Another person who gets it:
… What I fear such a movement [for a playoff -ed.] may get rid of — while failing to temper cries of fans — is the loyalty of fans and the popularity and competiveness of the greatness that is college football. Currently every game counts. One loss can be the difference between the Rose Bowl and the Cotton Bowl.
With a playoff all of that changes. One, two and maybe even three losses with the increased number of games being played could be acceptable to making the playoff field. Then Division 1 football becomes a second tier NFL.
So by all means, complain, moan, curse the football gods and the BCS, but think of the repercussions a change from the BCS to a playoff will have on the sport that sees unrivaled support and dedication from its fans.
Get The Picture 
I think you’ll find a four team playoff would probably never have a three loss team. And rarely have a two loss team.
LikeLike
Alas, I don’t get it. Conference champs only. Problem solved.
LikeLike
I think he’s attacking the uncertainty of what the process might deliver. “Be careful what you wish for”, and all that.
I agree with both of your points – but if we wind up with, say, a 16 team playoff, he’s going to be a lot more correct than you guys are about the consequences.
LikeLike
The conference champs only would have to be a plus 10 affair if it meant all conference champs and an 8 team affair for BCS champs and two extras. Also, what do you do with Notre Dame.
Having more teams than four would mean a significant change probably abolishing the BCS. I personally don’t want that.
Also, an 8 team playoff would almost definitely mean a huge change in the bowl system and the importance they feel they hold in the college football world.
LikeLike
First off, nothing is going to happen until the BCS contract comes up for renewal. Secondly, there are too many variables for a basketball march madness type tourney could ever be adopted (the season would be too long, the regular season means crap, revenues are all out of whack, etc…).
In my humble opinion, the only logical baby step to making everybody happy(er), is to keep the BCS computer system and have a “plus one” game. It adds a new bowl to the situation (not like we need it, but it’s revenue). Only extends the season by one more game. It essentially creates a playoff system for teams 1 through 4. And face it, if you are the 5th ranked team in the country, you don’t have too much of an argument that you should be #1.
Here’s a question: in the history of the BCS, what % of teams in the top 4 going into the BCS bowls were undefeated, one loss, two loss, etc…? Historically, where would the controversies be? I’m just curious to know.
LikeLike
The plus one leaves you in the same predicament as now if it is not clear which two games yield the winners who will play in the plus one game beforehand. That’s why it makes more sense to have some system as we have now to pick the four best teams and let them play in a playoff.
Example: If you matchup one and two and then have a plus one and three and four play in separate bowls, then both will argue they should play in the plus one game. Sometimes the plus one would be very clear as in 2004 with Auburn, but most times it will not and only leave us where we are now.
LikeLike
kckd –
One, two, three and four have to all play in only two bowls (admittedly, this is complicated by some of the conference contracts that are with certain bowls).
You just take the top two bowls (which rotate every year as they do now). The only issue is seeding. Does 1 play 2 in one bowl and 3 play 4 in another with the winners meeting in the new champ bowl? Or, does 1 play 4 and 2 play 3 like traditional tourney seeding. It doesn’t really matter to me. I think that we are talking about the same thing here. It’s just a matter of semantics and seeding to decide how the top 4 duke it out.
LikeLike
Hassan we are in agreement. But traditionally the plus, as I understand it, is to just play the bowls as is (not making sure that the top four play each other, which would be a four team playoff) and then pick two to play another game after all the bowls are finished. And that is no different than what we already have, except it’s prolonged another week.
LikeLike