Alright, the BCS has once again screwed up, and it looks like after the Sugar Bowl we will be right back to the problem that the BCS was supposed to solve, split national champions. So, what is the solution? A playoff system of some sort is the obvious answer, but how many teams should be included, and how do you decide the teams will play for the national championship. I'd like to here everyone's solution, I still need some time to perfect mine.
Are you saying that there should be no change in the BCS and that its okay for a team that's ranked #1 in both human polls to be left out of the National Championship Game?
You're happy with the current system? I think it should be the Top 8 teams. I'm not sure if it should be determined by BCS or Coaches Poll. There's flaws with each. Each of those 4 games is equivalent to the BCS games right now. It's not like the other BCS game winners mean much. Then have another round. Those winners play each other for the Real NC. No conference championship games for anyone. That means there'd be only one extra game.
I do. Because it just goes to show you how biased the polls are. Why should USC be number one. They have only one thing over LSU and Oklahoma. They are hotter. So freaking what. That doesn't make them better if they played an easier schedule. Who wouldn't be hot if they played an easy schedule. Oklahoma and LSU played tougher schedules and had the same record. Period. They are the top two teams. If the media wants to vote USC #1 based on some gut feeling that they are better fine. But that doesn't make them the better team. It just makes them the better team in the media. Everybody catches media favor. The Cinncinnati Bengals had it too before today. The media couldn't stop talking about them. Big deal. It doesn't make them an AFC contender. The record is proof. The schedule is proof. Everyone agreed on this format because it actually does determine the two best teams. The only problem is that the media doesn't think this is the sexiest game. So they think it screwed up. But it didn't. The system picked the two best teams.
Actually I'm just tired of hearing about everyone's plan to fix all that is supposedly wrong with College Football. I also agree with PSJ. Everyone dogged TCU about their SOS but cuts USC slack.
Take out the CPU polls, and add something to where a #1 or #2 has to win their conference, and I'll be pleased. A playoff system would render the regular season somewhat useless. Look at college basketball. Who really cares about that sport right now? Controversy has made college football the most passionate sport for fans to follow. Without it, college football is just another sport.
USC played the 37th toughest schedule in the land. TCU played the 95th toughtest schedule in the land. There's a bit of a difference in kind there.
Exactly. Yeah but OU played the 11th and LSU the 29th. TCU was just looking for a BCS appearance while USC wanted a shot at the title.
The difference between a playoff in college football would be that only 8 teams, at most, get into the playoff while in college basketball 65 teams get in. Do you consider the NFL regular season useless? I agree with you to an extent, but the problem is without a conference championship game, how does the SEC, Big XII, and next year the ACC determine a conference champion when every team in the conference does not play each other? I think that you still have to give the champions of the Big 10, Big XII, Pac-10, ACC, and SEC automatic bids with the other 3 teams being determined by at large bids. Next year, the Big East will be too weak to deserve an automatic bid.
No, I disagree because I think the top 8 teams should be eligible. A conference championship in the SEC or Big XII means way more than any other conference. What if there are two good teams in one division, or two 1 loss teams playing each other in the conference championship? They play each other out of spots even though the loser is better than teams in other conferences.
6 Conference Champions, along with the 2 highest wildcards in a BCS-type calculation make the playoffs. If a minor conference team wins its conference and is in the top-8 of the BCS rankings, it gets an automatic berth pick over a wildcard. If the Big East really does suck, then make that 5 conference champions and 3 wildcards. Conferences can continue to have champonship games if they want. It forces a team to win the title, but it also boosts a team's potential seeding. Holiday, Cotton, Citrus, and Fiesta Bowls play the 4 first round matchups around December 20-25th. New Year's Day sees the Sugar and Orange Bowls in the semi-finals. Around January 7th, we have the Rose Bowl championship. Limit regular-seasons to 11 games plus a conference champonship. Then, at most, a team will play 15 games, and only two teams can do that. We've had 15 game schedules before. This system doesn't affect finals and is done before school starts up again. To keep them happy, Fiesta, Sugar, Orange, and Rose Bowls would rotate the championship and semi-final games. Those 4 games would be as popular as ever, and the other three bowls would be more popular than now. Thus, more TV viewing audience and more money all around.
Yes, I find the NFL very boring in the regular season. Especially week 16 and 17 when you have teams who have clinched sitting out their best players.
You guys are also forgetting how much worse it was before the BCS. USC would have been locked into the Rose against Michigan anyhow, under the old system. And I'm not sure if OU would have been able to play LSU in the Fiesta or Sugar.
What a disingenuous argument. That's like telling a women's libber that they are forgetting how bad it was when women still couldn't vote.
Well, I'm one to think that women in America are pretty well off, relatively speaking when compared to how women are treated in other countries... But that's for another board. Fact is that at least half of why college football has the most passionate fans is due to the controversy that comes with it. I don't want to sacrifice controversy for the sake of having so-called "clear-cut" winners. Ask college basketball about how popular it is compared to college football, even with the so-called "March Madness" where everyone and their mother has a shot to win the title.
I agree about the controversy generated by the BCS. Lord knows I was bored to tears during the NCAA Tournament for basketball watching the best teams in the country proving it on the court. Geez, what were those idiots thinking, letting the players play each other to see who the best team was - they should've asked Jeff Sagarin! All the arguments in favor of the BCS over a playoff system are frickin' idiotic.
That wasn't my point. My point was that people don't care about college basketball until March. Which makes up roughly 1/5th of the basketball season. College football, on the other hand, is followed hardcore for 4+ months. Do you not see the difference? Also, tell me how many college basketball threads have been on this board, a BASKETBALL BOARD, compared to college football. Fact is that college football's controversy is a big reason why college football is followed much more closely than any sport, pro or college.
Ask college basketball about how popular it is compared to college football, even with the so-called "March Madness" where everyone and their mother has a shot to win the title. March Madness, I believe, is 2nd only to the Superbowl in viewership and attention.
