|
|
Post by jwiley10 on Dec 8, 2008 19:53:03 GMT -6
And that the BCS' systems works just fine?
|
|
|
|
Post by isu is shit on Dec 9, 2008 11:29:47 GMT -6
yep
|
|
|
|
Post by thunderhawk on Dec 9, 2008 11:51:34 GMT -6
And that the BCS' systems works just fine? I'll admit that I love the bowls. It's unique to sports and it's fun. And allows for way more beer consumption. HOWEVER... With rare exception, we really don't have a legit national champion in big-time college football. The last one I can think of was Texass when they beat the University of Spoiled Children. There has to be some way to preserve the bowls and have a reasonable playoff. There is no way in hell that Floridump and Oklahomeless should be playing for the NC while Texass is left out in the cold. The "national champion" will be as tainted as a one night stand with a tranny. |
|
|
|
Post by ignatiusreilly on Dec 9, 2008 12:21:57 GMT -6
I think a D-1 College football playoff system would be the most exciting thing in all of sports. Too bad we will never see it. They need to cut back on the number of bowls and let the teams that do not make the playoffs play in the bowls.
|
|
|
|
Post by isu is shit on Dec 9, 2008 12:30:51 GMT -6
Why don't you think FL should be in the Championship?
I'm sure you say that Texas should be ahead of Oklahoma and be in the Championship because Texas beat Oklahoma, but Texas also lost to TTU and Oklahoma destroyed them. Oklahoma also has better quality wins outside of conference than Texas does.
FL did lose one game this year, but it was very close and to a team that is going to a bowl. They beat a #1 and previously unbeaten team as well.
I think the Championship game is correct this year, but I don't think it's right every year.
|
|
|
|
Post by MoHawk on Dec 9, 2008 13:07:03 GMT -6
Why don't you think FL should be in the Championship? I'm sure you say that Texas should be ahead of Oklahoma and be in the Championship because Texas beat Oklahoma, but Texas also lost to TTU and Oklahoma destroyed them. Oklahoma also has better quality wins outside of conference than Texas does. FL did lose one game this year, but it was very close and to a team that is going to a bowl. They beat a #1 and previously unbeaten team as well. I think the Championship game is correct this year, but I don't think it's right every year. It's not that Florida shouldn't be in the national title game, but UT should have a chance to be in the title game. A playoff is the only legitmate way to determine a champion in sports. Every other major sports entity uses a playoff to determine its champion...from DIII college ball to the WNBA to MLB to NBA to NFL. Here's the solution. Keep the bowl system. Make the four major bowls the Elite 8. Add two more games, the Final Four, and you've not only created your national champion, but far more revenue and interest than what you have now...and you absolutely OWN the month of December. What's on for sports right now? Early season NBA, college basketball and the NBA? Who cares. College football could make millions upon millions, hell, maybe billions, if they could just convice the old boys club that runs the bowl system to make even more money than what they already are. |
|
|
|
Post by Solar Stud on Dec 9, 2008 13:08:22 GMT -6
People, people, people....the BCS only came about to try to pit the #1 and #2 teams in the championship game.
The BCS was not founded to make all the rest of the bowls, BCS or otherwise, fair or equitable.
The BCS does a decent job in getting the #1 and #2 teams at the end of the season.
However, there are WAY too many fucking bowls....worthless....the fact Iowa almost jumped both NW and MSU even both teams had better records and beat us is just stupid.
|
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Dec 9, 2008 14:51:56 GMT -6
What is the purpose of having a bowl on December 22nd that 7500 people attend that pits a 7-5 team versus a 6-6 team? Oh yeah, some douchenozzles trying to make money. Great reason to have a shitty football game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Saggitariutt Jefferspin (ith) on Dec 9, 2008 14:55:29 GMT -6
What is the purpose of having a bowl on December 22nd that 7500 people attend that pits a 7-5 team versus a 6-6 team? Oh yeah, some douchenozzles trying to make money. Great reason to have a shitty football game. I'll watch it. I guess I don't mind the "shitty" bowl games. The more games the merrier, IMO.  |
|
|
|
Post by thunderhawk on Dec 9, 2008 15:00:31 GMT -6
People, people, people....the BCS only came about to try to pit the #1 and #2 teams in the championship game. The BCS was not founded to make all the rest of the bowls, BCS or otherwise, fair or equitable. The BCS does a decent job in getting the #1 and #2 teams at the end of the season. However, there are WAY too many fucking bowls....worthless....the fact Iowa almost jumped both NW and MSU even both teams had better records and beat us is just stupid. I have to disagree. With the exception of a couple of years in the BCS era, the "top two" teams have been the subject of legitimate controversy. I'd submit that the BCS is batting about .250 when it comes to its core mission. That's pretty fucking bad if you ask me. We need, at the minimum, a Final Four. Preferably an Elite Eight. |
|
|
|
Post by jwiley10 on Dec 9, 2008 18:49:42 GMT -6
Everybody casually states that a playoff is needed, but the logistics of it just don't work.
If you have an 8 team playoff, who gets invited? The conference champs from the 6 BCS conferences and 2 at-large? This year, the at-large teams would be Texas and Utah/Bama. The odd man out between Utah/Bama and Texas Tech would have a gripe about not being invited.
If you have a 16 team playoff, do you invite the conference champions from every conference? There's 11 spots with room for 5 at-large. Does anyone really believe that Troy, Buffalo or Boise State have a chance to win the title? Do you really expect fans to travel to up to four different locations for the games?
|
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Dec 9, 2008 19:05:13 GMT -6
I love bowl season. Period. I'm guess I'm with you, jwiley. While the BCS isn't perfect, I think it does a decent job getting the top two teams together(about 75% of the time IMO). I agree with seth that there are too many bowls(34) yet I'll still watch most or all of them. It's crazy that some conferences have as many as 7 bowl tie-ins. 20 bowl games would be perfect. The top 1/3 of teams would have a post season.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Flying Spaghetti Monster on Dec 9, 2008 19:52:08 GMT -6
And that the BCS' systems works just fine? That puts you in the same nest as Jan M., if that tells you anything. Also, I think it would be better to argue over who should be the 7 & 8 teams in and 9 & 10 out, or 15 & 16 teams in and the 17th out, rather than debating even who is 1 or 2. |
|
|
|
Post by 101 on Dec 9, 2008 20:37:20 GMT -6
There really isn't a "fair" way to do it.
When you think about the "elite 8" approach, it sounds pretty reasonalble on the surface. It will eliminate the situation we have this year with TX, but it just changes the focus to who came in at #9 and got screwed because they should have been in. Then it will next fall to the seeding and how people think that isn't fair.
There is no perfect answer. Unfortunately.
Personally, I think they need to get rid of the coaches polls. Half of them have someone else fill out their ballot and the other half just vote having never watched any of the games. Complete crap.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Flying Spaghetti Monster on Dec 10, 2008 10:57:06 GMT -6
Yes, but like I said, it is much more palatable to argue over who is 8 or 9, than who is 2 or 3, or for this year, maybe even who is 1, 2, and 3.
I can make a good argument that USC and Texas should have a shot at the title. If we have 8 in, then we're looking at whether its Penn State or Boise State. Not quite so dramatic.
|
|
|
|
Post by MoHawk on Dec 10, 2008 11:36:56 GMT -6
Yes, but like I said, it is much more palatable to argue over who is 8 or 9, than who is 2 or 3, or for this year, maybe even who is 1, 2, and 3. I can make a good argument that USC and Texas should have a shot at the title. If we have 8 in, then we're looking at whether its Penn State or Boise State. Not quite so dramatic. Agreed. Every March, we gather 'round the TV and see who gets in and who doesn't to the Big Dance. Then, we argue about who shouldn't have gotten in or who should have for the next week. But you know what we DON'T argue about? The legitimacy of the national champion...and THAT is what, in my mind, is changed with a playoff system for college football. And as for who those 8 teams are...either take the top 8 in the BCS rankings if you want, or have a committee, just like the basketball selection committee. |
|
|
|
Post by Saggitariutt Jefferspin (ith) on Dec 10, 2008 11:53:45 GMT -6
Yes, but like I said, it is much more palatable to argue over who is 8 or 9, than who is 2 or 3, or for this year, maybe even who is 1, 2, and 3. I can make a good argument that USC and Texas should have a shot at the title. If we have 8 in, then we're looking at whether its Penn State or Boise State. Not quite so dramatic. But you know what we DON'T argue about? The legitimacy of the national champion...and THAT is what, in my mind, is changed with a playoff system for college football. Excellent point Mohawk. Well played. |
|
|
|
Post by jwiley10 on Dec 10, 2008 12:10:48 GMT -6
I have still yet to see anyone provide the logistics of how a playoff system would work. In I-AA, II and III, you have the games played on campus until the championship game. And in the lower levels, you have geography dictate the matchups. Would that apply to the Div. I playoff?
Also, in those other levels, you don't have bowl games to contend with. Are you guys still proponents of bowl games to those that do not qualify for the playoff?
I believe we do have a playoff system -- it's called the regular season. Teams get eliminated each week. That is what makes the college football season so intriguing week in and week out. How many people would have watched the SEC Championship game this past weekend if both Bama and Florida would have been selected for the playoffs regardless of the outcome of the game?
College basketball runs into this problem because of their tournament. It seems most fans are very casual observers of college basketball until the calendar hits mid-February. We know Carolina, Duke, UCLA, Kansas, et al. will qualify for the tourney so their regular season games aren't as dramatic and/or "must see".
|
|
|
|
Post by MoHawk on Dec 10, 2008 14:09:19 GMT -6
I have no problem with keeping the bowl system around so those schools not making it into that year's tournament have a final game to play.
As far as the 8 team playoff goes, I would keep the Rose, Sugar, Orange and Fiesta bowls as your "Elite 8" games. Have 1 play 8, 2 play 7, etc. You then add two more games, at a site that can rotate each year, for the final four, and a final game a week later.
You're right wiley in that no one would have watched the Bama/FLA match up if we knew they were already in the tournament. BUT, in the following weeks, any revenue lost from that one game is made up tenfold in the number of eyeball glued to the TV for playoff Saturday. Can you imagine that? A single Saturday with four college football win or go home games?
I'd argue that's far better than anything we have now.
The meaning of the regular season will be diluted to small extent, that I'll grant you. However, it won't be much. The top 8 teams in the BCS standings all have one loss, save for Utah which is undefeated.
So, while there is a slim margin for error, there's not a lot. Maybe a two loss team sneaks in there, but will more than likely face the number one or two team in the nation in the first round of playoffs.
So, I don't think the regular season loses all that much of its luster AND you get a legitimate national champion.
The only thing keeping all of this from happening is old men worried they won't make as much money...when in fact, they're staring down the barrel of a gold mine.
|
|
|
|
Post by Solar Stud on Dec 10, 2008 14:09:59 GMT -6
But you know what we DON'T argue about? The legitimacy of the national champion...and THAT is what, in my mind, is changed with a playoff system for college football. Excellent point Mohawk. Well played. Ditto here MoHawk. VERY well stated. |
|
|
|
Post by The Flying Spaghetti Monster on Dec 10, 2008 14:19:07 GMT -6
I believe we do have a playoff system -- it's called the regular season. Teams get eliminated each week. BULLSHIT! Texas has one loss, just like Oklahoma. Texas beat Oklahoma in what was supposed to be one of those "regular season playoff games". Oklahoma plays for the national title, not Texas. It's not rocket science. ....and I rarely watch ANY games outside of the Big Ten, as I could give a shit less since there's no rhyme or reason on how teams get national championships. Also, we've already got precedent on Bowls hosting two games a year. Instead of one bowl hosting 2 games, all you do is add two more double dips. Big deal. |
|
|
|
Post by socal on Dec 11, 2008 8:43:22 GMT -6
Excellent point Mohawk. Well played. Ditto here MoHawk. VERY well stated. I think you're giving Mo too much credit. Besides the teacher, Mo doesn't appear to have that level of intelligence. More likely, some caller into the radio station came up with it. |
|
|
|
Post by MoHawk on Dec 11, 2008 8:46:29 GMT -6
Ditto here MoHawk. VERY well stated. I think you're giving Mo too much credit. Besides the teacher, Mo doesn't appear to have that level of intelligence. More likely, some caller into the radio station came up with it. Says the man calling himself Cousin Eddie... |
|
|
|
Post by socal on Dec 11, 2008 9:05:50 GMT -6
I think you're giving Mo too much credit. Besides the teacher, Mo doesn't appear to have that level of intelligence. More likely, some caller into the radio station came up with it. Says the man calling himself Cousin Eddie... Dude, the shitter was full. |
|
|
|
Post by isu is shit on Dec 11, 2008 9:35:01 GMT -6
If we have an 8 team playoff, Iowa won't be in the Outback bowl.
Why is this such a big issue anyway? We're all Iowa fans, and I don't see them becoming National Champs anytime soon, so fuck it.
|
|
