armchairgm
all sports, all you
+ Add Friends
You are not logged-in.
Sign Up - Log In
Main Page
Sports
Write
Articles
Hot Links
Images
Meet People
Fun
Explore
MLB - NFL - NBA - NHL - College Basketball - College Football - Soccer - Nascar - Other
Article - Locker Room Discussion
All Articles - New Articles - Today's Articles
Submit a Link - Approve Links
Picture Game - Ratings - Polls - Pick Game - Quiz Game - Spring Silliness
Random Page - Random Image - Random Fan
Edit
Page history Discuss pageWhat links here

College Football Playoff format (2nd attempt)

12
Vote

by user False Prophet

Sorry, the first time I tried this It didn't work. This is an idea I thought of last night of how a College Football playoff system would Work. The 4 major conferences (Big 10, SEC, Big 12 and Pac-10) would each have a conference championship. The winner of each conference championship would face the reverse seeded winner of the 4 non-conference championship games (i.e. the best conference team would face the worst non-conference seed). The seeding would have the 4 major conferences as the top 8 seeds in order of the home team's record, so the best conference team would face the second team in their conference, then the top eight teams not all ready in the playoffs, determined by record, would play in a normal playoffs style of seeding. There WOULD be re seeding as such: After each round, all remaining Conference Champion teams would be reseeded as the top seeds, done by record, and then the non-conference seeds would be reseeded by record. The tiebreaker will be the AP poll rankings.

So, for example, this is how it would look as of 10/5:

Conference Championship Quarter finals Semi-Finals Rose Bowl
Ohio State   
Michigan
  
Louisville


Tennessee
  
Auburn


Florida
Georgia


Notre Dame
  


Boise State


Texas
West Virginia
Clemson
USC
Rutgers
LSU


Oklahoma


Date

Thu 10/05/06, 3:57 pm EST


Enable Comment Auto-Refresher
Anonymous Fanatic #1
1151 days ago
Score 0+-
That sounds no more less complicated or less controversial than what's already in place.
Permalink | Reply
False ProphetAll-Star
1151 days ago
Score 0+-
How is it controversial, it is a 16 team playoff almost identical to the one used in the NFL
Permalink
I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer
1151 days ago
Score 0+-
(that was me, I can't seem to stay signed in now that the redesign is up) reseeding after every round would tick people off if their team was dropped to a lower seed
Permalink | Reply
False ProphetAll-Star
1151 days ago
Score 0+-
But the reasoning behind it is so if there is an upset where say Oregon beat USC, if the other 3 favorites win, then they would be seeded higher.
Permalink
False ProphetAll-Star
1151 days ago
Score 0+-
But how is that controversial, it's the same thing they do in the NFL, but instead the system rewards Conference Champs who stay in the tournament. I personaly think no reseeding would be better, but I'm trying to keep some of the ideas from the BCS so if it were proposed, it would get more support
Permalink
I am a cpcpMajor Leaguer
1151 days ago
Score 0+-
So what if all the games are upsets and there are no conference championships left?
Permalink
Anonymous Fanatic #2
1151 days ago
Score 0+-
You didnt need to create a new opinion. All you had to was click "edit" on your first opinion, and repaste the new code. Anyway, nice article!
Permalink | Reply
False ProphetAll-Star
1151 days ago
Score 0+-
But I wanted it to show up as a new opinion, so it would be seen by more people, otherwise I would have just edited it
Permalink
Srtellis4585JV Squad
1151 days ago
Score 0+-
Interesting...a little confused though. If there's a conference championship game (say, Ohio State vs. Michigan), do those teams end up playing each other again in the first round?
Permalink | Reply
ASwaffAll-American
1150 days ago
Score 1+-
I think the idea is that Conference Championship games become part of the tournament. Instead of having a conference championship and THEN having bowl games, the conference championships become like bowl games, where the team that wins advances and the loser is out.
Permalink
Jgov05All-American
1151 days ago
Score 2+-
I'm sorry, but the way you explained this makes absolutely no sense to me.
Permalink | Reply
Swilson3Waterboy
1151 days ago
Score 0+-
Yeah, I don't get it. It's kinda confusing.
Permalink | Reply
DNLLegend
1151 days ago
Score 0+-
It's a bit confusing, but no more so than the BCS. My big gripe is that the ACC (and to a lesser extent, the Big East) aren't "big 4." Obviously that makes sense this year, but during those years when FSU, Miami, and VTech don't all suck, and conversely, OSU and Michigan do, how do you justify the line?
Permalink | Reply
False ProphetAll-Star
1150 days ago
Score 0+-
The reason for the Big 4 to get in is that they are the usually the best conferences. If it turns out that say the best Big ten Team is 8-8 and the Big east has 4 teams better then that, while they won't have home field, they should still win. I thought about that, but the only alternate plan is to give each of the Conference Champs an Automatic Bid, but then if there is a good Independent team and 6+ non-conference champs teams that are better then some of the smaller conferences, then there are More better teams being left out
Permalink
F01123581321Tee-Baller
1150 days ago
Score 0+-
I suppose you could rotate the two semifinals and the final through the Rose, Sugar, Orange, and Fiesta bowls. With one omitted each year... or maybe the third place game? I agree with DNL, I think all 6 BCS conferences need to have equal rights to the automatic bids.
Permalink | Reply
F01123581321Tee-Baller
1150 days ago
Score 0+-
Just to help me understand, are these the correct first round matchups?

Big 10 #1 Big 10 #2

  1. 2 at-large
  2. 6 at-large

SEC West #1 SEC East #2

  1. 4 at-large
  2. 5 at-large

Big 12 North #1 Big 12 South #1

  1. 1 at-large
  2. 8 at-large

PAC 10 #1 PAC 10 #2

(I used the current USA today poll and espn conference standings to place the teams)
Permalink
F01123581321Tee-Baller
1150 days ago
Score 0+-
Sorry, I'm new here. Automatic Formatting wins this time. Why can I edit the article, but not my post? That seems a little backwards. Hopefully you can see what I'm getting at. (insert some breaks, # signs, SEC East #1 and a 3vs7 at-large game)
Permalink
PnattRed-Shirting
1150 days ago
Score -1+-
May I help? I'm a nut when it comes to iguring out playoff systems! I spent months trying to figure out the ideal finals system for the AFL Finals Series but I sorta came with the conclusion that it was alright the way it was!!
Permalink | Reply
PnattRed-Shirting
1150 days ago
Score -1+-
figuring*
Permalink
Swilson3Waterboy
1150 days ago
Score 0+-
I would support the idea of having the top four teams ranked in the BCS play. 1 vs 4, 2 vs 3, then the winners play. Anymore than four and the regular season loses importance.
Permalink | Reply
Srtellis4585JV Squad
1149 days ago
Score 0+-
I've never been a fan of the "loses importance" argument. Half the teams lose their first game of the season...so how important is the rest of the season to them if only unbeatens (or really good one loss teams) have a shot at the national championship? Not very.
Permalink
ASwaffAll-American
1150 days ago
Score 0+-
I love the format, but major conferences would never go for this. They'd lose tons of money by having their conference championship games become part of a tournament that would eliminate their number two teams at the hands of a conference opponent. I love it, but I don't think the conferences would ever go for this.
Permalink | Reply
DeuelioJV Squad
1150 days ago
Score 0+-
Do you think the #17 team would find this controversial? I think the best way, although it would still be controversial, would be to have the top four in the BCS play with the winners playing for the title.
Permalink | Reply
ASwaffAll-American
1150 days ago
Score 0+-
The number 17 team can find it controversial all they want. They finished 17, and that's just too bad. 16 teams is plenty (and obviosuly many would argue more than enough) for a CFB tournament. I think a number five team would have a much more reasonable gripe than a number 17 team, but the top four would probably be plenty. Get outside the top four, and the whining is usually just sour grapes.
Permalink
Anonymous Fanatic #3
1150 days ago
Score 0+-
My point was that no matter what you do, there will be controversy. The fifth team in the four team format would have a gripe, but just as with the men's basketball tournament, there will always be teams left out. I find it terrible that there is not an NCAA champion but a Sears trophy winner.
Permalink
ASwaffAll-American
1150 days ago
Score 0+-
I know there will always be controversy. My point is that once you get out of the top four, or especially out of the top 8, the whining gets a lot easier to dismiss. Especially because football is such a different animal than basketball. There is much more parity in college basketball than in college football. In college basketball, you can have 64 teams and almost every single one of them can realistically compete for the national championship. In college football, once you get outside of the top ten, that really can't be said.
Permalink
Srtellis4585JV Squad
1150 days ago
Score 0+-
#17 would have less of a gripe than an unbeaten #3 though.
Permalink | Reply
Alex HolowczakHall of Famer
1150 days ago
Score 0+-
I saw the first article and wondered what happened... Well done for sorting it out in the end!
Permalink | Reply
PnattRed-Shirting
1148 days ago
Score -1+-
Can someone please explain to me how college football works...
Permalink | Reply
PnattRed-Shirting
1148 days ago
Score -1+-
like the conferences, divisions, playoffs, etc.
Permalink | Reply
PnattRed-Shirting
1148 days ago
Score -1+-
how many teams are in the playoffs? 16? tell me everything
Permalink | Reply
PnattRed-Shirting
1148 days ago
Score -1+-
it doesn't make sense
Permalink | Reply
Add your Comment
ArmchairGM welcomes all comments. If you don't want to be anonymous, Register or Login. It's free


Retrieved from "http://armchairgm.wikia.com/College_Football_Playoff_format_%282nd_attempt%29"

This page was last modified 14:12, 15 November 2006. Content is available under the GFDL.

Contribute

ArmchairGM's pages can be edited.
Is this page incomplete? Is there anything wrong?
Change it!

Edit this page Discuss this page Page history

Recent contributors to this page

The following people recently contributed to this article.

Embed this on your site

Main Page About Special Pages Help Terms of Use Advertise