Here it is! This year's College Football Play-off Seedings and Brackets!

[joeybee12]

http://msn.espn.go.com/page2/s/bracket/bcs.html

Now, try and tell me this DOESN'T make ssense and is NOT do-able!!!!!!!! (Go to the link to get the brackets--couldn't cut and paste it toow ell!)


PAGE 2's "REAL" BCS PLAYOFF
First round Quarterfinals Semifinals Finals

(1) Oklahoma (12-1)
(16) Wash. St. (9-3)

(8) Tennessee (10-2)
(9) Miami (Fla.) (10-2)


(5) Ohio St. (10-2)
(12) Georgia (10-3)


(4) Michigan (10-2)
(13) Iowa (9-3)


(6) Texas (10-2)
(11) Miami (OH) (12-1)

(3) USC (11-1)
(14) Purdue (9-3)


(7) Florida St. (10-2)
(10) Kansas St. (11-3)

(2) LSU (12-1)
(15) Florida (8-4)

ALSO SEE:

Round 1: (1) Oklahoma vs. (16) Washington State

Round 1: (8) Tennessee vs. (9) Miami (Fla.)

Round 1: (5) Ohio State vs. (12) Georgia

Round 1: (4) Michigan vs. (13) Iowa

Round 1: (6) Texas vs. (11) Miami (Ohio)

Round 1: (3) USC vs. (14) Purdue

Round 1: (7) Florida State vs. (10) Kansas State

Round 1: (2) LSU vs. (15) Florida

[VermontDem2004]

1. 16 team playoff?

Fuck that. I would much rather have a 4 team playoff using a BCS formula but without the computer rankings or averages. A 16 team playoff is giving too many teams a second chance to win the national championship.

[terryg11]

5. no second tier team is going to win four in a row in that bracket

ONLY the best would make it through. look, I adore my hawkeyes but we wouldn't stand a chance to be a spoiler there. neither would washington st. or tennessee or most of the others. I agree though, cut it down to at least an 8 team field, like I just said most of those teams don't stand a chance anyway so let's cut to the chase

[sasquatch]

8. I agree with that statement

:)

[sleipnir]

2. Here's why not!

It's 16 teams, 4 weeks, won't EVER happen. Perhaps down to 8, then yes. But you can't shorten the season by 4 weeks or lengthen it, remember these guys are STUDENTS first! Also, then you run into NFL playoffs and they'll never let that happen. Sufficit to say, 8 teams, and with little to no early non-conference, it's possible.

[SoCalProgressive]

3. And I suppose Div 1-AA, II, and III

football players aren't students? Well, they are and seem to get along just fine with a 4 week playoff system.

[sleipnir]

7. Ummm....

I can see you're point but really it's also about money and they aren't going to shorten D1 schedules to accomidate a 4 week playoff, because...

Really, it's all about money. Money from the early non-conference games is king in D1. This sorta thing doesn't happen in D1AA and is absolutely non-existant in D2(unless they're playing a D1 school) and D3. They don't have to worry about 3, 4, 5 game non-conference games that pay for the program in one fell swoop though tickets and TV time.

Also, look at the 16 teams, they're all (except for Miami OH) big D1 schools. Don't seem to see any other mid majors in there which was to be the whole point of the playoffs. Get the mid majors in some of these high profile games.

I'm all for an 8 team playoff, it'll be interesting.

[Scimmio]

16. no shortened schedules...

Twelve or thirteen games a season, minus Bowls, is a nice full schedule. This isn't one of those fake, non-contact sports like basketball or baseball...(oops, did I say that out loud?)

You also can't take too many regular games out. D1 football makes a ton of money for schools. The AD at most schools is usually a demi-god with vast powers. The bigger the school, the more money and the more power. Brand loyalty comes into play. Can you imagine a shortened season where the Florida Gators (evil incarnate, as they may be) have to drop FSU or Georgia from their schedule to accommodate the possibility of matching up against a yet-to-be-determined bracket team? Wisconsin? Purdue? We might see some great games but it would hardly pack The Swamp with 12,000 over seating capacity and 3-day tailgate parties in the parking lots. Auburn's coach is still Auburn's coach because he beat Alabama. Their Almumni sure as heck would have liked to have been ranked this year, anywhere in the Top 25 even. Auburn could have gone 01-11 but if you beat 'Bama you get an automatic year reprieve. Also, a bit too far West of the Mississippi for my tastes but...can you imagine a year without Texas vs. Texas A&M?

I think the better proposals have been to use the polls and have the BCS numbers assist, to a degree, in "unclear" years. All contending conferences must play division title games to even up schedules and late games. We might have still ended up with three 12-01 teams this year but USC's case might have been made a little more if they re-beat Wash St or blew out Oregon in a conference title game. Oklahoma would be hard pressed to explain why they should compete in the title game when they get stomped at the end of the season. Remember the Nebraska-Colorado fiasco?

Forget brackets, half-regular season fare, or even extending the season into late January. This year should have seen LSU vs. USC for the Sugar Bowl and Oklahoma vs. Michigan in the Rose Bowl. Now we have to wait for LSU to blow out Oklahoma and the Rose Bowl to turn into some 12-9 sleep fest, otherwise folks are gonna griping about final ranks.

[frylock]

4. ncaa division-I football is a free developmental league..

for the NFL, nothing more, nothing less. They play basketball for nearly 6 months, but you rarely hear many folks complain about that. Nope.. this is all about money. Money for the school, money for the conference, money for ABC. Thank god for NCAA mens hoops!!

[VermontDem2004]

6. Less then 15% of the athletes get drafted next year

Less then that get signed by a NFL Team. For most of these people they are playing football for a scholarship, the superstars are auditioning for the Pros.

[sasquatch]

10. NFL europe is where a lot of those kids go

They seem to come back as better quality athletes though:sheesh:

[democracyindanger]

9. (almost) my thoughts exactly

A playoff system that lasts any longer than two weeks is out of the question, because of 1) Academics; 2) The NFL; 3) Human anatomy

The first two are self-explanatory. As for 3, despite the players being big, tough, college athletes, I don't think the average college football player's body could handle much of any extension of the season. Make 'em play a month of playoffs, and I'd bet you'll see a lot of injuries, a lot of pro careers nipped at the bud.

Screw the BCS, and playoffs. If a team gets #1 in both major polls, then they're the champion. If there are two #1's, they face off in a bowl. End of story.

[sasquatch]

11. Div. IAA II III kids don't seem to have a problem with a 4 week playoff

[democracyindanger]

12. true

But there's a huge difference between the speed and size of D-I players and the other divisions.

[sasquatch]

19. What does that have to do with anything?

:shrug: Football is football. If the DIAA, DII and DIII kids can do it why can't they?

[democracyindanger]

23. Physics

Bigger things + faster speeds = greater collisions

Simple as that. :shrug:

[sasquatch]

24. You still haven't awnsered the question

Why can't they handle a playoff if the other kids can. The other kids are on the same playing level and they can handle it:shrug:

[democracyindanger]

26. They're not on the same playing level

Yes, they all play the same game, but DI players are simply bigger and faster. If you're talking academics, then, fine, I'll concede that point. But the difference in physical abuse taken by DI players and non-DI seems pretty obvious. :shrug:

[sasquatch]

27. No it isn't

The DI kids play DI kids. The same as the small schools. Small school kids play other small school kids. I don't see why this is a problem.

[sleipnir]

17. Ok, to counter this talking point, Warning: it's a bit offensive..

But, if you're not D1 you're not a real athelete anyway...so this argument is invalid.

Really D3 is just glorified high school atheletics. While I commend the lower division student atheletes, 99.7% of them aren't going anywhere with their football careers, because they weren't that good to begin with.

The level of competition at D1AA/D2/D3 is a joke compared to D1. Sure, they can handle 4 extra weeks because the level that they are expected to perform at is much, much lower than D1. I've been to games on all of these levels and I will say that the competition is absoulety GD higher in D1 by leaps and bounds.

You can't expect OU or LSU's squad to fight against top ranked opponents each week and not get injured, tired, burned out, etc...It's just too tough now in D1 for that kind of effort.

[sasquatch]

18. But they're academic requirements are about the same arn't they

There's no reason why the DI kids can't play a playoff schedule.

[sleipnir]

20. Yes, if not HARDER in D2/D3...But that's not my point...

I'm coming from a physical perspective. They aren't physically able to perform for 4 more weeks, due to the high level of competition.

Most D2/D3 schools have more rigorus academics, but that's because a lot of those schools are very prestigious. Also, a D3 athelete can't get a scholarship based on their sport, it's all academic based.

But, again, I'm saying physically, the D1 kids are on a whole different level of contact, energy output, that their bodies can barely handle a regular season (which is why a lot of teams fall apart during Conf. Champ. and the last reg. season games.) let alone a non-stop playoff system. With the bowls you get between 2-5 weeks rest, which they absolutley need at that level.

[sasquatch]

21. I say shorten the season to 12 games if not 11 then

Then they can get a rest and play the playoff games.

[sleipnir]

22. Won't ever happen...it was already discussed up around Thread 5 or so.

Short version: Too much money in non-conference games and you get the loss of yearly rivalries.

[sasquatch]

25. You don't have to shorten the season I just made the suggestion

Football is football. The kids at the small schools are on the same level of competition as their opponets as are the DI kids with other DI kids.

[ChoralScholar]

13. Guys, what this amounts to:

I think the reason schools will not go to a playoff system, is the fact that it's actually definitive, and is telltale of the kind of season you had. You either make the playoffs or you don't. If you do, you either win out or you're eliminated.

It completely goes against our current coaches' justifications of bad seasons. As it is now, you can have a shitty year, lose some big games (like Arkansas did) and look back and say "Hey.... we went to a bowl game that year; it couldn't have been that bad of a season." Sounds much better than "We were ranked in the low 30's, didn't go to the playoffs, and we hung up our pads in November"

That coach might not keep his job as long as the coach who looks back and says "We went to bowl games 8 of the last 9 years;" even though they probably have the exact same W/L record.

Secondarily, it's also question of having parity with teams that you don't belong with. "Look we all went to bowl games! - Oklahoma, Arkansas, LSU, Tulsa, USC, and Boston College. We're all the same, right? We all went to bowl games." Yeah.. we know differently, but the casual observer might not know that the Sugar Bowl is much more important than the Independence Bowl.

[joeybee12]

14. Ok, I'm back, and here to say it's all about the money!

Everyone involved makes a lot of money off the bowl system--that's why there won't be a play-off system.

But until there is one, it will be rare when there will be no doubts whatsoever about the legitimacy of any school's national championship.

[UrbScotty]

15. Michigan could get revenge against Iowa!

:D

[sasquatch]

28. And we can start all of the Michigan/Ohio State joke threads again

:7 Or would that cheapen "the game":(