Current Format vs BCS Format?

[Leonard15]

Ok from a Notre Dame perspective what has changed since the BCS era ended? In the BCS era if Notre Dame went undefeated and no more than 2 teams were unbeaten they would be selected to play for a national championship e.g. 2012. Now with the playoff format Notre Dame still needs to go undefeated to play in the playoffs as now all it means is that going undefeated means you are most likely guaranteed a playoff spot but being a 1 loss team is still not good enough for Notre Dame.

For these reasons I stopped watching after the loss to FSU last year and I've stopped watching after this years loss to Clemson. So in short the more things change the more they stay the same meaning we are no closer to a national championship than a few years back.

 

[ACamp1900]

I prefer the pre BCS model, multiple bowls that no longer matter were huge, must watch games back then... Cfb was at its best then... Too much wanting it to be like the NFL and the like IMO... Not a BCS guy but def hate the playoff

 

[ickythump1225]

I don't mind the playoffs, but I HATE, HATE ,HAAAAAAATE the "playoff committee." Say what you want about the BCS but at least it did its best to be objective. The only reason OSU, with a Charmin soft cupcake schedule, made it to the playoffs last year is because the committee wet themselves over their beat down of a mediocre Wisconsin team.

 

[NDPhilly]

I really think that having a set number besides two of who competes for the NC isn't ideal. Think the number of teams of who should get to compete for the NC every year should vary depending on how many teams you could argue should be in the NC. Like if there are 2 teams who are undefeated, it should just be them who play in a NC, but if there are 6 power 5 one-loss teams then it should be a 6 team playoff.

Don't think the NCAA would go for this though. They'd prefer a set playoff

 

[ACamp1900]

I thought the best thing would have been a plus one... More bowls matter and you have, in reality, more than four teams in it... Then go off the final poll for the top two... Could even have had a four team when the polls merit it... Would have been the best for all parties IMO... But a playoff just for the sake of one was and is stupid imo

 

[dad4aa]

Ok from a Notre Dame perspective what has changed since the BCS era ended? In the BCS era if Notre Dame went undefeated and no more than 2 teams were unbeaten they would be selected to play for a national championship e.g. 2012. Now with the playoff format Notre Dame still needs to go undefeated to play in the playoffs as now all it means is that going undefeated means you are most likely guaranteed a playoff spot but being a 1 loss team is still not good enough for Notre Dame.

For these reasons I stopped watching after the loss to FSU last year and I've stopped watching after this years loss to Clemson. So in short the more things change the more they stay the same meaning we are no closer to a national championship than a few years back.

When did Notre Dame lose only one game and not make the playoffs?

 

[NDPhilly]

Imagine how fun a 16 team playoff would be though with a 10-11 game regular season. Or 12 where the top 4 get first round byes. Doesnt make sense but would be incredibly entertaining like for basketball

 

[IrishSteelhead]

Imagine how fun a 16 team playoff would be though with a 10-11 game regular season. Or 12 where the top 4 get first round byes. Doesnt make sense but would be incredibly entertaining like for basketball

Imagine how boring that 10 game regular season would be though.

 

[BGIF]

Ok from a Notre Dame perspective what has changed since the BCS era ended? In the BCS era if Notre Dame went undefeated and no more than 2 teams were unbeaten they would be selected to play for a national championship e.g. 2012. Now with the playoff format Notre Dame still needs to go undefeated to play in the playoffs as now all it means is that going undefeated means you are most likely guaranteed a playoff spot but being a 1 loss team is still not good enough for Notre Dame.

For these reasons I stopped watching after the loss to FSU last year and I've stopped watching after this years loss to Clemson. So in short the more things change the more they stay the same meaning we are no closer to a national championship than a few years back.

Still trolling.

As you've stopped watching, you should also stop posting until ND wins a NC as a public service. Meantime you can shave your shave in meaningful protest.

 

[no.1IrishFan]

Ok from a Notre Dame perspective what has changed since the BCS era ended? In the BCS era if Notre Dame went undefeated and no more than 2 teams were unbeaten they would be selected to play for a national championship e.g. 2012. Now with the playoff format Notre Dame still needs to go undefeated to play in the playoffs as now all it means is that going undefeated means you are most likely guaranteed a playoff spot but being a 1 loss team is still not good enough for Notre Dame.

For these reasons I stopped watching after the loss to FSU last year and I've stopped watching after this years loss to Clemson. So in short the more things change the more they stay the same meaning we are no closer to a national championship than a few years back.

BYE, FELICIA!

 

[Cogs]

Shorten season by 1 game (pointless non-conference games), keep conference champion ship. 16 team playoff would be a BLAST. My god, you could even do winners of each conference plus 6 at large. Shit would be bigger than March Madness.

 

[alohagoirish]

This system is far and away better then the BCS. 4 team playoff allows all kinds of potentials that were simply impossible before. ND for example could run the table with its only loss to the undefeated ,#1 Clemson team, and squeeze in the #4 spot looking for a rematch. Fantasy , perhaps , but so much is possible that wasn't.

BCS is clearly a step back from this 4 team playoff and its wide ranging possible outcomes, what would be a step up would be an 8 team playoff. Expect that within 6 years.

 

[NDhoosier]

Ok from a Notre Dame perspective what has changed since the BCS era ended? In the BCS era if Notre Dame went undefeated and no more than 2 teams were unbeaten they would be selected to play for a national championship e.g. 2012. Now with the playoff format Notre Dame still needs to go undefeated to play in the playoffs as now all it means is that going undefeated means you are most likely guaranteed a playoff spot but being a 1 loss team is still not good enough for Notre Dame.

For these reasons I stopped watching after the loss to FSU last year and I've stopped watching after this years loss to Clemson. So in short the more things change the more they stay the same meaning we are no closer to a national championship than a few years back.

Then you are not really a fan... You fit more under the bandwagon fan category.

 

[wizards8507]

I prefer the pre BCS model, multiple bowls that no longer matter were huge, must watch games back then... Cfb was at its best then... Too much wanting it to be like the NFL and the like IMO... Not a BCS guy but def hate the playoff

Word.

 

[Grahambo]

Life's too short to worry about going undefeated, national titles, etc. I mean, would it be great to win a natty? Hell yes. Is that the goal? Hell yes.

At the same time, just enjoy watching the Irish every week. Enjoy it for the moment and not for what happens a few months down the road.

 

[dad4aa]

I prefer the pre BCS model, multiple bowls that no longer matter were huge, must watch games back then... Cfb was at its best then... Too much wanting it to be like the NFL and the like IMO... Not a BCS guy but def hate the playoff

If you are going to "crown" a National Champion then there has to be a playoff. Letting a committee or computer program decide which two teams out of 120 deserve to play for a National Championship is just stupid. Way to much bias into those decisions...even with computer picks. All other sports...including all other levels of football...have a playoff. The problem is it needs to be at least 8 teams. Not sure it needs to be more than that, people's opinions will vary on that topic. But if you are going to have 5 special elite conferences (Power 5) then you have to have one team from each of those conferences have the ability to make the playoffs.

5 undefeated teams at the end of the season will likely never happen, but if the top team/conference champion was undefeated in all Power 5 conferences...one conference would miss the playoffs. The discussion can be made that one conference is weaker than another, but they are all in the Power 5 group and, in this case, should all be represented. Will need at least a 5 team playoff.

Add to that, the typical SEC argument that they have the toughest conference in the country (again debatable but will say they do for the next argument). Then the second best team in the country could be a 1-loss team from the SEC. Since we have to have 5 teams to cover all the Power 5 conferences...a minimum of 8 teams in the playoff is needed. Add 3 at large teams and you cover this argument as well as the opportunity for an Independent like Notre Dame to advance (or a 1-loss power 5 conference champion to advance along with an undefeated ND) and the potential for a really strong non-power 5 conference team to advance.

IMO this would at least handle 90% of the debate about the current playoff format and not extend the season too much for student athletes. Football is too tough a game to have a playoff system like basketball. There is no way football players could handle two games in a week like what happens in March Madness. The more games we add, the much longer the season and that is a big negative to a lot of people. Changing from a 4 to an 8 game format adds one week and covers all the bases...again, JMHO.

 

[ickythump1225]

I think we should have either A)kept the BCS rankings and just used 1-4 as the playoff (with the option to expand to 8 at some point) or B) just used the plus 1 method. At the conclusion of the bowl schedule take the number 1 and number 2 teams and have them play.

 

[kmoose]

Life's too short to worry about going undefeated, national titles, etc. I mean, would it be great to win a natty? Hell yes. Is that the goal? Hell yes.

At the same time, just enjoy watching the Irish every week. Enjoy it for the moment and not for what happens a few months down the road.

^^^THIS^^^

 

[wizards8507]

If you are going to "crown" a National Champion then there has to be a playoff.

Therein lies the problem. The very premise of crowning one "definitive" national champion in a field of 120 teams playing 12 or 13 games each is absurd. It can't be done. It's a futile exercise. The playoff creates an illusion of legitimacy, but there are too many teams and too few games for there to be any kind of valid determination at the end of the season that's any better than the "eye test" of the old system. College football used to be able to claim the best regular season in sports, but the bigger we make the playoff, the less relevant "any given Saturday" becomes.

 

[ACamp1900]

Therein lies the problem. The very premise of crowning one "definitive" national champion in a field of 120 teams playing 12 or 13 games each is absurd. It can't be done. It's a futile exercise. The playoff creates an illusion of legitimacy, but there are too many teams and too few games for there to be any kind of valid determination at the end of the season that's any better than the "eye test" of the old system. College football used to be able to claim the best regular season in sports, but the bigger we make the playoff, the less relevant "any given Saturday" becomes.

Agreed, reps deserved and given... I'll also add, a playoff crowns nothing but who is hottest at that given time.

 

[anarin]

All of this can be fixed if the top 25 poll didn't come out until the 5th or 6th week of the season. At that point you can rank accordingly. By the end of the season you can have a top 8 playoff.

But hey that's just my opinion.

 

[Grahambo]

Therein lies the problem. The very premise of crowning one "definitive" national champion in a field of 120 teams playing 12 or 13 games each is absurd. It can't be done. It's a futile exercise. The playoff creates an illusion of legitimacy, but there are too many teams and too few games for there to be any kind of valid determination at the end of the season that's any better than the "eye test" of the old system. College football used to be able to claim the best regular season in sports, but the bigger we make the playoff, the less relevant "any given Saturday" becomes.

Also, reps.

It's partly why I've settled for a double digit win season and a bowl win. That to me, is a great year.

 

[dad4aa]

Agreed, reps deserved and given... I'll also add, a playoff crowns nothing but who is hottest at that given time.

Isn't that how playoffs works in all sports?

 

[dad4aa]

Therein lies the problem. The very premise of crowning one "definitive" national champion in a field of 120 teams playing 12 or 13 games each is absurd. It can't be done. It's a futile exercise. The playoff creates an illusion of legitimacy, but there are too many teams and too few games for there to be any kind of valid determination at the end of the season that's any better than the "eye test" of the old system. College football used to be able to claim the best regular season in sports, but the bigger we make the playoff, the less relevant "any given Saturday" becomes.

Totally disagree. If all teams made the playoffs then yes, this would hold true. If you have to win your conference or finish with an 11-1/12-0 record to advance then EVERY given Saturday matters.

 

[ACamp1900]

Isn't that how playoffs works in all sports?

And playoffs for the sake of are stupid in all sports.... I'm willing to take the bigger sample size over entertainment value.

 

[ulukinatme]

I think the playoff system is fine, but it really needs to be 8 teams and I think it's just a matter of time before we get there. Money will drive them to add the extra 4 teams, that's an extra week of playoff football. To be honest, unless they have 3 or more losses, every Power 5 Champ should be in. The remaining 3 spots should go to anyone deserving, regardless of conference, with no more than 2 teams from any one conference taking part. That gives the Boise State's of the world a chance to take part. No first round Bye's for anyone either.

 

[wizards8507]

Totally disagree. If all teams made the playoffs then yes, this would hold true. If you have to win your conference or finish with an 11-1/12-0 record to advance then EVERY given Saturday matters.

How many seasons have eight teams finished with one loss or less? Never? We're already seeing the "any given Saturday" thing wither. Alabama loses to Ole Miss? No worries. The first comment out of everyone's mouth is "Alabama is still in this."

 

[Monk]

How many seasons have eight teams finished with one loss or less? Never? We're already seeing the "any given Saturday" thing wither. Alabama loses to Ole Miss? No worries. The first comment out of everyone's mouth is "Alabama is still in this."

Yes, but most people would say Alabama still has a shot at being ranked 2nd by the end of the year and making the BCS NC game if it was still around. How many years did 2 undefeated teams actually play in the BCS NC game. A 4 team playoff still keeps the regular season just as relevant as before with a better chance of having a true National Champion. I am on the fence with an 8 team playoff. It would make the end of the season much more interesting and give ND a better shot at winning a NC, but do those extra 4 teams deserve the chance to win it. The problem is you will have many more years like last year where there are 5 or 6 teams that are very comparable and should have an opportunity to compete in the playoffs.

I don't believe you can go back to the pre BCS for the fact that an undefeated team with a crappy schedule would get real consideration as the National Champion. At least make that team play some top competition in a playoff like Ohio State did last year. They had an awful regular season schedule and maybe that helped them stay healthy for the playoffs, but they still beat 2 of the best teams in CFB to win the Championship.

 

[ACamp1900]

In the pre BCS that team plays a major bowl game that matters... Add the plus one and if that team wins they actually get a shot... What people don't realize is with this system you keep the bowl as what they were always meant to be, which is a great thing, AND you have more than just four teams involved in the process, you actually expand the potential field without locking yourself forever and always into some expanded playoff that as a result ruins cfb's greatest strength, the reg season.

 

[Monk]

In the pre BCS that team plays a major bowl game that matters... Add the plus one and if that team wins they actually get a shot... What people don't realize is with this system you keep the bowl as what they were always meant to be, which is a great thing, AND you have more than just four teams involved in the process, you actually expand the potential field without locking yourself forever and always into some expanded playoff that as a result ruins cfb's greatest strength, the reg season.

I don't have a problem necessarily with a plus one where they take 2 teams from the winner of the major bowl games and have them play in a championship game. If that was the case, it would be considered a playoff though. If I'm remembering correctly, the pre BCS model didn't always put the 1 verse 2 in the major bowl game. It was 1 playing 6(random low rank) and 2 playing 4(random low rank), then just deciding which of those two teams should be ranked number one. To me, that it is a crazy way to pick the best team in CFB. Correct me if I'm wrong on which ranked team played who back then. It was a long time ago.