Does the new play-off system hurt small schools?

Home Archive College Sports Does the new play-off system hurt small schools?
Fly4Fun's avatar

Fly4Fun

Senior Member

7,730 posts
Sep 28, 2012 11:22 AM
With the now "old" BCS system we have seen a rise of smaller schools competing with the big boys. In an effort to remain perfect a lot of BCS schools schedules quite a few cup cakes to beef up the win-loss. This gave small scools a source of income for their athletic programs and also some attention which is used as a recruiting tool. Come to our school, you will get nationally televised games against that school that shunned you.

Now all that has led to the gap becoming more narrow between the BCS schools (especially the weaker ones) and the non-BCS schools.

However, with the new play-off format schools are wanting to beef up their OOC schedule (recent example of course being OSU) and dropping those smaller schools. This will lead to the BCS schools playing other BCS schools more often in the OOC schedule than the non-BCS schools.

They start to lose some of the money they were getting to be cup cakes, they start to lose the spotlight that had been shining on them.

I'm thinking that the gap might start to widen again between the haves and the have-nots.
Sep 28, 2012 11:22am
ernest_t_bass's avatar

ernest_t_bass

12th Son of the Lama

24,984 posts
Sep 28, 2012 11:50 AM
Don't really care.
Sep 28, 2012 11:50am
xKoToVxSyNdRoMe's avatar

xKoToVxSyNdRoMe

Senior Member

1,054 posts
Sep 28, 2012 1:47 PM
I'm cool with that. More important games throughout the year. Sure it's cool to see some upsets but I'd rather watch a lot of good teams play each other every week than watch a bunch of lesser teams get beat down. There will still be some "cupcake" games but this means there will be more big match-ups especially early on, so I'm cool with it. It would also make the upsets a little more special since there will be less opportunities for them. With every major team scheduling lesser teams it means there is a much greater chance for an upset to happen. With less of these games, it means an upset would be a bigger deal. Now upsets happen somewhat frequently so it seems to water it down a little as it's not very shocking when it happens.
Sep 28, 2012 1:47pm
Mulva's avatar

Mulva

Senior Member

13,650 posts
Sep 28, 2012 3:55 PM
I'm just waiting for the four 16-team superconferences to emerge. Let the "have nots" become 1-AAA.
Sep 28, 2012 3:55pm
ts1227's avatar

ts1227

Senior Member

12,319 posts
Sep 28, 2012 8:46 PM
It'll eventually lead to a split, where the current BCS and independents become 1-A, and the mid majors become the new 1-AA (and 1-AA becomes basically 1-AAA)
Sep 28, 2012 8:46pm
Azubuike24's avatar

Azubuike24

Senior Member

15,933 posts
Sep 28, 2012 9:49 PM
ts1227;1282669 wrote:It'll eventually lead to a split, where the current BCS and independents become 1-A, and the mid majors become the new 1-AA (and 1-AA becomes basically 1-AAA)
In a way, this is how it should be. The only issue I could see would be scheduling. How do you adjust to teams having/wanting to schedule the 1-AA teams? Would there be any stipulation where a 1-AA team could get into the playoff hunt?
Sep 28, 2012 9:49pm
Speedofsand's avatar

Speedofsand

Troublemaker

5,529 posts
Sep 28, 2012 9:53 PM
It will only hurt them if they go undefeated and less than 2 BCS conference teams are undefeated.
Sep 28, 2012 9:53pm
Azubuike24's avatar

Azubuike24

Senior Member

15,933 posts
Sep 28, 2012 10:00 PM
If the 1-AA teams are considered a "lower tier", do the BCS teams even bother scheduling them? You're going to have 9-game conference schedules and possibly overall schedules reduced to 11 games. Even if it stays at 12, I have a feeling you will see 9 conference games and 3 "gimme home games" with 1-AAA teams or even FCS teams. If all you have to do is get into the top 4 or top 8 for the playoffs, nobody is going to risk losing OOC games knowing they can potentially lose twice in their conference and still get a bid.
Sep 28, 2012 10:00pm
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Sep 29, 2012 7:20 AM
ts1227;1282669 wrote:It'll eventually lead to a split, where the current BCS and independents become 1-A, and the mid majors become the new 1-AA (and 1-AA becomes basically 1-AAA)
I agree. I've never thought the MAC, for example, was 1-A but somewhere between 1-A and 1-AA...too strong for 1-AA but too weak to compete at 1-A (although that seems to have changed a little of late).
Sep 29, 2012 7:20am
goosebumps's avatar

goosebumps

Senior Member

1,058 posts
Sep 29, 2012 10:18 AM
There are MAC teams that are better year in and year out than Indiana, NW, wake forest, Iowa state and others
Sep 29, 2012 10:18am
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Sep 29, 2012 10:21 AM
goosebumps;1282894 wrote:There are MAC teams that are better year in and year out than Indiana, NW, wake forest, Iowa state and others
I can also agree with that which is why I don't really buy-off the "small school" vs "big boys" argument. However, in terms of strength of conferences, fan following, stadium size, etc. there's no way the MAC fits the - um - "big boys" category.
Sep 29, 2012 10:21am
ts1227's avatar

ts1227

Senior Member

12,319 posts
Sep 29, 2012 10:24 AM
goosebumps;1282894 wrote:There are MAC teams that are better year in and year out than Indiana, NW, wake forest, Iowa state and others
Then there's Eastern Michigan, who should have never come up to 1-A. The conferences are a mix of schools closer to "haves", and then slam dunk "have not and never will bes"
Sep 29, 2012 10:24am
Azubuike24's avatar

Azubuike24

Senior Member

15,933 posts
Sep 29, 2012 12:04 PM
Iowa State and Northwestern have both be good lately. Not great, but certainly more than capable of dominating the MAC more often than not the last 5 years. I'll give you Indiana and maybe Wake Forest, and certainly other teams in the BCS. Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, Washington State, Syracuse, etc...
Sep 29, 2012 12:04pm