The playoff/anti-BCS crowd are zombies

[Caboose]

On the CBS halftime show during the LSU/Auburn game one of the hosts, after discussing Virginia Tech now being 6-0 after losing two non-conference games, says "If Virginia Tech wins the ACC, take THAT BCS!"

Now I have to ask what the F said occurrence has to do with the BCS?

I am beginning to think the pro playoff crowd have never actually thought about what they are arguing for. Time and time again I hear them say weird things that make no sense in context to the debate.

[Crucifax Autumn]

AQ thing I guess. It's them saying that the way it's set up could reward a team like VT more than a non AQ school with a better record.

[silverwheels]

Both sides are full of idiots.

[Okla-homey]

For the record, I favor a 16 team play-off. The BCS blows.

[Caboose]

AQ thing I guess. It's them saying that the way it's set up could reward a team like VT more than a non AQ school with a better record.

Considering about 99% of playoff proposals involves taking the conference champions and plopping them into a tournament whether they deserve to be there or not I have to lough out loud if that is the best explanation available.

[mightysooner]

Because if two loss V-Tech wins the ACC they get an automatic BCS birth over a potentially undefeated non BCS conference team?

[Collier11]

Yup ^

I prefer a playoff so it can be settled on the field, the idea of the BCS isnt horrible, its just the way it is put together that is idiotic

[Caboose]

Both sides are full of idiots.

Its hard to say there are two sides at all.

[StoopTroup]

As a few Media folks have stated...it might be that a Playoff could be a good way to decide who a champion is...it also may make it to much like the NFL. The loss of seeing so many teams with kids who will never play another snap get a shot at a Bowl Game might be a huge mistake. It also will make it damn near impossible for fans to travel to all the games that would be played at years end. You'll end up with a bunch of really lousy games and watching it on TV. And forget about buying one of the 15,000 tickets to the big game if your team actually makes it to the Championship Game. Corporate will own all of those. Hell they damn near do now.

[2121Sooner]

The Big East and the ACC suck at every sport except hoops, Lacrosse, and raping strippers.

[Caboose]

Yup ^

I prefer a playoff so it can be settled on the field, the idea of the BCS isnt horrible, its just the way it is put together that is idiotic

A playoff doesn't settle "it" on the field. This is another example of a meaningless catch phrase the zombies keep regurgitating and further cements the obvious conclusion that they have never actually thought about what they are talking about.

[silverwheels]

A playoff doesn't settle "it" on the field. This is another example of a meaningless catch phrase the zombies keep regurgitating and further cements the obvious conclusion that they have never actually thought about what they are talking about.

Kinda like anti-playoff people saying that "every game matters"?

[slh1234]

We actually have a playoff. It only has two teams currently. That settles that issue on the field.

[Caboose]

Kinda like anti-playoff people saying that "every game matters"?

Every game does matter when your entire body of work is being judged, does it not?

[silverwheels]

The Big East and the ACC suck at every sport except hoops, Lacrosse, and raping strippers.

Odd choice for a first post, but funny.

[SicEmBaylor]

I'm a fan of the current bowl system, but the BCS could probably use a little tweaking.

[Caboose]

We actually have a playoff. It only has two teams currently. That settles that issue on the field.

Correct. An expanded playoff settles things on the field no better than our current playoff. Some years it could be argued that it settles it on the field LESS than our current playoff system.

[2121Sooner]

When is the last time there was a National Champion crowned in the BCS or even before then when there was a legitimate debate. I am thinking UW and Miami in 1991

When else was there a debate?

USC in the 90's?


Not sure.

[Crucifax Autumn]

I bet if more people really understood the BCS formula in depth their would be less bitching. They just need to adjust some of the AQ/non-AQ shat so people will get their way about that crap but do it in a way that forces them to be good and face good competition.

[silverwheels]

Every game does matter when your entire body of work is being judged, does it not?

The vast majority of mid-majors (if not all) have no shot at the title before the season even starts, regardless what they do. Once a team loses 2 games, in most years, the rest of their games won't matter as far as their chances to make the national title game goes.

I guess you could say that every game matters because every game is calculated into the computer formulas, but that's about it.

[Crucifax Autumn]

When is the last time there was a National Champion crowned in the BCS or even before then when there was a legitimate debate. I am thinking UW and Miami in 1991

When else was there a debate?

USC in the 90's?


Not sure.

Auburn 04?

[2121Sooner]

Odd choice for a first post, but funny.

Silverwheels, you have described me better than you can even know in one post. Odd......but funny.


Well done

[Caboose]

The vast majority of mid-majors (if not all) have no shot at the title before the season even starts, regardless what they do.

All teams play be the same rules currently. Be ranked #1 or #2 at the end of the season and you will play for the NC. (Whether you deserve to or not).


Once a team loses 2 games, in most years, the rest of their games won't matter as far as their chances to make the national title game goes.

Thats not the same as saying every game doesnt matters now is it? In fact it is saying precisely that every game does matter. The fact that the team lost 2 games while someone else went undefeated MATTERS.

[Collier11]

A playoff doesn't settle "it" on the field. This is another example of a meaningless catch phrase the zombies keep regurgitating and further cements the obvious conclusion that they have never actually thought about what they are talking about.

please explain, you put the top teams in a playoff and let them see who is the best, settled on the field

[silverwheels]

All teams play be the same rules currently. Be ranked #1 or #2 at the end of the season and you will play for the NC. (Whether you deserve to or not).



Thats not the same as saying every game doesnt matters now is it? In fact it is saying precisely that every game does matter. The fact that the team lost 2 games while someone else went undefeated MATTERS.

That statement is my main problem with the system in place. It relies on subjectivity. I realize a purely objective system cannot work with the current alignment and size of Division 1-A, but I can still dislike the poll system.

[Caboose]

Auburn 04?

Sounds like the BCS has a pretty good record then. Whats that, like 14 - 1?

[2121Sooner]

Auburn 04?

Fair point. So one time since the BCS started. And dont give me crap abut Boise St being out cause their schedule sucks.

I think the only other times was UW and Miami debate in 91 and UW BYU in 84when they beat the Sooners in the Orange Bowl.

I still hate the Huskies for that game.

[Collier11]

When is the last time there was a National Champion crowned in the BCS or even before then when there was a legitimate debate. I am thinking UW and Miami in 1991

When else was there a debate?

USC in the 90's?


Not sure.

Um, 2000, 2003, 2004, 2007, 2008

[Caboose]

That statement is my main problem with the system in place. It relies on subjectivity. I realize a purely objective system cannot work with the current alignment and size of Division 1-A, but I can still dislike the poll system.


ANY system is going to rely on subjectivity. Stop acting like subjectivity is a bad thing. Red herring in the debate.

[silverwheels]

ANY system is going to rely on subjectivity. Stop acting like subjectivity is a bad thing. Red herring in the debate.

Not true. It can be done, just not with a league 120 teams large.

[StoopTroup]

You'll never see OU play for all the marbles in a playoff system as much as you have with this BSC system.

Limits on spending will have to be made equal for every Div. IA School and College Football will be ruined forever.

[Collier11]

Obama is a socialist :D

[Leroy Lizard]

The vast majority of mid-majors (if not all) have no shot at the title before the season even starts, regardless what they do.

That would probably be true of a playoff as well.

[silverwheels]

That would probably be true of a playoff as well.

If the playoff determines its berths based on votes or outside human input, then yes. If it's an objective system, then no. Every team would start off the season with a shot at the title as long as they won. Can't say that with the current system. Five teams finished last season undefeated. Obviously only 2 got to play for the title.

[Leroy Lizard]

Fair point. So one time since the BCS started. And dont give me crap abut Boise St being out cause their schedule sucks.

I think the only other times was UW and Miami debate in 91 and UW BYU in 84when they beat the Sooners in the Orange Bowl.

I still hate the Huskies for that game.

There wasn't much of a debate about UW and BYU. If OU had won there would have been a debate.

In hindsight, BYU was a terrible choice for the MNC.

[slh1234]

There are subjective calls by refs in every game. Sometimes they make a difference.

So here is the balance in the BCS:

Pollsters get to put their input in on things I think are stupid and subjective like the "eye test" that ESPN wrote about this last week. They get to evaluate style points the way they want to and decide who they think is better. One voter's odd ideas can't skew the whole thing, but contributes to the whole thing.

The computer rankings are designed to be a scoring system to evaluate what teams have accomplished. You can argue with how they score things, but it is the scoring system we've decided we will accept, so it can't be changed in the middle of the game. You can argue the same thing about the football game itself (Who says that a field goal should be worth 1/2 as much as a touchdown, or that a touchdown merits you the chance for an extra point? It's irrlelevant because it is the rules agreed to to decide winers. Same thing with the BCS scoring - create your schedule to give you a chance to score high enough to win it).

The arguments I hear from ESPN types against computers (They weren't watching ... they must have been asleep) are asenine, and not really even funny or cute. I think it would be embarassing for someone with a college education to have to resort to an argument like "The computers must have been asleep" to support their point.

And, of course, humans can take into account a maximum of 7 factors when making a decision. Most of us take 3 or fewer factors for most of our decisions. That means a lot is forgotten that computer algorithms will continue to evaluate, and they have no feelings so cognitive bias or cognitive dissonance plays no part in the evaluation (Although it plays some part in the design of the scoring algorithms themselves.)

It is part human, and part mathematical. I think it is a huge improvement over what was in place before. The fact that some voters complain when the computers put teams in a different order than they chose is possibly good evidence that it is better now than when it was just human polls. The fact that they find comfort in arguments about computers being asleep shows their own ignorance IMO.

Having 2 teams chosen when more than 2 teams have identical records is not BCS chaos. That is exactly what the BCS system was supposed to do - find a way of scoring and evauating which 2 teams were to play for the championship when more than 2 teams had identical records and similar accomplishment. Those two teams being chosen from a larger body is the BCS functioning as designed. The comments about something causing BCS "Chaos" is ignorance IMO.

It isn't perfect, but I'll take it over it's predecessor.

I'm sure it'll change in the future. I'm not a great fan of the college football playoff for many reasons, but I wouldn't cry about it when it happens - I know there will be some change at some point.

[Leroy Lizard]

If the playoff determines its berths based on votes or outside human input, then yes. If it's an objective system, then no.

What objective system would give mid-majors a spitting chance of gaining a playoff berth without rewarding them for playing in a weak conference?

[Caboose]

Not true. It can be done, just not with a league 120 teams large.

We are dealing with a team that is 120 teams large. ANY system you devise for it will rely on subjectivity. What are you talking about, "Not true"?

If your argument is that "I dont like the BCS in college football because it is subjective, so I want a playoff because it wouldn't be subjective in some other league that we aren't talking about".... well, I have to question your mental capacity.

We are talking about a league that has 120 a teams in it. A league that has a 120 teams in it is not going to have a playoff system that doesn't rely on subjectivity. So drop the objectivity/subjectivity argument. It is bizarre, nonsensical, and AGAIN, indicative that you have never actually thought about what you are trying debate.

[Collier11]

The BCS does not consistently allow the two best teams to play for a natl title, the whole reason the season is played is to decide a national title. Now if they wanted to go to a plus 1 I could live with that but the current system only works half the time, if that

[tommieharris91]

I bet if more people really understood the BCS formula in depth their would be less bitching. They just need to adjust some of the AQ/non-AQ shat so people will get their way about that crap but do it in a way that forces them to be good and face good competition.

I understand it pretty well, and I have problems with the current system.

[silverwheels]

We are dealing with a team that is 120 teams large. ANY system you devise for it will rely on subjectivity. What are you talking about, "Not true"?

If your argument is that "I dont like the BCS in college football because it is subjective, so I want a playoff because it wouldn't be subjective in some other league that we aren't talking about".... well, I have to question your mental capacity.

We are talking about a league that has 120 a teams in it. A league that has a 120 teams in it is not going to have a playoff system that doesn't rely on subjectivity. So drop the objectivity/subjectivity argument. It is bizarre, nonsensical, and AGAIN, indicative that you have never actually thought about what you are trying debate.

Interesting. You can't grasp the concept that Division 1-A can be contracted, or some of the teams can leave and form their own division and have whatever system they want. The mid-majors might as well split off and form their own division, since they have no shot at the title with the BCS, anyway. Have I said that is likely? No, but it is a possibility.

Before you start questioning my mental capacity, you might want to worry about your own.

[Leroy Lizard]

Here is my idea for ranking teams.

ONE computer, with a publicly-accessible algorithm.

That way, everyone knows what they have to do before the season begins. The computer cannot be swayed by airplane banners or halftime appeals.

[slh1234]

The BCS does not consistently allow the two best teams to play for a natl title, the whole reason the season is played is to decide a national title. Now if they wanted to go to a plus 1 I could live with that but the current system only works half the time, if that

What constitutes the "Best" teams? If you think of it, the wildcard teams often play for championships in the NFL or MLB. If they were the "best" teams, why are they wildcard teams? Maybe it is that they just were better at one particular point, possibly because of an injury to another team.

[silverwheels]

Here is my idea for ranking teams.

ONE computer, with a publicly-accessible algorithm.

That way, everyone knows what they have to do before the season begins. The computer cannot be swayed by airplane banners or halftime appeals.

SkyNet? No thanks.

[tommieharris91]

Obama is a socialist :D

You win the thread.

[Leroy Lizard]

The BCS does not consistently allow the two best teams to play for a natl title, the whole reason the season is played is to decide a national title.

If that were true, Akron wouldn't play at all.

There is more to college football than crowing a national champion. And this is the core of my problem with the pro-playoff crowd: They simply do not understand that.

[Collier11]

What constitutes the "Best" teams? If you think of it, the wildcard teams often play for championships in the NFL or MLB. If they were the "best" teams, why are they wildcard teams? Maybe it is that they just were better at one particular point, possibly because of an injury to another team.

Thats my point, they are automatically saying that Team A and B are the 2 best teams and completely discounting every other team and in alot of years, that is up to debate

[Leroy Lizard]

SkyNet? No thanks.

:confused:

[slh1234]

Interesting. You can't grasp the concept that Division 1-A can be contracted, or some of the teams can leave and form their own division and have whatever system they want. The mid-majors might as well split off and form their own division, since they have no shot at the title with the BCS, anyway. Have I said that is likely? No, but it is a possibility.

Before you start questioning my mental capacity, you might want to worry about your own.

Nothing stops teams from splitting off and forming their own leagues now. I thought the same thing when Tulane was leading the charge to force the BCS to include them - they did nothing to earn a spot, but wanted to use legal processes to force the issue. Why can't they just form their own league.

I have a similar thought in wanting super conferences, though. I thought it would be interesting to see possibly a PAC16 where there are 4 divisions with the 4 division champs playing down for the conference championship. Probably not likely, but I thought it would be an interesting scenario.

[Collier11]

If that were true, Akron wouldn't play at all.

There is more to college football than crowing a national champion. And this is the core of my problem with the pro-playoff crowd: They simply do not understand that.

True, for some teams simply making a bowl game is good but alot of teams only get to play for a bowl when they should have a shot at a title.

[slh1234]

Thats my point, they are automatically saying that Team A and B are the 2 best teams and completely discounting every other team and in alot of years, that is up to debate

Incorrect. See my previous post. They are using a scoring system to pick 2 teams with the best season score to play for a championship.

[silverwheels]

If that were true, Akron wouldn't play at all.

There is more to college football than crowing a national champion. And this is the core of my problem with the pro-playoff crowd: They simply do not understand that.

I understand it, which is why I'd rather not have a "national champion" at all than have one by BCS or voting. I'd still enjoy college football just as much.

[Caboose]

The BCS does not consistently allow the two best teams to play for a natl title,

How can you possibly tell?
Whatever your answer, I will counter with the fact that a playoff doesn't either. Just watch the NFL or NCAA basketball for proof of this every year.


the whole reason the season is played is to decide a national title.

Debatable. Many would argue that college football IS the regular season. Bowl games didnt even factor into NC discussions until like the 60's.
The regular season in college football has always been its appeal.



Now if they wanted to go to a plus 1 I could live with that but the current system only works half the time, if that

Again, debatable. Outside of 2004 I cant find any real compelling failure of the BCS, and 2004 is debatable itself.
Regardless, any other system would fail just as much if not more.

[Crucifax Autumn]

I understand it pretty well, and I have problems with the current system.

Fair enough. I just find that in general most of the bitching is based on misconception. You are smart enough to have an informed opinion and that I can handle. There's a vast majority out there that just spout off "BCS sucks" becuase people like to complain and in any year there will be 118 fan bases that DON'T get their way.

[silverwheels]

Nothing stops teams from splitting off and forming their own leagues now. I thought the same thing when Tulane was leading the charge to force the BCS to include them - they did nothing to earn a spot, but wanted to use legal processes to force the issue. Why can't they just form their own league.

I have a similar thought in wanting super conferences, though. I thought it would be interesting to see possibly a PAC16 where there are 4 divisions with the 4 division champs playing down for the conference championship. Probably not likely, but I thought it would be an interesting scenario.

It would be interesting to play around with alignment like that. If EA Sports would make a playable and enjoyable game that also gives you free reign over college football alignment, I'd be all over it.

[StoopTroup]

One of the biggest problems right now isn't the BCS.

It's that some Conferences play a Championship game and others don't.

It's quite possibly a mistake to have 120 Div IA Teams and maybe the NCAA ought to make the Conferences be run the same way with the same amount of teams in each. If you're ever going to have a fair Playoff system...something like this will need to take place anyway.

[Leroy Lizard]

True, for some teams simply making a bowl game is good but alot of teams only get to play for a bowl when they should have a shot at a title.

If a playoff (especially a 16-team playoff) appears, then those teams that dream of playing in a bowl may not even have that option.

Any college president of a mid-major that is pro-playoff is nuts.

[Collier11]

Again, debatable. Outside of 2004 I cant find any real compelling failure of the BCS, and 2004 is debatable itself.
Regardless, any other system would fail just as much if not more.

2000- Miami gets left out after beating FSU

2001- Neb gets blown out by CU, doesnt even win the conf and gets in over Oregon

2003- LSU gets left out after we lose our conf title game

2004- Auburn gets left out after going undefeated in the SEC

2006- two 2 loss teams make the title game

2008- tex gets left out after beating ou head to head


Go do some more research, the bcs doesnt work. Now, im not saying it cant work better but it needs to be fixed, otherwise it just throws sh*t against the wall and hopes it sticks

[silverwheels]

Don't forget Washington in 2000. They beat Miami and also only had 1 loss.

[Caboose]

Interesting. You can't grasp the concept that Division 1-A can be contracted, or some of the teams can leave and form their own division and have whatever system they want. The mid-majors might as well split off and form their own division, since they have no shot at the title with the BCS, anyway. Have I said that is likely? No, but it is a possibility.

Before you start questioning my mental capacity, you might want to worry about your own.

After talking about these concepts for exactly ZERO percent of this thread then admitting they arent going to happen so they are irrelevant to the debate leads you to think that I can't grasp them? Really?
So I should just assume that you can't grasp that 2+2=4 because we havent talked about it in this thread even though it is irrelevant to the topic? Is that your logic? And you are one of the people spearheading the debate on the side of the playoff people?

Do you have any more irrelevant talking points you want to regurgitate?
Why have you not taken the time to actually think about the topic before you talk about it. It isnt hard.

Why dont the playoff people just admit the only reasons they want a playoff are that it would be fun and exciting and neat? Why do they continue to pretend it is because of all these nonsense reasons that dont stand to reason?

[Collier11]

Because in a playoff, even if the 4 seed out of 4 teams wins it or the 8 seed out of 8 teams wins it, it is played out on the field

[slh1234]

2000- Miami gets left out after beating FSU

2001- Neb gets blown out by CU, doesnt even win the conf and gets in over Oregon

2003- LSU gets left out after we lose our conf title game

2004- Auburn gets left out after going undefeated in the SEC

2006- two 2 loss teams make the title game

2008- tex gets left out after beating ou head to head


Go do some more research, the bcs doesnt work. Now, im not saying it cant work better but it needs to be fixed, otherwise it just throws sh*t against the wall and hopes it sticks

All of those are examples of the BCS doing exactly what it supposed to do. A scoring system chose which two teams when there were more than 2 teams with similar claims. There were differentiators and tiebreakers, and it was all agreed upon before the season began. The teams who were left out didn't score as well as the teams that got there.

[silverwheels]

After talking about these concepts for exactly ZERO percent of this thread then admitting they arent going to happen so they are irrelevant to the debate leads you to think that I can't grasp them? Really?
So I should just assume that you can't grasp that 2+2=4 because we havent talked about it in this thread even though it is irrelevant to the topic? Is that your logic? And you are one of the people spearheading the debate on the side of the playoff people?

Do you have any more irrelevant talking points you want to regurgitate?
Why have you not taken the time to actually think about the topic before you talk about it. It isnt hard.

Why dont the playoff people just admit the only reasons they want a playoff are that it would be fun and exciting and neat? Why do they continue to pretend it is because of all these nonsense reasons that dont stand to reason?

Try reading one of the other million threads we have on this topic before you get all snarky, smart guy, and you might figure out that what I have said isn't irrelevant. And I'm not in favor of a playoff as long as college football is in its current alignment. I'm not in favor of the BCS or poll system, either.

Take your attitude somewhere else. It's amazing how cranky anti-playoff people can get over this discussion.

[Collier11]

All of those are examples of the BCS doing exactly what it supposed to do. A scoring system chose which two teams when there were more than 2 teams with similar claims. There were differentiators and tiebreakers, and it was all agreed upon before the season began. The teams who were left out didn't score as well as the teams that got there.

are you frickin kidding me? LOL So now its a beauty pageant instead of football?

[StoopTroup]

Way to much money and power will need to change hands for any real attempt to have a fair system in effect. Getting rid of all these Polls would be the first thing to go and the NCAA will be the deciding factor in finding the best Teams to play each other. I just don't see it happening without some sort of intervention like Obama mentioned. Hell right now you have already got State Senators/Governors and Reps getting involved in taking it all apart.

Any major changes will end up ruining how we currently enjoy in watching our Teams play.

[Caboose]

2000- Miami gets left out after beating FSU

2001- Neb gets blown out by CU, doesnt even win the conf and gets in over Oregon

2003- LSU gets left out after we lose our conf title game

2004- Auburn gets left out after going undefeated in the SEC

2006- two 2 loss teams make the title game

2008- tex gets left out after beating ou head to head


Go do some more research, the bcs doesnt work. Now, im not saying it cant work better but it needs to be fixed, otherwise it just throws sh*t against the wall and hopes it sticks

All of those are debatable, and regardless, you are wanting to *fix* what you perceive to be broken with something that is even more broken. Every playoff proposal I have seen is the equivalent of throwing sh*t against a wall and hoping it sticks. What are you going to do? Change formats every year?

[slh1234]

Because in a playoff, even if the 4 seed out of 4 teams wins it or the 8 seed out of 8 teams wins it, it is played out on the field

Only among those 4 teams or 8 teams. We stil have to have a way to choose those 4 or 8 teams, and then we go back to the wildcard argument made earlier.

The only way for it to be played out on the field as you assert is if all D1 teams play in a playoff. That is obviously not going to be feasible. But all the teams have same chance to schedule to get into the BCS game. If their athletic department doesn't get it, then let them consult with the math department when negotiating schedules.

[Collier11]

Like I said, im not 100% against the BCS but they need a plus 1 or some kind of changes. SOS needs to be added back in for 1

[silverwheels]

Hasn't the BCS changed its format several times? Interesting.

[Caboose]

are you frickin kidding me? LOL So now its a beauty pageant instead of football?

do you have a rational rebuttal that you have thought about, or are you going for yet ANOTHER mindless meaningless catch phrase?

What year has the BCS failed to match up the BCS #1 and the BCS #2 team in the NC game?

[Collier11]

All of those are debatable, and regardless, you are wanting to *fix* what you perceive to be broken with something that is even more broken. Every playoff proposal I have seen is the equivalent of throwing sh*t against a wall and hoping it sticks. What are you going to do? Change formats every year?

exactly, thank you for making my point. Those results were debatable

[slh1234]

are you frickin kidding me? LOL So now its a beauty pageant instead of football?

It is a scoring system designed specifically to MINIMIZE the beauty pageant.

Are you able to keep it on point, or do you really need the "Are you fricking kidding me" type of comments to make yourself feel better about your position?

[Collier11]

do you have a rational rebuttal that you have thought about, or are you going for yet ANOTHER mindless meaningless catch phrase?

What year has the BCS failed to match up the BCS #1 and the BCS #2 team in the NC game?

it matched up the #1 and #2 team by the bcs rankings ever year, that is a dumb statement. It doesnt necessarily get the most deserving team though, I just listed several episodes when this happened

[Leroy Lizard]

Why dont the playoff people just admit the only reasons they want a playoff are that it would be fun and exciting and neat? Why do they continue to pretend it is because of all these nonsense reasons that dont stand to reason?

This.

All this anguish about the mid-majors getting a fair shot is just smoke-and-mirrors. As if OU Sooner fans really are interested in Akron getting a chance to win the national title.

[Collier11]

Hasn't the BCS changed its format several times? Interesting.

LOL

[Caboose]

Hasn't the BCS changed its format several times? Interesting.

The BCS has made 1 somewhat major change (the addition of another game) and tweaked its formulas and weights a few times... so no.

Sounds like you are missing the point though, arent you?

[slh1234]

it matched up the #1 and #2 team by the bcs rankings ever year, that is a dumb statement. It doesnt necessarily get the most deserving team though, I just listed several episodes when this happened

Neither does a playoff system by many arguments that can be put forward. At the end of the day, each person takes a position and believes the points, and puts forth the arguments that help support what they want. They then use things like "Are you fricking kidding me? LOL" to deal with the points they don't want to acknowledge because it isn't helpful to proving the point they want to be proven.

[Collier11]

Wrong, you really need to do some research before you go on. You were wrong about there only being controversy one time in 04 and you are wrong about this. They have "tweaked" the formula several times

[silverwheels]

The BCS has made 1 somewhat major change (the addition of another game) and tweaked its formulas and weights a few times... so no.

Sounds like you are missing the point though, arent you?

Not really. Every time there's a controversy and public uproar, the BCS changes something (a "tweak" is still a change, BTW) to appease the public and/or coaches/administrators.

[Collier11]

Neither does a playoff system by many arguments that can be put forward. At the end of the day, each person takes a position and believes the points, and puts forth the arguments that help support what they want. They then use things like "Are you fricking kidding me? LOL" to deal with the points they don't want to acknowledge because it isn't helpful to proving the point they want to be proven.

I said that cus your statement was so laughable, not to prove a point. Like I said, im not 100% against the Bcs but those of you who say it does its job are wrong, it hasnt done its job almost half the time

[Leroy Lizard]

it matched up the #1 and #2 team by the bcs rankings ever year, that is a dumb statement. It doesnt necessarily get the most deserving team though, I just listed several episodes when this happened

Collier, the BCS was created with the express purpose of matching a #1 vs #2 in a final bowl game. Fans got tired of watching #1 play against #8 (or even worse) in a bowl game.

The BCS has done its job. But fans are still not satisfied, and never will be.

[slh1234]

Wrong, you really need to do some research before you go on. You were wrong about there only being controversy one time in 04 and you are wrong about this. They have "tweaked" the formula several times

Of course they have. They have also tweaked the rules in college football several times. There is no point to be proved with the "Tweaked" argument.

[Collier11]

Well when the other guy says they havent, then there is a point to be proved. He has no clue what he is talking about it would appear

[slh1234]

Hasn't the BCS changed its format several times? Interesting.

Similar to the way that college football has changed rules from time to time.

[Caboose]

Try reading one of the other million threads we have on this topic before you get all snarky, smart guy, and you might figure out that what I have said isn't irrelevant. And I'm not in favor of a playoff as long as college football is in its current alignment. I'm not in favor of the BCS or poll system, either.

Take your attitude somewhere else. It's amazing how cranky anti-playoff people can get over this discussion.

If you want me to reference something you have said then say it in the thread. Its not my responsibility to trog through months of messageboard material looking for some obscure statement you might or might not have made. Not to mention that it doesnt matter in WHAT thread you talked about it before because it is NOT going to happen so it is irrelevant to the current conversation.

I think you are confusing my attitude with the unfavorable circumstances of you bringing a dull knife to a gun fight.

I am not cranky, nor am I anti-playoff.

[Crucifax Autumn]

You guys are turning me on.

[Collier11]

Collier, the BCS was created with the express purpose of matching a #1 vs #2 in a final bowl game. Fans got tired of watching #1 play against #8 (or even worse) in a bowl game.

The BCS has done its job. But fans are still not satisfied, and never will be.

Agreed and in that matter it IS better, the problem I have is in almost half the seasons there have been several teams with LEGITIMATE arguments for not getting left out

[Collier11]

Similar to the way that college football has changed rules from time to time.

The rules dont determine who play for the national title, your arguments are getting worse and worse

[StoopTroup]

I said that cus your statement was so laughable, not to prove a point. Like I said, im not 100% against the Bcs but those of you who say it does its job are wrong, it hasnt done its job almost half the time

What most folks continue to talk about to get rid of the BCS is laughable.

It's what we have and I think it's increased OU's chances in playing in the big one.

Any major change towards a playoff system will cause so many problems it will make your head spin worse than reading this thread does IMO.

[slh1234]

I said that cus your statement was so laughable, not to prove a point. Like I said, im not 100% against the Bcs but those of you who say it does its job are wrong, it hasnt done its job almost half the time

If the statement was so laughable, you would have no problem taking it apart. So do it. Your post was an attempt to avoid dealing with the substance of the post.

[silverwheels]

I think you are confusing my attitude with the unfavorable circumstances of you bringing a dull knife to a gun fight.

Keep being a jerkoff for no reason.

[Collier11]

If you want me to reference something you have said then say it in the thread. Its not my responsibility to trog through months of messageboard material looking for some obscure statement you might or might not have made. Not to mention that it doesnt matter in WHAT thread you talked about it before because it is NOT going to happen so it is irrelevant to the current conversation.

I think you are confusing my attitude with the unfavorable circumstances of you bringing a dull knife to a gun fight.

I am not cranky, nor am I anti-playoff.

the problem is that you are stating stuff as fact that is not even close to fact, therefore your argument is void

[StoopTroup]

the problem is that you are stating stuff as fact that is not even close to fact, therefore your argument is void

Agreed.

[Collier11]

What most folks continue to talk about to get rid of the BCS is laughable.

It's what we have and I think it's increased OU's chances in playing in the big one.

Any major change towards a playoff system will cause so many problems it will make your head spin worse than reading this thread does IMO.

so in an OU fans world it works great, doesnt mean it always works correctly

[slh1234]

The rules dont determine who play for the national title, your arguments are getting worse and worse

Of course they do. The rules begin with what is scored in what way, and continue to things like what players can move when, what hits are considered legal and what ones are not, what fumbles can be advanced and which ones don't, etc. etc. etc. Are you saying none of these things affect who wins a game?

[Collier11]

now you are just being ridiculous, enjoy the game though fellas... Boomer Sooner

[Caboose]

Wrong, you really need to do some research before you go on. You were wrong about there only being controversy one time in 04 and you are wrong about this. They have "tweaked" the formula several times

LOL so the fact that it has been tweaked means it was wrong? So every year before 2010 college football itself has been wrong because they tweak in game rules? There is a big difference between tweaking some details and making wholesale format changes.

[Collier11]

If the statement was so laughable, you would have no problem taking it apart. So do it. Your post was an attempt to avoid dealing with the substance of the post.

Ive already answered it several times in this thread, not gonna post it again

[StoopTroup]

so in an OU fans world it works great, doesnt mean it always works correctly

I never said it worked correctly.

I'll never believe a playoff will either.

I just think changing to a playoff will look like what legalizing marijuana will look like. I ****ing mess. lol

Just like this thread to BTW....

[Caboose]

the problem is that you are stating stuff as fact that is not even close to fact, therefore your argument is void

Do you know the difference between a fact and an opinion? It is interesting that you guys want to make the objectivity/subjectivity angle part of your argument when you dont seem to know the difference.

[Collier11]

LOL so the fact that it has been tweaked means it was wrong? So every year before 2010 college football itself has been wrong because they tweak in game rules? There is a big difference between tweaking some details and making wholesale format changes.

everytime there is a big debate the formula is changed, that shows that it doesnt work correctly, simple concept

[slh1234]

Ive already answered it several times in this thread, not gonna post it again

Really? You I don't see it. Spell it out again if you can becasue what I see you doing several times is trying to laugh off things you can't address logically.

[Collier11]

Do you know the difference between a fact and an opinion? It is interesting that you guys want to make the objectivity/subjectivity angle part of your argument when you dont seem to know the difference.

Of course I do, you STATED that it has worked without debate in all years but 1, I easily proved you wrong in that it hasnt worked without debate 6 times, just stop

[StoopTroup]

Do you know the difference between a fact and an opinion? It is interesting that you guys want to make the objectivity/subjectivity angle part of your argument when you dont seem to know the difference.

The idea that this is an argument is where you're going out of control.

None of us have any control over it. Many of us don't like the idea of either system.

A playoff will be tweaked for years just the same as the BCS has had to make changes.

Making every team and conference tow the line by the same set of rules under either system would be where major changes would need to take place first anyway.

[StoopTroup]

just stop

Agreed.

[Collier11]

Gonna go watch some football and drink some beer, who is with me?

[Caboose]

Of course I do, you STATED that it has worked without debate in all years but 1, I easily proved you wrong in that it hasnt worked without debate 6 times, just stop

The problem with that response is that I didnt say that AT ALL.

Go back through the thread and show me where I said the BCS has worked without debate in all years but 1. I will wait patiently for you to come back and apologize for your mistake or for lying about it, whichever it was. But take too long, I am going to leave to watch the game soon.

So no, you didint prove anything except that you dont know the difference between a fact and an opinion.

[StoopTroup]

Gonna go watch some football and drink some beer, who is with me?

In. Iowa just lost.

[Crucifax Autumn]

I don't start until Kickoff, but I'm gonna do more than my share in a short time frame.

as for the BCS is was better back when there was real SOS and quality wins involved.

[Collier11]

Again, debatable. Outside of 2004 I cant find any real compelling failure of the BCS, and 2004 is debatable itself.
.

That was easy

[Collier11]

Sounds like the BCS has a pretty good record then. Whats that, like 14 - 1?

again, too easy

[StoopTroup]

I don't start until Kickoff, but I'm gonna do more than my share in a short time frame.

as for the BCS is was better back when there was real SOS and quality wins involved.

Agreed. This years formula has had me shaking my head quite a few times already.

[Dwight]

BCS FTW!!!

[Collier11]

dwight Fn Schrute!!

[Leroy Lizard]

Agreed and in that matter it IS better, the problem I have is in almost half the seasons there have been several teams with LEGITIMATE arguments for not getting left out

And there always will be.

[silverwheels]

BCS FTW!!!

Question: what kind of bear is best?

[StoopTroup]

Somebody get me some coffee!

[Collier11]

I prefer beer

[StoopTroup]

I prefer beer

There's way to many beers out there to choose from compared to coffee.

[Collier11]

If there were starbucks for beer, itd be awesome :D

[Dwight]

Question: what kind of bear is best?

That question is impossible

[StoopTroup]

If there were starbucks for beer, itd be awesome :D

I bet you'd order the Venti with a head on it.

[Collier11]

you said Head

[Caboose]

That was easy


So let me get this straight, you think that this:

"it has worked without debate in all years but 1"

is the same as this:

"Again, debatable. Outside of 2004 I cant find any real compelling failure of the BCS, and 2004 is debatable itself."


And you think that this:

"it has worked without debate in all years but 1"

Is the same as this:

"Sounds like the BCS has a pretty good record then. Whats that, like 14 - 1?"

Please explain how in either of the two bottom quotes I said there was no debate in all years but 1?

Again, you dont know the difference between a fact and an opinion.

[Collier11]

I showed you how your opinion was ridiculous, I can use facts to back it up quite easily as well...I also showed you how you contradicted your own opinion, just give it up

[StoopTroup]

I'm LMAO.

I love a good book every now and then.

http://www.maydavenportpublishers.com/MayDavenportImages/mdBooksscans/Children/Leroy-lizard.jpg

[Caboose]

I showed you how your opinion was ridiculous, I can use facts to back it up quite easily as well...I also showed you how you contradicted your own opinion, just give it up

So lets get this straight,the highlight of your time here was the time you spent arguing against a statement that I never even made? And showing us that you dont know the difference between a fact and an opinion? And these are minds that think they can *fix* college football?

[Crucifax Autumn]

Tastes great!

[Collier11]

So lets get this straight,the highlight of your time here was the time you spent arguing against a statement that I never even made? And showing us that you dont know the difference between a fact and an opinion? And these are minds that think they can *fix* college football?

Do you even know what you are talking about cus no one else does, lol

[Caboose]

Do you even know what you are talking about cus no one else does, lol

Well, I guess I won this thread. next time bring your A game. I like this topic. Tell ya what, I'll take the playoff side next time.

[StoopTroup]

So lets get this straight,the highlight of your time here was the time you spent arguing against a statement that I never even made? And showing us that you dont know the difference between a fact and an opinion? And these are minds that think they can *fix* college football?

No....but I think we couldn't **** it up any worse then anyone else has.

[StoopTroup]

Well, I guess I won this thread. next time bring your A game. I like this topic. Tell ya what, I'll take the playoff side next time.

We're not done with your caboose. Do you like penguin?

[silverwheels]

That question is impossible

False. Black bear.

[Collier11]

Well, I guess I won this thread. next time bring your A game. I like this topic. Tell ya what, I'll take the playoff side next time.

Oh snaps STOOP, he declared victory...we all know what that means

[Caboose]

Oh snaps STOOP, he declared victory...we all know what that means

I think anyone reading this thread knows what it means. Next time I will debate your side for you. It is the easier side anyway.

[StoopTroup]

Oh snaps STOOP, he declared victory...we all know what that means

He's bent over now...might as well drive it Home.

ALL ABOARD!

http://ih3.redbubble.net/work.2655158.2.flat,550x550,075,f.the-little-red-caboose.jpg

[Collier11]

You should just give it up and go enjoy the OU game, You cant even keep track of your own arguments, lol.

Have fun playing with yourself, im out

[Collier11]

He's bent over now...might as well drive it Home.

Squeal like a pig boy

[Statalyzer]

There never has been, nor will there ever be, a good argment for the side that thinks we should have mythical, split, or contestable national championships.

[StoopTroup]

There never has been, nor will there ever be, a good argment for the side that thinks we should have mythical, split, or contestable national championships.

What should be done then. :D