Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Sports' started by KenH, Dec 3, 2008.
I like it!
I still like my system better.
However, I could live with this system. But there are a couple of glaring things that would make this problematic:
One, the "break" between the early and latter rounds. For a playoff, this is not feasible. Some would scream that it benefits those who have an academic schedule that would fit this. Others would not have that luxury and would scream bloody murder. Also, the TV folks would likely not go for this. I know there's a lull now, but it's different when you're talking perception on the tv exec part.
Two, Troy & Tulsa getting in ahead of teams in the top 15 in the BCS is just not realistic. We keep forgetting: March Madness CANNOT be replicated and we shouldn't try. Any playoff system that tries is flawed from the get-go.
Three, a sixteen team playoff will ruin most of the present bowl formula whereas my plan keeps that in virtual tact while having a playoff tournament.
Fourth, this system mandates a change to make games move faster and have fewer plays. This is one of the worst changes in college football recently and is universally criticized. Ramping this up so you can have a 17-18 game season is ridiculous. Under my plan, 14-15 games max is only adding a couple to the present schedule (one more for the national champs at worst). This is the biggest "sticking point" with Univ. presidents. It will continue to be so.
Fifth, there's no special provision for Notre Dame in this plan, and that's not realistic. I'm sorry guys - the Golden Domers will continue to buy their special provisions with their blood money. They would likely barge into a playoff with only 7 or 8 wins and would blast out an Ohio State or Texas Tech this year in this plan. Of course, that hasn't been an issue lately
This all said, at least we're moving in the right direction. If people would only wise up and take my plan!