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.
Here's my $0.02 on college football now, and why a playoff wouldn't end up being a good thing.
Currently, the BCS system has a flaw because every team who was considered for a national championship this year had at least one loss. The only other team? Utah, who never was expected to beat Alabama in the first place. Do they have a case for National Championship? Yes they certainly do, but it won't ever happen.
Utah fans are screaming for the #1 vote, but let's say there was a playoff? Do Utah fans think they could actually compete in a quarterfinal, semifinal, then final game? I don't think they could beat 3 powerhouse programs in a row and win a national championship.
Then brings in the problem for teams that are ranked, #12, #11, #10, #9, etc. They don't get a shot at the national championship either, and they'll feel too they deserve to be in an 8-team playoff! Then the arguing and politics come in again.
But let's say there was a playoff, what happens to all the other small bowls being played? They get shoved aside for these "bigger" games? The sponsors wouldn't like that, and they'll take their names out of these bowl games. "Papa Johns" wouldn't sponsor the bowl game, then the BCS will look for another sponsor, which would be hard to come by.
For those who say "no, have the smaller bowls first, then the playoff". THE SEASON WOULD BE TOO LONG!!! How would it workout? The smaller bowls play, and then when those teams are done, they get into off-season stuff. The teams that are in the playoff, the season will extend into february. Recruiting is gonna be hard during preparation for the playoff games, and off-season training is shortened. The bigger programs will falter a little bit, because off-season training and recruiting is held off until eliminated in the playoff. It's like the NFL draft then, the ****tier teams, get the head start.
Here's my opinion. GET RID OF THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP!!! There should be no BCS National Championship game! Crazy? Maybe, but it gets rid of all the politics and bs that comes along with it. You ask, "every other sport has a national championship!". Well, not every sport requires a week of preparation to play a game.
Here's what should happen. There are 4 Large Bowl games. The Rose, Sugar, Fiesta, and Orange Bowl. You get the 6 conference champions in the BCS divisions, and 2 "At-Large" picks, 1 which must be from the Non-BCS conferences.
But opposed to having always, say, a Big-10/Pac-10 showdown in the Rose Bowl, it is drawn out of a hat, for which teams play which. And since the BCS does not announce this, until the election show, it would intruigue players since they don't know who plays where, and who plays who. And then teams like USC won't complain about being in the Rose Bowl every time.
So let's say for this year, these would be the games, drawn out of a hat by the BCS. And the selection show announces
Rose Bowl: Big 12 champ vs ACC champ
Sugar Bowl: Pac-10 champ vs SEC champ
Orange Bowl: Big 10 champ vs At-Large #1
Fiesta Bowl: Big East vs At-Large #2
The next year, the BCS draws out of a hat again before the season. The Selection Show announces...
Rose Bowl: SEC champ vs Big East champ
Sugar Bowl: Big 12 champ vs At-Large #2
Orange Bowl: Pac-10 vs At-Large #1
Fiesta Bowl: Big 10 vs ACC
This way there's no politics on who's selected for what, and the next year there's no pre-season rankings, until a certain point in the season. So no one gets an upper edge for the "At-Large" bids.
I know alot of people would think I'm crazy, but I think this would appease most people, and keep the heated discussion off who should be the national champion. Well, because... THERE IS NO NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP
That will never really work. The BCS at least does have as much politics as a #1 does not get to play a weak opponet in a set bowl matchup. I really think a playofff would make college sports more a semi-pro league more than it is now. Just looking at the majors of many players you have to wander if they are invented to let them into college.Then there is the original purpose of a bowl game which is to reward the players that are conference champions, The way it is going with the style system so many use to run up the score not many second stringers get to play much even in the regular season. Overall there is just too much money which makes recruiting hard for most schools. Better than the past on naming a national champion but it will never be perfect.Even bowl games don't mean much because there are usually five teams that could beat any of the others on any given night.
Uhh the other NCAA divisions have football playoffs so your "Well, not every sport requires a week of preparation to play a game." falls flat.
As for the #9 team complaining, well it is not like they would get a shot at the title the way it is set up now anyway.
And the lesser bowls? Screw them. They play to half empty stadiums anyway. They are not a loss. Is there really "tradition" in the Motor City Bowl? Is it really a reward to anyone to go to Detroit in December?
The only caveat I would add is this:
- All conferences must have a championship game. I would waive the 12 team rule to allow the Big 11, Pac 10 and Big East to have their #1 and #2 teams play each other. Because this provides an advantage to the Big East, I would throw ND in there for them. They would not need to play a conference schedule but if their overall record would put them in the BE Champ Game, then they go there.
So a general schedule would look like this:
- Dec 2 - Conference Championship Day
- Dec 9 - Round 1 at higher seed
- Dec 23 - Semi Final Round (Rose, Fiesta, Orange, Sugar) bracketed like NCAA Basketball.
- Jan 1 - Championship Game (at one of the semi-final sites, rotating)
ETA: I am using the standard 6 + 2 for the 8 seeds.
The season isn't longer. It would be shorter! And that includes throwing a week in there between the first two rounds so fans could make travel arrangements easier.
It would work, it would be awesome. Does it lessen the regular season? Not really. Look at the Big 12 this year. That was the most compelling part of the regular season and that would still be there.
The problem isn't so much the BCS as it is the computers. Far too often the coaches actually get the vote right, but then the computers come in at the last second and completely screw everything up.
Uhh the other NCAA divisions have football playoffs so your "Well, not every sport requires a week of preparation to play a game." falls flat.
As for the #9 team complaining, well it is not like they would get a shot at the title the way it is set up now anyway.
And the lesser bowls? Screw them. They play to half empty stadiums anyway. They are not a loss. Is there really "tradition" in the Motor City Bowl? Is it really a reward to anyone to go to Detroit in December?
The only caveat I would add is this:
- All conferences must have a championship game. I would waive the 12 team rule to allow the Big 11, Pac 10 and Big East to have their #1 and #2 teams play each other. Because this provides an advantage to the Big East, I would throw ND in there for them. They would not need to play a conference schedule but if their overall record would put them in the BE Champ Game, then they go there.
So a general schedule would look like this:
- Dec 2 - Conference Championship Day
- Dec 9 - Round 1 at higher seed
- Dec 23 - Semi Final Round (Rose, Fiesta, Orange, Sugar) bracketed like NCAA Basketball.
- Jan 1 - Championship Game (at one of the semi-final sites, rotating)
ETA: I am using the standard 6 + 2 for the 8 seeds.
The season isn't longer. It would be shorter! And that includes throwing a week in there between the first two rounds so fans could make travel arrangements easier.
It would work, it would be awesome. Does it lessen the regular season? Not really. Look at the Big 12 this year. That was the most compelling part of the regular season and that would still be there.
PLEASE. You're looking at it from your perspective, not the BCS!!! Try and look at it as a business proposition for them, not your emotions.
The lower divisions have playoffs, but they don't have as many of the sponsored bowls either.
Well think of the situation this year, Boise State was undefeated, and got shafted and couldn't get into a BCS bowl game. They had every right to be in there, just as much as Utah did. They ended up losing against TCU yeah, but before the bowls were set, they had just as much a right as Utah.
Look, they get sponsors for every game. Even with half empty stadiums, the sponsor of say the "Eaglebank Bowl", gives cash to the winning team and pays for rental of stadium and what not. If these smaller bowls aren't televised, they'll pull out of this deal. Meaning, no sponsor, no payout to teams and BCS, no payed rental of stadium, no electricity bill paid for, etc etc. This isn't appealing to the BCS who makes cash from this game.
The powers that be in the Big 10, Pac 10, and Big East wouldn't agree to this. They don't have enough teams to have a championship game. Big 12 has 2 divisions, as does SEC, ACC. Which makes it fair for a conference champion. Let's just say in the Pac-10, Washington makes a turn around and is #2 behind USC , USC beat them originally and is undefeated while UW has 1 loss. In the conference championship UW beats SC, and then they both have identical records. Blah blah blah, here comes the debate, here becomes politics. For a conference championship, you need to have 2 divisions.
Your playoff format would get in the way of smaller bowl games, again not in the best interested of the BCS. Neither is it for the 8-4 team who might earn $1,000,000 from the bowl game. So it won't happen.
The only way it would work, is if the playoffs happened after the smaller bowl games, all the way until January 1st (why is the GMAC and International Bowl after the Rose is beyond me). So you have all your bowls played, then a playoff. This season would be 4 weeks. Quarters in January on the first week, week for travel arrangements, semi's in the 3rd week. Another week needed for travel arrangements, then the National Championship on the first week of February!!!
A bit of a long season it seems like to me, and guess what... Signing Day for recruits is on the first week of february too... uh-oh! I guess the teams in the playoff and in the National Championship get a bit screwed here.
Speaking of travel arrangements, thats expensive propositions for people! Expect good seats for say around $2000, that's up to 3 games they pay for, plus flight. People wouldn't end up going to the quarters games, semi's a bit more, and national championship everyone.
Without a national champion there is no point in playing the game at all.
That's the stigma that sticks with this theory now. Rose Bowl, Orange Bowl, Sugar Bowl, and Fiesta Bowl are all big deals man. This national championship makes all these other bowls almost irrelevant. That's why without a national championship, it puts meaning again into these bowl games.
That's the stigma that sticks with this theory now. Rose Bowl, Orange Bowl, Sugar Bowl, and Fiesta Bowl are all big deals man. This national championship makes all these other bowls almost irrelevant. That's why without a national championship, it puts meaning again into these bowl games.
With no National Championship that makes College Football like writing a book or making a movie that has no conclusion. It's pointless.
I am sorry but those bowls you mention have no meaning whatsoever. You dont win a championship when you win those bowls. They are nothing but exhibition matches. Pickup games at the local park have as much meaning as those bowl games.
In sports, if your regular season if over and you have no shot at winning the championship you pack your **** and go home. You dont get to play another game.
How would you feel if the NFL had a 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 11th, etc place games? You would probably think it was pretty stupid. Well, thats all those bowl games are. Pointless games meant for nothing more than to make money.
I am sorry but those bowls you mention have no meaning whatsoever. You dont win a championship when you win those bowls. They are nothing but exhibition matches. Pickup games at the local park have as much meaning as those bowl games.
In sports, if your regular season if over and you have no shot at winning the championship you pack your **** and go home. You dont get to play another game.
How would you feel if the NFL had a 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, 11th, etc place games? You would probably think it was pretty stupid. Well, thats all those bowl games are. Pointless games meant for nothing more than to make money.
or how would you feel if last year in the NFL they played one round of the PO's and then had a computer determine than New England was the best team and handed over the trophy to them or had a computer determine they were the best team in the AFC and, say, the Eagles were the best team and then had them play for the Super Bowl? The Giants wouldn't have even finished first in the NFC voting because nobody thought they'd make a run and win it all. But this is essentially what we have in college.
I'm sick of hearing it can't be done, there are 34 , yes THIRTY FOUR BOWL GAMES!!! many with mediocre teams playing to non-sold out crowds. They start these games in mid-december --- there's plenty of time.
the problem with a top 4 or 6 or even one off is that nobody will be able to say with confindence who's in the top 4 or 6. Many times there's debate as to who should be in the "national championship" game so a one off wouldn't work either.
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.
, USC beat them originally and is undefeated while UW has 1 loss. In the conference championship UW beats SC, and then they both have identical records. Blah blah blah, here comes the debate, here becomes politics. For a conference championship, you need to have 2 divisions.
