Swarbrick on scheduling, ND Network, Jumbotron, etc.

[Rocket89]

http://onefootdown.fantake.com/2010/12/01/death-to-the-bcs-a-book-review-part-1/

For anyone that is interested...

 

[ShamrockOnHelmet]

How many lower tier teams do you kick out to do that tho? 6? Why should they get a boot when they worked hard?

6-6 teams worked hard? Not hard enough if they were only 6-6. The good news there is that the "systems" days are numbered. There will be a playoff one day, whether anyone likes it or not. Its only a matter of when.

 

[kmoose]

The main argument FOR a playoff is that everything is settled on the field...........

But that's not a no-brainer.

The final regular season BCS poll looked like this:

1. Auburn
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Stanford
5. Wisconsin
6. Ohio State

Oregon beat Stanford in the regular season. Let's say Stanford beats Oregon in the Championship game: Both teams have the same record, and both teams beat each other. Now you move on to strength of schedule, margin of victory, and all of the other arguments that we currently have. So what have you gained? You've gotten a champion based on what people think and computers compute. Sound familiar?

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see the matchups that a playoff system would bring. But to sit here and claim that it will end all of the controversy is so naive as to almost be downright unintelligent.

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

The main argument FOR a playoff is that everything is settled on the field...........

But that's not a no-brainer.

The final regular season BCS poll looked like this:

1. Auburn
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Stanford
5. Wisconsin
6. Ohio State

Oregon beat Stanford in the regular season. Let's say Stanford beats Oregon in the Championship game: Both teams have the same record, and both teams beat each other. Now you move on to strength of schedule, margin of victory, and all of the other arguments that we currently have. So what have you gained? You've gotten a champion based on what people think and computers compute. Sound familiar?

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see the matchups that a playoff system would bring. But to sit here and claim that it will end all of the controversy is so naive as to almost be downright unintelligent.

LOL are you serious? It's the championship game. It's what matters. Did people say in Super Bowl XLII that strength of schedule had to get involved when the Giants beat the Patriots since the Pats won in Week 17? No. This argument is hilariously ridiculous.

 

[Rocket89]

The main argument FOR a playoff is that everything is settled on the field...........

But that's not a no-brainer.

The final regular season BCS poll looked like this:

1. Auburn
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Stanford
5. Wisconsin
6. Ohio State

Oregon beat Stanford in the regular season. Let's say Stanford beats Oregon in the Championship game: Both teams have the same record, and both teams beat each other. Now you move on to strength of schedule, margin of victory, and all of the other arguments that we currently have. So what have you gained? You've gotten a champion based on what people think and computers compute. Sound familiar?

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see the matchups that a playoff system would bring. But to sit here and claim that it will end all of the controversy is so naive as to almost be downright unintelligent.

Well that's just turning it into a confused philosophical discussion that will always lead to a dead end no matter what system is used.

We use playoffs in our society to determine champions, just like we have a democratic goverment because it's what works best. We'll never really KNOW who the best team is in football (whatever that means), just like we'll never cure of all society's problems. But we go with the system that works best.

I mean teams lose to an opponent during the regular season all the time and then beat them in the playoffs and most of the time if it's an upset (as we would probably deem Stanford beating Oregon), we praise the underdog for raising their level of play, fighting through adversity, committing to winning, etc, etc.

Personally I love the adage that playoffs are where champions are made. I think it's very much a huge part of what makes our society great. The Giants lost to the Pats during the regular season when NE ripped off a 18-0 record, but then beat them in the Super Bowl. I can just picture a college football fan walking down the sidewalk talking to himself, "Well, we don't really know who the better team was do we? The Pats beat the Giants in New York and had the better overall season and the better statistics...."

I think of the Olympics too where someone like Usain Bolt and other athletes could come in second in qualifying stages but ends up winning the gold medal in the finals. Do we go around debating who the best athlete was?

If we want to talk about a playoff ruining CFB's precious regular season, that's a different matter all together. But playoffs are where true champions raise their game, defy the odds and prove on the biggest stage that they are the best. I don't think it's right to say that playoffs don't determine a real champion, because they do on planet Earth. There's always going to be controversy no matter what, but so be it. I'm sure there are Pats fans walking around today thinking 2007 New England should have been or are the champions, but they're not.

 

[Rocket89]

LOL are you serious? It's the championship game. It's what matters. Did people say in Super Bowl XLII that strength of schedule had to get involved when the Giants beat the Patriots since the Pats won in Week 17? No. This argument is hilariously ridiculous.

Ahh, we went with the same comparison.

Very nice!

 

[ACamp1900]

Blows my mind how people think a playoff somehow shows 'true champions'...

the team that wins a playoff is usually the team that gets hot at the right time... period.

I'll pretense this by stating right now I believe strongly cfb needs fixing... but so does the NFL, NHL, NCAABB, MLB and just about every other league out there...

how about we have a sport where every game matters as much as the next instead of having four months of what bascially equates to nothing but scrimmages leading to a crap shoot playoff.... you can't sit here and tell me who ever wins a playoff is the best team in the sport... The Pats/Giants thing was a perfect example of this... the Pats that year where maybe the greatest team in history... but I guess they weren't that great because the one game they lost in over a year was during the playoff????? thats really the logic here?? kmoose was right with the last statement of his post... for a number of reasons...


first, there are five or so things that make cfb great.... one is the attachment to the schools... students and alums really can say 'we' and mean it...THAT would not be effected by a playoff at all...

the rivalry games are SO important compared to other sports... playoff formats, especially expanded formats would kill this... who cares who wins The Game when both tOSU and Michigan would make a 16-24 team format in most years...?

The Regular Season. No explanation needed I would hope.

The Bowls... okay, so no one cares about the toilet bowl... and here I agree, scrap more than half of the bowls... but the Sugar Bowl, Rose Bowl, Orange Bowl and others are a great tradition not just for cfb but for the country... personaly as a so cal kid I look at the Rose Bowl as a biggergame than the Super Bowl most years... there are dozens of reasons why scarping the bowls is a bad idea... and no matter how much the playoff thumper insists otherwise you can not have a bowl season followed by a playoff tourney.

The passion and intensity is so much greater than any other sport... a lot goes into this, but at least part of it is that every games mattters (unlike ANY OTHER SPORT) even in a year where you lose four games, losing five can be the difference between a top 25 class in recruiting and a 40 something class for a lot of programs... and for those only losing 1-2games, well... obviously. throw in expanded playoffs and yeah, kiss the intensity goodbye until.... the playoff. Sorry, I'll take a sport that is intense every game.

the debate, discussion, etc.... if it were such a bad thing people wouldn't take part in it and just watch the NFL.


there is more but I would say at least 2/3 of the things that make cfb great are such because of the current system...




also, call me crazy but I believe the system that allows for the largest sample size to be the most important towards deciding a champion is the best system (crazy thought huh?... in fact you can carve that in stone as to why I hate playoffs in general) and cfb for all it's faults is the only sport set up in that fashion... yet you guys what to change it??? WHY!?!? God forbid games actually matter.


also, let's look at this precious playoff system... basically playoffs were used prior to the 1960s for nothing more than tie-breakers (which is when, for the most part, the only time they are valid)... the owners saw how much they could make from making it a yearly thing and made it so... which wasn't such a bad thing because intially, for the most part, they were the two best records from each league or conference a quick four team thing.. nice way to tie together everything from the season and crown a champ...

the problem arose when owners started expanding it for the same reason playoff thumpers bash cfb... money. Why anyone would advacate a system that allows a team that is nowhere (literally NOWHERE) near their conferences top record or could not even win their division in some stupid watered down divison format go on to win the Championship for the enitre sport is beyond me... call me crazy but I only what Championship caliber teams having something to say about who wins a Championship in a format like that... and the nightmare I see is a 32 team cluster you-know-what happening within 25 years after a playoff is put into place... this format was never about finding a better way of finding a champion (if that were the case the NFL would just expand the reg season and give the best record the trophy...

I would also add that the Olympics comparrison is not valid because the entire sport is set up as a playoff (qualifying etc.) format... whereas the other sports we are talking about here are basically cut into two formats entirely.

anyway, to review... playoffs suck.


Here's my suggestion to this 'problem'... leagues like the NHL should have the Presidents Trophy mean more than the Stanley Cup (Again, bigger sample size should mean more in every case)... cfb football should do away with the toilet bowls (making bowl invites a much bigger deal) and move the title game back one week... in fact no, they shouldn't, it's ALREADY played a week after the other bowls... just don't set the title game up until all bowls have been played... you would not have a situation of Bosie or TCU not getting their shot and you would not see the reg. season turned into nothing more than a 'play-in' for a crap shoot stupid little tourney... nothing is prefect (certaintly not a playoff) but this is as close as you're gonna get to making EVERYONE happy. though the bowl thing won't happen for the same reason MLB, NFL and others won't do away with division and wild cards that do nothing but water down their systems.... money.

The best part of the Swarbrick interview was his response to this issue... my response... let's hope their never will be any momentum either.

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

From what I read, you seem like a soccer fan. Your Celtic avatar confirms it (I also love Celtic).

However not every team plays each other. Right now college football has a system where a team could go undefeated and not have a chance at the championship. How is that fair? That's like saying the World Cup isn't fair because Ghana made it further than Italy even though Italy is probably a better team.

 

[Rocket89]

Okay let's take a look at some of the things you're talking about here.

There's a difference between believing the playoffs is the best way to determine a champion and saying the playoffs show who the "true" champion is. What is a "true" champion? How do we define what a "true" champion is? If the playoffs don't declare a true champion, does the current CFB system do so? Why? Auburn was the true champion this year...but what about TCU?

I don't care that teams "get hot" during the playoffs. I care that teams need to raise their game to another level during the playoffs and those who are soft usually get beat. In a lot sports we see teams that are great regular season teams, put up lots of points, play with skill and finesse, lead the league in points or whatever...but when the heat gets turned up, when the physicality and big stage appear during the playoffs those teams that we thought were the best get beat.

It's simply not just a case of a regular season being a bigger sample size either. I'm not saying that there isn't SOME credence to that theory because in a lot of cases, yes the regular shows us who the "best" teams are. But sometimes all the regular season does is show us....who's the best during the regular season.

So even though the playoffs might be a "smaller sample size" and a "crapshoot" they are explicity there to seperate the men from the boys...on the big stage.

Now I will say that of all the sports, college football does typically do the best job of showing who the best teams in the country are during the regular season. But I will contend that adding a playoff will make the process more accurate and better. Notice how I didn't add anything about a nonsense "true" champion. You guys can debate that with Plato if you want.

Basically you have three reasons you're against a playoff.

1. The regular season is a bigger sample size.
2. Rivalries
3. Passion of the regular season

I've already talked a little bit about the first issue, but with the current system we are seeing an average of 3 or 4 undefeated teams each decade who get left out and aren't national champions. So yes, sometimes there are years where there are only two undefeated teams and everything works out perfectly in the regular season and we see a battle for the title. But that's not happening every year and we get teams like TCU this year who get left out. I'm not okay with that.

The last two points are one in the same as far as I'm concerned. As to the rivalries in college football, a playoff is not going to change anything. I think it's pretty foolish to think that.

The real question is how will a playoff devalue the regular season and how will it add to the regular season. I think a lot of the anti-playoff crowd simply states that a playoff will "ruin" or lessen the importance of the regular season without mentioning how it could add to the regular season.

Now, what will the playoff ruin in the regular season? Basically, it takes away the importance of being undefeated. I'm okay with that specifically because CFB history is littered with one-loss champions, undefeated teams that get left out, and shared national titles. When half of the time a non-undefeated team is crowned a champion, then I'm okay with sacrificing that for a playoff.

So, when we see those No. 1 versus No. 2 games late in the season, and it is do or die to take the game and keep the national title hopes alive, yeah a playoff is going to lessen the importance of that game. It will also slightly lessen the importance of other games between top ten teams or teams that are in the driver's seat to make the playoffs.

For example, the Iron Bowl wouldn't have been as important because had Auburn lost they would have still made a 16-team playoff anyway and (possibly) gone on to win the title anyway too.

I won't deny that a playoff would make a game like that a little less important. But we also have to ask ourselves...how many games are there like that in college football every year? Clearly very, very few. And what about TCU's season? Or what about Auburn in 2004? Those teams played the game, didn't lose and were left out.

With the way the system is currently constructed, the only truly "big" games, the ones that the traditionalists defend as what makes the regular season so great, are the ones the two teams that play for the title played in during the regular season. That's why we always hear the argument about Oregon beating Stanford in the all-important regular season, but having people having an anuerysm if Stanford ended up getting into a playoff and then beating Oregon.

That's why the sanctity of the regular season is worth spoiling a little bit in my view. What if Oregon lost later in the season after beating Stanford? Suddenly, that game we talk about now as being so important and crucial to making the regular season so great, didn't mean as much because Oregon didn't play in the title game. And the point is, this happens dozens of times every year. We think games are huge when they are played, but then later in the season or after the season is done, they aren't because Team X ended up losing anyway.

That's why I'm saying that these huge games that everyone is so afraid to lose with a playoff are just so preciously few every season. It's like we can't have a playoff because those three or four huge games drop down to only 75% significance? Eh, I'm okay with that.

So there's the drawbacks of a playoff on the regular season, but what about what a playoff adds to the regular season?

Let's talk about the rivalry with USC for example. In 1988, we beat USC on the road to end the season and went on to win the title. With a playoff, we could have lost that game and still won a title. That's the kind negative impact a playoff brings, right? You could throw the Michigan and Miami games in there too as well if you want as the huge games that year. But that's just one season out of the past 22 years. And from USC's perspective, we could have beat them during their undefeated 2004 season and killed their title chances. But in 95% of the other seasons, a playoff wouldn't negatively affect the rivalry's importance.

And in fact, a playoff would INCREASE the importance of the rivalry a lot more than it would hurt it. For example, ND could be 10-1 and USC could be 9-2 in the season ending meeting. With the current system, neither team is going to win the title, so it's not a huge game, right? But with a playoff there are a whole boat load of implications that make the game a lot bigger than it would otherwise be.

Does USC get into the playoff if they win? Will Notre Dame stay in with a loss too? Will Notre Dame keep home field advantage if they win? What seed will Notre Dame get if they win?

These are the types of stories that would play out in a ton of games all season long and especially as we come down the stretch in November. I've already conceded that a playoff hurts a certain aspect of the regular season, but THIS IS HOW A PLAYOFF INCREASES THE IMPORTANCE OF THE REGULAR SEASON.

USC and ND could both have 1 loss in the game...and we could knock them out of playoff contention. That's not awesome? Michigan could have knocked Ohio State out of the playoffs this year too. It's the same story all across the country all season long.

With those aspects making the regular season better, I think it balances out the negatives I already talked about. And this is BEFORE we even bring up the playoffs themselves which would be so unbelievably amazing. Add that up and I think the playoffs scenario is much better. Schools wil make more money, the games will be played on campus' and earn those communities a crap load more money, and the sport will grow and become bigger.

And something else that isn't talked about enough from the "regular season is so important" crowd. Since the BCS started we have seen teams water down their schedules. THIS HAS LESSENED THE IMPORTANCE OF THE REGULAR SEASON. Everyone is so scared of losing one game that no one has the balls to schedule tough OOC games, and that is hurt the regular season. With a playoff, teams won't be as afraid to lose one game and the process will be more about boosting one's resume and trying to get into the playoff.

Every year there are plenty of one-loss teams. If you're one of those teams and you didn't win your conference, you're fighting for one of the at-large bids to the playoffs. You're not helping your cause if you played Youngstown State, Akron, Iowa State, and Lafayette out of conference. You do that and you run the risk of being left out of the playoff. Over time, programs will start scheduling tougher games early in the season and tougher games overall. Doesn't that make the regular season more important? Doesn't that breath life back into CFB instead of the stale system we have now where there's like 4 really great OOC games all year long?

 

[Rocket89]

From what I read, you seem like a soccer fan. Your Celtic avatar confirms it (I also love Celtic).

However not every team plays each other. Right now college football has a system where a team could go undefeated and not have a chance at the championship. How is that fair? That's like saying the World Cup isn't fair because Ghana made it further than Italy even though Italy is probably a better team.

Haha...I had those thoughts too, soccer fan...ugh.

But yeah I love Celtic too!

 

[kmoose]

LOL are you serious? It's the championship game. It's what matters. Did people say in Super Bowl XLII that strength of schedule had to get involved when the Giants beat the Patriots since the Pats won in Week 17? No. This argument is hilariously ridiculous.

It's no more ridiculous than people saying that Boise State is just as deserving as a team that runs the table in a major conference. But I would love to see a playoff, just to see the matchups it would create.

 

[ACamp1900]

K I'll just cut you of at the pass on your first point... the best way to decide a champion is the way sports used to do it for the most part before playoff thumpers ruined everything... play the most games you can, best record at the end is your champion.... period. (Almost impossible to do in cbf I know)

the reason we got away from that is not because it wasn't settled on the field, not because it's wasn't fair... it was because of dollars...

as far as the rest, you pretty much agree to disagree... I stand by the basic point, the largest sample size is the best judgement of a team... or anything... ALWAYS... period.

cfb gives us that... look at baseball... I'm a Halo fan, I have one title to celebrate/cherish whatever... 02... the Angels were not anywhere near one of the best five teams in baseball that year... but they got hot, got in as a wildcard and won it... sorry that is NOT stepping up when it counts and suddenly becoming the best team in the sport... that's simply winning a few games at the right time, not what I would classify as the best team in the sport. Whereas other Angel teams since then have clearly been one of the best teams in baseball, if not THE best over a 162 games... only to be beat by some wildcard team (like them in 02) who just got hot for 3 games... 3 games, trumping 162... how anyone can make the case that things have gotten better in this regard in any sport since the constant expansion of playoffs across the sports landscape is just completely beyond me...

I really do feel that people just want a playoff because people just want a playoff... it's the status quo, no one questions it's many flaws and just joins the echo chamber on it. In many regards I really do think it's that simple.

and I would say your argument for adding intensity to the season feels like sports socialism... lol (For lack of a better term I guess) ... Seriously though, let's help the teams that lost 2,3 maybe even 4 games get into a playoff and make things more interesting for THEM... while the teams that have actually earned a spot in the title discussion can sit starters for their end of the year games and not think twice about it... really? that makes things better through the reg. season??? You lose to your rival and it's now, "Oh well, we can still play them again in the playoffs"... I really don't see that making things better for rivalry games.

and let's really think about this... what do you always hear from the vast majority of casual sprts fans in regards to when they watch?? Do they say they watch the teams on the brink of the playoffs at the end of the year?? Do they watch much of the reg. season at all?? Honestly Rocket, what do they say? "Oh, well, I pretty much just watch some of the playoffs and the Super Bowl/NBA Finals/Stnaley Cup/World Series etc."

I would say the argument playoffs somehow make the reg. season more intense is pretty long for lack of evidence...

I'm kind of tired of hearing about the injustice of non playoff system too... three years in a row the high school team I coach for has finished 9-3, two of those three season we were left out of the playoffs in favor of teams that were 6-6 and 4-8 because of in-division/league records for those two seasons...

look at the Giants this year... teams getting hosed is not just a BCS problem... yet that's the only system we target... and I really do think it'd be an easy fix

bascially it comes down to this, as I have said, the larger sample should be most important, there should never, ever be a situation where one can use the term, "Win it when it counts"... they should all count... and when you have a system designed to set great teams apart you should only involve great teams... now cfb MAY do just that to begin with if a playoff were implemented... but as has happened in every other sport, someone will start crying, the playoffs will get expanded time and again and you've watered down the whole thing... look at cbb for crying out loud... try to make the case that THAT is a better system... really???

As far as the BCS not being fair... I agree... doesit need fixing? Yes,... can you say both about every other sports deciding system... I would say so... and a playoff is not the answer imo... I still say the best way to make everyone happy is simply take 1 & 2 after the bowls are all played... as I said they already play the title game about a week and a half after New year's anyway...the person who can't tell who's 1 & 2 after the bowls should just take up sewing.

hell, I'd be in favor of going back to the old system prior to the BCS before a playoff.

so yeah, agree to disagree... (I do this with someone jsut about every time this year... it's getting older each time... like politics or religion this topic...)