re: With the BCS, every game is a playoff??????

quote:

---

Why are we discussing conference winners automatically making the playoffs? Just keep the current BCS ranking system, then take the top 4,8, however many teams. What is so complicated about that?

---

This is the most rational playoff system, but if you go to 8 teams, the politics of college football are going to create a system where each major conference has a bid. There wont be agreement on a playoff system without everyone getting a chunk of the pie

Lets say this year that Wisconsin, Ohio State, and Michigan state have by far the best teams in the country. All three schools have won every game except against each other, holding serve at home and losing on the road.

So in the current system they have eliminated each other from the championship game. Now Oregon plays in a much weaker conference against much weaker teams, same as Boise St. Same as TCU guess which three teams still have a shot at a national title?

The best solution is a 16 game playoff, 11 automatic conference winner births, 5 at larges.

Or you can keep arguing that Boise State is a deserving national title contender without any proof just like they do to start the season. The season is meaningless it proves nothing without a playoff at the end. Congratulations Boise St. you've gone undefeated against a schedule 10 other teams in football could go undefeated, and for that you get to play for the championship.

As for the meaningless games.

On a regular basis only the MAC and Sunbelt teams will be unranked, and you aren't going to see either conference in the second round unless they pull a miracle upset on the road against the #1 or #2 team in the country.

Sure you can argue Va. Tech doesn't deserve a shot (with 2 losses) but you can't argue that'd be a meaningless game.

These are the teams that'd be in right now I'll star the ones that won't be worth watching

1. Oregon (Pac 10 champ)
2. Auburn (SEC champ)
3 TCU * (MWC champ)
4 Boise St. (WAC champ)
5 LSU (At Large)
6 Wisconsin (Big 10 champ)
7 Stanford (At Large)
8 Ohio St (at-large)
9 Mich St. (at-large)
10 Ok St (Big 12 champ)
11 Alabama (at- large)
12 Va Tech (ACC champ)
13 Pittsburg (Big east)*
14 UCF (conf. usa)*
15 No. Ill (MAC)*
16 FIU (sunbelt)*

Under the current system 1 loss LSU, Ohio St, Mich. St, Ok State, Stanford, Wisconsin, undefeated Boise St, and undefeated TCU will get left out of the national title shot.

My main gripe is that I think any of the big 10 teams or LSU and Boise St and TCU have proven as much this season as Oregon. You can easily make an argument for 6 teams that at this point have proven as much ore more than Oregon and based on the system have no shot at winning a national title.

Quit comparing the system to the NFL. With 12 games instead of 16 and only playing inter division teams 1 time a team it isn't so clear cut that team X had a better season than team y.

The saints certainly wouldn't have played for a title last year under the BCS system.

quote:

---

The best solution is a 16 game playoff, 11 automatic conference winner births, 5 at larges.

---

this is a horrible solution, for a variety of reasons i have discussed multiple times, but let me just point this out

quote:

---

Lets say this year that Wisconsin, Ohio State, and Michigan state have by far the best teams in the country. All three schools have won every game except against each other, holding serve at home and losing on the road.

---

how do these 3 teams all make that 16 team playoff? there will be 5 at-large bids, and the big10 will get 2 of these 5? unlikely

now let's assume the money-sharing concepts of the 16-team playoff (each conference gets paid a certain amount per game) exist, and let's assume all 3 teams make it. you don't realize how badly the big10 will out-gain everyone else that year?

the stratification will be huge. the big10 and SEC will be on different levels than any other conference

quote:

---

You could have 12 teams. The top four are rewarded with a bye. 5-8 are rewarded with a first round home game. All the teams that didn't win their conference are competing for the one at large spot (or two or three, if some conferences don't qualify for a playoff berth).

---

Most schools would probably prefer the money from the home game

quote:

---

There are no objective reasons to suggest the BCS is even close to a successful way of picking a national champion. Not to mention its already produced a split championship and will again.

---

Please list all of the undeserving champions from the BCS era.

Yeah, 2007 UGA who got curbstomped by the team that did win their division

I asked for undeserving champs, not teams that you think got left out.

Utah 2008 would have you believe otherwise they went undefeated.

2009 Boise St would like to make an objection they went undefeated too.

2007 Southern Cal wants to know why they were left out.

2006 Boise St would mention their still the only undefeated team.

2005 - BCS got it right

2004 - Wait you don't think there's a good argument for an undefeated SEC team getting left out?

An SEC that is 19-7 in BCS bowls and 6-0 in BCS title games. The big 12 is 7-10 and Oklahoma is 3-5 ....

2003 - Cluster frick

So no you the BCS doesn't get it right it's a sham.

1 out of 7 makes me think you have low expectations for some reason.

For someone with 186k posts its a shame you don't know much about college football.

Completely different saying 3 11-1 teams don't deserve a shot and 1 11-2 team got shafted.

quote:

---

2009 Boise St would like to make an objection they went undefeated too

---

with a SOS in the 80's I believe.

quote:

---

2007 Southern Cal wants to know why they were left out.

---

They had a bad computer score and lost at home to a 3-8 team, if they win that game they would not have been left out.

quote:

---

2006 Boise St would mention their still the only undefeated team.

---

against a crappy schedule.

quote:

---

2004 - Wait you don't think there's a good argument for an undefeated SEC team getting left out?

An SEC that is 19-7 in BCS bowls and 6-0 in BCS title games. The big 12 is 7-10 and Oklahoma is 3-5 ....

---

The BCS is for just 1 season, in this case, 2004. What the record of all teams from the SEC, especially game AFTER 2004 is completely irrelevant. In 2004 the SEC was not as strong as other years. Auburn played a crappy OOC schedule, they were 3rd in the computers which are unbiased and don't care about preseason polls. Sorry.

quote:

---

1 out of 7 makes me think you have low expectations for some reason.

---

You're right 1 out of 7 that could be argued, 2004. 6 of 7 the BCS was right.