My BCS Solution

[GoldenDomer21]

Ok, lets see if I can bring this back to life here.

First, 14 to 15 games is not to much. Other sports play twice as many and I dare you to tell them that their sport isn't as tough or abusive or time consuming. and if you want to gripe and complain about it. Lessen the regular season to 10 games. Its used to 10, and fewer in years past.

Second, we need to moved to a playoff system! Period! No more complaining about the voting system, which is inherently flawed. It's all to unfortunate that a playoff systems would still depend on a voting system to name the 8 teams who play.

Here is my idea...

Name 6 regional conferences for Division 1
South: All Schools south of Kentucky, west of Georgia, and east of Austin, TX. Not including Florida.
Atlantic: All schools in states along the Atlantic coast. Including West Virginia
Midwest: All states east of the Atlantic conference, north of Kentucky, and West of the Dakotas. Basically the Big 10 including Kentucky.
Mountain: All states west of the Dakotas, north of Texas, and go into Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado.
Desert: West of Austin, TX to the SoCal border, including Nevada, Utah, and Idaho.
Pacific: All States touching the Pacific Coast and Hawaii.

6 regional conferences each have one bid into a 8 team playoff. 2 wild card positions given to the two hardest conferences of that year. Voted on by football experts, not coaches.

Each season consists of 11 games, plus conference championship, plus playoff. Cross divisional (D1 vs D1aa or 2) games are allowed, but disqualify you from the playoff system. (No NC for you!)
Each Conference is mandated to play 7 conference games, plus 4 non conference.

There is no National ranking system in this. Yikes! I know. Each conference is voted on and has a ranking of its own. SOS, quality wins and losses, record all have a big meaning. Losing late has a lesser meaning.

This way each team is forced to play the best in their conference in order to win. And we keep all 120 D1 teams.

This is just an idea. It needs tweeking. So tweak it!

 

[coachjohnson]

too much money is lost by doing a playoff system and some of the smaller schools would loose money. BCS is definitely flawed but plus 1 is good.

 

[Echo Insanity]

just have a 64 team tournament. lol

 

[SoCalDomer]

Ok, lets see if I can bring this back to life here.

First, 14 to 15 games is not to much. Other sports play twice as many and I dare you to tell them that their sport isn't as tough or abusive or time consuming. and if you want to gripe and complain about it. Lessen the regular season to 10 games. Its used to 10, and fewer in years past.

Second, we need to moved to a playoff system! Period! No more complaining about the voting system, which is inherently flawed. It's all to unfortunate that a playoff systems would still depend on a voting system to name the 8 teams who play.

Here is my idea...

Name 6 regional conferences for Division 1
South: All Schools south of Kentucky, west of Georgia, and east of Austin, TX. Not including Florida.
Atlantic: All schools in states along the Atlantic coast. Including West Virginia
Midwest: All states east of the Atlantic conference, north of Kentucky, and West of the Dakotas. Basically the Big 10 including Kentucky.
Mountain: All states west of the Dakotas, north of Texas, and go into Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado.
Desert: West of Austin, TX to the SoCal border, including Nevada, Utah, and Idaho.
Pacific: All States touching the Pacific Coast and Hawaii.

6 regional conferences each have one bid into a 8 team playoff. 2 wild card positions given to the two hardest conferences of that year. Voted on by football experts, not coaches.

Each season consists of 11 games, plus conference championship, plus playoff. Cross divisional (D1 vs D1aa or 2) games are allowed, but disqualify you from the playoff system. (No NC for you!)
Each Conference is mandated to play 7 conference games, plus 4 non conference.

There is no National ranking system in this. Yikes! I know. Each conference is voted on and has a ranking of its own. SOS, quality wins and losses, record all have a big meaning. Losing late has a lesser meaning.

This way each team is forced to play the best in their conference in order to win. And we keep all 120 D1 teams.

This is just an idea. It needs tweeking. So tweak it!

OK, i am really confused on how this solves the problem of making sure the best teams make it to the playoffs or NC game.

There are 120 teams in D1. You want to make 6 conferences. That means there are 20 teams in a conference. You have each team playing 7 conf games and 4 non-conf games. The winner of each conf get's an auto bid in the 8-team playoff.

Here's where I'm confused or your system is flawed. Let's say two teams play the bottom (worst) 7 teams in a conf and both win all of those games, 7-0. Both of those teams go to the conf championship and the winner goes to the playoff. That result is worse than we have right now. You have the two most underserving teams with a chance to go to the NC playoffs.

What happens if two one-loss teams played all of the toughest teams in a conf?? Neither of them get to go to the conf championship, and the likelihood of getting a "wild card" bid is very slim. How does that solve the problem that undeserving teams make it to the NC game/playoff games??

This is why in my original post, I seperated the weak conferences in D-1 vs the BCS confs. Since not every team in the BCS confs are good teams, I moved them down.

Until you can get everyone playing as close to the same stength of schedule, there will always be arguments that a team with one more loss is more deserving than another team.

 

[GoldenDomer21]

I see what your saying. What I was thinking to make sure the most deserving teams get put in the tourney is that there is no more national ranking, only rankings within each conference. So first through 20th. All voted on by professionals based on record, SOS, quality wins, and quality losses. This will force each team to attempt to play a harder schedule. This way you're not trying to shove 120 teams into 8 spots, only 20 into 2 spots per conference. Plus wild cards.

And I wouldn't based it on record. Record has a factor, but it would not be the sole deciding factor like it is in conferences now. That way the teams that play the cupcake schedules don't rise to the top. The LSU's that play 4 tough teams and lose two games move to the top.

The idea is that the conference championship is used as an extension to the 8 team NCAA tournament. Which allows 12 teams to vi for the big game. 1 in 10 teams have a shot. Plus the two wild card spots, much like your idea. Best non winning team in the strongest conferences ect... As opposed to 1 in 60 with the BCS system.

People say this will take away from the season. But I think if you make SOS an important enough factor in choosing the conference contenders the teams will be forced to play as many tough teams as they can handle. Playing 7 conference games will allow them to play at the very least 2 teams that would be considered top 25 under the current system. And playing the 4 non conference games will give each team a chance to schedule at least 2 to 3 contending teams. For 4 to 5 tough games, and then middle of the road games and a couple of cup cakes.

I just can't see dismissing 40 or so teams to D1aa. Beyond being bad for revenue, it would be bad for recruiting. Players with top talent will want to stick to D1a. It would create this huge divide where even if a team was able to talk some talent into going to school with them and be able to crawl out of D1aa, they would be hard pressed to compete right away, and probably not for 10 years or so.

I agree that there needs to be some restructuring. I also think there needs to be new ways of picking the best teams. I think instead of sitting a bunch of analysts in a room and having them decide, they need to get 20 or 30 guys like you and me together and have us hash it out...not likely.

 

[ACamp1900]

thanks for putting this together SoCal... I will say this... ANYTHING that has the word "playoff" in it gets left at the door for me...

best things about cfb...

-tradition (bowls, conference rivals, inter-sect. rivals and such)
-intensity (sorry, every sport that has a playoff can only match cfb during the postseason, cfb is that intense every game... you lose that, you lose half my interest)
-honestly, I simply don't enjoy playoffs as much... and sorry playoff thumpers you have plenty of sports that get ruined imo by such formats that you can choose to enjoy whenever you please... the only sport that keeps it truely interesting is cfb... i love it!

PLEASE don't mess with it

my stance isn't the popular one I know but I am very passionate about it... why some insist on having all sports EXACTLY the same is beyond me...

 

[Legacy]

SoCal,
Reps for so much thought and work. I feel everything on which it's based - "The NCAA takes over" (and reorganizes for a National Championship goal) is flawed. The NCAA will not intervene. They got $96 million from the bowls last year (http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/postseason_football/2006-07/5_yr_summary_GR.pdf) for doing little, the conferences are too strong and want to maintain their relationships. The BCS conferences have bowl contracts with associated TV networks and carved up $147 million in profits last year (http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/postseason_football/2006-07/Excess_Bowl_Rev-Exp.pdf). Why should a BCS conference let a team from a non-BCS in on the take? Money drives this.
Plus traditional affiliations. Some have reorganized in a similar manner and eliminated all independents. How do you feel about ND as part of the Big 10 (with PSU going to the Big East)?

 

[SoCalDomer]

How do you feel about ND as part of the Big 10 (with PSU going to the Big East)?

i say no way. not because of the tradition of it, but because ND would lose their national appeal.

 

[SoCalDomer]

SoCal,
Reps for so much thought and work. I feel everything on which it's based - "The NCAA takes over" (and reorganizes for a National Championship goal) is flawed. The NCAA will not intervene. They got $96 million from the bowls last year for doing little, the conferences are too strong and want to maintain their relationships.

I know, asking the NCAA to take hold of something and run it efficiently and fairly is kind of joke. But, did I forget to mention i appointed myself head of the NCAA? LOL. My first order of business would be to sanction Urban Liar and Petey the Poodle out of CFB.

The BCS conferences have bowl contracts with associated TV networks and carved up $147 million in profits last year.

No doubt money is the biggest obstacle here. But my system assumes the NCAA goes out to the current bowl affiliations and negotiates the contracts to allow them to market it etc. You could still have the OrangeBowl, Cotton Bowl, Gator bowl, etc. The only change would be that the BCS does not determine who goes to each bowl, the NCAA does based on the conf champ system in my first post.

Why should a BCS conference let a team from a non-BCS in on the take? Money drives this.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here. My system seperates the BCS schools from the non-BCS schools in D-1. Yes, some current non-BCS schools would be moved into one of the Big-6 conf, but some would be moved out too. The sharing would still go in within the conf. So none of the Big-6 conferences woudl share the bowl money with non-Big-6 conference schools.

Plus, you ask how would I make them do all that? simple, you forgot i appointed myself NCAA president for life.

 

[GoldenDomer21]

thanks for putting this together SoCal... I will say this... ANYTHING that has the word "playoff" in it gets left at the door for me...

best things about cfb...

-tradition (bowls, conference rivals, inter-sect. rivals and such)
-intensity (sorry, every sport that has a playoff can only match cfb during the postseason, cfb is that intense every game... you lose that, you lose half my interest)
-honestly, I simply don't enjoy playoffs as much... and sorry playoff thumpers you have plenty of sports that get ruined imo by such formats that you can choose to enjoy whenever you please... the only sport that keeps it truely interesting is cfb... i love it!

PLEASE don't mess with it

my stance isn't the popular one I know but I am very passionate about it... why some insist on having all sports EXACTLY the same is beyond me...

I completely understand feelings of the people who think a playoff would ruin the sport of cfb. I respect those thoughts, and understand that a lot of people are very passionate about them. All of them center their arguments around tradition and excitement. But, I think steps can be taken to ensure it is exciting throughout the season and that individual school traditions are not lost.

1st, all the other sports that have playoffs have insane seasons of 20 or 30 or more games. So yeah, each game means less and less and sort of just blends into the others. The excitement dwindles and pretty soon, whats the point? cfb has 12 games right now. each one means something. Right now we have 4 BCS bowls, 8 teams, and those are the coveted spots. So whether we are chasing a bowl of a seed in a tourney, whats the real difference? Not much...If you use the BCS formula to tabulate who gets in and stays out. The hype is still there. And all we really do is shift the debate from who the best team is, to who the 9th team is. And the best team is proven on the field.

2nd, and this is the simplest of all. Make SOS mean something. Don't make it so damn easy to waltz into the playoffs beating only 2 or 3 top teams. If you want excitement, mathematically build it into the BCS formula. Schools who wish to contend will start scheduling to contend. Those that don't will go to D1aa.

3rd, I think people need a change. Tradition is great. It is great within each school. But change can be good to. Some of these fantasy changes that SoCal and others have posted may not be right, and are mostly for fun. But, some change needs to be made. Fans want a crowned champion. Fans want to leave the debate at the door about who should have made it and who shouldn't but got the shot anyway. Giving the 8 best teams the chance at the title doesn't, by any means, completely eliminate the debate. It does however, drastically reduce the anyones ability to argue the point.

 

[irishmarine]

the money men at the top wont let it happen. ever. its a shame

 

[GoldenDomer21]

Well, thats the problem. It shouldn't be about the money. It should be about the sport. CFB is supposed to be played for the purity of the game. That's why the NCAA doesn't allow the athletes to get paid. So why shouldn't everything around cfb reflect that idea? It just seems hypocritical.

cfb from the 20s to the early 60s had the right idea. Play for the love of the game. Not for the money involved with it.

 

[Legacy]

Bowl Revenues

Bowl Revenues

SoCal,
Here are the most recent bowl revenues per conference and their teams:
Conferences (# of Teams) Bowl Profit Ave profit per team
SEC (12) $28,387,595 2.37 mill
Big Ten (11) $24,596,178 2.24 mill
Big East (8) $15,379,427 1.92mill
Pac 10 (10) $18,129,063 1.81 mill
Big 12 (12) $20,337,305 1.69 mill
ACC (12) $19,561,526 1.63 million

The non-BCS teams usually get approximately $300,000 per team, much more if you are Hawaii, Boise State, Utah State and make the BCS bowl. So it's great for Boise St, Fresno St, etc to move into the big money conferences, but not appealing for the current BCS teams you are moving out - Iowa St, Baylor, etc - to D-II, who will make much less.

 

[SoCalDomer]

The non-BCS teams usually get approximately $300,000 per team, much more if you are Hawaii, Boise State, Utah State and make the BCS bowl. So it's great for Boise St, Fresno St, etc to move into the big money conferences, but not appealing for the current BCS teams you are moving out - Iowa St, Baylor, etc - to D-II, who will make much less.

No doubt moving those teams would not be appealing for them. No doubt they would not want to lose money they have flowing in. But they currently add nothing to their conf (meaning competition), they do nothing to help bring in that conf or bowl money and they add nothing to CFB as a whole.

In fact they hurt their conf by taking a disproportionate amt of money compared to what they help bring in. They hurt their conf because they lower the SOS of the top teams. They hurt CFB because playing them doesn't make the top teams more competitive.

The teams that I would move (or put on warning that they could be moved) are teams that have no business playing D-1 football.

They are the welfare teams of CFB.

 

[kmoose]

I think a playoff means too much time taken away from studies (or family).

College is meant to prepare people for "real life", right? What better lesson to learn than some "jobs" mean missing alot of holidays and/or family time. Of course, I have been averaging 65-70 hours a week since I started my new job in February, so maybe that is just some bitterness creeping out?