BCS Sucks!

[timothy1997 0]

This year, sure. If you think Michigan is not a top-5 football program, you have some serious head-out-of-ass-pulling to do.

I dont think Michigan is a top 5 program right now. Look at the last 5 years. I clearly will put USC, Miami, Ohio State, Oklahoma, and LSU ahead of them. Maybe even teams like Va Teach, Tennessee, Texas, and Oregon are ahead of Michigan too.

Michigan is in the top 5 of the big ten, not the country. Michigan is not even the best team in the Big Ten consistantly right now. the better team is clearly Ohio State.

Now if your talking about all-time, then I agree with Michigan in the top 5.

[darko99 0]

Can you honestly say you'd rather watch Oregon and Ohio State? Or Oregon and Notre Dame? It's a Michigan fans dream, watch the two arch nemisis beat the tar out of each other. It's classic. 6th best offense vs. the 7th best defense. I'm picking ND in this one, I think Weis will have the Irish pick Ohio State apart. Look at what he almost did to USC with a bye week to prepare. Now he has a month. This is something the BCS FINALLY got right.

[betterREDthandead 58]

But in the past, you can go undefeated and still be screwed by the BCS. Imagine the problem if a team like LSU went undefeated or even Penn State.

How would a playoff solve that? Instead of bitching that the #3 team got screwed, people would be bitching that the #9 team got screwed.

[Hockeytown Red Wings 245]

How would a playoff solve that? Instead of bitching that the #3 team got screwed, people would be bitching that the #9 team got screwed.

Yeah, that is definitely true but it wouldnt be as bad. An undefeated not getting a shot at a national title is pretty troubling, no matter who've they've played or how they've won.

[DesertWing 11]

NEVER. There's no better regular season in all of sports than college football. In basketball, you can have a nice long playoff to weed out all the Cinderellas, all the teams playing way over their heads on a hot streak. Can't do that in football. That's what the regular season is for.....if you make it to the national championship, you earned it by not tripping up in the regular season.

If you take the top 8 college football teams and put them in a playoff, I don't see any of them being a Cinderella. Besides, part of what makes the NCAA tournament so much fun to watch is seeing a small school advancing against the bigger schools. It's not like the national champion ends up being a Cinderella (what was the last one....Villanova in 1985?)

[gowingsgo 3]

This is why I no longer am enthused to watch college football.

Oregon has routinely been screwed in the BCS system. They werent screwed by Notre Dame though, they were screwed by Florida State beating Virginia Tech in the ACC title game. The automatic births in title games leads to a non-BCS team taking a BCS spot from a team ranked in the top 6.

The system is flawed and until they have a playoff I have no interest in it.

[betterREDthandead 58]

If you take the top 8 college football teams and put them in a playoff, I don't see any of them being a Cinderella. Besides, part of what makes the NCAA tournament so much fun to watch is seeing a small school advancing against the bigger schools. It's not like the national champion ends up being a Cinderella (what was the last one....Villanova in 1985?)

Exactly....the 64-team field is big enough to weed out the pretenders. And watching the underdog win wouldn't be much fun, because the underdog would not be Southnortheastern West Dakota Tech, it'd just be a team you've seen before. No Cinderella fun. An 8-team field is just the right size to let a totally undeserving team sneak in. Would you like to see 2-loss Miami (the 8th BCS team right now) cruise to a championship because Reggie Bush blew out an Achilles on the first play of the game?

The system is flawed, but somebody propose me a playoff scenario and I'll blow it apart and show it's just as flawed, if not more, than anything we've got now or saw in the past. A playoff in college football would be a colossal mistake. Every single game right now is crucial. You don't get second chances in college football, which is as it should be.

[dallas27 7]

Um, the winners of each division play each other in a playoff? Round Robin-quarter-semi-finals.

I don't see how that can be flawed...

[timothy1997 0]

Exactly....the 64-team field is big enough to weed out the pretenders. And watching the underdog win wouldn't be much fun, because the underdog would not be Southnortheastern West Dakota Tech, it'd just be a team you've seen before. No Cinderella fun. An 8-team field is just the right size to let a totally undeserving team sneak in. Would you like to see 2-loss Miami (the 8th BCS team right now) cruise to a championship because Reggie Bush blew out an Achilles on the first play of the game?

The system is flawed, but somebody propose me a playoff scenario and I'll blow it apart and show it's just as flawed, if not more, than anything we've got now or saw in the past. A playoff in college football would be a colossal mistake. Every single game right now is crucial. You don't get second chances in college football, which is as it should be.

Under my 16 team field, it rewards teams that win the divison more and only gives 4 wild card slots. You can't tell me this wouldn't be exciting. Lot of teams get left out by losing games during the season like michigan or conference championships like LSU. Only thing I would ban is Independent teams.

Divison Winners

Florida State

West Virginia

Penn State

Texas

Tulsa

Akron

TCU

USC

Georgia

Ark. St.

Boise State

Wild Cards

Ohio State

Notre Dame

Miami

Oregon

That would be a crazy tournament. Giving a shot to every school, even the little ones.

[darko99 0]

I liked it pre-BCS. Whay the heck couldn't MI and Nebraska simply have played one more game in 97? We had less problems res BCS. I also don't like the idea of a tourny.

Edited December 8, 2005 by darko99

[betterREDthandead 58]

Um, the winners of each division play each other in a playoff? Round Robin-quarter-semi-finals.

I don't see how that can be flawed...

You guys are gonna leave out Virginia Tech in favor of Arkansas State??

I quote from a playoff promoter above:

The automatic births in title games leads to a non-BCS team taking a BCS spot from a team ranked in the top 6.

So here we have automatic berths for freakin' Arkansas State - a "non-BCS team" taking a spot from a team easily ranked in the top 16. You just kicked out Virginia Tech, LSU, and UCLA, all of whom had terrific seasons in good conferences. You think there's squawking when an undefeated team gets left out? You oughta see what happens when 6-5 Akron, 6-5 Arkansas State, and 7-4 Tulsa (records before conference championship games) beat out 2-loss teams in the SEC and ACC for spots in the playoff.

A 16-team playoff would take four weeks - that's longer than the 64-team March Madness, because you can't play two football games in one weekend. Academics is a big enough problem on football teams, and now you've taken away a huge chunk of the second semester as well as the entire first one. A round-robin would be even worse, it'd be like a whole new season.

[darko99 0]

Um, the winners of each division play each other in a playoff?  Round Robin-quarter-semi-finals.

I don't see how that can be flawed...

You guys are gonna leave out Virginia Tech in favor of Arkansas State??

I quote from a playoff promoter above:

So here we have automatic berths for freakin' Arkansas State - a "non-BCS team" taking a spot from a team easily ranked in the top 16. You just kicked out Virginia Tech, LSU, and UCLA, all of whom had terrific seasons in good conferences. You think there's squawking when an undefeated team gets left out? You oughta see what happens when 6-5 Akron, 6-5 Arkansas State, and 7-4 Tulsa (records before conference championship games) beat out 2-loss teams in the SEC and ACC for spots in the playoff.

A 16-team playoff would take four weeks - that's longer than the 64-team March Madness, because you can't play two football games in one weekend. Academics is a big enough problem on football teams, and now you've taken away a huge chunk of the second semester as well as the entire first one. A round-robin would be even worse, it'd be like a whole new season.

Agreed

[timothy1997 0]

Um, the winners of each division play each other in a playoff?  Round Robin-quarter-semi-finals.

I don't see how that can be flawed...

You guys are gonna leave out Virginia Tech in favor of Arkansas State??

I quote from a playoff promoter above:

So here we have automatic berths for freakin' Arkansas State - a "non-BCS team" taking a spot from a team easily ranked in the top 16. You just kicked out Virginia Tech, LSU, and UCLA, all of whom had terrific seasons in good conferences. You think there's squawking when an undefeated team gets left out? You oughta see what happens when 6-5 Akron, 6-5 Arkansas State, and 7-4 Tulsa (records before conference championship games) beat out 2-loss teams in the SEC and ACC for spots in the playoff.

A 16-team playoff would take four weeks - that's longer than the 64-team March Madness, because you can't play two football games in one weekend. Academics is a big enough problem on football teams, and now you've taken away a huge chunk of the second semester as well as the entire first one. A round-robin would be even worse, it'd be like a whole new season.

Va Tech, LSU, and UCLA had their chances to win their divison. Under a 16 team playoff that rewards big and small divisons, every team gets a shot.

Its not a perfect system but neither is the current BCS system. Very difficult to come up with a perfect system. A college playoff championship game would draw as many people and buzz, if not more than the Super Bowl.

Edited December 10, 2005 by timothy1997

[betterREDthandead 58]

Um, the winners of each division play each other in a playoff?  Round Robin-quarter-semi-finals.

I don't see how that can be flawed...

You guys are gonna leave out Virginia Tech in favor of Arkansas State??

I quote from a playoff promoter above:

So here we have automatic berths for freakin' Arkansas State - a "non-BCS team" taking a spot from a team easily ranked in the top 16. You just kicked out Virginia Tech, LSU, and UCLA, all of whom had terrific seasons in good conferences. You think there's squawking when an undefeated team gets left out? You oughta see what happens when 6-5 Akron, 6-5 Arkansas State, and 7-4 Tulsa (records before conference championship games) beat out 2-loss teams in the SEC and ACC for spots in the playoff.

A 16-team playoff would take four weeks - that's longer than the 64-team March Madness, because you can't play two football games in one weekend. Academics is a big enough problem on football teams, and now you've taken away a huge chunk of the second semester as well as the entire first one. A round-robin would be even worse, it'd be like a whole new season.

Va Tech, LSU, and UCLA had their chances to win their divison. Under a 16 team playoff that rewards big and small divisons, every team gets a shot.

Its not a perfect system but neither is the current BCS system. Very difficult to come up with a perfect system. A college playoff championship game would draw as many people and buzz, if not more than the Super Bowl.

A perfect system is impossible, I think that's the one thing everyone agrees upon. But in your scenario, Ohio State, Miami, and Oregon had chances to win their conferences too, didn't they?

Fact is, no matter how you do it, the basic problem is this: Who gets a chance to play for the national championship and who does not? The best way to do it, in my opinion, is to pick from as small a field as possible. Picking a field of 16 means that you're trying to narrow it down from about 20-24 worthy candidates, so as many as 8 schools will feel jobbed. Picking a field of two means very few teams can make any kind of case. The debate has never included more than three teams. A lot simpler than trying to pick 16 or 8 from as many as 20-24 worthy candidates.

And I don't see the college championship game ever approaching the hype of the Super Bowl. We will see this year with the Rose Bowl: nobody can dispute that USC and Texas are THE picks for the national championship. With no distraction coming from teams thinking they should be there instead, we have a true national championship game.

[timothy1997 0]

Um, the winners of each division play each other in a playoff?  Round Robin-quarter-semi-finals.

I don't see how that can be flawed...

You guys are gonna leave out Virginia Tech in favor of Arkansas State??

I quote from a playoff promoter above:

So here we have automatic berths for freakin' Arkansas State - a "non-BCS team" taking a spot from a team easily ranked in the top 16. You just kicked out Virginia Tech, LSU, and UCLA, all of whom had terrific seasons in good conferences. You think there's squawking when an undefeated team gets left out? You oughta see what happens when 6-5 Akron, 6-5 Arkansas State, and 7-4 Tulsa (records before conference championship games) beat out 2-loss teams in the SEC and ACC for spots in the playoff.

A 16-team playoff would take four weeks - that's longer than the 64-team March Madness, because you can't play two football games in one weekend. Academics is a big enough problem on football teams, and now you've taken away a huge chunk of the second semester as well as the entire first one. A round-robin would be even worse, it'd be like a whole new season.

Va Tech, LSU, and UCLA had their chances to win their divison. Under a 16 team playoff that rewards big and small divisons, every team gets a shot.

Its not a perfect system but neither is the current BCS system. Very difficult to come up with a perfect system. A college playoff championship game would draw as many people and buzz, if not more than the Super Bowl.

A perfect system is impossible, I think that's the one thing everyone agrees upon. But in your scenario, Ohio State, Miami, and Oregon had chances to win their conferences too, didn't they?

Fact is, no matter how you do it, the basic problem is this: Who gets a chance to play for the national championship and who does not? The best way to do it, in my opinion, is to pick from as small a field as possible. Picking a field of 16 means that you're trying to narrow it down from about 20-24 worthy candidates, so as many as 8 schools will feel jobbed. Picking a field of two means very few teams can make any kind of case. The debate has never included more than three teams. A lot simpler than trying to pick 16 or 8 from as many as 20-24 worthy candidates.

And I don't see the college championship game ever approaching the hype of the Super Bowl. We will see this year with the Rose Bowl: nobody can dispute that USC and Texas are THE picks for the national championship. With no distraction coming from teams thinking they should be there instead, we have a true national championship game.

personally, i would love a 64 team tournament rewarding all teams that have a shot. However, I don't think the NCAA would want the players playing every weekend in dec and jan. They would have to have teams play twice in a week and i doubt that will happen.

This year's championship game has it right....TEXAS VS USC. However, if they simply took a longer road to get there or have this game played a week after the other games...the hype would be higher. The problem with the BCS in the past is their "national championship game" was tranished. It was questionable if those teams were the best. This year's game should have nobody questioning the two teams and if they deserve to be there.