BCS is the worst system and will not be fixed no matter how many tweaks they add to it. They add one more BCS bowl and, to be fair, it makes it so two more teams can come so it's a bit better but it's still not the best nor will it ever be the best until they implement a playoff. Most people would agree that a playoff would eliminate a lot of the crap that happens every year and it would allow some teams that deserve a shot at the national championship to get their shot.
A great example of injustice is Boise State this year. I'm not a huge Bronco fan but because they are from the WAC they must go undefeated to even get into the BCS bowl games and yet they will not be playing for the championship against The Ohio State University simply because the WAC is viewed as an inferior conference. I agree that most teams in the WAC aren't great but BSU is the only other undefeated team this year in division 1-A so why not give them a shot? I know all the arguments and there is some merit but what would solve all of this is a playoff. Take 32 teams and include all conference champs and then other deserving teams such as Michigan, LSU, Notre Dame etc...and match them up in a highest playing lowest setting. This system would not minimize the regular season as you'd have to show your worth during the season and win your conference.
I am a BYU fan and we hail from the Mountain West Conference. Our football teams are good and have beaten teams from all conferences. Some of the better teams we have are BYU, TCU, and Utah but under the current system we will never be given a shot at the National Championship, it's unjust and quite frankly ridiculous to say to a team "I'm sorry, you're good enough to compete in the top division, but we don't feel that anybody from this conference will ever deserve a shot at being the best in the nation". We ended up with two teams in the top 25 AP poll BYU at 19 and TCU at 25. BYU had two early season losses that were close and should have won but due to a lack of execution on our part did not. TCU lost to BYU and were injured after and the next week lost to a pretty good Utah team. There are plenty of 3 and 4 loss teams above them, which is irritating but to be fair a playoff should be demanded so as to truly prove who is the best team.
It wouldn't take that much if any extra time. As soon as the regular season is done the playoff commences and let the madness ensue. Think of how exciting a 32 team playoff could be. Money shouldn't be an issue as there would be even more money to be had and the BCS bowl names could be kept for the final 4 and championship game so they wouldn't loose out. It just makes sense and would give some of the lesser known teams a chance. Also, it would allow teams from the non-BCS conferences to be all to tell recruits that we now have a shot at the national championship. You can't tell me that this doesn't affect recruiting. Many of the top players won't even consider a non-BCS conference for this reason alone. Every other college team sport has a playoff, why shouldn't we? All other college football divisions have a playoff, why shouldn't we?
A great example of injustice is Boise State this year. I'm not a huge Bronco fan but because they are from the WAC they must go undefeated to even get into the BCS bowl games and yet they will not be playing for the championship against The Ohio State University simply because the WAC is viewed as an inferior conference. I agree that most teams in the WAC aren't great but BSU is the only other undefeated team this year in division 1-A so why not give them a shot? I know all the arguments and there is some merit but what would solve all of this is a playoff. Take 32 teams and include all conference champs and then other deserving teams such as Michigan, LSU, Notre Dame etc...and match them up in a highest playing lowest setting. This system would not minimize the regular season as you'd have to show your worth during the season and win your conference.
I am a BYU fan and we hail from the Mountain West Conference. Our football teams are good and have beaten teams from all conferences. Some of the better teams we have are BYU, TCU, and Utah but under the current system we will never be given a shot at the National Championship, it's unjust and quite frankly ridiculous to say to a team "I'm sorry, you're good enough to compete in the top division, but we don't feel that anybody from this conference will ever deserve a shot at being the best in the nation". We ended up with two teams in the top 25 AP poll BYU at 19 and TCU at 25. BYU had two early season losses that were close and should have won but due to a lack of execution on our part did not. TCU lost to BYU and were injured after and the next week lost to a pretty good Utah team. There are plenty of 3 and 4 loss teams above them, which is irritating but to be fair a playoff should be demanded so as to truly prove who is the best team.
It wouldn't take that much if any extra time. As soon as the regular season is done the playoff commences and let the madness ensue. Think of how exciting a 32 team playoff could be. Money shouldn't be an issue as there would be even more money to be had and the BCS bowl names could be kept for the final 4 and championship game so they wouldn't loose out. It just makes sense and would give some of the lesser known teams a chance. Also, it would allow teams from the non-BCS conferences to be all to tell recruits that we now have a shot at the national championship. You can't tell me that this doesn't affect recruiting. Many of the top players won't even consider a non-BCS conference for this reason alone. Every other college team sport has a playoff, why shouldn't we? All other college football divisions have a playoff, why shouldn't we?
posted by Mormegil at 19:13
5 Comments:
I don't want an all out playoff in college football. Then it would be just like the NFL.
Part of the reason why college ball is growing so much is because of its quirks- quirky offenses, quirky rankings and polls, and quirky post-season.
The thing is, if you want to play for the title, then play great competition and go undefeated. If you don't do one of those things, then you can't really say you were wronged or screwed over- you just didn't do your job.
The only problems happen when there are three teams who all meet the requirement (see Auburn two years ago). That's when a playoff is needed.
But not a huge playoff. Just a plus one. That's what I think they should do. I think they should seed the top four, play them in the major bowls as semifinals, and then the winners play for the title in a bowl game one week later. I think that would solve 99% of the country's gripes.
The only thing it wouldn't fix is someone like Boise St. going undefeated and getting left out.
First let me say it's very unlikely that this year's Boise State team would hang with Ohio St, Mich, USC, FLA, Oklahoma, LSU, Ark, or those types. I could see them upsetting someone like Notre Dame, but of course I don't think Notre Dame is a top ten team either.
But let's pretend that Boise State was legit. How would they go about getting into the four team playoff. Well, the NCAA could make a rule for the weaker conferences. Something like "If you go completely undefeated AND have on your non-conference schedule three teams from BCS conferences with winning conference records, THEN you can have the #4 playoff spot."
Then it will be up to them to schedule top flight opponents in the non-conference and go undefeated. That's my take anyway. Of course someone from Conf USA or WAC or MAC will never agree with me. Oh well.
-tp
I think a playoff system would go a long way towards solving a lot of the problems with Division I. My team (Wisconsin) was left out of the BCS bowls, despite being ranked as high as 5th in one poll, because we had the misfortune to be in the same conference as the first- and second-ranked teams for almost the entire year. The only game we lost all year was to Michigan (who I think should be playing in the national championship, instead of Florida), despite having a rookie coach who's the second-youngest in the country, but we're still stuck going to the Capital One Bowl.
"Michigan (who I think should be playing in the national championship, instead of Florida)"
Nah... rematches should nearly always be avoided, particularly when the first match up is at the end of the year.
Michigan lost to Ohio St. That's it. Michigan doesn't win the title. Try again next year.
Try this- think of the game in terms of what result would cause the most controversy.
If Ohio St wins the game, no controversy.
If Michigan wins a rematch- uh oh... we're talking HUGE controversy. Particularly if the game is super close. Michigan would claim the title because they won that game, Ohio St folks would argue that they deserve the title just as much because they split games with Mich, and Florida would argue they deserve it because they have the same record and played a tougher schedule.
On the other hand, if Florida wins, where is the three team controversy? There isn't one. Ohio St can't talk because Florida beat them the only time they played them. Michigan can't talk because Florida beat the team they couldn't beat.
As you can see, an Ohio St vs Florida final would provide a much more clear champion. If you listen to sports radio and read sports publications regularly and thus know the way controversies are started and fueled, you know I'm right.
Ohio St vs FLA = champ
Ohio St vs Mich = controversy
-tp
Did anyone happen to catch ESPN's all-time-greatest college football team playoff Wednesday night?
The final was....
95 Nebraska defeats 71 Nebraska
Mwu ha ha ha!! It doesn't get any better than that!
And the other Nebraska team in the 32 team field, 83 Nebraska- they also lost to 95 Nebraska.
So it seems the only teams capable of beating Nebraska's best teams are other Husker teams. Hee hee hee. But I already knew that.
Go Huskers!
Well, tp, I must stand corrected about the national championship. Both Michigan and Ohio State played pathetically in their bowl games, which to me even more argues that there should be a playoff, so hopefully the top-ranked teams won't end up folding in important bowls and we'll be able to see more interesting matchups. Also, it makes me mad that Notre Dame gets the unfair advantage of not having to be part of a conference for football. My (much higher-ranked) team was kept out of a BCS bowl due because there were two other good teams in our conference, but Notre Dame, simply because they're Notre Dame, will never have to run into a situation like that because they're given this advantage from the start. And while I'm at it, I'm going to grumble about Wisconsin not only being picked to lose our bowl game (even though we were ranked higher than Arkansas), but being ranked lower after we won it than before we played! It aggravates me very much. :p
Post a Comment
<< Home