D-IA Playoffs

[GatorGrad]

Question for you guys...

What is the minimum # of teams for D-IA College Football that you would need to see in order for you to consider it to be a legit championship sport? I assume that a 16-team tournament including all 11 conference champs would suffice and be accepted by most of us. But would any of these options be accepted in your opinion?

1) 16 team tournament, but conference champs not guaranteed a bid (top 16 chosen by committee or BCS rankings.)

2) 8 team tournament involving 6 BCS Conference Champs + 2 at large teams chosen by either committee or BCS rankings.

3) 8 team tournament based strictly on committee selection or BCS rankings (no auto bids.)

4) 4 team tournament based strictly on BCS rankings or committee.

In other words, what is the minimum (or maximum) # of teams that YOU think need to be involved, and how should the teams be selected? I am not asking what your IDEAL format would be, where the games would be, etc. Just basically what is a "must have" for any legit D-IA playoff system in your mind.

[String911]

4 is enough and 4 is all I want. This way the bowls can still have significant meaning and the regular season still matters. When is the last time a team was ranked outside the top 4 and had a legitimate argument they were the best team in the country?

[CJHawkeyes]

Question for you guys...

What is the minimum # of teams for D-IA College Football that you would need to see in order for you to consider it to be a legit championship sport? I assume that a 16-team tournament including all 11 conference champs would suffice and be accepted by most of us. But would any of these options be accepted in your opinion?

1) 16 team tournament, but conference champs not guaranteed a bid (top 16 chosen by committee or BCS rankings.)

2) 8 team tournament involving 6 BCS Conference Champs + 2 at large teams chosen by either committee or BCS rankings.

3) 8 team tournament based strictly on committee selection or BCS rankings (no auto bids.)

4) 4 team tournament based strictly on BCS rankings or committee.

In other words, what is the minimum (or maximum) # of teams that YOU think need to be involved, and how should the teams be selected? I am not asking what your IDEAL format would be, where the games would be, etc. Just basically what is a "must have" for any legit D-IA playoff system in your mind.

6-16 teams determined by transparent equitable objective rules.

[CJHawkeyes]

4 is enough and 4 is all I want. This way the bowls can still have significant meaning and the regular season still matters. When is the last time a team was ranked outside the top 4 and had a legitimate argument they were the best team in the country?


The best team is irrelevant.

[String911]

The best team is irrelevant.

Then so is the season. Let's go ahead and expand to 128 teams, drop the season and go straight into a playoff format!

[CJHawkeyes]

Then so is the season. Let's go ahead and expand to 128 teams, drop the season and go straight into a playoff format!

Non sequitor. Competition isn't about determining the best team. It is about determining a winner. Certainly, you can favor a format that intuitively favors an unknown best team, but the best team is not entitled to win the competition because it is the best team. As such, a team does not have to have a legitimate argument for being the best team in order to argue for deserving an opportunity to win a particular competition. For example, see Boise State. I doubt Boise State was the best team last year, but I would argue that that they deserved the opportunity to compete for first place in an expanded playoff. Yet, even after their bowl win, they were only viewed as the fifth best team if that is what #5 in the polls represents.

[GatorGrad]

The only true way to guarantee that every team controls their own destiny for a shot at a National Championship would be to guarantee a spot in a playoff for ALL conferences. That's the only way where a coach in the Sunbelt Conference can look his men in the eyes prior to the season and say "If you guys win every single game this season, you will be National Champions." True? Otherwise, you could always have an unbeaten team like Boise State go unbeaten, and they might not be selected by the committee or have a high enough ranking to warrant a spot in the playoff. With a 4, 8, or even 16 team tournament that uses a committee or some sort of "rankings," it will always be possible for a team to win every single game, doing everything they possibly can do, and still not get a chance to compete for a National Championship. Until this is fixed, there will always be issues.

I'm not saying that it would be normal for a Sunbelt Champ to be the best team and prove themselves in a 16-team tournament if given the chance. In fact, I doubt it would ever happen. But I DO think that they would deserve the opportunity to prove themselves and have a fair chance if we are ever to take the post-season of college football seriously. Boise State might have won the National Championship last year if given the opportunity to play in a playoff. We'll never know for sure - that's the problem. They certainly proved that they could play with the big boys by beating Oklahoma. And this is coming from a fan of the team that won the BCS Title last year.

I believe that the ability for every school to control their own destiny in the hunt for a National Championship is the key to a legit playoff. You can have at large bids to allow for the big boy conferences to get extra teams in and that's fine and probably the fair thing to do. As long as every conference champ gets their shot. Even if it's just one team from the Sunbelt in a playoff, at least all Sunbelt teams know at the start of the season that they control their own destiny - win their conference, then win the playoff, and they could be National Champs! It might not be likely, but that's OK - as long as it's possible. If a deserving team were to ever emerge from the Sunbelt Conference, it would be a shame to never know if they truly could have won a National Championship.

Unfortunately, I honestly don't see it happening in our lifetime. The NCAA would truly need to take over the post-season 100% and the bowl system would be done. As of now, any playoff will need to incorporate the bowl system. This means no more than a 4-team BCS Playoff which I think you will see starting with the 2010 or 2015 season depending on what can be worked out with the TV Networks. It will keep the bowl system intact, and at least avoid the situation of major BCS schools finishing unbeaten and being left out like Auburn '04. It would be pretty hard to finish unbeaten in a BCS Conference and not finish in the top four. But it won't solve the Boise St issue. It's a babystep in the right direction at least.

[GatorGrad]

By the way, I think you would actually see some sort of separation between the big boys and the small schools in DI-A Football before you would ever see a true 16-team playoff with all conference champs getting an auto-bid. Unless the NCAA completely takes over, the BCS schools will never agree to a legit playoff that would incorporate all of DI-A in our lifetime.

Look no further than the Florida President proposing such an idea to his own SEC counterparts last month and being shot down before he could even finish. He went into the meeting planning to propose a legit playoff that would include all of DI-A...he came out just repeating the "company line" and saying that our best bet is to "work within the current bowl / BCS structure." In other words, a 4-team BCS plus one playoff is as good as it's going to get in the near future.

[String911]

Non sequitor. Competition isn't about determining the best team. It is about determining a winner. Certainly, you can favor a format that intuitively favors an unknown best team, but the best team is not entitled to win the competition because it is the best team. As such, a team does not have to have a legitimate argument for being the best team in order to argue for deserving an opportunity to win a particular competition. For example, see Boise State. I doubt Boise State was the best team last year, but I would argue that that they deserved the opportunity to compete for first place in an expanded playoff. Yet, even after their bowl win, they were only viewed as the fifth best team if that is what #5 in the polls represents.


You're in favor of diluting the regular season. I don't agree that a team without any legitimate claim to being the best team in the nation should be allowed to compete in a playoff.

It's most certainly not a non sequitur. If anything, I can take your statement above and apply directly to what I'd said. If the purpose of a playoff is not to find the best team, but instead just determine a "winner", it's not a leap in logic to suggest you should be okay with no regular season and a massive 128 team tournament.

I wouldn't want to slant anything toward, as you put it, "an unknown best team". Rather, I'd seek to ensure that any team which would emerge victorious in a playoff format earned the right during the regular season.

It's not the NFL, it's college football. I don't like seeing 9-7 teams in the NFL playoffs, frankly.

I've yet to see anything addressing how to incorporate a larger playoff into college football without significant damage to the bowl system.

[CJHawkeyes]

You're in favor of diluting the regular season. I don't agree that a team without any legitimate claim to being the best team in the nation should be allowed to compete in a playoff.

It's most certainly not a non sequitur. If anything, I can take your statement above and apply directly to what I'd said. If the purpose of a playoff is not to find the best team, but instead just determine a "winner", it's not a leap in logic to suggest you should be okay with no regular season and a massive 128 team tournament.

I wouldn't want to slant anything toward, as you put it, "an unknown best team". Rather, I'd seek to ensure that any team which would emerge victorious in a playoff format earned the right during the regular season.

It's not the NFL, it's college football. I don't like seeing 9-7 teams in the NFL playoffs, frankly.

I've yet to see anything addressing how to incorporate a larger playoff into college football without significant damage to the bowl system.

I'm not actually arguing against your preference for a four team playoff. I'm just stating my opinion that a team does not need to have a legitimate argument as the best team when the purpose of the competition is not to determine the best team. That said, I concede that its not a leap of logic to suggest that I would be okay with an all inclusive playoff based on my position that competition is about determining a winner. However, determining the winner of a competition as opposed to the best team does not preclude limits on how many teams advance to a playoff. The regular season is a part of the whole competition in which teams compete for playoff berths. As I said, you can favor a format that intuitively favors the best team, whoever that may be, such as limiting a playoff to only the most successful regular season teams rather than allowing everyone in. I certainly do. That said, I pretty much agree with what you say above and I'm probably just nitpicking about your best team standard.

[Stumpy Stew]

I think a 16 team playoff is the best. The 11 conference champs and 5 at large. And 16 is a good number..works for FCS/Div I-AA

GO APPS

[Blue Hen]

I'm with Stumpy 16 teams ( 11+5), 15 games, 4 weeks, 1 genuine champion.......nothing to it.

It's the most logical, inclusive, fairest playoff model for 1A.

[GatorGrad]

Hen & Stew:

Would you call D-IA a legit championship sport if it was a 16 team playoff, but conference champs were not given automatic bids and instead all seedings were based on a committee or BCS Rankings?

What about an 8-team tournament where only the 6 BCS Conferences got the autobids or no autobids at all?

Or a 4-team BCS Playoff just based on a committee or BCS Rankings?

Would you accept any of the above, or does it absolutely have to be the 11+5 formula for you to be satisfied???

[aufan59]

6 team with #1 & #2 getting byes

[Blue Hen]

Any of the above, GG, would certainly be an improvement (in varying degrees) to what we have now.

I don't think I can be personally or completely satisfied until the post season is in the hands of the NCAA and big time CF's championship is an NCAA championship........like every other NCAA sport at every level. A breakaway ,renegade , self-serving cartel (55% of D1A )cannot be running the post season and provide us a legitimate championship.
Also, conference championships must determine championship playoff participants........simply because conference championships and standings are the only non mythical, non opinionated, non voted, non perceived, non politically corrupt, non disputed ( I could list 20 'nons') measure we have in big time CF.
In other words a) take what's 'real' b) play and eliminate c) crown the last team standing 'champion'....like every other non mythical championship team sport .

[Stumpy Stew]

GG, I agree with Hen that some type is better than the current system. But to make it a real and legitimate NC, it should involve the conference champs, not opinions and such. If you (a general you, not you in particular hehe) look at the other FOOTBALL championships that the NCAA manages, you will find that conference champions from qualifying conferences automatically make the playoffs, the rest of the field are at large teams. And a committee selects the at large teams and they do a good job. As with all selections like this, there are disputes on who should and who should not be in, but there some rules on who makes it. I know in I-AA/FCS if you have more than 4 losses, you can not make the playoff field.

[GatorGrad]

Yea a 16 team tournament involving all 11 conference champs + 5 at large bids selected by a committee would be the only "perfect" playoff IMO. It would definitely require the NCAA taking over completely, and the bowl season as we know it would die off.

But since this isn't really a reality for the near future, I could live with an 8 or even just a 4 team playoff for now. I don't think there's been many times that a major conference team has finished unbeaten and finished outside of the top four so it would at least solve that issue while keeping the bowl system intact and keeping the regular season as important as it is now (you would likely need to either finish unbeaten or at most have one single loss to finish in the top four.)

Nothing would have to change - the structure is already in place with the title game being a week after the BCS Bowl Games. You just need to match up 1v4 and 2v3 in two of the BCS Bowl Games with the winners playing in the title game. No, this doesn't solve the "control your own destiny" issue, especially for the nonBCS Conference. But I think it would be a step in the right direction.