BCS does it again

#28
#28
mad4vols said:
I liked the bowls better before we had the BCS
Click to expand...

This.
BCS destroyed the satisfaction of a successful season. Now it's NC or nothing. I can remember what an accomplishment it was for an SEC team to get to the Sugar Bowl. Now, you dont even know if an sec team will be in the Sugar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#29
#29
Roustabout said:
This.
BCS destroyed the satisfaction of a successful season. Now it's NC or nothing. I can remember what an accomplishment it was for an SEC team to get to the Sugar Bowl. Now, you dont even know if an sec team will be in the Sugar.
Click to expand...

When was the last time an SEC team was not in the Sugar Bowl.

I get your point though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#30
#30
OrangeBalls said:
Tell that to Auburn in 2004.
Click to expand...
:crazy:

Boston Vol said:
Oklahoma had a better resume than Auburn in 2004.
Click to expand...
:clapping:

Those that whine about Aub 2004 are always the ones that are really not true fans of cfb. All it takes is some simple examining and its apparent. If you take the 3 undefeated teams that year - USC, Ok, Aub - and compare their schedules its really to see that Aub doesn't compare to the other two. SOS, against ranked teams, even that USC & Okl played a full D1 scheduled while Aub played a D1AA team (Citidel). Anyway its ranked, Aub comes up 3rd.

And if you think a 4 team playoff would have solved this discussion you'd be sadly mistaken. Its easy to put those three in their spots but try to determine who goes in the #4 slot. California, Texas, Utah, Louisville all have just as much argument of getting in. Don't forget Boise St who was undefeated but then Georgia and VaTech will give you an argument for them.
 
#31
#31
VolsSportsFan said:
I'd rather have #5 whining than #3.
Click to expand...

Why is 3's complaint more legit than 5's if they all have 1 loss.

What if the scenario was:

Team Red started the season #20 and Team Blue started #1. Red upsets blue in a close one in week 3. Blue drops drops to #7 and Red jumps up to #10. Then red drops a close one to #15 a week later and drops down to #15. Then both teams win out and the others in front lose so the final rankings are Blue #3, Red #5.

Both teams have one loss Red beat Blue but now they are getting left out of the mythical playoff.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#33
#33
burntorangeVOLffle said:
Why is 3's complaint more legit than 5's if they all have 1 loss.

What if the scenario was:

Team Red started the season #20 and Team Blue started #1. Red upsets blue in a close one in week 3. Blue drops drops to #7 and Red jumps up to #10. Then red drops a close one to #15 a week later and drops down to #15. Then both teams win out and the others in front lose so the final rankings are Blue #3, Red #5.

Both teams have one loss Red beat Blue but now they are getting left out of the mythical playoff.
Click to expand...

Yes, nobody said it's perfect, but it's still preferable that #3 gets a shot in the new scenario and #5 left out, than the current system where both #3 and #5 both don't get a shot.
 
#37
#37
hohenfelsvol said:
BCS is hit or miss.
Click to expand...

The BCS was much better than the old system, though I do agree it devalued the bowls somewhat. It got to where outside the NC game and whatever bowl UT might be in, I watch but cared little about the other bowls. Even the other BCS bowls almost became an afterthought.

However, there's no amount of argument or debate that will ever convince me it's better than a true playoff format.
 
#39
#39
If Auburn is one of the 2 best teams in college football then this was an awful year for college football. I do have to say that FSU looks pretty legit and worthy of being there. Alabama would've been a much more exciting matchup but I'd hate seeing them have a shot at yet another title.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#40
#40
VolsSportsFan said:
The BCS was much better than the old system, though I do agree it devalued the bowls somewhat. It got to where outside the NC game and whatever bowl UT might be in, I watch but cared little about the other bowls. Even the other BCS bowls almost became an afterthought.

However, there's no amount of argument or debate that will ever convince me it's better than a true playoff format.
Click to expand...

I don't feel that this plus 1 is a true playoff. It just adds to the mess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#43
#43
burntorangeVOLffle said:
What's the deciding factor?

MSU lost by 4
Baylor lost by 32

Mich St beat #2 tOSU
Baylor beat #10 OU
Click to expand...

The same criteria they use now; I never said that would change, or that it wasn't still flawed. But including more teams decreases the chances that you incorrectly left out a team that deserved it.
 
#44
#44
burntorangeVOLffle said:
I don't feel that this plus 1 is a true playoff. It just adds to the mess.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree, I think it was just a compromise since the public sentiment was a playoff is needed. I think it will be better but only slightly, but at the least IMHO it's a start.

I really hope they go to 8 teams within 10 years and that's where it stays, but they'll either stick with 4 forever or they'll go the other way and expand it to something ridiculous like 20 teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#45
#45
byobbio said:
Best formula for CFB. Playofff won't compare. It always works out. Two best teams are plying for championship.
Click to expand...
Any system that allows a team that didn't win it's division of the conference and didn't even play for the conference championship into the title game is severely flawed.

Count me in as one who enjoyed it more pre-BCS
 
#46
#46
ellivhsaN said:
Any system that allows a team that didn't win it's division of the conference and didn't even play for the conference championship into the title game is severely flawed.

Count me in as one who enjoyed it more pre-BCS
Click to expand...

So you hate pretty much every sport except FBS football sometimes?
 
#48
#48
VolsSportsFan said:
I don't disagree, I think it was just a compromise since the public sentiment was a playoff is needed. I think it will be better but only slightly, but at the least IMHO it's a start.

I really hope they go to 8 teams within 10 years and that's where it stays, but they'll either stick with 4 forever or they'll go the other way and expand it to something ridiculous like 20 teams.
Click to expand...

I think the only "fair" way to do it have for AQ conf champs (Make those CGs mean something) and 2 wild cards. Seed them with 1-2 getting a week off. Winners of 3v6 and 4v5 go onto play 1 and 2 them the NCG. That way you are only adding at most 3 games to the season of the lower seeds move on.

Some formula other than human opinion needs to decide the wild cards and seeding though. That is probably the least "fair" part. For instance, Bama just gets the benefit of the doubt as some people still think they are the better team than both AU and FSU.

Another part of the problem is there are just too many teams in FBS. Making it fair so the Boises get a chance along with the non power conference winners like Bama is going to be tough. As much as I hate expansion it may need to go to just Four 16 team Mega Confs and bump some teams back down to FCS. Of that would never happen because there is too much money involved.
 
#50
#50
burntorangeVOLffle said:
There is only two years I think it really got it wrong. Allowing OU in after they lost the BIG12CG over USC in 03 and again in 04 over an undefeated Auburn.
Click to expand...

To be fair, that 04 OU team was undefeated as well. The SEC hadn't started its dominant run yet so they didn't have the respect/recognition OU did. If the scenario plays itself out again today, no way OU makes it.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top