]

Can we at least live in the real world while discussing this stuff? You don't get a playoff without getting the blessing of the BCS conferences, and you sure as [expletive] don't get the blessing from the BCS schools when you're guaranteeing them as many spots as the [expletive] Sun Belt and charred corpse of the WAC

 

Why not? If the money is as good (or better) than the current system, they'll play anyone you ask them to

 

Oh right, Cuban's $800,000 annual payout should seal the deal

[BigSlick]

anyone that says that it would lessen the importance of the regular season, that too many 'undeserving' school would get in or whatever

 

id bet all of them 100 dollars that a few years down the line a 12-16 team playoff system would be more profitable, more heavily watched, more gambled on, and damn right more exciting than almost anything. it would automatically be up there with march madness, and might even butt heads with the nfl in popularity. it would be insanely amazing and exciting.

 

and i'm not gonna lie to you guys, it will lower the importance of the regular season. i just don't care about that. 'the regular season as a playoff' has always been a farce anyway, only the right programs who have balanced the right out of conference schedules with the strength of their conference schedule have benefited from it. going undefeated hasn't been a guarantee (see auburn in 2004) and with such a small sample size regular season, you can never truly properly weigh how powerful conferences are. having an elimination playoff is the only 'fair' way to determine a winner.

 

even those holding reservations would be swayed within a few years. its the best way to get rid of all the ambiguity, and we'd get so many more exciting and worthwhile games.

 

40-10 blowouts in the first round? maybe? its not like the bowl system doesn't have its fair share of blowouts and the match ups are all stupid anyway.

 

edit: i'd like to remind most people here that the only reason we dont already have a playoff is because of Jim Delaney and because of how he corners the market for the Big Ten and how much money they rake in. something like this would have to be uber super profitable for him to get on board.

[hawkeyecub]

Can we at least live in the real world while discussing this stuff? You don't get a playoff without getting the blessing of the BCS conferences, and you sure as [expletive] don't get the blessing from the BCS schools when you're guaranteeing them as many spots as the [expletive] Sun Belt and charred corpse of the WAC

 

Why not? If the money is as good (or better) than the current system, they'll play anyone you ask them to

 

Come on, tell me you guys don't actually believe this junk.

 

You think they'll take a deal that has a likely negative impact on regular season and other bowl games AND puts garbage teams from garbage conferences on the same level just because the money is AS GOOD as it is now. Or slightly better.

[rawaction]

If/when it happens I just hope to hell it's not something stupid like 16 teams or all conference champs are invited. 4 is plenty, but if you need 6 or 8 it's marginally acceptable.

 

Why would something like "all conference champs are invited" be a bad thing? 11 conference champions and 5 WC teams sounds fair to me. And if they're so bad they won't make it past the first round, now will they?

 

 

so they shouldn't be there.

 

You could say that for a lot of the 14-16 seeds in the NCAA tournament every year, too. Are you against a basketball playoff?

 

Basketball and football are different animals though. Football is a more physical sport that takes more of a physical toll on players. In basketball, a lesser talented team is more likely to hang with a great team because so much is dependent on execution, rather than physical ability. Plus, with 5 players on the floor vs. 22 in football, the disparity in talent is greater.

 

And there is still the injury factor. I don't think it makes any sense to make an elite football team play a mismatch game in a tournament. Football players get hurt more than basketball players obviously. How pissed would Auburn be if Cam Newton got injured vs. Troy in a 56-3 rout? It's completely unnecessary in football.

[bcl412]

I used to like the idea of a 16 team playoff but the odds of some random small school team winning a game would be so low, as everyone else has said, it'd be kind of pointless. There is no anything could happen scenario making it worthless. Top teams just don't lose to those teams.

 

I would love to see a playoff but I don't hate the BCS. I just wish they took out the humans completely. That seems to ruin the process. They should come up with a good formula and let the computers decide the rankings and the championship game.

[rawaction]

I used to like the idea of a 16 team playoff but the odds of some random small school team winning a game would be so low, as everyone else has said, it'd be kind of pointless. There is no anything could happen scenario making it worthless. Top teams just don't lose to those teams.

 

I would love to see a playoff but I don't hate the BCS. I just wish they took out the humans completely. That seems to ruin the process. They should come up with a good formula and let the computers decide the rankings and the championship game.

 

16 team tourney would either be all 11 conference winners + 5 at large. Or it would be top 16 in BCS. Either way is bad, IMO.

 

The little guys getting in as you said would be an issue. Also, a 3-4 loss team that is 16th in the BCS would be bad. Not that they couldn't win a game like a Sun Belt team, but the fact that teams in the teens would be 3rd or 4th in a major conference could win 4 games and be a champion with 3-4 losses. That's absurd.

[Derwood]

The obvious headache is trying to mix polls and conferences. A playoff either needs to go with one or the other. Imagine the NFL's play offs awarding the wildcards to teams via a system of human and computer polls....

[Guest]

Also, a 3-4 loss team that is 16th in the BCS would be bad. Not that they couldn't win a game like a Sun Belt team, but the fact that teams in the teens would be 3rd or 4th in a major conference could win 4 games and be a champion with 3-4 losses. That's absurd.

 

A 3 loss team that won it's way through a 16 team bracket would be more than deserving of being the Champion.

[rawaction]

Also, a 3-4 loss team that is 16th in the BCS would be bad. Not that they couldn't win a game like a Sun Belt team, but the fact that teams in the teens would be 3rd or 4th in a major conference could win 4 games and be a champion with 3-4 losses. That's absurd.

 

A 3 loss team that won it's way through a 16 team bracket would be more than deserving of being the Champion.

 

Possibly. But that 3-loss team would only have gotten a chance because they started the season expecting to be one of the best teams in the country. And their regular season would easily be considered a failure.

 

I understand the parallels between a 7-9 NFC West team getting in the playoffs, but at least that team will have won their division. A team like Alabama lost 3 games in its conference and didn't win the conference. I don't think you can give you a shot to a team like that. It's not really fair.

[Guest]

Also, a 3-4 loss team that is 16th in the BCS would be bad. Not that they couldn't win a game like a Sun Belt team, but the fact that teams in the teens would be 3rd or 4th in a major conference could win 4 games and be a champion with 3-4 losses. That's absurd.

 

A 3 loss team that won it's way through a 16 team bracket would be more than deserving of being the Champion.

 

Possibly. But that 3-loss team would only have gotten a chance because they started the season expecting to be one of the best teams in the country. And their regular season would easily be considered a failure.

 

I understand the parallels between a 7-9 NFC West team getting in the playoffs, but at least that team will have won their division. A team like Alabama lost 3 games in its conference and didn't win the conference. I don't think you can give you a shot to a team like that. It's not really fair.

 

Why? No one would bat an eye in basketball if someone like Duke finished 3rd in the ACC then won the title as a 4-5 seed. If you want to say that teams would get an unfair advantage because of anchoring in the human polls, then I'm with you. But that's a different issue than having 16 teams v. 8 v. 4. That anchoring effect exists because of the criteria used to rank the teams, not because of how many would make the playoff.

[rawaction]

Also, a 3-4 loss team that is 16th in the BCS would be bad. Not that they couldn't win a game like a Sun Belt team, but the fact that teams in the teens would be 3rd or 4th in a major conference could win 4 games and be a champion with 3-4 losses. That's absurd.

 

A 3 loss team that won it's way through a 16 team bracket would be more than deserving of being the Champion.

 

Possibly. But that 3-loss team would only have gotten a chance because they started the season expecting to be one of the best teams in the country. And their regular season would easily be considered a failure.

 

I understand the parallels between a 7-9 NFC West team getting in the playoffs, but at least that team will have won their division. A team like Alabama lost 3 games in its conference and didn't win the conference. I don't think you can give you a shot to a team like that. It's not really fair.

 

Why? No one would bat an eye in basketball if someone like Duke finished 3rd in the ACC then won the title as a 4-5 seed. If you want to say that teams would get an unfair advantage because of anchoring in the human polls, then I'm with you. But that's a different issue than having 16 teams v. 8 v. 4. That anchoring effect exists because of the criteria used to rank the teams, not because of how many would make the playoff.

 

Again basketball is a different animal. With a 12 game football season, the number of wins and losses for a great or championship caliber season is clearly laid out. In basketball, not so much.

[Guest]

I'd say it's the exact opposite. There's way too much variance in a short schedule with little overlap between teams across the country to give an arbitrary number of losses that make a team unworthy of earning it's way through a playoff bracket.