Honestly, I would completely do away with automatic bids. It is one of the major flaws in the systems now. Sorry, no one can argue a #15 Clemson from a conference that isn't all that strong getting an automatic bid over Boise State or Kansas State.

What about if a conference has no team ranked in the top 12 they forfeit their bid. The two problems you have with totally doing away with it is (a) it helps to negate poll bias (what if writers seem to unfairly bias SEC teams that leads to 5 of 8 making the field) and (b) it ensures you won't have a bunch of conference rematches (what if the SEC champshionship game is rematched in the first round and there are 4 other SEC teams?). I would keep the automatic bids, but make a ranking requirement.

The other reason a 16 team playoff is untenable is - how many games are these college kids going to play?!? 16-17. To me, that's too much, but if you cut back the regular season then you take away games from every school in the country. 16 just doesn't make sense schedule-wise.

What about if a conference has no team ranked in the top 12 they forfeit their bid. The two problems you have with totally doing away with it is (a) it helps to negate poll bias (what if writers seem to unfairly bias SEC teams that leads to 5 of 8 making the field) and (b) it ensures you won't have a bunch of conference rematches (what if the SEC champshionship game is rematched in the first round and there are 4 other SEC teams?). I would keep the automatic bids, but make a ranking requirement.

Well to fix writer bias, you take the human polls completely out of the BCS formula. This should be done anyway and it lets the computers determine things. Human bias is the biggest problem with the BCS formula right now and doesn't belong.

For the 2nd part, if you have each conference champion is in there...so every gets represented - fairly. If you fill in the at-large spots by the BCS rankings...yes - you very well could have 5 teams from the same conference. How is this any different than the Big 12 having 3 of 4 spots in a basketball Final Four?


The other reason a 16 team playoff is untenable is - how many games are these college kids going to play?!? 16-17. To me, that's too much, but if you cut back the regular season then you take away games from every school in the country. 16 just doesn't make sense schedule-wise.

I would say worst case is you'll see kids play 15 games a season. Hey guess what. EVERY OTHER DIVISION IS THE SAME WAY. I don't see why those in the FBS subdivision are special to where they don't have to play the same amount as the FCS and other divisions. I guess they need to be more pampered? LOL Regardless. If you take the regular season back to 11 games, that isn't a big deal. I would also favor allow post season bowl games by setting them up as exhibition games for schools wanting to get in a 12th game. The playoff system would not completely eliminate the entire bowl post season...that would be foolish and never fly. Most kids now are playing 13 games. To take only 4 teams beyond that is not a bad thing. What do you think a plus one is going to do? The exact same thing. A team in the SEC, for example, will end up playing 15 games if they go all the way.

So that should address any concern of yours. It opens the field to more teams to make to the big game, but keeps things pretty stable now. If schools are worried about playing a 13th game - maybe pre-season exhibitions would be something to look at?

Any playoff system is going to have to include home games with only the championship game being played on a neutral field. You can't expect fans in sufficient numbers to travel to three straight road games.

Any playoff system is going to have to include home games with only the championship game being played on a neutral field. You can't expect fans in sufficient numbers to travel to three straight road games.

Agree. Example I gave would have the first 2 rounds played at the highest ranked team's stadium. The semi finals and final game would be played like it is now at a rotating site.

Agree. Example I gave would have the first 2 rounds played at the highest ranked team's stadium. The semi finals and final game would be played like it is now at a rotating site.

With an exception that no rotating site can be near a campus like this year's next to LSU. Fans majority advantage should never be tolerated (Alabama got very lucky).

You would think they could still find a money machine in a hybrid setup. Take 8 or 16 teams and do a playoff. Then at the same time still permit the exhibition bowl games for schools not involved in the championship series. The championship play off can start with the first round (or two with 16 teams) can be at the higher ranked team's home stadium. Then the semifinals and championship game would then be in a rotating host city every year. This wouldn't be any different than what you have now with the Sugar Bowl a week before the BCS title game.

Of course the issue becomes what teams do the other big bowls get like the Rose Bowl. They are going to want their Big Ten/Pac 12 match up. However would they even settle for taking a someone other than the conference champion? Yes they have several times, but never have been all that happy with it.

So play this out with this year's setup...

16-team playoff would have been:

Round 1: Michigan @ LSU, Wisconsin @ Alabama, Georgia @ Oklahoma State, Michigan State @ Stanford, South Carolina @ Virginia Tech, Kansas State @ Houston, Oklahoma @ Boise State (*chuckle*), and Oregon @ Arkansas. Organize them in a bracket like the basketball playoffs and say in Round 2 we get something like this with all the top ranked teams winning...

Round 2: Virginia Tech @ LSU, Boise State @ OSU , Houston @ Stanford , Arkansas @ Alabama.

Round 3: Oklahoma State vs. LSU , Stanford vs. Alabama all at say this year would have been New Orleans.

Title Game: LSU (if they actually could score) vs. Alabama (if they could stop Stanford).

It would produce a lot of big name match ups and would and pull most issues out of the equation on a fair system. Teams like Boise State and Houston still get their chance to play. It would seem like a win win, but it'll come down to ABC willing to cough up more money for it. Or a combined ABC/Fox/CBS bid to make it work.

They would need to get more money out of the TV for it to even balance out, since it shrinks the pool of people going to the game so may lead to less attendance and more games means shorter times at the city for those traveling to so less funding by the local organizers.


8 team playoff with homefield for the first round (16 teams is too many). Use BCS rankings for seeding. Conference champions from SEC, Big 12, Big 10, Pac 12, and ACC have automatic bids and the three highest ranked other teams by the BCS earn at large selections. Teams from the same conference can't play each other in first round so the lower ranked team will drop a spot unless they are the last seed. Regular season will have to be capped at 11 games. That way the championship game teams will likely play 15 total games. It's a lot, but only two teams do it with a bye week prior to the championship. Here's how my plan would have worked this year:


I don't like any team getting home field advantage, with the deck already stacked with rankings.

I don't like any team getting home field advantage, with the deck already stacked with rankings.

That definitely happens in the pros which don't even have rankings. It certainly makes the regular season more important if you can get home field advantage.

That definitely happens in the pros which don't even have rankings. It certainly makes the regular season more important if you can get home field advantage.

However, the pros have had their system for a long time, not going from a neutral field to a biased one.

However, the pros have had their system for a long time, not going from a neutral field to a biased one.

So what difference does that make?

With an exception that no rotating site can be near a campus like this year's next to LSU. Fans majority advantage should never be tolerated (Alabama got very lucky).

Not going to happen. There is pretty much a major university with in a couple hour drive of every major stadium. LSU isn't in New Orleans, but it isn't too far away. Just no way to have something like that.


They would need to get more money out of the TV for it to even balance out, since it shrinks the pool of people going to the game so may lead to less attendance and more games means shorter times at the city for those traveling to so less funding by the local organizers.

Yeah that's true. However it won't impact a ton of cities, but we would probably see the number of exhibition bowl games go down to around 20ish.


I don't like any team getting home field advantage, with the deck already stacked with rankings.

No real way around it to keep things simple. Just about every sport does it except NCAA FBS football and the NCAA basketball tourney.