Help with Speech: Topic: BCS vs Playoff System
- Thread starter isubballisback
- Start date
I always come back to this...
The only reason this is an issue is because people are obssessed with crowing a #1 team. What is wrong with fighting for your conference championship and then going on to hopefully win a big bowl game?
IMO -- A "National Champion" in Division I-A college football is a myth.
The only reason this is an issue is because people are obssessed with crowing a #1 team. What is wrong with fighting for your conference championship and then going on to hopefully win a big bowl game?
IMO -- A "National Champion" in Division I-A college football is a myth.
But you're not leaving out a two loss Oklahoma, or a two loss Va Tech or a three loss Central Florida. If you include schools from Conf USA but limit it to one team for the B10, SEC, B12 is an absolute joke.
Tough **** for Ohio St and Mich State, they lost the tiebreaker with Wisconsin. If the Big 10 had round robin scheduling, the 3-way tie likely doesn't happen.
Since this has kind of turned into a "How would you run things" thread, I thought I would throw in my two cents.
Hold bowls just like in 1994 (before the BCS was invented) If that were the case these would be the match-ups (borrowed from SI.com and Stewart Mandel):
Then after all the bowls are complete, hold the BCS game with the highest ranked teams. This would make it less likely that there would be 3 undefeated teams, still provide match-ups like Texas & Vince Young v USC & Reggie/Matt, while not taking an entire month to play out. Just add an extra week onto the back end and hold the BCS National Championship game at alternating site just like they do now.
Hold bowls just like in 1994 (before the BCS was invented) If that were the case these would be the match-ups (borrowed from SI.com and Stewart Mandel):
Using AP rankings:
Rose: No. 2 Oregon vs. No. 4 Wisconsin
Orange: No. 9 Oklahoma vs. No. 12 Virginia Tech
Sugar: No. 1 Auburn vs. No. 6 Ohio State
Cotton: No. 3 TCU vs. No. 8 Arkansas
Fiesta: No. 5 Stanford vs. No. 17 Nebraska
Read more: Eliminating AQ bids would improve BCS process; more Mailbag - Stewart Mandel - SI.com
Rose: No. 2 Oregon vs. No. 4 Wisconsin
Orange: No. 9 Oklahoma vs. No. 12 Virginia Tech
Sugar: No. 1 Auburn vs. No. 6 Ohio State
Cotton: No. 3 TCU vs. No. 8 Arkansas
Fiesta: No. 5 Stanford vs. No. 17 Nebraska
Read more: Eliminating AQ bids would improve BCS process; more Mailbag - Stewart Mandel - SI.com
Then after all the bowls are complete, hold the BCS game with the highest ranked teams. This would make it less likely that there would be 3 undefeated teams, still provide match-ups like Texas & Vince Young v USC & Reggie/Matt, while not taking an entire month to play out. Just add an extra week onto the back end and hold the BCS National Championship game at alternating site just like they do now.
I agree with this.
In fact, in California high school football, they never used to crown a state champion until like 2005. They claimed the state was too large for a tournament. That said, to win your section, you still had to beat like 65 teams... so it would be no different than Iowa HS football.
In college football, if you go 11-0 and win the big 10 and then win the rose bowl... ppl got a pretty damn good idea if your the best team in the country. If your TCU and you go 13-0, ppl know you're good. Why is it the #1 spot that only matters?
Ask all those SEC teams... they'll tell you their goal each season is to win the SEC.. not even the national championship. Its because the NC is just kind of a big hoopla game in a way.
Rogue52, you hit the nail on the head.
I don't really care that much about who is #1. I care much more about who wins the Big 12 and how my team does. It is the talking heads on ESPN who can't seem to rest until they have something more definitive in terms of #1. The rest of us care about our teams and our conferences and bowls.
And yes, UNI made it to the Sweet 16 last year, but do people really think they were one of the 16 best teams in the country? We know that they won the State of Iowa mythical championship. They will be remembered for beating Kansas and making huge last second shots on given days, but most people still think Kansas was a better team last year than UNI.
It's not a joke, conference play determined who the best team was from each conference. Only those conference championship teams should be permitted in a championship playoff. Due to logistics and timing, only the best 8 conference champs should qualify. The only teams that could legitimately complain about this system would be UConn, Miami OH, and Troy/FIU; the only confernece champs excluded from the playoff.
This... including the following:
The finals is the championship bowl that year. The consolation games are played in the remaining (now) BCS bowl games. All non-tourney-qualifying teams go to the rest of the 64ish bowl games.
2008
11-1 Texas
11-1 Oklahoma
11-1 Texas Tech
only 1 team would make the tournament, which one? Oklahoma? Then Texas still gets screwed. Even though they could have been the best team in the country that year, a conference champions only tournament STILL wouldn't have allowed them to prove it on the field!
Cyjack I think you just made my point. Wisconsin win the big 10 this year. Ohio st an msu didn't.
Wisconsin gets big 10 playoff berth and other two get a runner up bowl game.
But that would reinforce importance of reg season. Those games during the season mattered immensely.
Wisconsin gets big 10 playoff berth and other two get a runner up bowl game.
But that would reinforce importance of reg season. Those games during the season mattered immensely.
IF they were to do a playoff, that might be the best way to go about it (only conference champions)
but that still isn't a good way of determining a champion nor is it a good way of determining who is the best team in the country
but that still isn't a good way of determining a champion nor is it a good way of determining who is the best team in the country
The Big 10 will have a championship game starting next year (I assume) so they will determine one indisputable conference champion. For bcs conferences that don't play a round robin or have a play-off, they would need a formula to determine their conference champ, but that's the position they put themselves in and would have to live with it. However I doubt there will be any bcs conferences in that position in the near future.
You can't compare basketball to football in terms of revenue.
Where did I say I wanted to see college football players get hurt and play any more than on extra game? If you eliminate one pointless early season non-conference game and eliminate these teams' bowl games teams would only be playing one extra game.
I like how you mention two mid-major teams play in the first round of the NCAA Basketball Tournament. Davidson, Gonzaga, George Mason, and UNI are all mid-majors that actually get shots to win in basketball unlike football. I mean why would we want to find out who's better on the field/court?
well, for one we shouldn't be comparing football and basketball. there is a reason you can play 4 bball games in one week and never play more than 1 football game.
and even if george mason is good, im honestly ignorant: how many fans do they bring to a game? I've seen some highlights on espn of some of those drake sized schools... the gyms are high school sized (or smaller).
adding basketball to the discussion is entirely moot however you look at it
and you compared the entire college basketball national tournament to a mid major bowl game. c'mon now
and even if george mason is good, im honestly ignorant: how many fans do they bring to a game? I've seen some highlights on espn of some of those drake sized schools... the gyms are high school sized (or smaller).
adding basketball to the discussion is entirely moot however you look at it
and you compared the entire college basketball national tournament to a mid major bowl game. c'mon now
The Colts just seem to have a lot of guys that get hurt, which has been the case again this year long before the play-offs. Why can every other division in college football have play-offs with the kids playing up to 14 games? Do they have larger rosters or are they tougher than d-1 players? And I'm not going to put much faith in Hawkins opinion of the play-offs, he needs to focus on finding another head coaching job (if he even gets the opportunity).
also, there is no such thing as a davidson/george mason in college football.
basketball = 15 players
football = 115 players
if you have a guy like stephen curry he can tear **** up on the bball court almost by himself. Put vince young on UNI's football team: they'd get 8th in the big 12
basketball = 15 players
football = 115 players
if you have a guy like stephen curry he can tear **** up on the bball court almost by himself. Put vince young on UNI's football team: they'd get 8th in the big 12
How about this perspective?
Can fan bases really be mobilized in a week to go to a bowl/tournament game? You would have the fans of all teams that had a possibility needing to make travel and hotel arrangements. If you lose one week, you don't go anywhere the next week. If you win, your fan base has to go to another city the next week. I'm not sure that even Ohio State could mobilize itself under these circumstances.
Plus, the travel and hotel industry relies on advanced reservations. I can't imagine the mess of trying to handle 50,000 fans from two of four possible schools all converging on websites as soon as their games are over.
Can fan bases really be mobilized in a week to go to a bowl/tournament game? You would have the fans of all teams that had a possibility needing to make travel and hotel arrangements. If you lose one week, you don't go anywhere the next week. If you win, your fan base has to go to another city the next week. I'm not sure that even Ohio State could mobilize itself under these circumstances.
Plus, the travel and hotel industry relies on advanced reservations. I can't imagine the mess of trying to handle 50,000 fans from two of four possible schools all converging on websites as soon as their games are over.
I don't see a 8 or 16 team playoff ever happening. Ever notice that the NCAA is NEVER mentioned during talks about bowls? There is a reason for that, and that is that the NCAA is not involved!
Know where the NCAA is involved? In the basketball playoff. And want to know another thing? The NCAA keeps 60% of the revenue from the basketball tournament. Only 40% gets split amongst the schools and conferences.
So, currently the schools and conferences keep 100% of the bowl and BCS money. In a playoff situation the NCAA would become involved and want a piece of those $$$$$. So.... to make a long story short, the conferences will NOT do anything that gives the NCAA a seat at the table and a claim to any money.
Best to hope for is a Plus 1.
Know where the NCAA is involved? In the basketball playoff. And want to know another thing? The NCAA keeps 60% of the revenue from the basketball tournament. Only 40% gets split amongst the schools and conferences.
So, currently the schools and conferences keep 100% of the bowl and BCS money. In a playoff situation the NCAA would become involved and want a piece of those $$$$$. So.... to make a long story short, the conferences will NOT do anything that gives the NCAA a seat at the table and a claim to any money.
Best to hope for is a Plus 1.