BCS rejects playoff proposal

#26
#26
volsforever27 said:
I agree with having to win your own conference, but then that brings up the debate about the weaker conferences.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. If you win a supposed weaker conference, shouldn't the team from the "stronger" conference win in a head to head matchup?
 
#27
#27
Lexvol said:
My disdain for all things Big Ten and Pac 10 grows deeper by the minute.
Click to expand...

read an article today in the JC Press addressing what I've always believed. Even if the Rose Bowl/Pac 10/Big Eleven didn't have their rules set in place, the other big leagues wouldn't vote for a playoff either.
 
#30
#30
^ Hm. Interesting perspective. Anybody else agree?

tvolsfan said:
That is why I like the plus one system. Every game still matters. And I would rather have the 5th place team complaining instead of the third place team.
Click to expand...
The fourth place team could be on such a streak towards the end of the season that they could win it all... Or in another scenario, why would said fourth place deam deserve to be in over said fifth place team? Maybe they're both one-loss conference champs. A small format playoff won't solve anything. IMO to do that, it would have to be at least 16 teams, at which point you're pretty much negating the importance of some regular season games, which IMO needs to be avoided at all costs.
 
#33
#33
milohimself said:
^ Hm. Interesting perspective. Anybody else agree?


The fourth place team could be on such a streak towards the end of the season that they could win it all... Or in another scenario, why would said fourth place deam deserve to be in over said fifth place team? Maybe they're both one-loss conference champs. A small format playoff won't solve anything. IMO to do that, it would have to be at least 16 teams, at which point you're pretty much negating the importance of some regular season games, which IMO needs to be avoided at all costs.
Click to expand...

Look at the past few years. In most cases, the plus one makes things better, and ends most of the real debate. I would rather have a 5th place team b***ch about not getting in than unbeaten Auburn, like in 2004. It won't ever be perfect, I think this way is better.
 
#34
#34
justingroves said:
Irrelevant. If you win a supposed weaker conference, shouldn't the team from the "stronger" conference win in a head to head matchup?
Click to expand...

Should.. yes. It's not irrelvant though, because going undefeated in some conferences is < than a one loss season in others. Do you include every conference? If so, people are going to say that the SEC is tougher than playing in say a Conference USA. If you're going to say win your conference then, I bet even a 3 loss UT team could beat some of the smaller conference champions. However, if you do win the SEC, you should be rewarded. Like I said, I don't know the perfect solution... I'm just hoping for a light at the end of the tunnel at this pooint.
 
#35
#35
UT IE 95 said:
Agree somewhat, but consider - Conference Champs is an undisputed title decided on the field. National Champs every year (but ours) has been heavily disputed based on several teams laying a claim to the "right to play in the last game".
Click to expand...

There wasn't too much doubt in 2005 or 2006.
 
#37
#37
right now the bowl system is guaranteed tons of cash. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Especially for a gamble that will likely pay off huge for the first five years, but then you never know. Especially if your team(s) lay a goose egg in the first round.
 
#38
#38
I think the thing peope really don't understand is that the movement to bring about a playoff is not nearly as strong or as widespread as people think. Kirk Herbstreit talks about it. Every now and then one university president will bring it up. That's pretty much it.
 
#39
#39
I can see the argument about the playoff hurting the regular season but I disagree. You are going to only have say 8 teams in the playoff, with everyone fighting as hard as they can to be listed in those 8 spots. Therefore, you lose that extra game in the season, you won't qualify for the BCS playoff. Also, March Madness is the most exciting time of the year and not many will argue that. I love basketball so my view may be different, but the field of 65 doesn't take anything away from the regular season IMO, and the same with the BCS playoff.
 
#40
#40
Ohiovol09 said:
I can see the argument about the playoff hurting the regular season but I disagree. You are going to only have say 8 teams in the playoff, with everyone fighting as hard as they can to be listed in those 8 spots. Therefore, you lose that extra game in the season, you won't qualify for the BCS playoff. Also, March Madness is the most exciting time of the year and not many will argue that. I love basketball so my view may be different, but the field of 65 doesn't take anything away from the regular season IMO, and the same with the BCS playoff.
Click to expand...

I can't think of a single year where at the end of the season I thought, "Gee that #8 ranked team really deserves a shot at the championship." In my opnion, if you go below the top 4 teams, you're including some guys that have no business playing for the national title.
 
#42
#42
milohimself said:
No, but there will be at least a handful of teams complaining every single season.

I'm against a playoff format altogether. Plus one, whatever. I'm fine with the BCS the way it is. Every single regular season game matters, which I like. And I concern myself with whether or not a team wins their conference, not the national title.
Click to expand...


Good grief: The idea that a playoff would make the regular season less important is completely IDIOTIC. This carnard hangs around forever despite the fact that it makes no sense: You couldn't make any playoff format with more than one loss--so I don't know why people keep bringing up the sanctity of the regular season! Get real...:eek:hmy:
 
#43
#43
armchairvol said:
Good grief: The idea that a playoff would make the regular season less important is completely IDIOTIC. This carnard hangs around forever despite the fact that it makes no sense: You couldn't make any playoff format with more than one loss--so I don't know why people keep bringing up the sanctity of the regular season! Get real...:eek:hmy:
Click to expand...

and in most years one loss takes away your chance at a national title. Milo is right, it would weaken the importance of the regular season.
 
#44
#44
armchairvol said:
Good grief: The idea that a playoff would make the regular season less important is completely IDIOTIC. This carnard hangs around forever despite the fact that it makes no sense: You couldn't make any playoff format with more than one loss--so I don't know why people keep bringing up the sanctity of the regular season! Get real...:eek:hmy:
Click to expand...

With an 8 team playoff there'd be at least one 2-loss team in there every year. With a 16 team schedule you'd be trying to figure out which couple of 3-loss teams should get into the playoff.
 
#45
#45
I don't think a playoff of any size would lessen the season and rivalry games. If anything, it would cause more teams to still be in the NC race late in the year, which would mean more playoff-atmosphere regular season games late in the year.
 
#46
#46
this is one of my favorite debates in college football. and as soon as i heard this on the radio this morning, i knew there'd be a debate here today......o happy days.
NEW COACH said:
I think the "plus one" format doesn't take much away from the regular season.
Click to expand...
no it doesn't, and it is the only playoff format that really makes any sense. the problem for the BCS conf's is if you start a 4 team playoff, how do you guarantee it doesn't grow? remember, the NCAA bball tourney started as an 8 team tournament, and is now comprised of 65 teams, and some want 128 team involved.......
oz615 said:
I just hope (and for their sake)that we don't get a a repeat of '01 (Nebraska in the Title despite not being in the Big XII CG) '03 (Oklahoma in the Title game Despite getting their ***es handed to them by Kansas St.) and '04 (Auburn getting shafted) because of their greed.

.
Click to expand...
to me, this is the biggest problem with the BCS is there isn't a qualifier other than being 1 or 2 in it's poll as to who gets in. neither of these two teams should have been allowed to play. conf. championships should weigh in. you don't win your conf., you don't play.

cause you're never going to convince me, in college football anyway, that a team that wasn't good enough to win it's own conf. or division in the conf., that it's the best team in the nation.


justingroves said:
Very simple solution: You aren't eligible for the National Championship game/playoffs if you can't win your own conference.
Click to expand...
:thumbsup:
armchairvol said:
Good grief: The idea that a playoff would make the regular season less important is completely IDIOTIC. This carnard hangs around forever despite the fact that it makes no sense: You couldn't make any playoff format with more than one loss--so I don't know why people keep bringing up the sanctity of the regular season! Get real...:eek:hmy:
Click to expand...
you couldn't be more wrong. and i'll give exhibit A from last season.

TN/GA in October. we pasted GA 35-7, we played for hte SEC title. in your world, GA is eligible to play for a national title. so, i ask, what's the big deal about the TN/GA game back in October? we lost the SEC title game, they lost to us, yet they are still playing for a national title. why on earth will anyone care about that october game if it didn't mean something? as it turns out, it did mean something. it meant for GA they got not shot at the SEC title and out of the NC picture. it would definitely change the regular season.


the bottom line for me in this debate is this:
1. i'm for the plus one, provided only conf. champs are eligible.
2. any 8-16 team playoff strictly based off the bcs rankings, i'm opposed to all together.
3. barring any of that, keep it like it is. it is still better than what we had before.......which if you will remember, in most years #1 and #2 played in separate bowl games and it really was left up to someone else to determine who won it all.

and finally, when people talk about the relative health of the BCS, they are not talking about competitiveness. when they speak of comfort level or support, they are not talking about the fans' opinions.

it simply boils down to the fact that it's May, and this is a viable topic on sports shows across the country. in that respect, the BCS works great. people are always interested.
 
#47
#47
jakez4ut said:
3. barring any of that, keep it like it is. it is still better than what we had before.......which if you will remember, in most years #1 and #2 played in separate bowl games and it really was left up to someone else to determine who won it all.
Click to expand...

It's amazing how many people forget this.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top