College FB Playoffs! 4 teams

[iceknight]

Four team playoff approved from season beginning in 2014.

ESPN Video http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:8099416

Another article:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8078786/bcs-commissioners-reach-consensus-four-team-college-football-playoff

[ElKabong]

:ThmbUp:

[Dahoss2002]

Guess something is better than nothing. Now everyone can debate and whine about why #5 and #6 didnt get in over # 3 and #4. No matter what, I still like college better than the pros.

[PhantomOnTour]

To do it right they need 8 teams.
Take the conference winners from the SEC-ACC-Big12-Big10-Pac10-Big East and add two wild cards (for situations like a Boise St. or an Alabama from last season) and you're all set.
An 8 team playoff requires seven games.
Rotate the Rose - Sugar - Fiesta - Orange - and three other big bowls (like the Cotton or Peach or Holiday or Outback or Citrus) as the quarters, semis and final.
You could even designate the big four bowls as the only ones eligible to host a semi or a final, and rotate them also.

DONE.

[newtothegame]

To do it right they need 8 teams.
Take the conference winners from the SEC-ACC-Big12-Big10-Pac10-Big East and add two wild cards (for situations like a Boise St. or an Alabama from last season) and you're all set.
An 8 team playoff requires seven games.
Rotate the Rose - Sugar - Fiesta - Orange - and three other big bowls (like the Cotton or Peach or Holiday or Outback or Citrus) as the quarters, semis and final.
You could even designate the big four bowls as the only ones eligible to host a semi or a final, and rotate them also.

DONE.
Only problem I see with this scenario is a team (like you mentioned) Boise st might never get in. I believe they are in the Mountain West conference. So, unless they somehow get a super high ranking, they will always be left out. Being a SEC guy myself, doesnt bother me alot about Boise. But, it doesnt seem right based on what you mentioned above.
I do think you have the right conferences and then the two wild cards would be the next highest ranked teams not to win their conference, which would almost assuredly leave out teams like boise every year.

[Robert Goren]

The NCAA hoop tourney takes 65 teams and there is still bitching over who got the last spot. No amount of teams will make everybody happy.

[maddog42]

Just 15 years ago we didn't even have a 1 vs. 2 matchup. This is the first step to a real Tournament. It will generate a huge amount of money, and money will drive the whole process. A great improvement.

[elysiantraveller]

I'm not a huge fan of this for a couple of reasons.

1) It simply isn't good enough with only 4 teams.

2) I actually felt the BCS computer model did a good job of selecting the top two teams year in and out.

3) This present system does away with above mentioned computer model and hands it over to "selection committee" who I am sure won't have an agenda.

[Valuist]

Its about time.

I think 4 is good. Realistically, I can't remember too many seasons when the 5th or 6th best team had a legitimate claim at the national championship.

[rastajenk]

Bowl games were invented to reward good teams (along with their fans and big boosters) with a vacation, and for the host cities to market their appeal as tourist destinations. Since neither of those aspects have anything to do with a football playoff, I don't see why the games have to be played in Pasadena, New Orleans, Miami or Phoenix. No reason why the rotation can't include Columbus, Ann Arbor or Detroit, South Bend, Seattle, New York, or any of a dozen other big stadium locations.

Let's finally see how that SEC team speed plays on the frozen tundra of Lambeau Field in January. Until then, I won't be fully supportive of a playoff to determine a national champion. It sounds like the deck will be stacked against northern teams. So it's still flawed.

As with most things, it's the unintended consequences that concern me. The new plan gets one of these :ThmbDown: from me.

[Valuist]

Bowl games were invented to reward good teams (along with their fans and big boosters) with a vacation, and for the host cities to market their appeal as tourist destinations. Since neither of those aspects have anything to do with a football playoff, I don't see why the games have to be played in Pasadena, New Orleans, Miami or Phoenix. No reason why the rotation can't include Columbus, Ann Arbor or Detroit, South Bend, Seattle, New York, or any of a dozen other big stadium locations.

Let's finally see how that SEC team speed plays on the frozen tundra of Lambeau Field in January. Until then, I won't be fully supportive of a playoff to determine a national champion. It sounds like the deck will be stacked against northern teams. So it's still flawed.

As with most things, it's the unintended consequences that concern me. The new plan gets one of these :ThmbDown: from me.

Sorry I don't buy that argument. And I've lived my whole life in the middle of Big Ten territory. Why should weather in any way be able to impact a football game? Why do you think they always play the Super Bowl in a warm climate (or a domed stadium)?

[rastajenk]

There are home teams throughout the NFL playoffs.

I would take a domed game in a northern clime. If fans are expected to travel to these playoffs (which I predict will be a problem), let's spread out the burden.