• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Here Is How I would Fix Football:

Hville said:
Ok well first of all you are proposing a lot of controversial things to get to the same position.
1. Starting with conference games isn't what most are going to like. Why would a non-conference game automatically mean more in November than it does in September?

2. Another big detractor is the number of games. You are now pushing the season out to 17 games for the top two teams. Up to 15 and 16 for many others. And you are proposing many of the games to be going during finals at school. That just isn't going to happen.

3. How would the regions be determined? Who would be assigned to them and how would that be determined? A selection committee? If geographical is it fair to have more top rated teams in a regional playoff in the Southeast rather than the Northwest or Southwest?

4. Would it really matter? At the end of the day its still Clemson and Alabama in there and people will be trying to create more scenarios to change that.

5. Travel. Yes they do do it in Basketball. But they are traveling to an event on short notice that lets them watch 3 different games instead of a single game.

6. Forcing teams into conferences. There is no reason teams should have to be in a conference. NCAA doesn't regulate conferences and any playoff or rules governing getting into a playoff should never be included in the selection process because the conferences aren't set up equally.

Sorry but the system is working as perfect as it can right now. Every scenario will have its issues but robbing Peter to pay Paul will still create the same issues with the same results.
Click to expand...
I reiterate, I either didn’t explain it well or you misread it. My first point in my original post was the season was the same length. Conference games then non-conference (actually playoffs). It only takes 4 games for a 16 team playoff to determine a champ. That is 12 or 13 games total. They (non-con games) mean more because they are determining champions of the regions and in the case of the Championship bracket, the NC.
Your other points are very valid and I was aware of them all. A conference alignment doesn’t have to be a marriage like ours is to the B1G. Just for football scheduling purposes. There are teams in conferences for one sport just for that purpose.
In the end, I don’t really care. Just throwing another possibility into the conversation. I thought it made sense as you get a true 16 team playoff without extending the season.
 

How would I fix college football? Nebraska goes 150-0 over the next 10 years.

Okay, maybe that's a little unrealistic. How about 148-2?
 
anotherdumbprediction said:
I reiterate, I either didn’t explain it well or you misread it. My first point in my original post was the season was the same length. Conference games then non-conference (actually playoffs). It only takes 4 games for a 16 team playoff to determine a champ. That is 12 or 13 games total. They (non-con games) mean more because they are determining champions of the regions and in the case of the Championship bracket, the NC.
Your other points are very valid and I was aware of them all. A conference alignment doesn’t have to be a marriage like ours is to the B1G. Just for football scheduling purposes. There are teams in conferences for one sport just for that purpose.
In the end, I don’t really care. Just throwing another possibility into the conversation. I thought it made sense as you get a true 16 team playoff without extending the season.
Click to expand...
how do you add 2 more rounds of playoff games without adding games? Are you proposing less regular season games?
 



anotherdumbprediction said:
I reiterate, I either didn’t explain it well or you misread it. My first point in my original post was the season was the same length. Conference games then non-conference (actually playoffs). It only takes 4 games for a 16 team playoff to determine a champ. That is 12 or 13 games total. They (non-con games) mean more because they are determining champions of the regions and in the case of the Championship bracket, the NC.
Your other points are very valid and I was aware of them all. A conference alignment doesn’t have to be a marriage like ours is to the B1G. Just for football scheduling purposes. There are teams in conferences for one sport just for that purpose.
In the end, I don’t really care. Just throwing another possibility into the conversation. I thought it made sense as you get a true 16 team playoff without extending the season.
Click to expand...
Are you saying have less non-conference games? Or are you saying don't pre determine the non conference games and make those part of the playoffs.
 
Last edited:
I was told playoffs would fix everything. What happened?
 
Hville said:
Are you saying have less non-conference games? Or are you saying don't pre determine the non conference games and make those part of the playoffs.
Click to expand...
The latter. Everyone is in a 16 team bracket after conference games. The Top 16 play for NC. The other "regions" for regional championship SW, NE..etc and a high level bowl game between the two 3-0 teams left standing in each bracket after three weeks. I just felt that playing the 1-0 teams and 0-1 teams against each other, then the next week 2-0's and 1-1's and 0-2's against each other in the brackets made for playing competitive games, as opposed to the majority of crappy, random matchups set up by schedule makers for Sept. And, of course, the 16 team NC playoff. All fits within 13 game schedule.
 




I’m actually warming up to a 16 team playoff and eliminating CC games. However, how subjective are rankings, especially the 14 - 18
Group. #16West Virginia vs Alabama, #15Texas vs Clemson, #14Kentucky vs Notre Dame, #13wash st vs Oklahoma. Actually sounds fun. Probably better than the 4 team garbage we’ve been getting imo. Just need a solid ranking criteria.
 
Might even compel marquee players to not skip the games like they do the bowls i.e. Will Grier.
 
anotherdumbprediction said:
Sixteen team playoff, season about same length.
Start with conference games or only one non-conference game.
Conferences with Championship games would play that game in a bye week for all other teams, between the conference games and the bracket games. The Top 16 would be selected before the conference championship games and those games would only determine conf champs and not affect rankings.
After conference games send Top 16 into Championship Bracket and the rest into regional brackets. After 3 weeks of bracket-play, there would be two undefeated teams per bracket. The Champ bracket would be for National Championship, the other bracket undefeateds would get major/good bowls as would the 2-1 teams in the Championship Bracket.
All teams not in bowls (6 wins wouldn't be qualifier, placement in bracket would be) finishes season by playing fourth bracket game, bowl teams wait for bowl season.
By the time conference play was over, we'd have good idea who Top 16 are. Number 17 would be placated by being a top dog in a regional bracket and good chance of playin way into good bowl instead of being bottom feeder in Champ bracket and receiving crappy bowl bid.

The nice thing about bracket play would be that teams would be matched up winners vs winners and losers vs losers. Teams would be playing against teams at their level instead of current non-conference games where people feast on cupcakes. In other words, the competition would always be good. There would still be a non-conference season so to speak, it would just be latter part of season and mean something.
All teams would need to be in a conference. Anyone not in a conference can go play Canadian teams with fat balls and oversized end zones.
Sure, travel would be determined only after finding out which bracket and after winning or losing bracket game, but they do it in bball. It could work.
Click to expand...
You may have some good ideas in there. But I can’t peel it apart enough to discuss it.
 
anotherdumbprediction said:
The latter. Everyone is in a 16 team bracket after conference games. The Top 16 play for NC. The other "regions" for regional championship SW, NE..etc and a high level bowl game between the two 3-0 teams left standing in each bracket after three weeks. I just felt that playing the 1-0 teams and 0-1 teams against each other, then the next week 2-0's and 1-1's and 0-2's against each other in the brackets made for playing competitive games, as opposed to the majority of crappy, random matchups set up by schedule makers for Sept. And, of course, the 16 team NC playoff. All fits within 13 game schedule.
Click to expand...
Starting to understand what you are proposing now. I'm guessing the issue with that will be the Akrons, Northern Illinois's and the Central Michigans. For that part even UCF. They rely on those non-conference games for exposure and revenue. A UCF is still going to have problems being recognized when the don't play any P5 teams until after their conference games and there is a poor likelyhood that....unless totally undefeated.....they would be recognized for being in the top 16.
In some ways your idea has some merit though. However I don't think we solve the "controversy" of subjectivity as all those brackets and the selections need to take place by humans. And I'm not offended by that but there are many that are.
 



You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top