Blog Goliard @ 106, perhaps we could auction off the right to sit in a machine gun nest for the monkey dancing competition. Can you imagine the money you could raise from Texas fans to take aim at the Sooners, for instance? We could pay off the national debt in a matter of minutes.

BTW, it’s not that I’m in favor of specifically over-hauling college football. It’s a bit like the imperial versus metric argument for measurement: you can’t claim that imperial is remotely rationalized, but it gets the job done.

We’ll see how things shake out in the bowl games I guess.

If we *have* to radically revamp college football, let’s make it more unique, not less!

Todd Gavorcik needs to be killed.

Yet another reason why the 1-AA style playoffs just ain’t happening in 1-A.

Yes, Missouri got shafted. But I’m not sure I’d argue that Arizona State did. They finished the season with exactly one win over a winning team (Oregon State).

I’ll have to head over to SMQ to see the discussion over there.

My radical solution would be to strip down the number of teams involved. Sorry mid-majors you are down to 1AA. I’d create 4 super-conferences who all had to play a full-round robin schedule. Then those 4 winners play-off against each other.

The bottom two teams from each superconference go down to 1AA and are replaced by the best two teams in the region (so the Western superconference this year would lose Washington and Stanford and gain Hawaii and Boise State). Programs would gravitate to their natural level.

Does that mean the best CFB players would have to adopt one word names? We’ve already got RoJo; how ’bout Ausberrio?

Ok, I deserve to be cyber-smacked.

As far as being different from basketball—–It most certainly is. You can have a basketball team play 2 games over a weekend, while you cannot ask a football team to do the same. This would keep football from inviting everyone who wins every lame conference championship to a playoff (thank goodness).

As far as being different from 1-AA football, it is and it isn’t. 1-AA takes the top 16 teams and plays them off. Until the NC game, each game is held at the higher seed’s field. If you were to implement this for Div 1 schools, you would need to do the same and would not be able to use bowl games as the playoffs, as some have suggested. If you think some bowls are sparsely attended now, wait until you ask fans to go on 4 weekend road trips in a row to undisclosed locations. You are going to lose a ton of travelling fans on finances alone, necessitating that the playoffs occur as home games for half the teams. So, the difference between 1-A and 1-AA football is the bowl tradition in the former.

Bottom line is that the choice is between current system, current system and a plus-1, or scrapping the bowls and doing a 1-aa type playoff. Good luck if you think that the coaches will take kindly to needing a top-16 ranking for a post season appearance. Also, if you thought the mid-majors are screwed now, try taking away their only opportunities for post-season appearances in exchange for 1-2 of those teams making the playoff.

Finally, 1-AA playoffs are no bastion of fairness either. There’s plenty of whining over who should get a home game, who should go and travel where, along with who should get in. Not saying it couldn’t work, but I doubt it will be the solution to all our problems.

yes they do but in those cases the champion is decided by a home and home round robin ON THE FIELD.

Trojan made a pretty compelling argument for a playoff predicated on the international competition format over at SMQ.

I tend to side with Blog Galiard’s perspective and don’t necessarilly think that a playoff would in every case make the better team the champion. Further while Trojan makes good points in his diatribe but on occassion the polling system (and the BCS – hey even a broken clock is right twice a day) it does produce a champion most fair, unbiased observers can agree on. Trojan, I’m sure knows this better than most when he considers the fate of his namesakes earlier in the decade.

It can be argued that those USC teams would have won a playoff but we didn’t really need such to judge them the best team in the land. This year we have no idea who would win a playoff and I suppose such a playoff is the most sensible way to crown an otherwise unidentifiable and perhaps undeserving champion. Still, such a playoff would drain at least some of excitment from regular season and I’m not willing to give that up to more fairly crown a champion when no self-evident candidate(s) presents itself.

BTW, the BCS sucks, Missouri and ASU got massively screwed and, yeh, Poll and Bowl would be better (with greater flexibility though, Rose needs to loosen up).

In this case, it would mean that each conference winner would go through and be seeded against a conference runner up. That way you could maintain the existing conference structure and have the playoffs be filled with teams who were there because they won rather than because someone argued that they were deserving.