Bill introduced into Congress to force a playoff

#54
#54
VolBuck24 said:
But when 2 schools from BCS conferences start 1 and 2 and go undefeated then you can't say anybody is more deserving.
Click to expand...

Sure you can; especially if the system is flawed.

In a playoff scenario, even Plus 1, they'd get their shot.
 
#56
#56
Isn't something like this done every year?

And perhaps more importantly:


DOESN"T CONGRESS HAVE OTHER, MORE IMPORTANT THINGS THEY SHOULD BE DOING!
 
#57
#57
VolBuck24 said:
But when 2 schools from BCS conferences start 1 and 2 and go undefeated then you can't say anybody is more deserving.
Click to expand...
Yes you can. Cincy went undefeated in the Big East, a BCS conference. TCU went undefeated in the MWC, a non BCS conference. By your assertion, Cincy is clearly a better team than TCU. Do you really believe that?

The power has shifted. The MWC is very possibly every bit as good as half of the BCS conferences, yet they do not get an automatic bid.
 
#58
#58
VolsSportsFan said:
Sure you can; especially if the system is flawed.

In a playoff scenario, even Plus 1, they'd get their shot.
Click to expand...

The system is setup to mean that there are 6 major conferences that are on the same level. So if 2 start 1 and 2 and go undefeated then they should play for it.
 
#59
#59
milohimself said:
Yes you can. Cincy went undefeated in the Big East, a BCS conference. TCU went undefeated in the MWC, a non BCS conference. By your assertion, Cincy is clearly a better team than TCU. Do you really believe that?

The power has shifted. The MWC is very possibly every bit as good as half of the BCS conferences, yet they do not get an automatic bid.
Click to expand...

My whole point is that they were from major conferences and were 1 and 2 the whole season going undefeated. They got the 2 right teams.
 
#60
#60
milohimself said:
Yes you can. Cincy went undefeated in the Big East, a BCS conference. TCU went undefeated in the MWC, a non BCS conference. By your assertion, Cincy is clearly a better team than TCU. Do you really believe that?

The power has shifted. The MWC is very possibly every bit as good as half of the BCS conferences, yet they do not get an automatic bid.
Click to expand...

That's a tall order. TCU, BYU, and Utah are all good, but the rest is pretty much garbage.
 
#64
#64
VolBuck24 said:
My whole point is that they were from major conferences and were 1 and 2 the whole season going undefeated. They got the 2 right teams.
Click to expand...
That's what gets missed every time this argument starts. The objective of the BCS is to get #1 playing #2 every year and it accomplishes this goal annually.

I'd love to see a +1 format, but all in all the BCS is a huge improvement over what happened in college football prior to the mid 90s.
 
#65
#65
even though the bcs doesn't come out until after week 6, does the fact that a team is #1 or #2 at that time really mean they should stay the same if they don't lose again? seems really contrived..

I guess it was pretty much the same when the AP decided it... if you started high, it was tough to get bumped down w/o a loss..
 
#66
#66
kptvol said:
That's a tall order. TCU, BYU, and Utah are all good, but the rest is pretty much garbage.
Click to expand...
And the majority of the teams in the Big Ten, ACC and Big East are what, exactly?

More of a commentary on how awful those conferences are, but either way, MWC could seemingly go toe to toe with any of them.
 
#67
#67
GAVol said:
That's what gets missed every time this argument starts. The objective of the BCS is to get #1 playing #2 every year and it accomplishes this goal annually.

I'd love to see a +1 format, but all in all the BCS is a huge improvement over what happened in college football prior to the mid 90s.
Click to expand...
I've come around to the idea of a playoff, but I may be alone in this regard: I really, truly don't care about crowning a national championship in college football. I liked the old system in that regard, it's pretty simple: You place in your conference, then you get selected in a relatively fixed set of bowl games. Play, then the AP votes on who they think is the national champs, which is not a huge deal.

I care about Tennessee winning the SEC fifty times more than I care about Tennessee winning the national title. Because no matter how you set it up, crowning a national championship is going to be subjective. The old format was a pageant. So is the BCS. Institute a small playoff, and the best teams in the country could still have potentially been left out. Create a playoff with too many teams and some team could turn a hot streak into a national title without putting together a complete season.
 
Last edited:
#69
#69
milohimself said:
I've come around to the idea of a playoff, but I may be alone in this regard: I really, truly don't care about crowning a national championship in college football. I liked the old system in that regard, it's pretty simple: You place in your conference, then you get selected in a relatively fixed set of bowl games. Play, then the AP votes on who they think is the national champs, which is not a huge deal.

I care about Tennessee winning the SEC fifty times more than I care about Tennessee winning the national title. Because no matter how you set it up, crowning a national championship is going to be subjective. The old format was a pageant. So is the BCS. Institute a small playoff, and the best teams in the country could still have potentially been left out. Create a playoff with too many teams and some team could turn a hot streak into a national title without putting together a complete season.
Click to expand...
As subjective as it is, a national title is as good as it gets in college football. I'd take a national title over a conference title any day. (Obviously its really unlikely for UT to win the national title without winning the conference title)
 
#70
#70
The reason I say that is because it's what your team has in their control. The Vols control their conference standings ever year.

To even play for the national title, you have to win your conference and then hope things shake out in your favor. If it was never in my teams control, I'm not concerned about it.

National titles are nice, obviously, but they will never me more than a beauty contest of one form or another.
 
#71
#71
milohimself said:
The reason I say that is because it's what your team has in their control. The Vols control their conference standings ever year.

To even play for the national title, you have to win your conference and then hope things shake out in your favor. If it was never in my teams control, I'm not concerned about it.

National titles are nice, obviously, but they will never me more than a beauty contest of one form or another.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with that, but they come along so rarely that it's a huge cause for celebration no matter what.
 
#73
#73
tvolsfan said:
I think if there is anything, there should be a plus 1 or a 4 team playoff. Anything else is probably too much.
Click to expand...
I agree. The problem, however, is that whoever is ranked #5 will complain that they got should have been #4. If you go to an 8 team format, then #9 will complain. No matter what format you use, someone will feel like they got screwed.
 
#75
#75
kptvol said:
Crappy teams that get bowl eligible by beating the hell out of teams from the MWC.
Click to expand...
This whole argument is speculative, obviously, but the bottom line is that the MWC is overall in the same ballpark of quality as three conferences with automatic qualifying bids.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top