2003 NCAA Division I Football Playoff Bracket

Every year at this time, I take the polls (ESPN and AP), one computer geek like me (Jeff Sagarin) and my own poll and come up with a 16-team bracket of what a playoff would look like, giving equal weight to each poll. In making the matchups, I go strictly by the total for each team, ignoring whether teams have played before and what conference is playing who. The higher seed would host in the first two rounds, and the major bowls can bid to host the semifinals and finals. Any one not making the 16-team field can go to a bowl game, so this would not "kill the bowls", one of the more specious arguments against a playoff. The meaningless bowls can still have their meaningless games and bring the money into their communities, kind of a football NIT.

The matchups with seed in parentheses, following the pairings down to see who would match up in the next rounds:

Top Half.....
(1) LSU
(16) Florida

(9) Ohio St.
(8) Florida St.

(12) Iowa
(5) Michigan

(13) Miami-Ohio
(4) Texass

Bottom Half...
(15) Boise St.
(2) USC

(10) Miami-Fla.
(7) Kansas St.

(11) Georgia
(6) Tennessee

(14) Purdue
(3) Oklahoma

 

I like the idea, but I doubt it would ever involve 16 teams. I could see something involving the 6 BCS bowls in a rotation with the top 8 teams playing off.
The top seed gets a home game against #8, and the other six match-up in three BCS bowls. Then the second round is matched up based on seed as well in BCS games.
The sixth BCS game matches the survivors in the Championship.

The Series would start the weekend before Christmas and resume on New Years day. The Championship would be played the weekend before the Superbowl.

 

I used 16 teams only because that's what they use for Division 1AA and II...imagine those over-worked poor kids having to play 4 extra games to win a national title...all of the missed class-time....

If they would just play around 25-30 games a season, they might miss as much time as the baseball, softball or golf teams do...it's so sad
:mercy:

And those heartless bastards that run Division III schools and how they take such advantage of 28 teams in their playoff...it's
just criminal...if you are not one of the top 4 seeds, you would have to play 5 games to win...a 16-game schedule....

I guess that Division 1A presidents just do a better job of protecting those poor athletes than they do in the lower Divisions...

 

One thing is certain, the Bowl system would have to remain intact. There are too many hands in the cookie jar getting fat off that shit! Coorporate America won't let this gold mine go unless the landscape is basically unchanged.
There would still be a BCS with what I have laid out and it wouldn't stretch the season but two weeks longer than it already is. Small price to pay for a right and just system. At least there could finally be a true champion.

So with what I was saying before it would look like this:
12/20/03
Oklahoma - Bye
LSU - Bye

Feista Bowl: #3 USC vs. #8 Tennessee
Orange Bowl: #4 Michigan vs. #7 Florida State
Cotton Bowl: #5 Ohio State vs. #6 Texas

Second Round (assuming higher seed wins)
1/1/04
USC gets a bye as the highest seeded survivor of round one
Peach Bowl: #1 Oklahoma vs. #5 Ohio State
Rose Bowl: #2 LSU vs. #4 Michigan

Semi's
1/17/04
Oklahoma is in the Sears Bowl as the Highest remaining seed from round 2.

Sugar Bowl: #2 LSU vs. #3 USC

1/25/04
BCS Championship Bowl: #1 Oklahoma vs. #3 USC

 

I actually like this better, using the top seven teams instead of the top eight:
12/20/03 (#1 gets a Bye)
Feista Bowl: #2 LSU vs. #7 Florida State
Orange Bowl: #3 USC vs. #6 Texas
Cotton Bowl: #4 Michigan vs. #5 Ohio State

1/1/04
Peach Bowl: #1 Oklahoma vs. #4 Michigan
Rose Bowl: #2 LSU vs. #3 USC

1/17/04
Sugar Bowl: #1 Oklahoma vs. #3 USC

 

Without a doubt there has to be a playoff for D-1 football. Keep the Big name Bowl money intact but realign the bowl to fit in the playoff scheme. Pro football does a great job having playoffs.
Why can't the NCAA heirarchy see this and make the freaking change. I think it's the Rose Bowl parade committee that keeps us from having a playoff. (^%*&%&^

What good is the BCS now???

 

Why dont they at least give a play-off format a try? Lets say a 3 year experimental play-off format, if it does'nt work then they will have proof to back up their constant excuses for not having one and keep the bowl system in tact. GIVE IT A TRY. All I have been hearing is excuses. I say PROVE IT. I would be willing to bet anybody that once a play-off system is place they will NEVER go back to the antiquated bowl system. Times change, this is'nt the roaring twenties anymore it's a different day and age. Things change....the old way is terribly flawed. It's time to move on.

 

Here is my chart:

 

if we were to be using this format, then people could finally shut up about usc. they would get beat first round.

 

I liked what you did with the rotating of the bowl games and all, but there are two points that may work against what you propose...

1) Teams would be doing a lot of traveling, and even though some teams travel better than others, that still is a lot, especially if you end up in some far-flung bowl game. They would have to keep in mind the general proximity of teams to the bowl when assigning them. But if they then did that, it might be even harder to get tickets (you'd really have to scramble) taken care of once you knew where the game was, so who knows...yet another question.

2) I thought there might be a 2nd point, but after looking at your graphic again, can you clarify some things for me...Is the list from New Orleans down to the Smurf Turf Bowl the ones eligible for the Wild Card games??? I think I'm reading that right....Does the 3rd seed get a home game if #1 has to play, but only #2 does if #1 get a bye??

A couple of other things, Texas would probably get all they want from Miami-Ohio (Mack would find a way) and USC would too...And are the dates on Thursday, or is that just as an example of how long it would take??

Thanks