Yes! I have finally been published and you may view my book at http://www.buybooksontheweb.com/pro
duct.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-5681-8 .
December Dream . . . Qualifying for the BCS Rankings is about a playoff system. I am mystified how everyone who wants a playoff also wants to use the bowls. The bowls are the 'sacared cows' or 'cash cows' as it were.
This is why I do believe my plan will be a very viable alternative to using the bowls. My plan let's the teams PLAY THE GAME!
And these are the games we could only hope to see. . . man! what a Dream!!!
only $10.95 in paperback. . .
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Playoff scenarios . . .
There have been several good ideas posted on this topic, but one item that has not been addressed is the ranking of the teams. The computers are one third of the vote. The Harris poll and the Coaches poll are the other two thirds of the vote. The computers have fixed variables, while the human pollsters may have their own agendas for the placing of their votes. . . maybe to support another team in their conference to a higher position than maybe they deserve, or past affiliation with a team one may have playd with in their college football days. YES! I am out right saying that humans have prejudices. Some may be well know by the individual, some may just be habit, and some humans act on their prejudices without even knowing they are being prejudical.
As long as we are relying on human pollsters to make the decision, we are basing the rankings on OPINION. . . and sometimes the facts get in the way. Two thirds of the final BCS polls are Opinion.
Now that we have that out of the way, lets be realistic. . . The Bowls were started to feature top rated teams. There was never any push on these Bowls to have a meaning for a Natonal Champion. These Bowls were started as a reward for the winning team of a conference or just because one of the bowls wanted to have their best local team play the top team from another part of the country with a very good winning record.
The BCS wanted to get the Rose Bowl as a part of their package so the other conferences could get a piece of the Rose Bowl's purse. Yes, the Rose Bowl before BCS always paid more than any other Bowl, [1997 Rose 10m, Orange 8.5m, Sugar 8.2m, Fiesta 8.2m] and it was exclusive to Pac 10 and Big 10[11] teams. Bowls have flourished as a way for the sponsoring cities to make additional gains in their local economic environment. A lot of the dollars gained are used to support United Way projects and other social programs that could not exist with out these Bowls providing the economic impact to their respective areas.
And let's take some history lessons here and note that the Proclaimed National Champion was always named at the end of the regular season, before the Bowls were played. 1965 was the first time the AP decided to hold their final poll until after the Bowls. And this was not done again until the 1968 season/ Bowls were played.
I have taken all of this into consideration. I recognized that there is no way to really, physicall speaking that is, have a playoff per se. The Bowls are the 'sacred cows' or in this case, the 'cash cows', and I don't think they are going to change.
Since I do feel that humans are the majority of the rankings voters, I do think we need some justification of the rankings. I have written my scenario here many times. . . Last game of the regular season pits #1 vs #2, #3 vs #4, #5 vs #6, etc. all the way down to #119 vs #120, or at least as many teams as there are bowl berths. This is the best way to prove which teams really earn a spot in the BCS Bowls, not just the National Championship game.
This proves that opinion is just that, opinion. Having teams of perceived equal strength will take it's toll on the pretenders by the contenders. Then we can schedule the Bowl matchups. If we get truer rankings by letting the teams play, wouldn't that justify the rankings to be more legitiment?
I guess I could write all the details here, but I think you should just buy my book for the full explaination at www.bbotw.com December Dreams . . . Qualifying for the BCS Final Rankings.
As long as we are relying on human pollsters to make the decision, we are basing the rankings on OPINION. . . and sometimes the facts get in the way. Two thirds of the final BCS polls are Opinion.
Now that we have that out of the way, lets be realistic. . . The Bowls were started to feature top rated teams. There was never any push on these Bowls to have a meaning for a Natonal Champion. These Bowls were started as a reward for the winning team of a conference or just because one of the bowls wanted to have their best local team play the top team from another part of the country with a very good winning record.
The BCS wanted to get the Rose Bowl as a part of their package so the other conferences could get a piece of the Rose Bowl's purse. Yes, the Rose Bowl before BCS always paid more than any other Bowl, [1997 Rose 10m, Orange 8.5m, Sugar 8.2m, Fiesta 8.2m] and it was exclusive to Pac 10 and Big 10[11] teams. Bowls have flourished as a way for the sponsoring cities to make additional gains in their local economic environment. A lot of the dollars gained are used to support United Way projects and other social programs that could not exist with out these Bowls providing the economic impact to their respective areas.
And let's take some history lessons here and note that the Proclaimed National Champion was always named at the end of the regular season, before the Bowls were played. 1965 was the first time the AP decided to hold their final poll until after the Bowls. And this was not done again until the 1968 season/ Bowls were played.
I have taken all of this into consideration. I recognized that there is no way to really, physicall speaking that is, have a playoff per se. The Bowls are the 'sacred cows' or in this case, the 'cash cows', and I don't think they are going to change.
Since I do feel that humans are the majority of the rankings voters, I do think we need some justification of the rankings. I have written my scenario here many times. . . Last game of the regular season pits #1 vs #2, #3 vs #4, #5 vs #6, etc. all the way down to #119 vs #120, or at least as many teams as there are bowl berths. This is the best way to prove which teams really earn a spot in the BCS Bowls, not just the National Championship game.
This proves that opinion is just that, opinion. Having teams of perceived equal strength will take it's toll on the pretenders by the contenders. Then we can schedule the Bowl matchups. If we get truer rankings by letting the teams play, wouldn't that justify the rankings to be more legitiment?
I guess I could write all the details here, but I think you should just buy my book for the full explaination at www.bbotw.com December Dreams . . . Qualifying for the BCS Final Rankings.
December Dream . . . [logistics, format]
I have set up the format to have all 11 games completed, and or Conference Championships completed by Thanksgiving weekend. Then we see the BCS rankings. Then in the nex 10 to 14 days, the playoff begins. Realistically, I think the number of Bowl berths are how many teams should be playing a 12th game. Those teams above the number of Bowl berts available most likely have less than a 6 win record, so maybe they don't play a 12th game that year. . . or not. That is not for me to decide.
The logistics are set that #1 hosts #2, #3 hosts #4, etc. In a some cases there may be a very few repeating games. And I have even suggested a revision of the current broadcasting rights, and a special broadcasting contract that could assist in the transporting of teams to their designated game for this 12th unscheduled regular season game. All the home teams would have to have an understanding of the gate split, or other consideration for the visiting team. Whatever is typical with a visiting team with no replay in the contract. Same with the ticket distribution. These are details that would have to be worked out by all 120 teams in Division I CF. I am not saying this is an easy plan, but it could be a viable plan with ALL schools participation, just like the BCS had to be agreeable by the Six conferences, but this will take all 11 conferences and the independents participation.
Last year, one of the computer pollsters still picked Utah as their Number One. Utah was ranked #6. In my scenario, Utah would have traveled to Southern California. If they would have decisively beaten Southern California, They may have jumped up high enough to be in the National Championship game, being the highest ranked undefeated team. Don't forget, two thirds of the BCS rankings are from human pollsters, and they are very subjective, and when it comes to their votes, we have seen in the past, they can be lobbied, like Mack Brown of Texas in 2004 and Urban Meyer of Florida in 2006.
It is true, many teams will make the cut to stay in the reach of the BCS Bowls, which are the highest paying Bowls, and that's what this is really all about, THE MONEY! A few teams will drop out of the top 10, and maybe even a few Conference Champions among them, so be it. I find it refreshing this year that all of the top 10 teams ranked in the BCS played in the BCS Bowls. This is the first time since the BCS started that that has happened. With the implementation of my Qualifying Round, it should remain that the Top Ten of the BCS Rankings should be in the BCS Bowls.
I have also set a proposed schedule of the 12th game to start on a Wednesday and end on a Saturday. On Sunday, the Final Rankings will be set, and the Bowl Games will be announced. This puts us at about December 10 or 12, somewhere in that date range, depending on the calander. Most teams do not know where they are going for a Bowl, usually by the 6th or 7th of December anyways, so this is just a few more days past this time.
As for the most current BCS Poll we would have seen Cincinnati hosting TCU and Florida hosting Boise State. If Boise would have had a decisive victory over Florida, and Cincinnati just bearly beating a TCU team, don't you think we just might have had enough human pollsters think that Boise State would have earned the right to be in the National Championship Game? Boise would have been undefeated. . . The human pollsters have had an effect on the rankings before, and will continue having an effect on the rankins in the future. And don't forget, the rankings have teams that are perceived to be teams of equal strength.
The real benefits of my proposed plan is to defeat one argument that is futile. . . "well who did they play?" This plan will let them play the game! Another argument is, "so they played that 'cup-cake' team". Now they may not have room to play Podunk academy for girls and boys. Do your reading, and check out what non-related others have said about my plan at www.bbotw.com December Dream . . . it is MY dream. Don't be so hasty to dismiss it. Think about it. It is different. And it is not a bracket playoff. And there are more details in the book. And so many have stated, there is no need for a playoff because the season IS the playoff. My plan just qualifies the contenders from the pretenders.
The logistics are set that #1 hosts #2, #3 hosts #4, etc. In a some cases there may be a very few repeating games. And I have even suggested a revision of the current broadcasting rights, and a special broadcasting contract that could assist in the transporting of teams to their designated game for this 12th unscheduled regular season game. All the home teams would have to have an understanding of the gate split, or other consideration for the visiting team. Whatever is typical with a visiting team with no replay in the contract. Same with the ticket distribution. These are details that would have to be worked out by all 120 teams in Division I CF. I am not saying this is an easy plan, but it could be a viable plan with ALL schools participation, just like the BCS had to be agreeable by the Six conferences, but this will take all 11 conferences and the independents participation.
Last year, one of the computer pollsters still picked Utah as their Number One. Utah was ranked #6. In my scenario, Utah would have traveled to Southern California. If they would have decisively beaten Southern California, They may have jumped up high enough to be in the National Championship game, being the highest ranked undefeated team. Don't forget, two thirds of the BCS rankings are from human pollsters, and they are very subjective, and when it comes to their votes, we have seen in the past, they can be lobbied, like Mack Brown of Texas in 2004 and Urban Meyer of Florida in 2006.
It is true, many teams will make the cut to stay in the reach of the BCS Bowls, which are the highest paying Bowls, and that's what this is really all about, THE MONEY! A few teams will drop out of the top 10, and maybe even a few Conference Champions among them, so be it. I find it refreshing this year that all of the top 10 teams ranked in the BCS played in the BCS Bowls. This is the first time since the BCS started that that has happened. With the implementation of my Qualifying Round, it should remain that the Top Ten of the BCS Rankings should be in the BCS Bowls.
I have also set a proposed schedule of the 12th game to start on a Wednesday and end on a Saturday. On Sunday, the Final Rankings will be set, and the Bowl Games will be announced. This puts us at about December 10 or 12, somewhere in that date range, depending on the calander. Most teams do not know where they are going for a Bowl, usually by the 6th or 7th of December anyways, so this is just a few more days past this time.
As for the most current BCS Poll we would have seen Cincinnati hosting TCU and Florida hosting Boise State. If Boise would have had a decisive victory over Florida, and Cincinnati just bearly beating a TCU team, don't you think we just might have had enough human pollsters think that Boise State would have earned the right to be in the National Championship Game? Boise would have been undefeated. . . The human pollsters have had an effect on the rankings before, and will continue having an effect on the rankins in the future. And don't forget, the rankings have teams that are perceived to be teams of equal strength.
The real benefits of my proposed plan is to defeat one argument that is futile. . . "well who did they play?" This plan will let them play the game! Another argument is, "so they played that 'cup-cake' team". Now they may not have room to play Podunk academy for girls and boys. Do your reading, and check out what non-related others have said about my plan at www.bbotw.com December Dream . . . it is MY dream. Don't be so hasty to dismiss it. Think about it. It is different. And it is not a bracket playoff. And there are more details in the book. And so many have stated, there is no need for a playoff because the season IS the playoff. My plan just qualifies the contenders from the pretenders.
A football fanatic's December Dream . . .
December Dream . . .Qualifying for the Final BCS Rankings. Published by InfinityPress www.bbotw.com available in paperback $10.95.
I am the Author of this book, and it may just be the most comprehensive plan for the next step of the BCS [Bowl Championship Series] to further amend the Bowl selection process.
Many of the suggested playoff formats have one or two things in common: a bracketed process where teams are seeded with the highest playing the lowest; and the other item is using the Bowl Games for this playoff system.
The Total Bowl payout has been over One Quarter of a BILLION Dollars the last few years. I do not think any playoff system will have a chance using the Bowls. It is simple really, if any one team has multiple Bowl games, it will be denying other teams, who could have enjoyed that spot, from earning the dollars paid for their participation in the Bowl. The Bowls are the 'sacred cows', or in this case the 'cash cows'.
To 'seed' the teams with the lowest playing the highest is, in my opinion, a total waste of time and energy. Let's face it, football is not basketball where a team can play 2 or 3 games per week.
On another note, how did these teams earn their rankings? Two thirds of the pollsters are persons with their opinions. Since these rankings are subjective at best, let's have some head to head immediate competition. Why not have #1 hosting #2, #3 hosting #4, etc. all the way to #119 hosting #120, or at least as many teams playing as there are Bowl berths to fill.
The key points to my format are:
Provides the next progressive step in determining who should play in the BCS Bowls.
Justify subjective rankings with more meaningful games.
A system where EVERYBODY WINS! Teams, Conferences, Schools, Fan[atic]s, Broadcasting Companies, Congress/Senate, and many others not listed here.
Provides a process of elimination before the Bowl berths are filled.
Allows all 11 Conferences and Independents to EARN their just positions in the BCS Bowls.
Reduces the human subjective factor out of the ratings.
Lets the Titan battle the Titan on the field of play, by letting the teams play the game!
Pits top ranked teams to play opponents of perceived equal strength.
Leaves no room on the regular season schedule to play that "cream puff" team.
Gives us the games we could have never had the foresightedness to have scheduled.
Reduces the opinions of Coaches and Harris Pollsters with reality results.
Provides tie-breakers with immediate results.
Keeps the Bowl System in tact.
Keeps the amount of games being played the same.
Meets Government passed regulations by providing one round of playoffs.
Insures Fair Play for all 120 teams to earn their BCS Bowl berth.
Provides additional profit centers for participating Teams, Conferences, and Schools.
Provides funds for teams to travel to these previously unscheduled games.
Cost effective.
Results effective.
If you think these points are well worth reaching, than maybe you should read the book and then I ask you to petition the Schools, The Presidents of the Schools, The Board of Directors of these Schools, and everyone you think may lobby for this radical change that would be in ALL parties best interest..
Thank You,
I am the Author of this book, and it may just be the most comprehensive plan for the next step of the BCS [Bowl Championship Series] to further amend the Bowl selection process.
Many of the suggested playoff formats have one or two things in common: a bracketed process where teams are seeded with the highest playing the lowest; and the other item is using the Bowl Games for this playoff system.
The Total Bowl payout has been over One Quarter of a BILLION Dollars the last few years. I do not think any playoff system will have a chance using the Bowls. It is simple really, if any one team has multiple Bowl games, it will be denying other teams, who could have enjoyed that spot, from earning the dollars paid for their participation in the Bowl. The Bowls are the 'sacred cows', or in this case the 'cash cows'.
To 'seed' the teams with the lowest playing the highest is, in my opinion, a total waste of time and energy. Let's face it, football is not basketball where a team can play 2 or 3 games per week.
On another note, how did these teams earn their rankings? Two thirds of the pollsters are persons with their opinions. Since these rankings are subjective at best, let's have some head to head immediate competition. Why not have #1 hosting #2, #3 hosting #4, etc. all the way to #119 hosting #120, or at least as many teams playing as there are Bowl berths to fill.
The key points to my format are:
Provides the next progressive step in determining who should play in the BCS Bowls.
Justify subjective rankings with more meaningful games.
A system where EVERYBODY WINS! Teams, Conferences, Schools, Fan[atic]s, Broadcasting Companies, Congress/Senate, and many others not listed here.
Provides a process of elimination before the Bowl berths are filled.
Allows all 11 Conferences and Independents to EARN their just positions in the BCS Bowls.
Reduces the human subjective factor out of the ratings.
Lets the Titan battle the Titan on the field of play, by letting the teams play the game!
Pits top ranked teams to play opponents of perceived equal strength.
Leaves no room on the regular season schedule to play that "cream puff" team.
Gives us the games we could have never had the foresightedness to have scheduled.
Reduces the opinions of Coaches and Harris Pollsters with reality results.
Provides tie-breakers with immediate results.
Keeps the Bowl System in tact.
Keeps the amount of games being played the same.
Meets Government passed regulations by providing one round of playoffs.
Insures Fair Play for all 120 teams to earn their BCS Bowl berth.
Provides additional profit centers for participating Teams, Conferences, and Schools.
Provides funds for teams to travel to these previously unscheduled games.
Cost effective.
Results effective.
If you think these points are well worth reaching, than maybe you should read the book and then I ask you to petition the Schools, The Presidents of the Schools, The Board of Directors of these Schools, and everyone you think may lobby for this radical change that would be in ALL parties best interest..
Thank You,
Playoff, money, Bowl system remaing intact . . .
My system incorporates a type of playoff, and it will keep the money, and even add additional monies to the system while keeping the Bowl system intact. It will keep the total number of games at 12, which is what the Colleges and Universities desire.
The regular season is a sort of playoff. There are few teams that survive the gambit of 12 gruling games, riddled with injuries, replacements, and even carrying that target on your back as a team goes unscathed through the regular season.
There is no fair and equitable solution in picking a true #1 team, but the closest thing we have doing an unbiased ranking are the computers, and they are one third of the BCS ranking. The computers have no prejudices or moral issues with any team. They are unswayed by human emotions, needs, wants, and desires. And most of all, the Computers are consistant in their ranking procedures.
Let me make sure your not thinking that only the computer imput should be looked at in this decision making process for ranking teams, but we must recognize that as long as people pollsters are also voting, they have agendas and prejudices. I do believe that the BCS ranking is a close proximity as to the rankings of the best teams of College Football, and to institute a playoff would be, in essence, killing off the bowl system as we know today, and a ruining of the "sacred cow", or in this case the "cash cow".
Like everyone who wants a playoff system, I too would like to see the best play the best. I do think some of the human pollsters are guilty of prejudices [and I cite some of this in my book], and that is why I do think we need to separate the condenders from the pretenders..
I think the BCS is the best alternative to any playoff, which will NOT, in my opinion make the dollars that the bowls make for the schools, teams, and conferences. That is why I devises a non-playoff system that would pit titan against titan, and really give us not only the flavor of a playoff, but the harsh reality of who is really worthy of being in the top ranking as the true #1 and #2 team to play in the National Championship game.
The biggest arguement that I hear ever year is . . . Well who did they play? And with my system we let them play the game! Teams of perceived equal strength play one another, and the winning team will, in essence, advance. A #4 or even a #5 team could ultimately end up playing in the National Championship game with my system, and the biggest benefit will be for the viewer, the fan!
I want to say it just one more time. . . 11 game scheduled regular season; a 12th game of the regular season will be based on the BCS Rankings with #1 hosting #2; #3 hosting #4; #5 hosting #6; etc. and this can go to #69 hosting #70 [to qualify the teams that will be heading for a Bowl], or even #119 hosting #120 [if we want to include all Division I teams].
This is as good as a playoff as it will thin the condenders and the victors will step up a notch to be eligible for the bowl. A few teams may drop out of contention for the BCS Biowls, and a few more teams may rise to their just positions. The top paying bowls are the BCS bowls where the top 10 teams [subject to Automatic Qualifiers [AQ]] will play and earn the Big Bucks. And maybe after this 12th unscheduled game, the BCS may want to rethink AQ's if they lose their 12th game.
This could lead to some of the best football we would have NEVER had the foresightedness to have scheduled. This would present an equitible system in place, every bit as qualifying as a playoff system. And we still have the Bowl games . . .sorta' like having your cake . . . and eating it too!
If you have questions, go to my profile and read my blogs, or just buy my book of December Dream . . . Qualifying for the BCS Rankings available at www.bbotw.com in paperback for $10.95.
The regular season is a sort of playoff. There are few teams that survive the gambit of 12 gruling games, riddled with injuries, replacements, and even carrying that target on your back as a team goes unscathed through the regular season.
There is no fair and equitable solution in picking a true #1 team, but the closest thing we have doing an unbiased ranking are the computers, and they are one third of the BCS ranking. The computers have no prejudices or moral issues with any team. They are unswayed by human emotions, needs, wants, and desires. And most of all, the Computers are consistant in their ranking procedures.
Let me make sure your not thinking that only the computer imput should be looked at in this decision making process for ranking teams, but we must recognize that as long as people pollsters are also voting, they have agendas and prejudices. I do believe that the BCS ranking is a close proximity as to the rankings of the best teams of College Football, and to institute a playoff would be, in essence, killing off the bowl system as we know today, and a ruining of the "sacred cow", or in this case the "cash cow".
Like everyone who wants a playoff system, I too would like to see the best play the best. I do think some of the human pollsters are guilty of prejudices [and I cite some of this in my book], and that is why I do think we need to separate the condenders from the pretenders..
I think the BCS is the best alternative to any playoff, which will NOT, in my opinion make the dollars that the bowls make for the schools, teams, and conferences. That is why I devises a non-playoff system that would pit titan against titan, and really give us not only the flavor of a playoff, but the harsh reality of who is really worthy of being in the top ranking as the true #1 and #2 team to play in the National Championship game.
The biggest arguement that I hear ever year is . . . Well who did they play? And with my system we let them play the game! Teams of perceived equal strength play one another, and the winning team will, in essence, advance. A #4 or even a #5 team could ultimately end up playing in the National Championship game with my system, and the biggest benefit will be for the viewer, the fan!
I want to say it just one more time. . . 11 game scheduled regular season; a 12th game of the regular season will be based on the BCS Rankings with #1 hosting #2; #3 hosting #4; #5 hosting #6; etc. and this can go to #69 hosting #70 [to qualify the teams that will be heading for a Bowl], or even #119 hosting #120 [if we want to include all Division I teams].
This is as good as a playoff as it will thin the condenders and the victors will step up a notch to be eligible for the bowl. A few teams may drop out of contention for the BCS Biowls, and a few more teams may rise to their just positions. The top paying bowls are the BCS bowls where the top 10 teams [subject to Automatic Qualifiers [AQ]] will play and earn the Big Bucks. And maybe after this 12th unscheduled game, the BCS may want to rethink AQ's if they lose their 12th game.
This could lead to some of the best football we would have NEVER had the foresightedness to have scheduled. This would present an equitible system in place, every bit as qualifying as a playoff system. And we still have the Bowl games . . .sorta' like having your cake . . . and eating it too!
If you have questions, go to my profile and read my blogs, or just buy my book of December Dream . . . Qualifying for the BCS Rankings available at www.bbotw.com in paperback for $10.95.
A Fair and Equitable System . . .
Roman Wolve said, ". . . we just want to see a fair and equitable end to each college football season. As every other professional and NCAA champion is determined by a playoff and no other sport utilizes a BCS type system. . ."
And I just want to address this by saying that the regular season is a sort of playoff. There are few teams that survive the gambit of 12 gruling games, riddled with injuries, replacements, and even carrying that target on your back as a team goes unscathed through the regular season.
There is no fair and equitable solution in picking a true #1 team, but the closest thing we have doing an unbiased ranking are the computers, and they are one third of the BCS ranking. The computers have no prejudices or moral issues with any team. They are unswayed by human emotions, needs, wants, and desires. And most of all, the Computers are consistant in their ranking procedures.
Let me make sure your not thinking that only the computer imput should be looked at in this decision making process for ranking teams, but we must recognize that as long as people pollsters are also voting, they have agendas and prejudices. I do believe that the BCS ranking is a close proximity as to the rankings of the best teams of College Football, and to institute a playoff would be, in essence, killing off the bowl system as we know today, and a ruining of the "sacred cow", or in this case the "cash cow".
Like everyone who wants a playoff system, I too would like to see the best play the best. I do think some of the human pollsters are guilty of prejudices [and I cite some of this in my book], and that is why I do think we need to separate the condenders from the pretenders..
I think the BCS is the best alternative to any playoff, which will NOT, in my opinion make the dollars that the bowls make for the schools, teams, and conferences. That is why I devises a non-playoff system that would pit titan against titan, and really give us not only the flavor of a playoff, but the harsh reality of who is really worthy of being in the top ranking as the true #1 and #2 team to play in the National Championship game.
The biggest arguement that I hear ever year is . . . Well who did they play? And with my system we let them play the game! Teams of perceived equal strength play one another, and the winning team will, in essence, advance. A #4 or even a #5 team could ultimately end up playing in the National Championship game with my system, and the biggest benefit will be for the viewer, the fan!
I want to say it just one more time. . . 11 game scheduled regular season; a 12th game of the regular season will be based on the BCS Rankings with #1 hosting #2; #3 hosting #4; #5 hosting #6; etc. and this can go to #69 hosting #70 [to qualify the teams that will be heading for a Bowl], or even #119 hosting #120 [if we want to include all Division I teams].
This is as good as a playoff as it will thin the condenders and the victors will step up a notch to be eligible for the bowl. A few teams may drop out of contention for the BCS Biowls, and a few more teams may rise to their just positions. The top paying bowls are the BCS bowls where the top 10 teams [subject to Automatic Qualifiers [AQ]] will play and earn the Big Bucks. And maybe after this 12th unscheduled game, the BCS may want to rethink AQ's if they lose their 12th game.
This could lead to some of the best football we would have NEVER had the foresightedness to have scheduled. This would present an equitible system in place, every bit as qualifying as a playoff system. And we still have the Bowl games . . .sorta' like having your cake . . . and eating it too!
If you have questions, go to my profile and read my blogs, or just buy my book of December Dream . . . Qualifying for the BCS Rankings available at www.bbotw.com in paperback for $10.95.
And I just want to address this by saying that the regular season is a sort of playoff. There are few teams that survive the gambit of 12 gruling games, riddled with injuries, replacements, and even carrying that target on your back as a team goes unscathed through the regular season.
There is no fair and equitable solution in picking a true #1 team, but the closest thing we have doing an unbiased ranking are the computers, and they are one third of the BCS ranking. The computers have no prejudices or moral issues with any team. They are unswayed by human emotions, needs, wants, and desires. And most of all, the Computers are consistant in their ranking procedures.
Let me make sure your not thinking that only the computer imput should be looked at in this decision making process for ranking teams, but we must recognize that as long as people pollsters are also voting, they have agendas and prejudices. I do believe that the BCS ranking is a close proximity as to the rankings of the best teams of College Football, and to institute a playoff would be, in essence, killing off the bowl system as we know today, and a ruining of the "sacred cow", or in this case the "cash cow".
Like everyone who wants a playoff system, I too would like to see the best play the best. I do think some of the human pollsters are guilty of prejudices [and I cite some of this in my book], and that is why I do think we need to separate the condenders from the pretenders..
I think the BCS is the best alternative to any playoff, which will NOT, in my opinion make the dollars that the bowls make for the schools, teams, and conferences. That is why I devises a non-playoff system that would pit titan against titan, and really give us not only the flavor of a playoff, but the harsh reality of who is really worthy of being in the top ranking as the true #1 and #2 team to play in the National Championship game.
The biggest arguement that I hear ever year is . . . Well who did they play? And with my system we let them play the game! Teams of perceived equal strength play one another, and the winning team will, in essence, advance. A #4 or even a #5 team could ultimately end up playing in the National Championship game with my system, and the biggest benefit will be for the viewer, the fan!
I want to say it just one more time. . . 11 game scheduled regular season; a 12th game of the regular season will be based on the BCS Rankings with #1 hosting #2; #3 hosting #4; #5 hosting #6; etc. and this can go to #69 hosting #70 [to qualify the teams that will be heading for a Bowl], or even #119 hosting #120 [if we want to include all Division I teams].
This is as good as a playoff as it will thin the condenders and the victors will step up a notch to be eligible for the bowl. A few teams may drop out of contention for the BCS Biowls, and a few more teams may rise to their just positions. The top paying bowls are the BCS bowls where the top 10 teams [subject to Automatic Qualifiers [AQ]] will play and earn the Big Bucks. And maybe after this 12th unscheduled game, the BCS may want to rethink AQ's if they lose their 12th game.
This could lead to some of the best football we would have NEVER had the foresightedness to have scheduled. This would present an equitible system in place, every bit as qualifying as a playoff system. And we still have the Bowl games . . .sorta' like having your cake . . . and eating it too!
If you have questions, go to my profile and read my blogs, or just buy my book of December Dream . . . Qualifying for the BCS Rankings available at www.bbotw.com in paperback for $10.95.
Give the people what they want . . .
We will not live long enough to see a bracketed playoff, no matter how many teams, if your using the Bowls. The Bowls represent a QUARTER BILLION industry to all the schools and conferences that participate. The Bowls are all independent, and all of these hosts have their own game plan, and it really does not matter, at least not too much, who the teams/schools are that come to play in their bowl, just as long as they come, and enjoy the vacation [spend money].
These Bowl Committees will use the monies they collect to sponsor programs for kids, like in Miami where they have a Boys & Girls Club that would not exist without these funds. If it is any consolation, the bowls were ment to be exhibition, and were up until 1965 when the AP decided to name their Champion after the Bowls were played. Then in '66' & '67', the AP went back to naming the Champion after the regular season, and in 1968, they made it permanent to announce their winner after the Bowl Games.
As for my version of a playoff. . . #1 hosting #2, #3 hosting #4, etc as the last regular season game. Then we have the winners from 1&2 play the winner of 3&4, or maybe the winner of 5&6. There would definately be a flair of interest, and with the pocketbook of the BCS per team in the 5 Bowls they control, the losers of the top matchups would possibly retain their presence in a lower BCS Bowl, but the dollars will be the same. If your in the 7,8,9,or 10 position, and lose, you may be booted to a Capital One or Pizza Bowl.
The top BCS Bowl would in effect, by defacto, be a PLUS ONE that many fans desire in lieu of a real playoff system.
In a few of the posts above mine, there was a complaint as to "why would a #1 team want to play a #2 as the last game of the season? Who says the #1 team IS the real #1 team unless they are the only unblemished team, like Utah a few years ago. I'll tell you how they are number 1, by subjective voting. Associated Press, Harris Pollsters, and Coaches. At least one game with a percieved to be equal opponet is all I ask. Then we can make out the Bowl schedule.
Another up there in the posts had a problem with the computer programs favoring one team more than another. That's fine by me, as long as they are not changed throughout the season. Sagarine's computer poll is very open on how he does it, and you can go to his website and review his criteria. He posts the changes and when they were made. So do most of the other computer pollsters. The point is, they are consistant from the 1st game of the season to the last game of the season. And they have their own formula for strength of schedule that they follow. Now Anderson and Hester computer Poll named Utah #1 when they went to the Bowl and won and finished the season 13-0.
I do believe that a few of the computer polls favor one conference more than another, but that is based on the criteria they have used and tested over a long period of time. That is also why we have had some changes in the chosen Computer Polls. You don't see the NY Times or Seattle Times computer Polls in the mix anymore.
I have a chapter on the Computer Pollsters in my book. Or you can go to their site if you wish, and examine how they do it. . . all but one. And he won't tell me how he does it, as I wanted to have that in my book as well.
Do take a moment and ask yourself, do you like the Bowls the way they are? Do you really want that #1 playing #2 to see who really is better? My plan does it and the only thing that will change will be that as the last game of the season we will see teams play their perceived equal. These are the games we could have never had the foresightedness to schedule!
December Dream . . .Qualifying for the BCS Rankings www.bbotw.com
These Bowl Committees will use the monies they collect to sponsor programs for kids, like in Miami where they have a Boys & Girls Club that would not exist without these funds. If it is any consolation, the bowls were ment to be exhibition, and were up until 1965 when the AP decided to name their Champion after the Bowls were played. Then in '66' & '67', the AP went back to naming the Champion after the regular season, and in 1968, they made it permanent to announce their winner after the Bowl Games.
As for my version of a playoff. . . #1 hosting #2, #3 hosting #4, etc as the last regular season game. Then we have the winners from 1&2 play the winner of 3&4, or maybe the winner of 5&6. There would definately be a flair of interest, and with the pocketbook of the BCS per team in the 5 Bowls they control, the losers of the top matchups would possibly retain their presence in a lower BCS Bowl, but the dollars will be the same. If your in the 7,8,9,or 10 position, and lose, you may be booted to a Capital One or Pizza Bowl.
The top BCS Bowl would in effect, by defacto, be a PLUS ONE that many fans desire in lieu of a real playoff system.
In a few of the posts above mine, there was a complaint as to "why would a #1 team want to play a #2 as the last game of the season? Who says the #1 team IS the real #1 team unless they are the only unblemished team, like Utah a few years ago. I'll tell you how they are number 1, by subjective voting. Associated Press, Harris Pollsters, and Coaches. At least one game with a percieved to be equal opponet is all I ask. Then we can make out the Bowl schedule.
Another up there in the posts had a problem with the computer programs favoring one team more than another. That's fine by me, as long as they are not changed throughout the season. Sagarine's computer poll is very open on how he does it, and you can go to his website and review his criteria. He posts the changes and when they were made. So do most of the other computer pollsters. The point is, they are consistant from the 1st game of the season to the last game of the season. And they have their own formula for strength of schedule that they follow. Now Anderson and Hester computer Poll named Utah #1 when they went to the Bowl and won and finished the season 13-0.
I do believe that a few of the computer polls favor one conference more than another, but that is based on the criteria they have used and tested over a long period of time. That is also why we have had some changes in the chosen Computer Polls. You don't see the NY Times or Seattle Times computer Polls in the mix anymore.
I have a chapter on the Computer Pollsters in my book. Or you can go to their site if you wish, and examine how they do it. . . all but one. And he won't tell me how he does it, as I wanted to have that in my book as well.
Do take a moment and ask yourself, do you like the Bowls the way they are? Do you really want that #1 playing #2 to see who really is better? My plan does it and the only thing that will change will be that as the last game of the season we will see teams play their perceived equal. These are the games we could have never had the foresightedness to schedule!
December Dream . . .Qualifying for the BCS Rankings www.bbotw.com
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
A football fanatic's December Dream . . .
December Dream . . .Qualifying for the Final BCS Rankings. Published by InfinityPress www.bbotw.com available in paperback $10.95.
I am the Author of this book, and it may just be the most comprehensive plan for the next step of the BCS [Bowl Championship Series] to further amend the Bowl selection process.
Many of the suggested playoff formats have one or two things in common: a bracketed process where teams are seeded with the highest playing the lowest; and the other item is using the Bowl Games for this playoff system.
The Total Bowl payout has been over One Quarter of a BILLION Dollars the last few years. I do not think any playoff system will have a chance using the Bowls. It is simple really, if any one team has multiple Bowl games, it will be denying other teams, who could have enjoyed that spot, from earning the dollars paid for their participation in the Bowl. The Bowls are the 'sacred cows', or in this case the 'cash cows'.
To 'seed' the teams with the lowest playing the highest is, in my opinion, a total waste of time and energy. Let's face it, football is not basketball where a team can play 2 or 3 games per week.
On another note, how did these teams earn their rankings? Two thirds of the pollsters are persons with their opinions. Since these rankings are subjective at best, let's have some head to head immediate competition. Why not have #1 hosting #2, #3 hosting #4, etc. all the way to #119 hosting #120, or at least as many teams playing as there are Bowl berths to fill.
The key points to my format are:
I am the Author of this book, and it may just be the most comprehensive plan for the next step of the BCS [Bowl Championship Series] to further amend the Bowl selection process.
Many of the suggested playoff formats have one or two things in common: a bracketed process where teams are seeded with the highest playing the lowest; and the other item is using the Bowl Games for this playoff system.
The Total Bowl payout has been over One Quarter of a BILLION Dollars the last few years. I do not think any playoff system will have a chance using the Bowls. It is simple really, if any one team has multiple Bowl games, it will be denying other teams, who could have enjoyed that spot, from earning the dollars paid for their participation in the Bowl. The Bowls are the 'sacred cows', or in this case the 'cash cows'.
To 'seed' the teams with the lowest playing the highest is, in my opinion, a total waste of time and energy. Let's face it, football is not basketball where a team can play 2 or 3 games per week.
On another note, how did these teams earn their rankings? Two thirds of the pollsters are persons with their opinions. Since these rankings are subjective at best, let's have some head to head immediate competition. Why not have #1 hosting #2, #3 hosting #4, etc. all the way to #119 hosting #120, or at least as many teams playing as there are Bowl berths to fill.
The key points to my format are:
- Provides the next progressive step in determining who should play in the BCS Bowls.
- Justify subjective rankings with more meaningful games.
- A system where EVERYBODY WINS! Teams, Conferences, Schools, Fan[atic]s, Broadcasting Companies, Congress/Senate, and many others not listed here.
- Provides a process of elimination before the Bowl berths are filled.
- Allows all 11 Conferences and Independents to EARN their just positions in the BCS Bowls.
- Reduces the human subjective factor out of the ratings.
- Lets the Titan battle the Titan on the field of play, by letting the teams play the game!
- Pits top ranked teams to play opponents of perceived equal strength.
- Leaves no room on the regular season schedule to play that "cream puff" team.
- Gives us the games we could have never had the foresightedness to have scheduled.
- Reduces the opinions of Coaches and Harris Pollsters with reality results.
- Provides tie-breakers with immediate results.
- Keeps the Bowl System in tact.
- Keeps the amount of games being played the same.
- Meets Government passed regulations by providing one round of playoffs.
- Insures Fair Play for all 120 teams to earn their BCS Bowl berth.
- Provides additional profit centers for participating Teams, Conferences, and Schools.
- Provides funds for teams to travel to these previously unscheduled games.
- Cost effective.
- Results effective.
If you think these points are well worth reaching, than maybe you should read the book and then I ask you to petition the Schools, The Presidents of the Schools, The Board of Directors of these Schools, and everyone you think may lobby for this radical change that would be in ALL parties best interest..
Thank You,
jt a.k.a. wwoodyhays on sportsline.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
