1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Down with college football polls!

Discussion in 'Football: NFL, College, High School' started by drapg, Sep 4, 2002.

  1. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,692
    Likes Received:
    16,229
    You could enact a 16 team playoff next season and the Texas-OU game will still mean so much due to 1) pride and 2) position in the Big XII South. It could be the difference between getting to the Big XII title game and then the playoffs or sitting at home come December.

    Agreed, but its certainly not as meaningful in the overall scheme of things. If we accept that these are both top 10 teams, they are most likely gonna make the playoffs anyway. It would be like the NFL -- yeah, Washington / Dallas is a big rivalry game, but if both teams were good and likely to make the playoffs anyway, it doesn't really matter. If its the game that decides if you make it or not, it's huge. With college football, every game is like that.

    I guess its just a different philosophy. I like the high-stakes nature of every game, but I can see why its less likely to find the two best teams since one silly mistake can cost a team their chance.
     
  2. SirCharlesFan

    SirCharlesFan Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 1999
    Messages:
    6,028
    Likes Received:
    143
    If you think the dispute to get into the championship game between teams saying they are #2 is hard to figure out, imagine when teams are saying "NO! WE ARE #16!!"


    You'd have fans of about 10 teams saying they deserve to be in the playoffs.
     
  3. drapg

    drapg Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    9,683
    Likes Received:
    2
    I'd rather have the problem of figuring out who's #16 than who's #2... The #16 seed has a much smaller chance of making it to the championship game, while the current BCS and its ability to choose a #2 ranked team is a direct reflection of who plays in the championship...
     
  4. TheFreak

    TheFreak Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 1999
    Messages:
    18,306
    Likes Received:
    3,318
    The best solution is to have the top 4 teams in a playoff. 1/4 and 2/3 play on New Year's Day, then the winner plays the week after. The regular season doesn't lose any of its significance. 16 teams is WAY too much for my tastes.

    To Refman's scenario -- who gives a **** what FSU fans might think? Seriously, that's one college that MAY be upset. Boo hoo. That would not affect the level of excitement for the sport as a whole one bit. Fans are always going to be upset no matter what the system is.

    Btw...I stole this idea from Phil Steele, and probably many others.
     
  5. Refman

    Refman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    312
    To defend my 16 team playoff scenario...there are roughly 12 significant Division 1-A conferences. The champion of each conference would get in...and 4 at large bids.

    Sure there would be teams that didn't get in who would say they deserved to be in...but how is that different from the basketball field of 64????
     
  6. drapg

    drapg Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    9,683
    Likes Received:
    2
    would your 16 team tourney implement bowls? unfortunately, bowls and their sponsors arent' going away... so there would have to be 15 bowl games involved in the tournament... the big 4 of the BCS would be in there of course, but how would the other 11 be chosen? I like your idea, but I wonder how to implement bowl games... i don't think the Rose Bowl or Orange Bowl will settle for a #17 vs. #24 type game... they will want the top teams... (maybe you already mentioned this, but i couldn't find it in the back posts)
     
  7. Buck Turgidson

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    101,471
    Likes Received:
    104,041
    Really? The Sun-Belt conference champ (or the MAC, or WAC, or Mountain West, or CUSA) deserves a guaranteed spot in a national playoff? A 3rd or 4th place team from a major conference has a better shot of winning a playoff than the usual (great teams from those conf's are exceptions, not the annual norm) champ from a mid-level conference. Why not just use the BCS formula to determine the 16 teams?
     
  8. Manny Ramirez

    Manny Ramirez The Music Man

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2001
    Messages:
    28,844
    Likes Received:
    5,755
    If the Sun Belt winner is Middle Tennessee, then you are damn right they deserve a spot! (I had to plug the alma mater there..:p ).

    I hate the current system, and I have been saying there should be a playoff for years. However, as much money that the bowls bring in for the conferences & the fact that college football loves the controversy, we are probably doomed with this BCS crap. The best thing that could have happened would have been in 2000 if FSU had beaten Oklahoma to get the Coaches' poll and Miami was voted #1 in the AP poll thus forcing a split champion, the one thing that the BCS is trying to prevent. Alas, it didn't happen and the BCS lucked out. They also lucked out again when Miami (thankfully for me) won. If Nebraska had upset Miami, then where does Oregon finish in the AP Poll?? I would have to believe that they would have been ranked #1.

    The great news is that the AP poll, unlike the Coaches' poll, has no contractual right to give the winner of the "BCS National Championship Game" its number #1 ranking. Eventually, this scenario will happen and could happen this year.

    BTW - someone mentioned earlier about how losing 1 game can effectively knock you out of the running for the NC. A classic example of this was in 1989. Florida State lost their 1st 2 games to Southern Miss (led by a young Brett Favre) and Clemson. They then won their next 10 games in a row including a 24-10 win against Miami. However, Miami beat Notre Dame (who later beat unbeaten Colorado in the Orange Bowl) in the last game of the regular season and then beat Alabama (in a game that was not as close as the score indicated) in the Sugar Bowl to become the National Champion. Yet, it was FSU that was generally considered the best team that year, but they had lost 2 games and finished ranked #3 behind Miami and Notre Dame, both 1 loss teams.
     
  9. BrianKagy

    BrianKagy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    4,106
    Likes Received:
    6
    I think FSU's 1997 team was better than Nebraska and Michigan both.

    And I think Ohio State's 1998 team was better than Tennessee's.

    So, yeah, it happens.
     
  10. Refman

    Refman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    312
    Because that way winning your conference championship isn't significant other then winning another game to increase BCS ranking. In ALL other sports, the conference (or division in the pros) champion gets into the playoffs. Also, maybe the competition level of college football would be increased if these smaller conferences got an auto bid...then they could compete for top level talent.
     
  11. Refman

    Refman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    312
    The big 4 bowls could host the later round games...with the title game rotating. The other games could be chosen based on location, etc. Any smaller bowls that aren't included can play their game as normal with non-playoff teams.
     
  12. Buck Turgidson

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    101,471
    Likes Received:
    104,041
    I thought the purpose of your system was to determine the best team in college football by having the top 16 teams play head to head. Your selection criteria precludes that.
     
  13. Refman

    Refman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    312
    The conference champion in each conference is presumably the best team in the conference. If you can't win your conference you can't be national champion. What's wrong with having the best team in each conference and a couple of at larges battle it out on the field for the title?
     
  14. Buck Turgidson

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    101,471
    Likes Received:
    104,041
    Outside of the ACC, Big East, Big 10, Big XII, SEC & PAC-10, no conference champ should be guaranteed inclusion in a playoff (or in the BCS). As a general rule (there are exceptions of course) the smaller conf's play an inferior quality of football.

    Also, in one sentence you say that a team that can't win it's conference doesn't deserve to be in a playoff, then in another you say there should be at-large spots (one, of course will be reserved for the Domers, assuming they can win 7 games)...which is it?
     
  15. Refman

    Refman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    312
    Actually...if I had my druthers EVERY team would join one of 16 conferences...then each champ would make the playoffs.

    Assuming that does not happen...the at large bids could go to those teams who did not win their conference but have been deemed to be a big draw with a legitimate chance at winning (Nebraska, Texas, OU..etc).

    All of that being said I wouldn't be upset if they did use the top 16 BCS teams. I do find it bad to say: "You just won the Mountain West conference, so enjoy a day in San Diego...oh wait, the Holiday Bowl is in the tournament. So enjoy your big bag full of nothing."
     
  16. drapg

    drapg Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    9,683
    Likes Received:
    2
    i gotta agree with the idea of having each conference champ getting an automatic inclusion into a 16 team playoff tourney...

    without that, we would be stuck with some sort of equation to figure out which teams deserve to enter the tourney besides the conf. champs of the ACC, Big East, Big 10, SEC, Big XII, and Pac-10... we'd be right back where we started and finding ourselves looking at a problem (figuring which teams deserve entry) that this solution is supposed to avoid.
     
  17. BrianKagy

    BrianKagy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    4,106
    Likes Received:
    6
    The problem I have with automatic bids is that a given conference champion isn't necessarily anywhere near one of the best 16 teams in the country.

    Northwestern woin the Big Ten title in 1995 and shared it in 1996 and 2000. In their bowl games, they lost 41-32 to a mediocre USC team, 48-21 to SEC also-ran Tennessee, and 66-17 to a Nebraska team that finished 2nd in the Big 12 North. There's no way any of those Northwestern teams belonged in the national championship playoff.

    Last year, the Big 12's four best teams (NU, CU, OU, UT) were all better than the Big Ten champion (Illinois).
     
  18. Refman

    Refman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    312
    The Big 10 champ gets automatic inclusion in the 4 BCS bowls...so what's changed?
     
  19. Buck Turgidson

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    101,471
    Likes Received:
    104,041
    Illinois finished 7th in both polls & 8th in the final BCS rankings, it's not like they were 7-4 or anything. I understand your point, but there's no way the major conf's would agree to a proposal that didn't give their champs an auto bid.

    Drapg, there's always going to be a subjective element to whatever system is used. The 17th team can gripe, but so can the 66th team in the NCAA tourney field and March Madness turns out fine each year.
     

Share This Page