Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've made my points, as have others. You're clinging to your "regular season won't matter" argument so you can't be convinced anyway.
Very few teams finish the season undefeated or with one loss. So how much does the regular season really matter anyway? There are roughly 9-10 teams PER CONFERENCE for which the regular season doesn't matter aside from becoming bowl eligible, which I think every playoff proponent wants to preserve.
A playoff system isn't going to hurt the integrity of Illinois-Indiana, or Purdue-Michigan. If anything, it gives those teams hope.
My comments to you have nothing to do with the regular season: I pointed out a handful of teams who would get a chance to play for a NC who I thought were unworthy and you responded (out of the blue) with some crap about unworthy teams in non-championship BCS bowls. Different subjects. Post a new thread if you want to talk about the fairness of the bowl tie-ins.
How many teams right now... or even better... after last year's final regular season weekend... do you feel are/were worthy of contending for a national championship? List them, if you would.
How many teams right now... or even better... after last year's final regular season weekend... do you feel are/were worthy of contending for a national championship? List them, if you would.
How does that relate to your initial post:
"Under the current scenario these same teams are guaranteed a BCS bowl game, and the money that follows... what's the difference? Who the hell wants to see 2 or 3 loss Pitt play in a BCS bowl? Or 2 loss Florida State or Va Tech in the Orange?"
are all undefeated right now. As it stands right now, they all deserve a shot at the NC. None of these teams play each other except Utah and TCU, so they could all finish undefeated. How do you decide who deserves a shot at the NC? Computer polls?
"Under the current scenario these same teams are guaranteed a BCS bowl game, and the money that follows... what's the difference? Who the hell wants to see 2 or 3 loss Pitt play in a BCS bowl? Or 2 loss Florida State or Va Tech in the Orange?"
That's a different argument that will eventually come full circle if you're just a little bit honest here...
are all undefeated right now. As it stands right now, they all deserve a shot at the NC. None of these teams play each other except Utah and TCU, so they could all finish undefeated. How do you decide who deserves a shot at the NC? Computer polls?
Conference championships and a +1, in my opinion. The system iss not perfect by any means but I think a playoff is too much.
The usual arguments I've ever heard against a playoff in College Football are:
- The Regular Season will lose its value
- No one has come up with a way to make it work
- "Unworthy" teams will get into the playoffs
- It will destroy the tradition of Bowl games
To which I say:
- I don't see how 120 teams who can play a max of 12 games a season, fighting for a shot at a title and position in the polls just for that spot can ever devalue anything in college football. Besides, the season is only a "playoff" for teams in select conferences. Even the weak teams in those conferences have a better shot at a BCS game than a 6-2 Hawaii team.... To me, that's one of the dumbest things ever said in sports history.
- SEVERAL people have made suggestions and planed out what they would like to see. Even I made a whole thread on my suggestion. As long as there are people with voices, there will be an outcry agaisnt what they view is wrong and they will come up with ways to change it.
- There have been a few "unworthy" BCS schools that got to the national title or a BCS bowland get stomped into the ground... Losing 3 games out of 11 or 12 means that you're still well over .500. And there are also SO many schools in college football, so why not have those teams compete? They may not be #1 or #2, but they can at least prove how good they really are. Just because a team is ranked #1 by the last week of the regular season doesn't mean they really are.
- Two things:
1. There IS a way to have playoffs AND keep the bowls. Incorperate bowl games for teams that lose in the playoffs (they will start the tournament right after the last week of the season, so it still gives them plenty of time to get invited to a bowl) and have everyone else that didn't make it just play in the other bowls. And...
2. There are already a million bowl games anyway.
Conference championships and a +1, in my opinion. The systems not perfect by any means but I think a playoff is too much.
You are admitting its a flawed system, and the one answer which is a playoff is "too much"? Except every other sport has a playoff. There is no valid argument against a playoff.
Look at those top 16 bcs rankings, there would be a handful of "upsets" in that group, this year and every year.
That's a different argument that will eventually come full circle if you're just a little bit honest here...
No, it's not. It was your direct response to me and the only topic I'm discussing with you. (edit)
Last edited by DOUBLE H; 10-25-2010 at 09:05 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
