Blog Entry

Mountain West proposes 16-team playoff

Posted on: October 20, 2011 11:29 am
Edited on: October 20, 2011 1:04 pm

A formal 16-team college football playoff worth at least $650 million has been proposed by Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson. obtained information from the document that was distributed to the 10 other Football Bowl Subdivision commissioners. It proposes that a human committee would rank 30 teams at the end of the season to help select the 16-team field. Those rankings would determine the 1-through-16 seedings. At least six Football Bowl Subdivision (formerly Division I-A) conference champions would be in the field. There would be a maximum of three teams per conference.

Thompson had an eight-team playoff proposal rejected by the BCS in 2009. With the current BCS agreement ending after the 2014 bowls, there is an opening for suggestions for new postseason models. BCS executive director Bill Hancock did not immediately comment.

Thompson's proposal was sent to those 10 other FBS commissioners, Notre Dame and Hancock.

Under his proposal, first-round games would be played the week after conference championship games (usually the second week of December).  The games would be played at the home stadium of the top eight seeds. The quarterfinals would follow on Jan. 1 or 2 at the four major bowl sites -- Orange, Sugar, Fiesta and Rose.

The semifinals would be played at the stadium of the two highest-seeded remaining schools. Bowls could bid on hosting the championship game.

Financial bonuses would be awarded to participating conferences based on performance in the NCAA's Academic Performance Rate. There is also a clause that would allocate $50 million "to address issues of integrity in intercollegiate athletics."

Several playoff scenarios have been proposed by commercial entities. The NCAA even explored the possibly in the mid-1990s before dropping the idea.

The Arizona Republic interviewed Thompson about his proposal on Wednesday.However, was able to obtain specific detailed information about the proposal.

The FBS commissioners were to discuss Thompson's proposal at a previously scheduled meeting Sept. 20 in Chicago. But conference realignment issues forced the meeting to be cancelled.

Information from the document details the revenue windfall long anticipated from a playoff. Under Thompson's plan, a conference would receive $25 million for each top eight seed it had in the field. For seeds 9 through 16, the revenue would decrease by $2 million in descending order. For example, the conference of the No. 9 seed would get $23 million, No. 10 seed, $21 million, etc.

Conferences would then receive $20 million for each team that reaches the quarterfinals (round of eight). The remainder of the revenue from the semifinals and championship would be distributed this way: Two shares for each for each of the semifinal winners. One share for each for the semifinal losers. Each of those shares, according to information in the document would exceed $25 million.

According to a source, Thompson also asked for support from the so-called "group of five" non-BCS conferences to support and promote the proposal. There was no consensus of support from those four other leagues -- Conference USA, WAC, MAC and Sun Belt -- according to the source.

The Mountain West at least is staying in the news. Thompson's league and Conference USA announced an alliance on Friday. The champions of each league -- soon to be a 22-team consortium -- would play each other, the winner of which would theoretically get an automatic BCS bowl bid. Both leagues are currently non-automatic qualifiers for BCS bowls.

They have received no assurance that they would receive an automatic bid under the new arrangement. The current BCS agreement runs through the 2014 bowls (2013 season). The champions of each BCS league (Pac-12, Big 12, Big East, ACC, SEC, Big Ten) are guaranteed a BCS bowl. That leaves four other spots filled by second teams from BCS leagues. Notre Dame and non-BCS league champions can also qualify by meeting certain benchmarks.



Category: NCAAF
Tags: bcs

Since: Jun 11, 2010
Posted on: October 20, 2011 3:50 pm

Mountain West proposes 16-team playoff

Last year Michigan St would have been in the top eight, and got in, only left out because of #of conference BCS bids, Would have made a first round Exit though, got hammered in bowl game! top eight period! no BCS limits on conference teams! and if Boise St is in, then so be it they earned it!

Since: Jul 28, 2008
Posted on: October 20, 2011 3:48 pm

Mountain West proposes 16-team playoff

To all the casual fans out there that want a playoff, forget about it. It isn't happening. Nor should it.

Since: Sep 4, 2006
Posted on: October 20, 2011 3:38 pm

Mountain West proposes 16-team playoff

1-AA (I refuse to use "FCS", since it sounds like a women's hygiene product) has used a 16-team playoff format since 1986. The amount of interest and income generated by having a similar playoff system in 1-A will make March Madness look like penny slots. This is WAY overdue.

Since: Sep 15, 2010
Posted on: October 20, 2011 3:36 pm

Mountain West proposes 16-team playoff


In a Plus 1 format the importance would change because teams would suddenly have a shot at playing in the BCS NCG.  For the 2 BCS bowl games that do not have a shot at participating in the BCS NCG, then they would be relegated to the same level as the Cotton Bowl, Chick-fil-a Bowl, or the Capital One Bowl.  It could have a serious negative impact on ticket sales, TV ratings, sponsorship; especially if the 2 BCS bowl games are expected to give the same payout as the other 2 that do impact who is national champion for that year.  In college basketball it would be no different than saying that the East and Midwest region winners would automatically go the championship game.  If that is the case then there would be no point to having a South or West region in the tournament that year.  The reason the NCG does not really impact the 4 BCS bowl games now is because all four are on equal ground with each other as glorified exhibition games.  Once they no longer remain equal, then that is when their importance will change. 

Bowl games and playoff will not be able to co-exist with each other.  Once you have a playoff then you might as well kiss the bowl games good-bye because TV ratings, TV coverage, and sponsorship will shift towards the playoffs.  It is no difference than the current relationship between the NCAA and NIT tournaments.  At one time the NIT was more prestigious than the NCAA tournament and look at where the NIT is now.  For the most part you get promotion for a few 1st and 2nd round games on TV and then nothing until the Semi-Final Round (unless you have a brandname in the tournament).  Once the NCAA tournament starts then the NIT is all but forgotten.  Granted the creation of the BCS has almost made the non-BCS bowl games irrelevant, but there are still some non-BCS bowl games that matter (i.e. New Year's Day games).  Once a playoff is implemented then suddenly New Year's Day games won't even matter anymore.

Since: Sep 6, 2006
Posted on: October 20, 2011 3:30 pm

Mountain West proposes 16-team playoff

Boise is in the top 8 and they are currently in the MWC....

Since: Aug 10, 2008
Posted on: October 20, 2011 3:29 pm

Mountain West proposes 16-team playoff

If you can put the top 8 teams in the BCS Bowls then fine, if you are the ninth ranked team in the country, you will not win a national championship anyway!
In my proposal, Michigan St (11-1) is the #9. They more than qualified last season. This is why 4 and 8 teams is a bad idea. There are simply more than 8 who qualify, plain and simple. 

Since: Jan 1, 2007
Posted on: October 20, 2011 3:28 pm

Mountain West proposes 16-team playoff

I came up with this same idea almost a decade ago. Where's my cut on the profit if this system is considered?

Since: Aug 10, 2008
Posted on: October 20, 2011 3:23 pm

Mountain West proposes 16-team playoff

His idea is similar to mine. My proposal calls for any conference champion in the BCS top-25 to receive a playoff spot. The remainder would be filled with at-larges. I've also had the idea to give seeds 1-4 a 2-round bye and seeds 5-8 a 1-round bye. No more than 4 games would be played that week. The top seeds would play fewer games in an attempt to advance to the championship. I will listen to anybody who wants a 16-team playoff. If you have an idea, by all means, share it. Mine would have looked like this last season in which 8 of the 11 conference champions qualified. 

1)*Auburn (13-0)
2)*Oregon (12-0)
3)*TCU (12-0)
4)Stanford (11-1)
5)*Wisconsin (11-1)
6)Ohio St (11-1)
7)*Oklahoma (11-2)
8)Arkansas (10-2)
1st round
9)Michigan St (11-1) v 16)Nevada (12-1)
10)*Boise St (11-1) v 15)*UCF (10-3)
11)LSU (10-2) v 14)Oklahoma St (10-2)
12)Missouri (10-2) v 13)*Virginia Tech (11-2)

2nd round
5)Wisconsin v 12)Missouri
6)Ohio St v 11)LSU
7)Oklahoma v 10)Boise St
8)Arkansas v 9)Michigan St

1)Auburn v 8)Arkansas
2)Oregon v 7)Oklahoma
3)TCU v 6)Ohio St
4)Stanford v 5)Wisconsin

1)Auburn v 4)Stanford
2)Oregon v 3)TCU

1)Auburn v 2)Oregon
(*)conference champion

Of course, we aren't guaranteed that all higher seeds would advance. I would have it bracketed like the NCAA basketball tourney. The season would end a week into January...the way it is now, except with the playoff we aren't subjected to 35-40 days of nothing happening between the end of the regular season and the BCS championship.   

Since: Oct 19, 2010
Posted on: October 20, 2011 3:13 pm

Mountain West proposes 16-team playoff

 Sounds good to me

Since: Jun 11, 2010
Posted on: October 20, 2011 3:00 pm

Mountain West proposes 16-team playoff

If you can put the top 8 teams in the BCS Bowls then fine, if you are the ninth ranked team in the country, you will not win a national championship anyway! so no need to include them!  I think last year VTech and Uconn received BCS bids and were not in the top ten! Top Eight Teams, no matter what Conference, no tie ins, if the SEC has three teams, ok lets play, then the season ends two weeks later! 

The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or