This Guy Has It Figured Out

[Tennesseeirish]

Check this out guys. What do you think?

The Wetzel plan - NCAA Football - Yahoo! Sports

 

[NDSMC78]

Point # 1--Imagine attending games in December in State College, PA, Columbus, OH, Madison, WI, Ann Arbor, MI, South Bend, IN, etc., for three weeks in a row. That's asking a lot of fans.

Point # 2--It's asking even more of the home venues to be able to have a bunch of hotel rooms and restaurants available on a week's notice.

Point # 3--How would you like to be a fan of a lower ranked team which pulls a couple upsets and have to travel to, say, Athens, GA, Norman, OK, and State College, PA, three weeks in a row, again all on a week's notice?

Point # 4--Despite the author's claim to the contrary, this would indeed kill the bowl games.

Point # 5--Does anyone really think we need games like Central Michigan playing Missouri?

I frankly think this is one of the worst playoff proposals which I have seen yet.

 

[SoCalDomer]

If going to a play off system, I would not have 16 teams, i would only go with 8, for many of the reasons mentioned by NDSMC78.

I would also differentiate between top tier conferences and the lower tier conferences. The SEC, Pac-10, ACC, Big-10, Big 12, and Big East (top tier) teams faced a much more difficulty task than the WAC, MAC, Mid-American, Sun Belt and Conf-USA (lower tier) teams.

And then there's the issue of rank vs conf champ being the deciding criteria for seed placement. On the one hand I think conf champ deserves something, but the conf champ may not have played all the same teams as a higher ranked member of the conf who played tougher non-conf games and only lost to the conf champ.

A playoff should not mix the top tier teams and lower tier teams. I guess there could be three playoff systems (D-1AA already does a playoff).

In the end, it's a mess and I don't think it will ever be fixed. Let's set up a system where USC can claim they "won" a championship because someone voted it to them. Oh wait, we already did that.

 

[Tennesseeirish]

Point # 1--Imagine attending games in December in State College, PA, Columbus, OH, Madison, WI, Ann Arbor, MI, South Bend, IN, etc., for three weeks in a row. That's asking a lot of fans.

Point # 2--It's asking even more of the home venues to be able to have a bunch of hotel rooms and restaurants available on a week's notice.

Point # 3--How would you like to be a fan of a lower ranked team which pulls a couple upsets and have to travel to, say, Athens, GA, Norman, OK, and State College, PA, three weeks in a row, again all on a week's notice?

Point # 4--Despite the author's claim to the contrary, this would indeed kill the bowl games.

Point # 5--Does anyone really think we need games like Central Michigan playing Missouri?

I frankly think this is one of the worst playoff proposals which I have seen yet.

Do you think the George Mason fans complained about traveling EVERY week up to the Final Four a few years ago??

 

[Newc]

Exactly, the whole travel thing is going to be what shoots down any playoff system that the NCAA can come up with.

 

[The Polish Irishman]

I have crapped better ideas than this one.....Troy are you serious

 

[NDSMC78]

Do you think the George Mason fans complained about traveling EVERY week up to the Final Four a few years ago??

Point #1 --basketball arenas typically seat 15,000 or so. Football stadiums seat 80,000, and up to over 100,000. Huge difference.

Point #2--ever been to the first round of an NCAA basketball tourney? There are tons of empty seats.

Point # 3--How many George Mason fans went to all rounds? I don't know, but I would wager not too many.

 

[loomis41973]

Another piss poor article and idea by Wetzel.

 

[Sureal]

If going to a play off system, I would not have 16 teams, i would only go with 8, for many of the reasons mentioned by NDSMC78.

I would also differentiate between top tier conferences and the lower tier conferences. The SEC, Pac-10, ACC, Big-10, Big 12, and Big East (top tier) teams faced a much more difficulty task than the WAC, MAC, Mid-American, Sun Belt and Conf-USA (lower tier) teams.

And then there's the issue of rank vs conf champ being the deciding criteria for seed placement. On the one hand I think conf champ deserves something, but the conf champ may not have played all the same teams as a higher ranked member of the conf who played tougher non-conf games and only lost to the conf champ.

A playoff should not mix the top tier teams and lower tier teams. I guess there could be three playoff systems (D-1AA already does a playoff).

In the end, it's a mess and I don't think it will ever be fixed. Let's set up a system where USC can claim they "won" a championship because someone voted it to them. Oh wait, we already did that.

Exactly. Let's have a champion of popular opinion!!!

This system that we have is crap. There needs to be a plus one or something better. But that 16 team thing is ridiculous.

Central Michigan... Horrible.

 

[KAPLAN]

8 at most, 4 would be good. If you are the #5 team you have no claim thus cannot complain about at 4 team playoff. A 16 team playoff would kill the bowls and make them alot less relavant. Do you think the Sugar Bowl would really want the #4 SEC team as its rep?

 

[Sureal]

I'm rooting for Oklahoma. I for one don't want to see the Ohio State Buckeyes get blown out again in a championship game but hey who cares. Two teams from the weakest BCS conferences vying for the "National Championship of Popular Opinion".

OSU v. WVU playing in January to determine who is the best team in college football.

Right.

 

[ColonialHead]

When I think of exciting football, I don't tend to think of Central Michigan vs. Missouri or UCF and Ohio State.

The bracket in this scenario produces a couple of favorable match-ups, just like the current bowl system will produce a couple of favorable match-ups. But it also produces a few really louses match-ups and rewards teams too heavily for having a good season. Especially when strength of schedule doesn't seem to have any effect on this proposal.

In this scenario, Ohio State is rewarded for their 11-1 season with a first round match-up with UCF. But did Ohio State achieve that by beating teams like Youngstown State, Akron and Kent State?

In this scenario, LSU gets saddled with a first round match-up against Boston College and a much greater risk of a first round loss than Ohio State, when in actuality, they are pretty equal teams. How is that fair.

I also loved the portion of the article where the author says:

Yes, all 11. Even the lousy conferences. While no one would argue that the winner of the Mid-American Conference is one of the top 16 teams in the country, there are multiple benefits of including champions of low-level leagues.

How is including the "lousy conferences" (author's words not mine) top teams going to provide "multiple benefits" to anybody?

The author makes a point of talking about how these "Cinderella" teams would do wonders for their school and for their fans:

For even lower-rated conferences – the Sun Belts, the MACs – allowing annual access to the tournament would not only set off celebrations on small campuses but it would encourage investment in the sport at all levels. Suddenly, there would be a reason for teams in those leagues to really care.

Since when should that be a factor in determining who the best team in the country is? You think I give a flying turd about the Middle Tennessee State University fan base and what this system would do for their school or SunBelt football??

It's not about marketing.... it's about implementing a system that best determines the champion of Div-I college football.

I'll be the first to admit that the current system has it's flaws. But I have never been a proponent of a playoff and this particular proposal is about the worst I have ever seen.

 

[Moostache]

If you are the #5 team you have no claim thus cannot complain about at 4 team playoff.

The 1977 Irish would probably have to dispute your claim that #5 has no claim top a national title playoff scenario...

I have always favored a 12-team playoff system.

11 games.
4 weeks.
Start on the first weekend in December.
Championship game on first weekend in January.

Stipulation #1 - conference cash-grabs, err....I meant conference title games would be outlawed....if conferences want to name a champ on the field, schedule fewer cupcakes and play it off in season or reduce the size of your conferences to actually allow a round-robin....

Stipulation #2 - guidelines would be in place for participation similar to the current BCS requirements - ie. no conference getting 3 slots, ND qualification requirements similar, etc...

The top 4 teams in a BCS-like rating system would get byes and seeded accordingly.
The next 8 teams would playoff in round one games at the home field of the higher seed.

The winners of those 4 games would then travel to the home stadium of the bye teams in re-seeded fashion (say that the #12 team somehow beat the #5 team, then the #12 team would be @ the #1 overall seed in round two and so on).

The semi-finals would be held in neutral sites (rotating through either the bowl game venues or NFL stadiums).

The championship game would be annually held in the Rose Bowl (or if that was too much of a stumbling block, it could be rotated through the Orange, Rose, Sugar and Cotton Bowls - go back to some traditional "Big Four - New Year's Day Games" - scrap the damn Fiesta Bowl!!! Hell until the mid-1980's the Fiesta was a "joke" bowl game anyway...kind of like the Poulian Weedeater Independence Bowl but funnier because ND was nto in it...))

If people wanted to keep the other existing bowl games (as a door prize for teams who couldn't qualify for the tourney yet wanted to have alumni gatherings and trips and an extra 6-weeks of practice time), then be my guest...those games are already meaningless made-for-TV exhibitions NOW and we have NO playoff anyway! Let the status quo rule and show a College game on every night of the week in December on ESPN: The Ocho!

 

[fitz_bu47]

THis plan isn't that great, but I would take it over what we got now anyday. I played in the NAIA and the top 16 teams in the rankings got in. One year we finished 17th so we played in a bowl game, I do think he is right that you can have a playoff and keep some of the bowl games for good teams that don't make it. You could also use the BCS games as the quarter's, semi's and rotate which one would be the title game. I do agree w/ you guys though if they were to do this then they would need to do it on rankings, strength of schedule etc. not just conference champs b/c Troy, Central Mich. etc. is a bit ridiculous.

 

[Fishin'_Irish]

Instead of making points, I'm just going to agree with what Colonial Head said. (Heh, I'm a poet.)

 

[SoCalDomer]

Stipulation #1 - conference cash-grabs, err....I meant conference title games would be outlawed....if conferences want to name a champ on the field, schedule fewer cupcakes and play it off in season or reduce the size of your conferences to actually allow a round-robin....

Absolutely.

 

[IHateMarkMay]

The real thing that irks me about the situation now, is that Notre Dame played their bowl game last year at the superdome... only miles away from LSU... i think if its a situation like that, the bowl should be moved or have the committees unable to select a team that is in a 300 mile radius of the bowl site. If it is the national championship and, for example LSU and ND play in the National Championship and its supposed to be held at the Superdome. I believe that the Superdome should have to switch with another venue for that year. I find it unfair to teams that are from the North where the bowl sites are few and far between.

 

[SoCalDomer]

Good point IHMM. I recall all the prognosticators last year saying it was definitely a home game for LSU.

 

[piyachi]

I couldn't believe that either - in reality in was only partially a LSU home game because ND has the strongest national following, but say this was OSU vs LSU - it would be insane.

This system is effed five ways from friday. It really is a shame that the entire thing is based around money instead of what is good for the student athletes and the fans. A playoff would help to determine a real champion and not leave teams like this years Hawaii, or last years Boise State out in the cold wondering if they ever could have won it all. I mean I don't think they win it, but who am I or the voters to determine that? Ugh the whole thing just makes me sick...

 

[quiksilver253]

terrible idea. so basically if notre dame is say ranked 18 in the nation, then they dont deserve a spot because they arent ranked high enough and there arent enough spots

 

[stonebreakerwasgod]

I say top 4. If you're #5, tough crap.

 

[IHateMarkMay]

I say top 4. If you're #5, tough crap.

Thats what they are saying now... except its the top 2, if your #3 tough crap...

 

[stonebreakerwasgod]

At least it's a playoff, and not just one game.

 

[piyachi]

Moose - why would you need to go to all that complication?

I don't think we need a 'conference winner' like central-who-effin-cares-university in there, but why make it complicated?

Take the top 16 teams, divide them via voting the same way mens bball does, and let the higher seed play at home. More revenue for programs, 16 teams with a shot to win it, and no muss or fuss.

Why dump conference championship games? Those other guys eat that up....although I don't get it. Just make it independent of the playoff - and extra week in between the end of the regular season where they could either rest for the playoffs or play their little game.

 

[stonebreakerwasgod]

You wanna add four more games at the end of year as opposed to ONE more. Well......two more for the conferences that are greedy and have championships.
I think it's too much. Maybe go with the top 10, and have a play-in game or two.

 

[ACamp1900]

I read as far as "A playoff is coming..." and closed the link... those are my thoughts...

 

[piyachi]

You wanna add four more games at the end of year as opposed to ONE more. Well......two more for the conferences that are greedy and have championships.
I think it's too much. Maybe go with the top 10, and have a play-in game or two.

Would people complain about the number of rounds in March Madness? I think the whole process is what is so fun, not just the title game (it's almost a letdown when you make it to the final four). I can't see a playoff as small as 16 teams being boring or tedious. The concern I would have is for player injuries and interfering with finals and whatnot.

The best way to answer this, and something the NCAA in its....bureaucracy would never do, is ask the players. Have every single D1A football player vote and see what they would like to do. I can assure you that the vote will unanimously support a playoff - but the NCAA doesn't care because all the players do is give their all for the team. They aren't the ones with money.

 

[stonebreakerwasgod]

There is NO question that it would be awesome. But at some point, it's not about the fans, it's about the players, their bodies, and education. It's too much.

Now if the season got cut down to 10 games, then maybe I could see a top 10 playoff, with a play in game or two.
But the other schools won't go for that because of two lost games.

It ain't gonna work, and it'll never get done beyond a 4 game playoff.

 

[ACamp1900]

Would people complain about the number of rounds in March Madness? I think the whole process is what is so fun, not just the title game (it's almost a letdown when you make it to the final four). I can't see a playoff as small as 16 teams being boring or tedious. The concern I would have is for player injuries and interfering with finals and whatnot.

The best way to answer this, and something the NCAA in its....bureaucracy would never do, is ask the players. Have every single D1A football player vote and see what they would like to do. I can assure you that the vote will unanimously support a playoff - but the NCAA doesn't care because all the players do is give their all for the team. They aren't the ones with money.

Do people give a damn about college basketball in ANY regard other than March Madness???????????

Here's a great idea...

Leave cfb continue exactly how it is right now... and it'll continue to be the most interesting sport in the country... wow, that's a new idea!!!

 

[NDSMC78]

Would people complain about the number of rounds in March Madness? I think the whole process is what is so fun, not just the title game (it's almost a letdown when you make it to the final four). I can't see a playoff as small as 16 teams being boring or tedious. The concern I would have is for player injuries and interfering with finals and whatnot.

The best way to answer this, and something the NCAA in its....bureaucracy would never do, is ask the players. Have every single D1A football player vote and see what they would like to do. I can assure you that the vote will unanimously support a playoff - but the NCAA doesn't care because all the players do is give their all for the team. They aren't the ones with money.

I don't know about you, but until the NCAA tournament comes around, the only college basketball I watch is when ND plays. Why watch regular season basketball? Any remotely decent club is going to make the tourney.