The BCS Blows (I mean…Bowls) Thread
Seriously, is there anyone out there who thinks the BCS is good for college football? This isn’t ice skating folks, voting should have no part in how a national champion is determined. Scoring determines who wins, winning determines who are the champions. It’s a simple formula. I still haven’t read an even somewhat convincing argument for not having some sort of playoff in college football. Even if it’s only the winner of #1 vs. #4 playing the winner of #2 vs. #3. That’s only one extra game for only four teams. (Of course you’ll have the #5 team whining because they didn’t have a chance at the national title but that’s much better than a legitimate complaint of the #3 team.) I know it’s all about money, so please remind me again why the big wigs of the major conferences don’t want a playoff? Wouldn’t that spell MORE money?
My opinion on the current controversy: The national championship already happened where the top two undefeated teams played against each other on the last game of the season and Ohio State won. Done. Over. But if we’re talking about what’s in front of us I have to grudgingly say I think Florida should be there.
Michigan: They didn’t even win their conference. In addition, they lost to Ohio State once, if they were to beat them in the championship Ohio State would have a legitimate argument that they are 1-1 on the season and should either share the national title or play another game.
Florida: They are the SEC Conference champs (toughest conference in college football). They also had a tougher schedule than Michigan.
The problem is that Michigan is probably the better of the two teams. And the BCS is supposed to pit the two best teams against each other.
In the interest of full disclosure, I’m not a Michigan fan (nor Florida), so I don’t have any stake in this year’s championship. In fact, I’m probably going to cheer for Florida just because I want the BCS sham to be even more obvious. It’s been entertaining, however, following the tool Urban Meyer’s foot-in-mouth comment and the idiot Jim Walden voting for Florida as the #1 team in the nation. Ugh.
One final thought, as a BYU fan it is extremely frustrating being in the crappy Mountain West Conference where we thought we were upgrading from the WAC when in fact we’ve sold our birthright (Holiday Bowl) for a mess of porridge (Las Vegas Bowl). Until BYU and Utah are brought into the PAC 10 they will never be considered legitimate contenders.
Any other thoughts on the BCS or the general state of college football?
As a Florida fan of many years, I can assure you with all objectivity that the BCS sucks except when Florida gets into the title game. Then, it ROCKS!
I listened to two sports radio jocks arguing the other day about BCS vs. non-BCS conferences. One claimed that the non-BCS conferences weren’t as good, therefore the BCS wa justified in excluding them. The other noted that the reason non-BCS conferences weren’t as good was because the BCS allows BCS conferences to out-recruit them. Its a vicious circle.
Personally I am hoping for Florida and Boise State to win. Under those conditions, whoever will be #1 (Florida or Michigan) will have more losses than whoever will be #3 or 4 (depending on where an unbeaten Boise will wind up).
Comment by HP — December 11, 2006 @ 3:31 pm
The BCS system is horrible. But what can you really do when you fight not only tradition (the Bowl system) but money (the Bowl system). Colleges reap huge financial rewards from their teams going to the Bowls. I personally wonder why any team cares if they won a bowl other than the Championship game. I really only want to watch one game, and that is the final one.
I’ve been for a playoff system since before they talked about the BCS. I think a playoff system would be the best way to go. Reduce the number of games you play in the regular season. Shorten the season and play the season only in your division. (I know again, money is the issue. if you invite a nationally renowned team, they bring in lots of money to your school). But then have a playoff system where all conferences are at play, so teams in the WAC can go up against teams in the ACC. They will probably lose for the first couple of seasons, but they’ll learn and get the experience and will one day surprise all.
Comment by Dan — December 11, 2006 @ 3:53 pm
The only argument I’ve heard against the BCS that makes a little bit of sense is the fact that it will de-emphasize the regualr season…which would be true. Teams would NEVER schedule a tough non-conference opponent because you could still get into a tourney with one and probably even two losses–so why risk it? The end of this season wouldn’t have been nearly as exciting if everyone would be in the playoffs anyway.
Now, that being said, the BCS sucks hard. They do a playoff in Division 2 and they can do it in D-1. Why they can’t see that a College Football tournament would be huge is crazy. They would absolutely OWN the month of December like Basketball owns March. Instead we have to wait 30-50 days for a championship game that usually ends up being an anti-climactic blowout. Stupid.
Here’s my solution. You will at first reject it, but upon more reflection, you will see the wisdom:
Keep the bowl games, but make them the first game of the season like the preseason basketball tournaments. You have these on Thurs-Mon. during Labor Day weekend and work out a formula as to which teams go where. You could also have cities like Chicago, New York, Kansas City, etc. host these games.
Just think about it.
Comment by Tim J. — December 11, 2006 @ 4:24 pm
I will also note that it is sad that the terms “BCS Conference” and “Non-BCS COnference” are used in NCAA Basketball.
One more point, a few years back, there was talk of teams from the “Non-BCS” Conferences basically seceding from the NCAA D-1 and forming their own Division with upper-echelon 1-AA schools.
Has anyone heard any more on this?
Comment by Tim J. — December 11, 2006 @ 4:31 pm
Until BYU and Utah are brought into the PAC 10 they will never be considered legitimate contenders.
Not so. BYU was in a very similar situation to their current MWC conference status in ‘83-84 when they won the national championship. If I remember correctly they lost the first game in the ‘83 season then went undefeated the rest of the year. Because of that they opened the ‘84 season ranked pretty highly and then beat some ranked opponents early on before going undefeated.
It may take a couple of consecutive solid seasons (and solid wins against BCS conference teams) for teams in non BCS conferences to have a shot at the title again but it could still happen. For instance, if Boise State were to beat Oklahoma in their bowl game and then beat some highly ranked opponents on way to another undefeated season in ‘07 they would have a chance of playing for the title next year I think. (Maybe the powers that be would prevent it though — they sure didn’t like letting BYU win it in ‘84…)
BTW — I despise the corrupt cartel they call the BCS. I am only disagreing with your comment about BYU needing to join a BCS conference.
Comment by Geoff J — December 11, 2006 @ 6:37 pm
I think the BCS is ridiculous. The only thing worse than the BCS is the fact that they justify it by claiming it is for the student athletes - when we have the basketball championships and the other division footballs have championship playoffs.
This is purely about the big eastern schools wanting to control power. Even the Pac-10, arguably one of the strongest conferences, is somewhat screwed by the BCS.
What they need to do is take the conference champions of each conference plus the top 8 teams plus the remaining teams by rank if there are (as there will be) duplicates. Arrange them by rank (i.e. number 16 plays number 1 and so on) and have a real playoff through December.
Comment by Clark — December 11, 2006 @ 6:37 pm
Tim, while true, the fact is that BCS teams typically only schedule either home games with non-BCS teams or away games with teams they are confident they can beat. (Which doesn’t always happen given when schedules are made) So, like recruiting, it is a vicious cycle.
Comment by Clark — December 11, 2006 @ 6:39 pm
we need a 16 team playoff. each conference champ (12 i believe, and all conferences need to have access to the post season…either give them a shot or make them division 1-aa, no need for two tiers of division 1 conferences) gets an automatic berth, and then the next four highest ranked non-conference champs would get in as well. first two rounds at home for the higher seeded teams (traveling to four games for your school would be a little much), the remaining three could be played at the big bowl locations (rose, sugar, orange). the remaining bowls could be for teams not in the tournament, kind of like the nit. like they matter anyway.
Comment by mike d. — December 11, 2006 @ 8:12 pm
The whole point of the BCS game was to determine a national champion when it wasn’t obvious. This year, it’s obvious.
Playoffs in football don’t make sense. The only reason for a national champion is moneymoneymoney.
E. Gordon Gee, former president of Ohio State, had it right: “Our goal is to win the Big Ten conference and then win the Rose Bowl.”
I will say, though, that it will be fun to turn Notre Dame into Tiger Meat - at home!
Comment by Ann — December 11, 2006 @ 10:24 pm
Ann, how can it be obvious when some teams, because of the conference they are in, can’t show what they are capable of? That just isn’t fair. So teams that go undefeated but have a weaker schedule will never have a chance to make it obvious that they are champion…
Comment by Clark — December 11, 2006 @ 11:36 pm
On Saturday, Green Valley State, the Division II champ from 2002, 2003, and 2005 will play the NCAA championship final game against Northwest Missouri State, the same team it beat in the final last year. Four playoff rounds to produce the same match-up as last year.
Comment by John Mansfield — December 12, 2006 @ 1:23 pm
Your right. We should probably just do away with the regular season then, too. Just let the pollsters pick the best two teams and let them battle it out.
Comment by Tim J — December 12, 2006 @ 1:37 pm
John, that’s interesting but I can’t tell if by giving us that analysis you are either for or against the BCS.
Comment by Rusty — December 12, 2006 @ 2:04 pm
Well, the first two D-II rounds were the same days as BYU’s last two regular season games. It seems a big question is do people prefer the teams to spend a month recovering from injuries and preparing for their bowl appearances, or would they rather wear down the teams with four playoff games first? The preference seems to be for the latter.
Comment by John Mansfield — December 12, 2006 @ 2:12 pm
I just don’t understand why the NCAA would want us to basically forget about College Football for nearly an entire month. Seriously, Ohio St. played Michigan almost exactly a month ago, and they won’t play again for three more weeks. Makes no sense.
Comment by Tim J — December 12, 2006 @ 2:25 pm
While it would still be imperfect, I have never understood why they don’t have a playoff among the winners of the four big bowl games.
Comment by Matt — December 12, 2006 @ 2:26 pm
Rusty, I don’t care too much either way. I edge toward the fun of watching lots of teams in post-season bowl games more than getting excited over the fairness of how a champion is crowned. I can see how others would enjoy playoffs more. What seems to be ignored is how playoffs would change the nature of post-season play in ways that have nothing to do with breaking a bowl cartel. Enduring several playoff rounds would take more out of a football team than it does a basketball team. I also suppose that Division II players are smaller overall than Division I players, so again, their playoff should be less wearing on the players.
Comment by John Mansfield — December 12, 2006 @ 2:27 pm
John’s point about injuries and healing is a good one. However I’d note the NFL doesn’t give much recovery time.
But it’s the one reason why I’m still on the fence about a 16 team playoff with all division champs. Maybe top 8 based upon polls?
Comment by Clark — December 12, 2006 @ 2:34 pm
I think it has to be 16 team with conference champs. That way, the regular conference seasons mean more, not less. Also, that way, every conference is guaranteed a slice of the revenue pie. An 8-tean tourney based on polls will wind up excluding the cururent non-BCS conferences nearly as effectively as the BCS.
Comment by S. P. Bailey — December 12, 2006 @ 3:11 pm
16-Team playoff:
Round 1 (First weekend in Dec.)
-Week Off-
Round 2 (Dec. week 3)
Round 3 (Dec. week 4)
-Week Off-
Championship (January week 2)
Comment by Tim J — December 12, 2006 @ 3:21 pm
And again, College Football would OWN the month of December.
Comment by Tim J — December 12, 2006 @ 3:22 pm
I am an Ohio State fan and Alum. That being said I am biased. I personally would like to see some type of Playoff system in place, but I do not want it to take from the tradition of college football’s regular season. I would not enjoy a 16-team playoff system that would cut the regular season short. There is so much tradition, and emotions that is attached to the regular season. There is nothing like big-10 football in November and the OSU/Mich game the week before Thanksgiving. It is a tradition that is over 100 years old and I and other OSU fans would not like that messed with. That weekend is just as big of a holiday as thanksgiving is where family gathers with friends to watch The Game.(the fans were upset that the kick-off time was changed to 3:30 this year because it messed with tradition. Even if OSU wins on Jan 8th it will be overshadowed by this years Mich. game.)
I also like the pre-conference season, if you had a long post season you would cut out these games not get the pre-season games we are use to here like Texas, Miami, USC, Notre Dame, Oklahoma to name a few that OSU is playing in the next few years.
Personally I would however like a 8 team playoff system of some sort that mixed in the bowls. I would enjoy the top 8 teams determined by a poll system to play it out.
Like I said I am biased but I would not care to see the conference winners of non-BCS teams playing in a tournament that just added one boring game to the mix and potental injuries. I just do not think that a typical BYU type vs.- Florida, Mich, OSU, or a USC would be that greatof a match-up. (I agree you would have an occasional upset from time to time.) However if BYU made it in the top 8 then like a Boise State that would be a different story.
Comment by adam — December 13, 2006 @ 8:40 am
Well now Boise State is undefeated and there is still a week of anticlimactic games that won’t settle anything. Yes, the game was exciting, but how can anyone take this BCS seriously when they manage to screw things up three-quarters of the time, and only get it right accidentally. If Florida wins next week I certainly won’t consider them the national champion. I wouldn’t even consider OSU the champion if they win, just like I didn’t consider USC the champion when Auburn and Utah were both also undefeated.
Then again, what do you expect from an organization like the NCAA, so hypocritical and corrupt, and a bunch of college presidents who are hardly the brightest bulbs in the box.
Comment by Bill — January 2, 2007 @ 12:21 am
HA Floirda stomped Ohio State Take that all u hypocrits
Comment by Jeff — January 9, 2007 @ 2:12 pm