National Expansion For College Football: Part VI
August 20, 2007 by bcsbusters
National Expansion For College Football - “The Holiday Bracket.”
If you haven’t taken the time to read the preceding parts of this series, please take the time to do so now. Only when considering the complete picture can one get an appreciation for the beauty and simplicity of this model!
PART I, PART II, PART III, PART IV, PART V.
The beauty of the BCS Busters Regular Season Bracketed Playoff for college football is the hidden simplicity of the overall plan. Many people believe a playoff format for college football would never work as it would render the regular season insignificant and would harm the traditions of the bowl platform for college football.
If we are talking about the traditional loser out NFL Model, then I whole-heartedly agree. A playoff would never work for college football.
The crux of my plan is attacking this sentiment by utilizing a unique regular season playoff format beginning in the last 4 weeks of the regular season. The brackets, known as the “BCS,” “Holiday,” “NIT,” and “Sportsman’s Brackets,” would create an unrivaled opportunity for college football to move forward and solve the mitigating circumstances that render the determination of a national champion obsolete, for the determination of the national champion in college football is as mythical today as it was before the creation of the BCS.
The current BCS system is a Titanic disaster given the eight years of ongoing controversy, and the never ending political smear campaigns designed to elevate the good ol’ boy brotherhood of the CFA.
A format of this design goes well beyond simply aligning the top-32 teams and sending them down the road to the Final Four. As I see it, the only way to determine a true national champion while maintaining the sacred cow concept of the regular season (every game is a playoff) and the traditions of the bowl season, all within a 12-13 game regular season would be utilizing the BCS Busters Regular Season Playoff Model.
The BCS Bracket, beginning in the vital month of November, is essentially a 32-team tournament with 4 primary functions. Initially, in Weeks #9 and #10, all the conferences across the country are competing to determine a conference champion. The format we would utilize for the entire BCS Bracket tournament is as follows.
- ACC Coastal #2 @ ACC Atlantic #1 (Virginia Tech @ Wake Forest)
- ACC Atlantic #2 @ ACC Coastal #1 (Boston College @ Georgia Tech)
- SEC West #2 @ SEC East #1 (Auburn @ Florida)
- SEC East #2 @ SEC West #1 (LSU @ Arkansas)
- Big-East South #2 @ Big-East North #1 (S. Florida @ Louisville)
- Big-East North #2 @ Big-East South #1 (Rutgers @ West Virginia)
- Big-10 East #2 @ Big-10 West #1 (Michigan @ Wisconsin)
- Big-10 West #2 @ Big-10 East #1 (Notre Dame @ Ohio State)
- Big-12 South #2 @ Big-12 North #1 (Texas @ Nebraska)
- Big-12 North #2 @ Big-12 South #1 (Texas A&M @ Oklahoma)
- PAC-10 South #2 @ PAC-10 North #1 (California @ Oregon State)
- PAC-10 North #2 @ PAC-10 South #1 (BYU @ USC)
- Rocky Mtn. West #2 @ Rocky Mtn. East #1 (Hawai’i @ TCU)
- Rocky Mtn. East #2 @ Rocky Mtn. West #1 (Houston @ Boise St)
- C-USA West #1 vs C-USA East #2 (Neutral Site) (SJSU vs. Marshall)
- MAC East #1 vs MAC West #1 (Netral Site) (Ohio vs. C. Michigan)
The purpose of this lay-out is to determine a conference champion and from there align the conference champions in a regional format to determine the best-of-the-best in the final two week’s of the regular season, which would undoubtedly determine not only the national championship participants, but also the teams who truly deserve to play in the BCS and upper-tier bowls, ending a landslide of controversy.
However, another argument the BCS godfathers continually throw at the playoff proponents is the fact that the smaller programs need the early season non-conference games to balance the books. Without these match-ups (S. Miss v. Alabama, Bowling Green v. Ohio State, Nevada v. Oregon or E. Carolina v. N.C. State) many of these non-BCS programs would go bankrupt. While this is true, it has been accounted for and can easily be overcome within my playoff model.
The hidden simplicity of the BCS Buster Proposal is that within the Holiday, NIT and Sportsman’s Brackets, these so called payment games would continue to take place with an additional bonus. If the non-BCS teams actually win the contest, they can move up within the brackets and gain access to the prized bowl events.
In the last 20 years since the 85/25 scholarship rule was enacted, many of these non-BCS teams have beaten the big boys, but really don’t gain much in terms of national recognition within the polls and bowls system. If you disagree, think about the road that Louisville, TCU and Boise State have taken in the last 15 years. Finally, after nearly two decades, can these schools be considered on a level playing field with SEC, ACC, PAC-10, Big-12 and Big-10 opponents. Yet, given the current system, these teams will never be granted an opportunity to compete for a national championship, in spite of being undefeated.
Within the BCS Busters Playoff Model, these non-BCS v. BCS match-ups would occur regularly and if the non-BCS teams win along the way, they can move up in the brackets and earn what they deserve. Of course, if they lose - they get what they deserve as well. The bottom line is the barriers of bias and discrimination would no longer be the roadblocks to success, and their journey to the upper levels of collegiate competition could literally happen in a couple or three seasons.
Therefore, instead of following the format that I utilized in the BCS Bracket (PAC-10 North #1 hosting the PAC-10 South #2 and vice-versa), the purpose of the Holiday Bracket is to line-up as many regional match-ups as possible between the conferences.
In the BCS Bracket, we took the top four teams in each conference, other than the MAC and C-USA, who only received two participants per conference (the top two teams from each division).
In the Holiday Bracket, we are taking the next four best teams per conference (the 5th-8th best teams) and placing them in a regional pool, which based on the 2006 season results, would have looked like this:
| East | South | North | West |
| Pittsburgh | Clemson | Purdue | Wyoming |
| Navy | Georgia | Kent State | Oregon |
| Penn State | S. Mississippi | Minnesota | Nevada |
| Maryland | Mississippi | Missou | Utah |
| E. Carolina | Florida State | Kentucky | UCLA |
| Virginia | Alabama | Kansas State | New Mexico |
| Tennessee |
Oklahoma State | Indiana | Texas Tech |
| M. Tennessee | Rice | Cincinnati | Arizona State |
The protocol for aligning the match-ups would be based upon the following standard operating procedures in order of priority specifically for the Holiday Bracket:
1) Conference match-ups that HAVEN’T already taken place will be given first priority. I believe I have covered this in Part II of this series.
2) Inter-conference games matching up the closest regional participating teams as possible shall take precedence.
3) Conference rematches (playing a conference foe for the second time) can only take place in week #12, in order to prevent a bowl match-up between participating teams residing within the same conference.
4) If after the results of Week #12, a bowl match-up is scheduled to take place between teams of the same conference, the bowl participants can be swopted with other another bowl facing a similar situation or by closest regional match-up to a participating bowl (Teams from the same conference cannot compete in the same bowl game).
Therefore, the Week #9 (Round #1) match-ups in the Holiday Bracket would have looked like the following.
Pittsburgh @ Navy (Conference match-up that hasn’t taken place)
Maryland @ Penn State
Virginia @ E. Carolina
M. Tennessee @ Tennessee
Georgia @ Clemson
S. Mississippi @ Mississippi
Rice @ Oklahoma State
Alabama @ Florida State
Kent State @ Purdue
Missouri @ Minnesota
Indiana @ Cincinnati
Kansas State @ Kentucky
Wyoming @ Oregon
Nevada @ Utah
New Mexico @ UCLA
Texas Tech @ Arizona State
As you can see, a number of the small market non-BCS teams are aligned with many of the BCS powers, so the payday games would continue to take place as part of the Holiday Bracket and yet the fans can attend due to the regional nature of the contests.
The only contest’s that are of significant distance would be the teams located along the west coast and southwest, but this is unavoidable due to the geographic location of each school. The majority of the schools are located east of the Rocky Mountains and it wouldn’t matter which format is used for college football, this hurdle must be overcome.
Considering this hurdle has been overcome in nearly every sport throughout the history of American sport, I’m not going to spend much time or thought trying to solve this. It is pretty much a given.
Here is a breakdown of the total number of payday type games (25) throughout the four week Holiday bracket occurring in weeks nine through twelve of the regular season.
Week #9:
E. Carolina v. Maryland
Tennessee v. Middle Tennessee
S. Mississippi v. Mississippi
Oklahoma State v. Rice
Purdue v. Kent State
Indiana v. Cincinnati
Wyoming v. Oregon
W. Michigan v. Cincinnati
UCLA v. New Mexico
Week #10:
Penn State v. Navy
Kentucky v. Cincinnati
Oregon v. Utah
Arizona State v. New Mexico
Minnesota v. Kent State
Middle Tennessee v. E. Carolina
Week #11:
Navy v. Maryland
Cincinnati v. Kentucky
UCLA v. Utah
Arizona State v. Wyoming
Indiana v. Kent State
Alabama v. S. Miss
Clemson v. Rice
Pittsburgh v. Middle Tennessee
Week #12:
Navy v. Mississippi
Minnesota v. Wyoming
Indiana v. Nevada
Similar Match-ups would be occurring in the “BCS, Holiday, NIT and Sportsman’s Brackets,” which virtually eliminates this argument. It can be done as part of the regular season in a regional format which would make a regular season playoff for college football financially viable.
|
2nd Round: Week #10 (1-0) “Winners Bracket” |
2nd Round: Week #10 (0-1) “Losers Bracket” |
|
|
|
| Navy (1-0) @ Penn State (1-0) |
Maryland (0-1) @ PITT (0-1) |
| Virginia (1-0) @ Tennessee (1-0) |
M. Tennessee (0-1) @ E. Carolina (0-1) |
| Florida State (1-0) @ Georgia (1-0) |
Clemson (0-1) @ Alabama (0-1) |
| Ole Miss (1-0) @ Oklahoma St. (1-0) |
S. Mississippi (0-1) @ Rice (0-1) |
| Missouri (1-0) @ Purdue (1-0) |
Kent St (0-1) @ Minnesota (0-1) |
| Kentucky (1-0) @ Cincinnati (1-0) |
Indiana (0-1) @ K-State (0-1) |
| Utah (1-0) @ Oregon (1-0) |
Nevada (0-1) @ Wyoming (0-1) |
| UCLA (1-0) @ Texas Tech (1-0) |
New Mexico (0-1) @ Arizona State (0-1) |
|
3rd Round: Week #11 |
3rd Round: Week #10 |
|
(2-0) “Winners Bracket Elite 8″ |
(1-1) “Losers Bracket Elite 8″ |
|
Penn State (2-0) @ Tennessee (2-0) |
E. Carolina (1-1) @ Maryland (1-1) |
| Oklahoma St (2-0) @ Georgia (2-0) |
S. Miss (1-1) @ Alabama (1-1) |
| Kentucky (2-0) @ Missouri (2-0) |
Minnesota (1-1) @ K-State (1-1) |
| Oregon (2-0) @ Texas Tech (2-0) |
Arizona State (1-1) @ Wyoming (1-1) |
“The Road To The  |
|
3rd Round: Week #11 (1-1) |
3rd Round: Week #11 (0-2) |
|
“Winners Bracket Championship Consolation Elite 8″ |
“Losers Bracket Double Consolation |
| Navy (1-1) @ Virginia (1-1) |
PITT (0-2) @ Middle Tennessee (0-2) |
| Ole Miss (1-1) @ Florida State (1-1) |
Rice (0-2) @ Clemson (0-2) |
| Cincinnati (1-1) @ Purdue (1-1) |
Indiana (0-2) @ Kent State (0-2) |
| Utah (1-1) @ UCLA (1-1) |
Nevada (0-2) @ New Mexico (0-2) |
|
Week #12: (3-0) Champions |
Week #12: Bracket (2-1) Champions -Consolation |
| Georgia (3-0) @ Penn State (3-0) |
Oklahoma St (2-1) @ Tennessee (2-1) |
| Oregon (3-0) @ Missou (3-0) |
Texas Tech (2-1) @ Kentucky (2-1) |
|
Week #12: ( 2-1) Losers Bracket
|
Week #12: (1-2) Losers Bracket |
| Alabama (2-1) @ Maryland (2-1) |
E. Carolina (1-2) @ S. Miss (1-2) |
| Kansas St (2-1) @ Arizona St. (2-1) |
Minnesota (1-2) @ Wyoming (1-2) |
|
Week #12: Holiday Bracket (2-1) Winners Consolation |
Week #12: Holiday Bracket (1-2) Double Consolation |
| Virginia (2-1) @ Florida State (2-1) |
Ole Miss (1-2) @ Navy (1-2) |
| Purdue (2-1) @ UCLA (2-1) |
Utah (1-2) @ Cincinnati (1-2) |
|
Week #12: Holiday Bracket (1-2) Losers Consolation |
Week #12: Holiday Bracket (0-3) Double Consolation |
| PITT (1-2) @ Clemson (1-2) |
Rice (0-3) @ N. Mexico (0-3) |
| Indiana (1-2) @ Nevada (1-2) |
New Mexico (0-3) @ Kent State (0-3) |
Holiday Bracket Bowl Line-ups:
1. (4-0) Georgia v. Missouri (Chick Fil-A bowl)
2. (3-1) Penn State v. Oregon (Las Vegas Bowl)
3. (3-1) UCLA v. Florida State (Aloha Bowl)
4. (3-1) Alabama v. Kansas State (Liberty Bowl)
5. (3-1) Tennessee v. Texas Tech (Sun Bowl)
6. (2-2) Kentucky v. Oklahoma State (Texas Bowl)
7. (2-2) Navy v. Utah (Poinsettia Bowl)
8. (1-3) Indiana v. PITT (Motor City Bowl)
9. (2-2) Virginia v. Purdue (Papa John’s Bowl)
10. (1-3) Ole Miss v. Cincinnati (New Orleans Bowl)
11. (1-3) S. Miss v. Wyoming (International)
12. (1-3) Maryland v. Arizona State (Emerald Bowl)
13. (2-2) Clemson v. Nevada (MPC Computers Bowl)
14. (2-2) E. Carolina v. Minnesota (GMAC Bowl)
15. (1-3) Rice v. New Mexico (Armed Forces Bowl)
Eliminated from Bowl Games:
Middle Tennessee (0-4)
Kent State (0-4)
Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of the BCSBusters Model is the vast number of fantastic match-ups that would occur on a regular basis, even before the much anticipated bowl season arrives.
To me, the following match-ups would be unbelievable for college football as the television ratings in the month of November would be OFF THE CHARTS!!! Instead of talking about the impending BCS Controversy - certain to happen yet again - college football fans would simply be ecstatic about the following impending match-ups - WOW, UFB!!
“Titanic” inter-league Match-ups as part of the Holiday Bracket.
- Virginia v. Tennessee
- Clemson v. Georgia
- Missouri v. Kentucky
- UCLA v. Texas Tech
- Penn St. v. Tennessee
- Clemson v. Alabama
- Kentucky v. Florida St
- Oklahoma St. v. Purdue
- Kansas St. v. Minnesota
- Maryland v. Penn St.
- Alabama v. Florida St.
- Kansas St. v. Oregon
- Purdue v. UCLA
- Penn St. v. Florida State
- Penn St. v. UCLA
- Florida St. v. Oregon
- Clemson v. Kentucky
- Oklahoma St. v. Arizona St.
- Tennesse v. Minnesota
- Clemson v. Oklahoma St.
- Pittsburgh v. Virginia
- Georgia v. Missouri
- Texas Tech v. Utah
- Virginia v. Georgia
- Virginia v. Texas Tech
“Titanic” inter-league Match-ups as part of the BCS Bracket.
- Florida v. Wake Forest
- Louisville v. Ohio State
- Oklahoma v. USC
- Boise St. v. C. Michigan
- Florida v. Ohio State
- USC v. Boise State
- Georgia Tech v. LSU
- West Virginia v. Michigan
- Texas v. CAL
- TCU v. SJSU
- LSU v. West Virginia
- CAL v. TCU
- Georgia Tech v. Michigan
- Louisville v. Wake Forest
- Boston College v. Auburn
- Rutgers v. Wisconsin
- Texas A&M v. BYU
- Houston v. Ohio
- Texas A&M v. Houston
- Virginia Tech v. Arkansas
- S. Florida v. Notre Dame
- Nebraska v. Oregon State
- Hawaii v. Marshall
- Virginia Tech v. S. Florida
- Arkansas v. Notre Dame
- Oregon State v. Hawaii
We haven’t even gotten to the NIT Bracket, which has it’s own set of hidden jewels for college football. This is like 10 years worth of bowl match-ups all within 4 weeks of a single season. When we compare this with the thunderous BCS Bracket - WOW - Now that’s a more entertaining season of college football and we haven’t even gotten to the bowl games…wouldn’t you agree?
Hey man, great site!
Thanks for the kind words in your comment at “The Nasty Boys,” it is MUCH appreciated and I have linked to both of your sites as you requested.
I’ll have to go back and rifle through all of your posts as you look to have the most thorough BCS sites I have ever seen, if not sports sites in general.
Keep up the good work, “Buster.”
-Matt
-”The Nasty Boys”
[...] and unfairness of the current debacle - all within the confines of a 12-13 game regular season. Sound impossible? Think again! If college football is going to move forward - without controversy - we must eliminate the bias and [...]
[...] Jim Delaney, Notre Dame and the PAC-10 conference, just as I have stated in several of my articles. The basis of my playoff proposal listed in the six part National Expansion series, which can be located within this very website, has been well publicized around the internet since [...]
[...] Jim Delaney, Notre Dame and the PAC-10 conference, just as I have stated in several of my articles. The basis of my playoff proposal listed in the six part National Expansion series, which can be located within this very website, has been well publicized around the internet since [...]
and yes, having read your site, i fail to see where the holiday folks can move up to the bcs level, the bcs chumps can fall to the holiday, and how you get 4 sec teams, one of which is most likely eligible for a new years day bowl, to play before hand..
General,
First of all, the only bowls the Holiday bracket teams can qualify for is the lower tier bowl games, due to the fact that they didn’t finish within the top four of their conference - why would you want a team who finished fifth in their conference to qualify for an upper tier bowl?
Since the BCS conferences (including the newly created Rocky Mountain Conference) would get the top-four teams from their conference to compete in the BCS Bracket, which would determine the 5 BCS games and the remaining upper tier bowl games.
The two teams finishing undefeated (4-0) in this 32 team bracket would be paired in the national championship game. From here it gets a little tricky. I’m sure your making the mistake of following the traditional bracket. In my recommendation the remaining teams who finish with one-loss (3-1)in the BCS Bracket would earn the remaining BCS Berths. The tricky part is that it doesn’t matter when the loss occurs as long as they finish 3-1. The loss could occur in the first round, second round, third round or the final four semi-final round. You’re not out of the running for a BCS Berth if you happen to drop a game, thus keeping the sacred cow concept that every game is important and a playoff in itself.
Here’s what I would recommend. Go to darters.com and print yourself off a 32-team bracket and you can fill it out a bunch of different ways, with all sorts of different winning combinations, but as long as a winning team continues to play another winning team and a losing team continues to play another losing team, it will begin to make sense. I wish I was a better computer tech for I would develop a power point presentation or perhaps a white board presentation to visually help you out here (UPDATE: I did actually create a site for you to look at which shows this in detail: http://www.ncaa-schedule.com and click on the brackets link)
Why are you making bowl ties rigid? For the BCS bowls this works well but how “sacred” is bowl-bidding? It would be no trouble keeping the 27 non-BCS bowls more “traditional.” Is there a monetary factor here as well?
Another random comment is that currently teams complete 12 or 13 games within 14 weeks. This means two(!) bye weeks for each team. And teams can schedule a cup-cake or intra-conference rival for that 13th game while keeping their important bye week.
Certainly and would most likely happen since schools like SC and Notre Dame would most likely want to continue their rivalry.