Poll: How Should the National Championship Be Decided Part II

KrAzY3 · Dec 9, 2009

After participating heavily in Redstar's poll/topic about how a National Championship should be decided, I came to the conclusion that there is great enthusiasm for a playoff but a lot of ambiguity in what football fans actually want. This debate will take place whether or not we participate (the House of Representatives is currently readying for a hearing). I feel it is important that we contribute to the discussion and attempt to come to a consensus. I'd like this to be a well informed debate and will attempt to give people some information to help them make their choice.

BCS
A list of participants in the BCS championship: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BCS_National_Championship_Game[/PLAIN]

Automatic +1
According to the AP and BCS this year's participants would be: Alabama, Texas, TCU and Cincinnati. Last year they would have been: Florida, Oklahoma, Texas and Alabama. I would note that both years a undefeated team would have been left out.

Automatic 8 Team Playoff
A potential 8 team playoff has been posted here.
No. 1 Alabama Crimson Tide vs. No. 8 Ohio State Buckeyes
No. 2 Texas Longhorns vs. No. 7 Oregon Ducks
No. 3 Cincinnati Bearcats vs. No. 6 Boise State Broncos
No. 4 TCU Horned Frogs vs. No. 5 Florida Gators

Automatic 16 Team Playoff
A potential 16 team playoff and a lengthy article has been posted here. If you don't want to go off site or do additional reading here is a post with just the bracket in picture form.

Conditional +1 or Playoff
The conditions could vary greatly so it's hard to give specific examples. One I might give is a +1 trigger in 2004 (because Auburn had as many wins as #1 and #2).

Other (12 Team, 32 Team, Old System, Super Conferences, etc..)
If you vote for this option please tell us exactly what you are voting for.

Here are the AP and BCS polls (I'm not listing all conference champions but those shouldn't take too much additional effort):
1998: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings[/PLAIN]
1999: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings[/PLAIN]
2000: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings[/PLAIN]
2001: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings[/PLAIN]
2002: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings[/PLAIN]
2003: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings[/PLAIN]
2004: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings[/PLAIN]
2005: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings[/PLAIN]
2006: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings[/PLAIN]
2007: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings[/PLAIN]
2008: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings[/PLAIN]
2009: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_rankings[/PLAIN]

Finally, here's a list of Division I/FBS National Champions: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I_FBS_National_Football_Championship[/PLAIN]

Thanks to Redstar (for the original poll and his OK for me to make a new one), NYBamaFan (appreciate your participation) and Heavy D (a great rapper and provider of a few of the links I used). I hope that we can have a informative discussion (perhaps even steer some of the fans from other schools coming here and complaining about the BCS to this topic) and that people vote for the option that they find best/most viable. Feel free to Digg or link to this poll if you want your vote to reach more people and for more people to participate.

Van · Dec 9, 2009

I vote for other. Playoffs do not take into account that our entire regular season is pretty much a playoff. +1 is unnecessary this year (we have the obvious top two teams) IMHO. I think no system would suffice short of a couple extremes. A) we can scrap all conferences and make the whole season a huge playoff or B) Form super conferences.

KrAzY3 · Dec 9, 2009

Not to take my own topic off-topic but I just got done fighting the parsing. A few sites have links that are parsed differently.

For instance a link to Wikipedia shows up like this: [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I_FBS_National_Football_Championship"]NCAA Division I FBS National Football Championship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

If you don't want the weird formatting you have to do something like this:

HTML:

[URL][PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I_FBS_National_Football_Championship[/PLAIN][/url]

The result is just the link showing up: [PLAIN]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I_FBS_National_Football_Championship[/PLAIN] (as long as you don't click edit, in which case it still gets parsed).

I'm stubborn...

Tide1986 · Dec 9, 2009

As a suggestion for our next poll on this topic, include a more expansive list (the "other" category is quite a catch-all), and use a multi-vote poll (check boxes) instead of a single-vote poll (radio buttons) so we can better gauge which forms of determining a national champion are most and least acceptable to the membership. Just a thought...
Posted via Mobile Device

2003TIDE · Dec 9, 2009

You should change "BCS" to "Whatever Congress Says" which is what it is going to be if we stick with the BCS.

NYBamaFan · Dec 9, 2009

I voted for automatic plus 1, but I would want it structured with the top 4 teams playing each other in what amounts to a 4 team playoff:

#1 plays #4, #2 plays #3 in the first week of BCS bowls

Winners play in the "plus 1" game in the BCSCG.

It could be implemented without any change in the current system. The only negative - 2 fewer teams would make it into BCS bowls each year.

Tide1986 · Dec 9, 2009

I voted "other" for a number of reasons. Here are a few of my thoughts on the matter:

(1) I really like the bowl system, and I have no issue with multiple champions being declared. I am, however, comfortable with the current BCS format in which an effort is made to match up the #1 and #2 teams at the end of the season.
(2) In general, I do not like most of the playoff formats that have been discussed because there just isn't enough differentiation among the teams and conferences based on strength of schedule. The ones that use automatic bids involving most of the current FBS conferences are the most flawed in my mind. As long as the FBS remains in its current bloated state (119 teams), there ought to be strict strength of schedule requirements to make a playoff instead of basing participation primarily on the optics of having an undefeated season or winning your conference.
(3) If the current FBS were bifurcated into the "big boy" conferences and the "not so big boy" conferences, a playoff MIGHT be acceptable in some form. It wouldn't be perfect, but a reasonable super conference might include the ACC, Big 10, Big 12, PAC 10 and SEC (yeah, and maybe even Notre Dame but with stringent requirements for making the playoffs). By my rough count, that would create a super conference of approximately 58 teams, which is about the most teams we should have if we're going to have a playoff.
(4) I think a +1 could be okay but not automatically every year and only under very limited circumstances. Of course, this year a +1 would be very unfair to Alabama if triggered especially given what Bama accomplished in the regular season and the SEC Championship. It seems that a trigger should include a strict strength of schedule requirement. For example, if there were other undefeateds with strength of schedule ratings in the ballpark of the #1 BCS-ranked team at the conclusion of the regular season and conference championships, then maybe a +1 could be triggered. I don't immediately recall the final strength of schedule rankings for the current undefeateds, but I suspect this trigger would not be activated this year. I'm not sure that Cincy, Boise and TCU have strength of schedule rankings that would/should trigger needing anything more than the current Bama/TX match up.

Well, that's a quick brain dump of some thoughts. I'm sure I'll have more to add as this discussion progresses.
Posted via Mobile Device

gmoney · Dec 9, 2009

i think that if your conference doesnt have a championship game you shouldn't be considered to play for the nt.that would help level the playing field somewhat

NYBamaFan · Dec 9, 2009

gmoney said:
i think that if your conference doesnt have a championship game you shouldn't be considered to play for the nt.that would help level the playing field somewhat

Even though the PAC 10 requires every team to play every other conference team every year? IMO, their system crowns a champion as effectively as any devised.

The Big Televen, on the other hand... :wink:

lostinNala · Dec 9, 2009

I will post my yearly diatribe on this topic:

Instituting a playoff system will undeniably make the reg. season less important; and without stopping all the bickering about who deserves to go. Look no further than the NFL; where 9-7 and 10-6 teams make deep runs into the playoffs. I don't care what anyone says, that means that you can drop a game or two and still be seeded in a playoff format. This is especially true if any of the playoff berths are tied to conf. championships.

Do you really think that GT (who lost twice, including once to 7-5 UGA) deserves a third shot at Bama or UTx because they beat Clemson (who lost to 7-5 USCe 2 weeks ago)???

And if playoff berths are not tied to conf champs, the same bickering about who deserves a shot will continue. Currently we have a 2 team playoff system. There is still this much controversy about our system. Do you really think expanding the field to 4, 6 or 8 will stop the whining??? If we had a 4 team playoff right now, the talk would still be about who deserves the 4th spot; Boise or UF. If we had a 6 team, it would include all undefeateds, but rendered the SECCG meaningless, and leaves us with the possiblity of facing UF in a few weeks again. Likewise, a filed of 8 this year would leave 6 different 2 loss teams arguing about who gets the final 2 slots; not to mention giving 2 loss teams from weaker conferences a shot to knock off undefeateds Bama and UTx.

Think of it this way. Those gator fans who love to chomp their hands, would have been telling us, "that's ok, we'll see you in 3 weeks," last week in ATL.

Last, but definitely not least, as a fan, I don't want to expand the season. Currently, if your team is in a BCS bowl or the NC game, you (as a fan) get to relax over the Holidays, watch some lower bowls on the tube, and then travel right around or after the new year to your bowl destination. If we run even a 4 team playoff, that's another game you expect fans to travel to, and when?? I'm already missing almost a week of work to travel to Pasadena. Do you really expect fans to travel, en masse, to neutral field sites this weekend, less than 2 weeks from Christmas, and then spend the Holidays with family, only to leave again for Pasadena the next week. I might as well have to take 4 weeks off from work. The problem would be multiplied by the number of teams we expand the field to.

Not to sound too cliche, but the grass is always greener on the other side, and you don't know what you've got til its gone. Only 15 years ago, we would be waiting to see who we were paired up against in the Sugar Bowl, and it could have been someone as low as 12-15 in the rankings. Then we would have to rely on the AP voters to vote us #1 if we won.

I personally prefer CFB over NFL; MLB; NBA and NCAA basketball. One of the main reasons is because every week is a playoff. I think many of you playoff proponents prefer CFB over these sports for the same reason, you just don’t realize it.

NYBamaFan · Dec 9, 2009

lostinNala said:
Instituting a playoff system will undeniably make the reg. season less important;

A plus one? Who are you kidding?

Tidester · Dec 9, 2009

I would vote for the 16 game playoff only if all teams play in a conference and have 16 conferences, then let all conference winners play in the play offs. that way the SEC championship and the other conference championships would still mean something. It also eliminates independants and taking a team just because they travel well or is a favorite with the media.

TideEngineer08 · Dec 9, 2009

I voted automatic + 1.

But I've been thinking, just how trying it would be to have anymore than we have now.

We have a grueling 12 game regular season and we expect to win them all. Then we have an SEC title game in which we have had to play a title contending team in Florida the last 2 years. Then, we'll have to play a semi-final and final.

That's 15 games.

I wonder if it's too much. I believe anything beyond that is. I know the NFL does it. I know the lower divisions do it as well. But major college football is just a different animal.

2003TIDE · Dec 9, 2009

TideEngineer08 said:
I voted automatic + 1.
But I've been thinking, just how trying it would be to have anymore than we have now.

If it is that bad, they can just remove the 12th game they added only a few years ago.

This argument holdS no water. People argued that a +1 or playoff would make the season too long for years. Then we went and added an extra game???? That makes no sense.

Heavy D · Dec 9, 2009

Thanks Krazy3 for the poll.

I think you defined it well enough. Those are the most popular competing options. I will vote for the 16 team playoff, of course, since I posted it on the other chain. But that playoff system is using what we have. In a perfect world I like the idea of the 96 team top division broken down into 8 super conferences, myself with the 8 champs meeting on home fields til the CG. Even though I believe this would have the smallest effect on the current regular season, it could still taint it.

I really don't want to effect the regular season,but the current post season stinks for anybody not in the BCSCG. I just keep coming back to a playoff as the best way to decide the championship.

I am resolved to the fact that the most we will ever see is a plus 1, which is something I can live with.

It just seems to me that the same arguments used against a playoff can be used against conference championship games currently. I agree with those who say the CCG is unfair to those conferences who have them if all are not going to have them.

IF the SEC had stayed at 10 teams and did what the Pac-10 currently does, would we all be happy with that?

But, in my opinion at least a plus 1 is needed with 4 vs. 1 and 3 vs. 2 using the Orange, Sugar and Rose. If the Rose doesn't want to cooperate, then put in the Fiesta or Cotton. I don't think a plus 1 will open pandora's box, unfortunately, I think it would probably end the debate.

J4Bama · Dec 9, 2009

I vote to let the People's National Championship decide on it :biggrin:

TideEngineer08 · Dec 9, 2009

2003TIDE said:
If it is that bad, they can just remove the 12th game they added only a few years ago.

This argument holdS no water. People argued that a +1 or playoff would make the season too long for years. Then we went and added an extra game???? That makes no sense.

I didn't add the 12th game...

I'm not making the argument the presidents make. I'm saying that it's damn hard for a team to go undefeated through a 12 game schedule. It's really hard to just keep it at 1 loss. Then you've got an SEC title game. Then a semi-final. Then a final.

KrAzY3 · Dec 9, 2009

Tide1986 said:
As a suggestion for our next poll on this topic, include a more expansive list (the "other" category is quite a catch-all), and use a multi-vote poll (check boxes) instead of a single-vote poll (radio buttons) so we can better gauge which forms of determining a national champion are most and least acceptable to the membership. Just a thought...
Posted via Mobile Device

I agree with the idea and that's why the other made it into there (kind of my own compromise). I wanted to give a poll with the most realistic options and kind of force people to choose the actual system they would prefer but I understood not everyone accepts one of those. The main reason I didn't go with the multi-vote (and myriad options, which in a single vote poll would have skewed the numbers away from a playoff) was it would be less "scientific" because one person might only vote for one option while other could choose ten, giving them far greater say. I still like the idea though and it might be worth doing down the road.

2003TIDE said:
You should change "BCS" to "Whatever Congress Says" which is what it is going to be if we stick with the BCS.

I can't agree with the argument in and of itself (we have to be mindful this doesn't become a political discussion) because I'd have to have faith the congress would approve of what ever system replaced the BCS. I also don't think they have any business being involved in the first place. Another poll that might not be appropriate for this forum would be "Do you prefer the BCS or a government mandated playoff?"...

NYBamaFan said:
I voted for automatic plus 1, but I would want it structured with the top 4 teams playing each other in what amounts to a 4 team playoff:

#1 plays #4, #2 plays #3 in the first week of BCS bowls

Winners play in the "plus 1" game in the BCSCG.

It could be implemented without any change in the current system. The only negative - 2 fewer teams would make it into BCS bowls each year.

I think there is a trend towards a +1 but the conference championships really get in the way. When 1 plays 2 it makes everything after kind of meaningless, unless of course you make 1 playing 2 meaningless. I'd say make the conference championship game part of the +1 but that's exactly what we have this year. It could reduce the SEC championship game to a exhibition like last year would have done, or with this year put Alabama and Florida unfairly into a 8 team playoff while everyone else was in a +1.

lostinNala said:
Think of it this way. Those gator fans who love to chomp their hands, would have been telling us, "that's ok, we'll see you in 3 weeks," last week in ATL.

This is the main reason I have always stood against additional games.
Last year a +1 and on would have likely forced a rematch of the SEC championship game. This year Florida (because of the game) is left out, but a 8 team playoff and on and they get a second shot. I think it's so very easy for fans of schools without a championship game to advocate for a playoff, when they don't have either a redundant game or a extra elimination game. I don't like the idea of Alabama playing a +1 elimination game if there will be a playoff of any sort because that's nothing but a disadvantage. On the other hand I don't see why the SEC should have to drop their championship game just because weaker conferences want a easier shot at a championship.

RedStar · Dec 9, 2009

I thought of another reason I support the BCS.

As it stands now, at least 33 teams end their season on a positive note. They've got momentum going into next season and they're fans have something to smile about, even if they finished 8-5.

It's no fun for anyone to lose their final game of the season only to have to wait another 8 months to play again, especially when 90% of those teams have no real shot at being the national champion anyway. Let 'em play their bowls.

NYBamaFan · Dec 9, 2009

KrAzY3 said:
...I think there is a trend towards a +1 but the conference championships really get in the way. When 1 plays 2 it makes everything after kind of meaningless, unless of course you make 1 playing 2 meaningless. I'd say make the conference championship game part of the +1 but that's exactly what we have this year. It could reduce the SEC championship game to a exhibition like last year would have done, or with this year put Alabama and Florida unfairly into a 8 team playoff while everyone else was in a +1....

Did you read the post of mine that you quoted? Every negative in your response was addressed. It would not just be a +1 after the BCSCG. Read my post again.

Also, since Florida is #5, in my scenario they are out of it. The SECCG loses none of its importance or impact...

Poll: How Should the National Championship Be Decided Part II

How Should the National Championship Be Decided?

BCS

Automatic +1

Automatic 8 Team Playoff

Automatic 16 Team Playoff

Conditional +1 or Playoff

Other (12 Team, Old System, Super Conferences, etc..)

Hall of Fame

Scout Team

Hall of Fame

Suspended

Hall of Fame

Suspended

Suspended

1st Team

Suspended

3rd Team

Suspended

Scout Team

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

1st Team

All-American

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

Suspended

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!