U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-18-2012, 05:44 AM
 
Location: Chicago
5,927 posts, read 6,566,066 times
Reputation: 5402

Advertisements

It looks like the BCS which pits the "two best" teams in the nation for a national championship will be replaced by a system of the 4 best teams in the nation fighting it out in play off.

But aren't both systems flawed.

How do we know the two or four best teams in the nation?

The majority of games, the most important games, the games played in the middle and last part of the season, and the games played when teams are at full strength and the kinks worked out al come in conference play. and thus they serve no purpose in comparing teams in different conferences with different opponents and different schedules.

All we have for the purpose of comparison is non-conference games. And they are a horrible yardstick to use.

Why?

the 3 or 4 non-conference games come towards the beginning of the season. they often look like exhibition games. in the NFL, these would be exhibitions and they do not even count.

schools don't have any control over the quality of their non-conference opponents. these games are scheduled far enough in advance that even if you were to schedule Alabama, Oklahoma, or Ohio State, you have no idea how good those teams will be the year you schedule them.

many non-conference games are played vs. cupcakes which aren't even in major conferences and offer their opponents valuable home dates against schools that gladly will come to your house to make money off of seating revenue. Indeed, some schools ONLY play these cupcakes.

So the only "common ground" of college football, these out-of-conference games have little common about them. and serve little purpose in comparing.

Thus, anyway you look at it, the two or four teams that get the invitation to play for a championship do so on the basis of perception, not what they have earned on the field.

What you earn on the field is a conference championship. And that one does not come with comparing you with other schools in other conferences who do not play common opponents.

In the best of all worlds, there would be 8 major conferences, each of whose champion is invited to play in a non-seeded tournament (since you can't tell who is best). Even if there were six such conferences, I personally could live with two "at large" teams.....but today's idea is only 4 teams....all of which would be "at large".

The mid-majors could have a similar tournament of conference champions of their own.

Look, I'm sure the notion that Alabama and LSU were the two best teams in the nation last year has a ring of truth about it. But neither Bama or LSU had earned that distinction. It is still perception. They played different schedules from other schools that might have also been considered for their slots.

Earn what you get. Neither MLB or NFL necessarily have their two best teams playing in the WS or SB.....what they do have are the NL and AL champs and the NFC and AFC champs playing....because they won their league or conference.

I don't think college football should be different. All you have at season's end are conference champs....make them equals in a play-off
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-18-2012, 07:30 AM
 
Location: The "Rock"
2,551 posts, read 2,417,216 times
Reputation: 1322
Quote:
Originally Posted by edsg25 View Post
In the best of all worlds, there would be 8 major conferences, each of whose champion is invited to play in a non-seeded tournament (since you can't tell who is best). Even if there were six such conferences, I personally could live with two "at large" teams.....but today's idea is only 4 teams....all of which would be "at large".

You are preaching to the choir...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2012, 05:22 PM
 
Location: Chicago
5,927 posts, read 6,566,066 times
Reputation: 5402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. GE View Post
You are preaching to the choir...
Mr. GE, I guess you and I have to get the amplifiers out and tuned up to max volume!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2012, 08:10 AM
 
203 posts, read 278,409 times
Reputation: 108
Ditto....

Here is my latest iteration of a simplified graphic explaining this process and its implementation.



Basically just needs tournament-seeding process. The above image implies: 1-SEC, 2-Big12(typo), 3-Great Lakes, 4-Pac14, 5-ACC, 6-BigEast, 7-MtWest, 8-CUSA, 9-MAC, 10-SunBelt. Could just base this on inter-conference play results or rankings of the conference as a whole. I think Seeding is necessary because it makes the Quarter-Finals more palatable to the large conferences, since it would ensure they basically get a first round cupcake in most cases.

Last edited by jasomm; 06-01-2012 at 08:50 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2012, 06:50 PM
 
48,516 posts, read 84,044,795 times
Reputation: 18051
Every system is falwed ,The NFL can't even assured the best team play in the super bowl. Any given saturday it well known that a team can lose that seals its fate.Part fo teh excitemnt of college football.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2012, 08:54 PM
 
3,723 posts, read 3,888,035 times
Reputation: 2785
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
Every system is falwed ,The NFL can't even assured the best team play in the super bowl. Any given saturday it well known that a team can lose that seals its fate.Part fo teh excitemnt of college football.
At least in the NFL, the good teams get a shot at the title. In the FBS, only the two teams deemed the best get a shot.

In my mind, there has never been a true champion crowned since a playoff if not used. I can't help but think back to 2005, where you had USC, Auburn and Oklahoma all go undefeated and Auburn got left out of the title game. Any time you can have a split national title, which has happened on more than 1 occasion, it's pretty sad.

In a perfect world you would have a 16 team playoff. I posted my system in another thread.

I would settle for an 8 team playoff though, if it was decided that 16 would never happen. The more entrants, the merrier.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2012, 09:14 PM
 
1,359 posts, read 4,384,131 times
Reputation: 771
To be fair, we have had at least a couple of seasons where there were two [and only two] undefeated teams, those times the system more or less worked.

I guess it's all about baby steps...the BCS at least made the split championships less likely since it got rid of all the conference bowl commitments. If they introduce some kind of four-team playoff it will at least get rid of the three-undefeated team scenario. Maybe in another ten years they'll make another change. The old system was entrenched for so long that in a way I guess we're lucky we're at least looking at changing the BCS system less than 20 years after it was enacted. Of course, a lot of it is that conference realignments are forcing the issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2012, 01:40 PM
 
Location: Englewood, Near Eastside Indy
8,345 posts, read 14,121,629 times
Reputation: 5964
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAM88 View Post
At least in the NFL, the good teams get a shot at the title.
The 2010 Tampa Bay Buccaneers went 10-6 and missed the playoffs. The 7-9 Seattle Seahawks not only made the playoffs, but hosted a playoff game because they won their division.

The 2008 New England Patriots went 11-5, finished tied for first place in their division and missed the playoffs. The 8-8 San Diego Chargers not only made the playoffs, but hosted a playoff game (against a 12-4 team no less) because they won their division.

The 2007 New England Patriots went 16-0, but lost the Super Bowl to a team that finished 10-6; and whom the Patriots defeated in the regular season.

For all the talk about how unfair it is that LSU had to beat Alabama again; and for all this talk about how we should only have the best teams qualify like the NFL...............it is funny just how flawed the NFL system can be sometimes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-07-2012, 02:03 PM
 
3,349 posts, read 2,659,498 times
Reputation: 1700
The eye test and strength of schedule

last year, the 4 best teams, in my opinion were

LSU, Bama, Arkansas and Boise St.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-12-2012, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Houston, TX
17,032 posts, read 26,906,373 times
Reputation: 16190
They make it work in D2.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > College Football
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top