+1 = PAC-10 leaving the BCS?

[boomersooner24]

I havent seen this posted on here

http://www.sportingnews.com/yourturn/viewtopic.php?t=245876

Pac-10 says they will leave BCS if plus-1 system is adopted

[goingoneight]

Watch them be the only conference in the nation left bitching about a playoff system being "wrong." Sad thing is, without the SUC 10 and the Big 11 agreement, the plus-one goes nowhere, and we have another decade of split National Champions and title game blowouts.

My $.02, tell 'em "this is how it is, this is how it's going to be... don't like it? Go steal more MNCs from 1912, that's the only way you'll ever get another if you choose to "leave" the official championship determination system.

[Sooner24]

Easy way to fix that is for no other BCS conference team play them. Don't play them in the regular season, don't play them in bowls, just don't play them.

[BASSooner]

haha well the pac 10 can just throw temper tantrums. They need to develop their teams to be EVEN better than they are now(excluding USC that is)

[IronSooner]

Fine. The Pac10 and Big10 can have their ghey rose bowl and the rest of us can play for a real title. I have no problem with that.

[StuIsTheMan]

Pac-10 says they will leave BCS if plus-1 system is adopted

Can someone tell me why this is a problem:confused:

And do you think Carol...oops I mean the Pac-10 would go with out a shot at the NC?

No chance...CALL THEIR BLUFF...and if they aint bluff'n...then see ya...it's a win/win.

one hand they are bluff'n and are made to look like a fool

and on the other they leave...and that's good right?:pop:

[colleyvillesooner]

Well...see ya ****ers!

[Harry Beanbag]

:les: The Rose Bowl tradition is more important than all of college football. Go PAC-10 and Big-10...err..11

[emoinwinter]

Can someone please explain to me again why we need a +1 system. If there are only 2 no loss teams left, how would that benefit anyone? If anybody thinks that a +1 system would help out, do you not think that there would still be controversy picking out the top 4? At that point you even have more gray area on who belongs.

[Jimminy Crimson]

Can someone please explain to me again why we need a +1 system. If there are only 2 no loss teams left, how would that benefit anyone?

Easy answer: more football! :texan:

[goingoneight]

Can someone please explain to me again why we need a +1 system. If there are only 2 no loss teams left, how would that benefit anyone? If anybody thinks that a +1 system would help out, do you not think that there would still be controversy picking out the top 4? At that point you even have more gray area on who belongs.

How many times in CFB history has unbeaten meant unbeatable? Does having a 12-0 record going into the BCS mean you're the best? I can think of two within the last four years whose perfect record didn't mean they were anything other than unmarked conference champions. The term 'champion' doesn't mean you're not human. Would you have been happy if we beat Texass and got screwed out of a MNC date with tOSU because of PAC 10 officials? Or would you like to square off with the best of the best and fight your way to the finish the way real champions do?
CFB will never evolve into a ghey tournament like basketball. It would lose a lot of viewers if it did, IMHO. We need a format where every week matters, strength of schedule matters, and conference championships matter.

Every week matters for OU to win the BIG 12 Championship. Strength of schedule matters as far as rank goes when you enter post-season. Only champions allowed to be THE National Champion.

But that ould be the logical thing to do, and we all know logic means nothing in college football. :mad:

[AlbqSooner]

If anybody thinks that a +1 system would help out, do you not think that there would still be controversy picking out the top 4?
*See the 65 teams eligible for a 64 team NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament.

[Straz1999]

I kind of see the commissioner's point. The plus one format is a half-a@$ playoff format. Either have a playoff or don't. This plus one would be stupid.

[TMcGee86]

I was under the impression teh +1 format was a four team tourney, with 1v4 and 2v3 and then the plus 1 game pitting the winners of each.

After reading the article it sounds like they would go back to bowl affiliations and then just pick the best two teams after that.


If that's the case, that is stupid.

It should be a four team playoff. Go back to Jan 1 Bowl games for the first round, and the next weekend have the championship game between the winners.

[swardboy]

Yeah, ok...drop out Pac-10....that'll boost your recruiting.

[Sooner in Tampa]

**** the pac-10 pussies and the horse they ride in on

[Flagstaffsooner]

EDSBS (http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/?p=3662)

Wonder what that 'Oklahoma" drill is?

[insuranceman_22]

This BCS system is pure BS. I know that it was designed (at least publically) to crown a National Champion, but the simply and plain fact is .... it simply ain't workin!

College Football like pretty much everything else in America is about $$$$$$. The bowls, TV, etc..... are locked in for conference (and a few teams) and they are not going to change. Why should they? They are guaranteed big money under the current system. If an 8 team playoff (or whatever) develops, they could be left holding their johnson's if they don't make it. Conference commissioner and university prez. aren't worried about it, they want to insure that the money flows in their direction. The average fan would like to see a playoff, I'd bet that most of the players on elite teams would also, but they (we) are not in charge. It's not about the fans or whose best, it's about MONEY (and personally I kind of think is sux).

[goingoneight]

EDSBS (http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/?p=3662)

Wonder what that 'Oklahoma" drill is?

Lean over and let the NCAA **** you in the ***.

[Flagstaffsooner]

The Oklahoma drill, which pits two players in hand-to-hand combat within a confined space, usually demarcated by blocking bags 3 yards apart as a running back tries to sprint through the open space, is a head-bashing, eye-popping, plastic-breaking contact drill that was used to get an early glimpse of what players were made of.
I always thought is was called the pit. Cant imagine wus-10 schools doing it.:D

[Seamus]

Lean over and let the NCAA **** you in the ***.


Holy shyte -- best post EVAR!!!!11!

http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/images/reputation/reputation_pos.gifhttp://www.soonerfans.com/forums/images/reputation/reputation_pos.gifhttp://www.soonerfans.com/forums/images/reputation/reputation_pos.gifhttp://www.soonerfans.com/forums/images/reputation/reputation_pos.gifhttp://www.soonerfans.com/forums/images/reputation/reputation_pos.gifhttp://www.soonerfans.com/forums/images/reputation/reputation_highpos.gifhttp://www.soonerfans.com/forums/images/reputation/reputation_highpos.gifhttp://www.soonerfans.com/forums/images/reputation/reputation_highpos.gifhttp://www.soonerfans.com/forums/images/reputation/reputation_highpos.gifhttp://www.soonerfans.com/forums/images/reputation/reputation_highpos.gif

[FaninAma]

Easy way to fix that is for no other BCS conference team play them. Don't play them in the regular season, don't play them in bowls, just don't play them.

I agree. Let the PAC 10 and the Big 10/11 play what amounts to an intramural league. The independents and the little guys really need to stick with the ACC/the SEC/ the Big 12 and the Big East if they ever want a chance to be in a playoff where they may one day play for the title.

Anytime a bunch of elitists try to dictate to everybody else it ususally ends up blowing up in their faces. I'd laugh my *** off if the PAC 10 and Big 10 turned into another Ivy League. But their fans would revolt and have the scalps of their respective AD's and conference commissioners before this happened.

The rest of the college football world needs to call their bluff.

[hookem31]

If the BCS goes to plus one, they say they will. What a load of crap. The PAC-10 has always had it's collective noses in the air when it comes to their precious Rose Bowl. So nobody but PAC-10 and Big-10 teams are allowed? Guess having a Big XII team come in and beat both conferences ticked 'em off a bit (I know, Vince's knee was down). :D

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19985785/


He says Pac-10 university presidents are more concerned about protecting the sanctity of Rose Bowl than further tweaking the current system, which dilutes the Rose Bowl with a double-hosting model. Hansen says "many" officials within the league and within the powerful Rose Bowl committee want the game once again to pit the Big Ten champions against the Pac-10 champions -- with no BCS strings attached.

[JohnnyMack]

Fox and the BCS have already started replacing the Rose Bowl. Go back and look at the way they marketed the Cotton Bowl this January. I still say the Rose Bowl and BCS will split up and the Cotton Bowl (at JerryWorld) will replace it.

[soonerhubs]

nm

[MiccoMacey]

F'em. F'em in their F'ing F hole.

The Rose Bowl, for all it's pomp and circumsatance, was a relative bust for the past twenty years prior to the BCS.

In the 80's and 90's, how many times was the winner of the Rose Bowl declared as the NC?

During that same time frame, how many times were both the Big Ten and Pac Ten champs ranked in the top five? Top ten?

I remember reading a thread about this and how they relied on "tradition" rather than being an actual worthy non-exclusive bowl.

[oufan1]

http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=96625

[birddog]

some people around here are search virgins.

[hookem31]

Don't know why I missed it.

[MiccoMacey]

some people around here are search virgins.

I've never even been to search first base. ;)

[Snrfn4ever08]

Is the Rose Bowl some sort of Religious Temple that I've not known about or something? How about the Pathetic Ten protect the sanctity of the game of football by holding officials accountable for cheating during their out of conference home games. Is it a sanctifying action to ignore the cheating actions of a player taking money from agents?

**** on the PAC 10 and **** on the Rose Bowl.

Sanctity my ***!
You didn't know the Rose Bowl is the Mecca of college football?

[oumartin]

good riddance!

[StuIsTheMan]

Anybody hear the Colin Cowherd Show this mornin? He had an Interview with the Pac-10 Comish. Can't find a link yet but he basically said that
1. a plus one system would not benefit his "Institutions"
2. There are no "Legitimate" schools in the region that are good enough to join the Pac-10 to expand the Conference, which leads me to...
3. They do not want a Pac-10 title game cause it would lesson their chances of one of their schools (SUC) to reach a BCS NC game.


I'll keep searching for a link...Colin Ripped him good...and the schmoe just kept back track'n and reading from his prepared script.

[CincySooner]

Anybody hear the Colin Cowherd Show this mornin? He had an Interview with the Pac-10 Comish. Can't find a link yet but he basically said that
1. a plus one system would not benefit his "Institutions"
2. There are no "Legitimate" schools in the region that are good enough to join the Pac-10 to expand the Conference, which leads me to...
3. They do not want a Pac-10 title game cause it would lesson their chances of one of their schools (SUC) to reach a BCS NC game.


I'll keep searching for a link...Colin Ripped him good...and the schmoe just kept back track'n and reading from his prepared script.


Yeah I heard that. Cowheard may be a world-class idiot, but he took the Pac-10 commisioner to school in that interview.

[MiccoMacey]

Agreed. Hansen kept sounding foolish and more interested in his league than the betterment of college football in general.

Cowherd also kept screaming that besides USC, and he has always led the charge in giving USC their props, there are no othr top 15 teams in the Pac-10. Hansen listed Cal, Arizona State and UCLA as other great football teams.

Cowherd's head exploded when he mentioned ASU.

Cowherd did him no service. He ripped him over and over again. I loved that interview.

[Statalyzer]

I was under the impression teh +1 format was a four team tourney, with 1v4 and 2v3 and then the plus 1 game pitting the winners of each.

It is not. That would be a Playoff.


After reading the article it sounds like they would go back to bowl affiliations and then just pick the best two teams after that.

That's correct. A +1 is just like what we've been doing, except now they pick the 1v2 matchup after the bowls instead of before it.


Can someone please explain to me again why we need a +1 system. If there are only 2 no loss teams left, how would that benefit anyone?

Exactly. Half the time the +1 will make things worse. If you have two undefeateds, this system might end up knocking them both out and leaving you with four 1-loss teams after it's all said and done, probably resulting in a split title and 2 teams left completely out.

[silverwheels]

If the BCS conferences want a post-season tournament, they should just implement an actual tournament instead of this half-assed "plus one".

[StuIsTheMan]

Exactly. Half the time the +1 will make things worse. If you have two undefeateds, this system might end up knocking them both out and leaving you with four 1-loss teams after it's all said and done, probably resulting in a split title and 2 teams left completely out.

So what you are saying is that a 11-1 OU, Texas or USC type team should not be in the mix with 2 Possible undefeates from schools like...Arkansas or Rutgers...both with easy schedules and COULD go undefeated...so you would put those two in the BCS NC?
Interesting:rolleyes:

[TMcGee86]

It is not. That would be a Playoff.



That's correct. A +1 is just like what we've been doing, except now they pick the 1v2 matchup after the bowls instead of before it.



Exactly. Half the time the +1 will make things worse. If you have two undefeateds, this system might end up knocking them both out and leaving you with four 1-loss teams after it's all said and done, probably resulting in a split title and 2 teams left completely out.


So, the BCS would be completely out? We would go back to bowl alliances?

Because if not, how would they align the BCS games?

Surely the BCS isn't going to allow itself to be phased out completely.


But otherwise you are right, it would make things worse.

However I don't know why the idiot Pac-10 Commish is against it, it would most definitely help his precious Rose bowl because they could go back to Big10 v. Pac10 every year, and it would help USC land a championship spot every year as they would not only not have to play a CCG but then they would get to lay waste to whatever overrated piece of crap the Big10 produced and they would be automatically in the NCG every year.

[TMcGee86]

So what you are saying is that a 11-1 OU, Texas or USC type team should not be in the mix with 2 Possible undefeates from schools like...Arkansas or Rutgers...both with easy schedules and COULD go undefeated...so you would put those two in the BCS NC?
Interesting:rolleyes:

I think what he meant was that if you had two undefeateds playing in different bowls, against say two one-loss teams, and both the one-loss teams win, you then have a split NC between whichever of the now four one-loss teams you think is the best.

[StuIsTheMan]

I think what he meant was that if you had two undefeateds playing in different bowls, against say two one-loss teams, and both the one-loss teams win, you then have a split NC between whichever of the now four one-loss teams you think is the best.

hence the +1...right?

That would take all the pretender undefeats and the legit one lossers and put them all in the mix...makes sence to me but i am from Oregon:D

[TMcGee86]

hence the +1...right?

That would take all the pretender undefeats and the legit one lossers and put them all in the mix...makes sence to me but i am from Oregon:D

yeah, I guess. You still have the question of whether the loser of game A could be the winner of game B, or vice versa, but I doubt it would effect the pretender undefeats.

The way I am reading it, the likelyhood of a boise or rutgers getting to the NC game would be slimmer than it is now.

I just think after the bowls you are always going to have the media going gah-gah over USC and the SEC winner.

I'm still confused as to what the bowl system would be before the +1 game.

[MiccoMacey]

Unless USC plays the SEC team.

Or if both the USC and SEC teams lose.

Anyway you slice it, it's still bologna.

[StuIsTheMan]

heh?

[Kingwoodboomer]

Anybody hear the Colin Cowherd Show this mornin? He had an Interview with the Pac-10 Comish. Can't find a link yet but he basically said that
1. a plus one system would not benefit his "Institutions"
2. There are no "Legitimate" schools in the region that are good enough to join the Pac-10 to expand the Conference, which leads me to...
3. They do not want a Pac-10 title game cause it would lesson their chances of one of their schools (SUC) to reach a BCS NC game.


I'll keep searching for a link...Colin Ripped him good...and the schmoe just kept back track'n and reading from his prepared script.


Goto the espnradio.com podcast page...goto thundering herd date 8/2 and hit play

[StuIsTheMan]

Goto the espnradio.com podcast page...goto thundering herd date 8/2 and hit play

Thanks there big guy but I was hoping for one that you didn't have to pay to get:D

[MiccoMacey]

heh?

Never mind the small man behind the curtain. He is of no consequence to you.

I was just referring to ways the media won't hype the USC-SEC title game winner.

[StuIsTheMan]

Never mind the small man behind the curtain. He is of no consequence to you.

I was just referring to ways the media won't hype the USC-SEC title game winner.

The media hypes all the Conference Championships...it sets up the BCS...of course they would hype it...this is all Pac-10 Rubbish...they just want their old money to come back to the Rose Bowl year after year...I for one am getting tired of the old style and would like to mix it up a bit...and when the traditional games come to pass it would make them that much more exciting...not seeing the same teams play eachother year after year...and also a +1 would give the at large births and non BCS Schools more of a shot at the NC...cause now they have no shot...AT ALL! but maybe that's fare to some people:rolleyes:

[TMcGee86]

The media hypes all the Conference Championships...it sets up the BCS...of course they would hype it...this is all Pac-10 Rubbish...they just want their old money to come back to the Rose Bowl year after year...I for one am getting tired of the old style and would like to mix it up a bit...and when the traditional games come to pass it would make them that much more exciting...not seeing the same teams play eachother year after year...and also a +1 would give the at large births and non BCS Schools more of a shot at the NC...cause now they have no shot...AT ALL! but maybe that's fare to some people:rolleyes:

I would be all for it if it was a 1v4 2v3 first weekend and the next game pitting the winners together.

But going back to the old bowl alliances, and then putting 1v2 together in a "+1" after the bowl games would be worse than what we have now.

All it would do is ensure that teams with easy bowl ties get into the championship game.

Lets say this year the system was in place and the Big10 sends a 2 loss Wisc team to the rose bowl after they beat Mich in the reg season.

USC after not having a CCG easily crushes them and they are automatically into the MNC game.


And say you then have a one loss SEC team and a one loss Big12 team playing in separate bowls and both win.

Someone gets f'd for being in a stronger conference and having to play a CCG.


It's the same as it is now but with one more game and with crappier bowl games leading up to it.


It's like the worst of both worlds.

[StuIsTheMan]

I would be all for it if it was a 1v4 2v3 first weekend and the next game pitting the winners together.

But going back to the old bowl alliances, and then putting 1v2 together in a "+1" after the bowl games would be worse than what we have now.

All it would do is ensure that teams with easy bowl ties get into the championship game.

Lets say this year the system was in place and the Big10 sends a 2 loss Wisc team to the rose bowl after they beat Mich in the reg season.

USC after not having a CCG easily crushes them and they are automatically into the MNC game.


And say you then have a one loss SEC team and a one loss Big12 team playing in separate bowls and both win.

Someone gets f'd for being in a stronger conference and having to play a CCG.


It's the same as it is now but with one more game and with crappier bowl games leading up to it.


It's like the worst of both worlds.

Dude what are you smoking...please read...
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2251585

[soonerboomer93]

Anybody hear the Colin Cowherd Show this mornin? He had an Interview with the Pac-10 Comish. Can't find a link yet but he basically said that
1. a plus one system would not benefit his "Institutions"
2. There are no "Legitimate" schools in the region that are good enough to join the Pac-10 to expand the Conference, which leads me to...
3. They do not want a Pac-10 title game cause it would lesson their chances of one of their schools (SUC) to reach a BCS NC game.


I'll keep searching for a link...Colin Ripped him good...and the schmoe just kept back track'n and reading from his prepared script.


you can download it as a podcast from iTunes

[TMcGee86]

Dude what are you smoking...please read...
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2251585


well, see, that is what I thought originally, but after listening to the Pac10 asshat, I was under the impression that it wouldn't be something like this:


The "plus-one" concept, where the fifth game of the BCS format would be a championship game with two teams advancing from the first four bowl games, was considered in 2004.

But if that is what they are proposing, then I am all for it.

However, I think the only way to do it would be to pit 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3. Or at the very least 1 vs 3 and 2 vs 4.

[Kingwoodboomer]

Thanks there big guy but I was hoping for one that you didn't have to pay to get:D


Check again there big guy...i didn't pay for my download