|
|
|
[All mathematics, theory and explanations
given are specific examples of the most probable scenarios. However, this 100%
patent approved proposal covering the concept of a Division I college football
playoff is not limited in format, ranking procedures, number of games,
structure, location, number of teams (particularly 3 or more), or any other
parameter similar or identical to those outlined in this proposal] The following is a list of some of the
possible variations to the ideas outlined within ‘Champions are Determined
on the Field’: The first 2 rounds of the Top 12 could be hosted by any 2 appropriate major sites as described if games in this tournament are played on Saturdays only (or for other select reasons): Round 1 Round 2
A Tertiary playoff could be added to the
postseason mix. This would consist of teams ranked #29 - #44. This Tertiary
tournament would be similar to the Secondary
Championship format and could be played on Thursdays directly before and at the
same sites as Secondary playoff games or at any additional bowl sites (there are
several other ways to incorporate these extra games such
as laying out the tertiary brackets on Wednesdays; or Wednesdays and
Thursdays; or hold the Tertiary games on Thursdays, the Secondary ones on
Fridays, and the Top 12 on Saturdays; etc.). Although much like a preliminary
before the main event, this format would require further study and is listed
mainly to clarify the point that a few issues within the scope of this proposal
may need to be negotiated and/or clarified in order
to satisfy all parties concerned. If in the next few years, the total number of
teams is 119 as expected; then, mathematically, what is the best percentage of
the total teams in Division 1A to make it
to the postseason?
.37 times (119 teams) = 44 teams.
12 + 16 + 16 = 44! [Top 12 + Next 16 + Tertiary 16]
This is justification enough for exploring
the idea of a Tertiary tournament of 16 teams. A better scenario for
incorporating these additional 16 teams for a total of 44 in the postseason may
be to combine the Next 16 and the Tertiary 16 for a total of 32 teams into a
modified Secondary tournament that would run for five weeks instead of four
(remember that the Top 12 tournament spans at least 5 weeks). Regardless of the type of tournament
and number of teams involved, there is always the possibility that the first
round(s) could be played on the home field of the higher seeded team. However,
there are inherent problems with home field advantage in a postseason utilizing
poll ranking procedures. The primary purpose of this proposal is to provide the
ultimate answer concerning a college football playoff where not even one person
(not a single player, not an individual fan, not one administrator) could
stand up and rationally say ‘this is unfair’ regarding any of the processes
needed for a playoff. This proposal definitely does succeed in it’s purpose,
is completely fair, and thwarts any potential for dissent; and, therefore,
strongly recommends against the use of home field advantage. Imagine an upstart
California team, after last-minute disappointing losses in it’s first two
games, running the table the rest of the way with superior performances in every
phase of the game. This is one of the most dominant teams in the country by the
end of the season as they find themselves in the Top 12 tournament. However,
there are a number of teams with either zero, one, or two losses, and; poll
slots #5 - #10 are congested into an extremely narrow range of points by which
teams are ranked. Final polls place California at #9, but with essentially
identical final ranking points as a typically strong #8 Penn State. Now, this
exciting California team must pack their belongings and travel across the entire
United States to the unfriendly confines of Happy Valley. Regardless of the
successes of this California team during the season, only the foolish would bet
against Penn State at home. This unfair advantage also holds true for other
bracket match-ups (such as #7 vs. #10, etc.). Each and every year where there is
home field advantage, some teams will suffer serious consequences because they
will be percentage points of percentage points behind other teams in the final
polls. Use only the GP rating formula and/or
computer rankings, thereby scrapping all
polls with subjectivity. Divide Div. 1-A into 4 major geographic
super-conferences each with 28 - 30 teams (east, west, south, north). Limit
non-conference games. The top (1) team in each super-conference at the end of
the season would obtain one of the first round byes for the Top 12 tournament.
Alternate
Tournament Possibilities: We do believe that the best number of
teams for the National Championship Bowl Tournament is, by far, 12! However, as
all concepts and principles are non-limiting; listed below are possible
solutions for a portion of the examples where the number of teams in a playoff
tournament may vary:
Fans love to pull for the underdog. Potential upsets are justification enough for a higher number of teams in a tournament.
There would be an overall potential
variation for each configuration where the number of teams vary. For example, if
there were 24 teams in the Championship tournament and still 16 teams in the
Secondary tournament, there would be a total of 40 (24 + 16) participating
teams, as opposed to 28. |
|
Send mail to mail@collegeplayoffs.com with
questions or comments about this web site.
|