What happens to the BCS if there are NO unbeaten teams? [Archive]

stoopified

9/18/2007, 02:06 PM

Then it disinegrates into chaos,IMHO.Teams will be scrambling to campaign for one of two BCS championsip game slots.It will become less of an athletic endeavor and more about politics.Judging from our recent political past,it could all come down to a few hanging chads in Florida. :) If the no undefeated team scenario doesn't happen this year,mark my words,it will happen soon.

IF we had an eight team playoff( with clearly defined requirements to make the field) in place,college football would be all about football and not about politics.Just my 2 cents.

My personal formula would IncludeChampions from ACC,SEC,Big 10,Pac10,Big 12,Big East.Mac,Mountain West,USA,and Sunbelt would playoff to decide final 2 spots.Under my plan No one without conference affiliation can make the field .OK,I forgot the WAC,guess my plan still needs work.

schlanker

9/18/2007, 02:26 PM

This time around I would be more worried about the opposite. 5 undefeated teams. We could very easily see an undefeated OU, either LSU or Florida, West Virginia, Ohio State, and USC or Cal. Who gets screwed in that deal.

yermom

9/18/2007, 02:32 PM

see 2003 ;)

GottaHavePride

9/18/2007, 02:35 PM

Yeah. If those 5 are all undefeated, Auburn gets screwed.

mikee likee

9/18/2007, 02:36 PM

Thermonuclear Meltdown. Or something from the book of Revelations, but it will be entertaining.

usmc-sooner

9/18/2007, 02:38 PM

who let Craig Humphries on the board.

RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!

9/18/2007, 02:39 PM

Maybe serious consideration of playoffs, for the future.

Scott D

9/18/2007, 02:40 PM

you're going to pull a muscle with all this speculating stoopified.

GottaHavePride

9/18/2007, 02:41 PM

What muscle would that be, precisely? I'm thinking there's a sphincter joke in here somewhere.

stoopified

9/18/2007, 02:42 PM

Thermonuclear Meltdown. Or something from the book of Revelations, but it will be entertaining.
Entertaining ,maybe but frustrating definetly.I'd rather have a real playoff and a real champion.I forgot about 2003,I was thinking usc was undefeated.

usmc-sooner

9/18/2007, 02:44 PM

what if .......we go undefeated, don't play for a NC, and everyone on our team goes pro, all our commitments sign somewhere else, and Nichol transfers then what?

Scott D

9/18/2007, 02:44 PM

Then our colors probably get changed to some vomit inducing shade of orange.

stoopified

9/18/2007, 02:48 PM

what if .......we go undefeated, don't play for a NC, and everyone on our team goes pro, all our commitments sign somewhere else, and Nichol transfers then what?
Could sit around telling stories about the old days in the Corp.

usmc-sooner

9/18/2007, 02:50 PM

what if I run out of stories? or they are all just too boring, and nobody wants to listen then what?

stoopified

9/18/2007, 02:52 PM

what if I run out of stories? or they are all just too boring, and nobody wants to listen then what?
We go to hornfans and lurk? :D

usmc-sooner

9/18/2007, 02:53 PM

we do what to hornfans?

Miko

9/18/2007, 02:54 PM

Dogs and cats sleeping together. Pandemonium.

usmc-sooner

9/18/2007, 02:55 PM

I think everything will work out fine. Were even stevens, it all evens out in the end.

Scott D

9/18/2007, 02:56 PM

I wouldn't be concerned about this until November 26th. If by that point nobody is undefeated or we have 5+ teams undefeated, that's the time to wonder about it.

stoopified

9/18/2007, 02:57 PM

we do what to hornfans?
Do ? Go? Whats the difference?It just means we are desperate enough to view hornfans.

usmc-sooner

9/18/2007, 02:59 PM

I think the BCS has worked out fine each year.

Texas Golfer

9/18/2007, 03:00 PM

It shouldn't make a difference. The system is computerized. The criteria is already in place and the losses will be figured into the equation.

In lieu of a playoff, an "unbiased" computer has more credibility than the biases of human voters...even moreso when there are no undefeated teams.

SoonerStormchaser

9/18/2007, 03:06 PM

what if I run out of stories? or they are all just too boring, and nobody wants to listen then what?

Then I'll tell my stories!

OUinFLA

9/18/2007, 03:08 PM

I'll do my best to keep Chad from hanging around down here in Florida and effecting us adversly.

silverwheels

9/18/2007, 03:10 PM

The university presidents and conference commissioners are not going to go to a playoff until it is the absolute last resort, and no, a +1 system is not a playoff. If there is some kind of controversy at the end of this year, expect more "tweaks" to the BCS formula and a downright dismissal of any kind of playoff.

Stoop Dawg

9/18/2007, 03:28 PM

I think the BCS has worked out fine each year.

Yeah, it's a real gem.

Stoop Dawg

9/18/2007, 03:33 PM

I wouldn't be concerned about this until November 26th. If by that point nobody is undefeated or we have 5+ teams undefeated, that's the time to wonder about it.

I think any time is a great time to discuss the failure known as "the BCS".

And is it really a "series"? There's really nothing special about 3 of the 4 games. Except the payout, of course.

MITSooner

9/18/2007, 03:38 PM

Man I wish there was a playoff... those games at the end of the season would be pure awesomeness.

silverwheels

9/18/2007, 03:40 PM

Man I wish there was a playoff... those games at the end of the season would be pure awesomeness.

And there wouldn't be 27 meaningless bowl games and only one postseason game that matters, either.

soonermix

9/18/2007, 03:40 PM

Stoop Dawg

9/18/2007, 03:47 PM

So, I know they renamed the "Div 1 AA" to "Championship Sub-Division". What are they calling "Div 1 A" now?

RacerX

9/18/2007, 03:49 PM

And there wouldn't be 27 meaningless bowl games and only one postseason game that matters, either.

There could be both.

silverwheels

9/18/2007, 03:52 PM

So, I know they renamed the "Div 1 AA" to "Championship Sub-Division". What are they calling "Div 1 A" now?

"Bowl Subdivision".

I prefer the old names.

silverwheels

9/18/2007, 03:54 PM

There could be both.

Yeah, and if major college football ever joined the rest of the sports world and instituted a post-season tournament, I think it would be cool to keep bowl games as a consolation for teams that didn't make it into the tournament.

That comment was more of a shot at the fact that under the current system, only 2 out of 120 teams get the chance to play for the title.

usmc-sooner

9/18/2007, 06:59 PM

the best team is crowned each year, I don't see a point of them playing a tournament at the end to verify would do. These tournaments or playoffs don't always have the best teams winning. What's the difference between a fluke loss that knocks you out at the front of the year or some fluke loss in a end of the year tournament. These playoffs are full of fluke wins, like KU beating us in 88, we won 3 of 4 games against them but they get crowned NC, they probably weren't even a top 8 team. Yet these things happen in playoffs. If you want a playoff you can watch lower level college football or the NFL. I think at OU's level the system is fine.

birddog

9/19/2007, 02:27 AM

you can't compare a 64 team tourney to an 8 team playoff.

so if we have 1 loss and end the year ranked 6th after an 8-game winning streak, you don't think we should have a chance to win the national championship. you're fine with a cotton bowl appearance? you'll be satisified if 3 or 4 tems go undefeated this year and we're left out because we started the year ranked lower than the other teams? that's bs.

there are regular season fluke losses too. usually there is a significant drop-off after you get past the top 8 or 9 teams. on any given day those top teams could beat each other. there wouldn't be any flukes in an 8-team playoff.

that being said, we'll never see a playoff system.

Blue

9/19/2007, 02:53 AM

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 08:31 AM

you can't compare a 64 team tourney to an 8 team playoff.
why not, that tournament is basically a little shorter than the regular season if you win, so the entire season is your playoff.

so if we have 1 loss and end the year ranked 6th after an 8-game winning streak, you don't think we should have a chance to win the national championship. you're fine with a cotton bowl appearance? you'll be satisified if 3 or 4 tems go undefeated this year and we're left out because we started the year ranked lower than the other teams? that's bs.

it's not bs if you have a fluke loss at the front or you have a fluke loss in a playoff no NC. A team that someone has watched all year and is ranked 6th should not ever play for a NC. I like the game the way it is. People have these hissies every year and every year I think it turns out fine. College football IMO has a truer champion than pro playoff champions and tournament champions.

there are regular season fluke losses too. usually there is a significant drop-off after you get past the top 8 or 9 teams. on any given day those top teams could beat each other. there wouldn't be any flukes in an 8-team playoff.[QUOTE]

there's fluke losses in any playoff see pro sports, once again see OU/KU that was down to a one game deal. Look at pro teams, you'll see one team beat a team then lose in the playoffs, or hear over and over how they play harder and more intense in the playoffs. If you're a fan of playoffs then watch pro sports. College football is the best thing on the planet. I don't want them to change it because you and Craig Humphries think we need a playoff.
The only time I'd be ok with it if you had OU, LSU, USC and Florida all finish undefeated which can't happen because LSU and Florida play. Other than than that there is no way a team ranked 4 or lower should ever get to play for a NC.

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 12:32 PM

the best team is crowned each year

That's certainly debatable. In fact, it's debated almost every year.

I don't see a point of them playing a tournament at the end to verify would do.

While it certainly wouldn't end all debate about who the "best team in the country" is, it would at least give us a real, undisputed National Champion.

What's the difference between a fluke loss that knocks you out at the front of the year or some fluke loss in a end of the year tournament.

One loss at the beginning of the year doesn't necessarily knock you out of the current system, and it certainly wouldn't knock you out of a playoff. Two losses, probably out under both systems. It's a wash.

Losses at the end of the year happen as well. Injuries, suspensions, "flukes", they happen under both systems and they happen all throughout the year. It's a wash.

These playoffs are full of fluke wins, like KU beating us in 88, we won 3 of 4 games against them but they get crowned NC, they probably weren't even a top 8 team. Yet these things happen in playoffs.

A playoff doesn't decide the "best" team. It's impossible to objectify who is the "best" team. A playoff gives you a "winner". KU may or may not have been the "best" team in 88. But one thing is for sure - they won the tournament. Just because Tiger doesn't win some tourny doesn't suddenly make him the #2 player in the world. But it does mean he didn't win the tourny. If there were a playoff and Boise State won it last year, a lot of people would call it a "fluke". But wouldn't you love to see them get a shot? Maybe they would get a beat down, maybe not. We'll never know because the "best" teams don't play each other at the end of the year.

IMO, a champion should be decided on the field, not by some judges. Sports that don't provide head-to-head competition require judges, but there's really no excuse for CFB to not have a playoff.

A 4 or 8 team playoff actually wouldn't change the system much. You'd still need the "BCS" to determine who gets into the playoff. There would still be much wailing and gnashing of teeth over who made the playoff and who didn't. But we'd get to see the "best" teams play each other and we'd get a legitimate "National Champion" (which not the same thing as "best" team). Why is it legitimate? Because you're going to have a really, really hard time convincing anyone that the #9 ranked team was a sure thing to run the tourny. However, many times it's pretty easy to argue that the #3 team could have beat the NC game winner.

In short, it's impossible to crown the "best" team at the end of the year under any system. Occasionally there is a concensus, but usually there is not. What we need (or "want") is to see these highly ranked teams actually play each other at the end of the year. And I think that a tournament with a clearly defined "winner" would be a great way to accomplish that.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 12:32 PM

There's a reason no other major sports league/association in America has the the bowl/poll system like Division 1-A: it's a stupid system. If 1-A had gone to a playoff when it split from 1-AA in the '70s, no one would be pining for the bowl system. You don't see 1-AA or Div. II trying to go to a bowl system.

Yes, it makes major college football unique. That doesn't mean "better". I think it's pretty dumb that not only do you have to worry about winning all your games, but you also have to worry about whether or not you'll get voted into the top 2. With a playoff, you only have to worry about winning.

The postseason of Div. 1-A relies way too much on the opinions of people that shouldn't matter at all, i.e. the media, coaches, and guys with computer formulas. Seriously? Computer formulas determine who the 2 best teams in the country are? That's ridiculous.

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 12:41 PM

4 team playoff is the only option.

Alabama vs Auburn. UA has already locked up a top 4 seed. U of A sits Shaun Alexander, Barker, and Prothro. (Imagining)

Rivalry games become **** because of the playoffs. It's like the NFL. The last few weeks mean ****. You people are so wrong you don't know it.

The only way it works is a 4 team playofff, bu what happens if OU is the only undefeated team and they get beat by a 2 loss team in the plus 1?

....?

I agree that fewer teams is better. I personally think you could go 8 teams, but 4 would be better than 2.

I'm also not sure that any regular season game would become ****, especially not a rivalry game. I don't see anyone "locking in" a spot until the very last game of the season, and that's usually a conference championship game (or should be).

Comparisons to the NFL playoffs are moot. The NFL takes 50% of its teams to the playoffs. Even if you took 8 in CFB that'd only be 7% of the teams. Huge difference.

What happens under the current system if OU is the only undefeated team and gets beat by a 2 loss team in the CCG? Answer: the 2 loss team wins the conference and goes to the BCS. No difference. We can still claim that OU was the best team in the Big 12 that year, but there's no disputing that KSU was the conference champion.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 01:07 PM

most playoffs are retarded and so people who think that a playoff is settling it on the field is naive.
Yeah playoffs, let's have half the teams in the playoffs and then let's throw in some .500 teams in to have a Wild Card. Anyone who thinks a bowl system is about money and playoffs aren't needs to be shot. Oh and let's really spice these playoffs up by putting the two best teams on the same side of the bracket, that's right the Cowboys and 49ers can play for the right to throttle the Bills in the Super Bowl because that's how you settle it on the field. Or how about the Steeler/Patriots or Colts/Patriots let's put them on the same side of the bracket. Let's also play these playoffs at someone's home field, then the last game on a neutral field.
That's like the dumbest system I think anyone could put together.
Even the Div II playoffs are set up like little bowls you don't need that many teams. After watching the season hardly ever is there any doubt who the two best teams are.

The only playoffs that are worth a crap are open seeded tournaments like wrestling tournaments and the ones that have a best of series like MLB and NBA.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 01:13 PM

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 01:21 PM

None of that has any relevance to what a playoff in 1-A would be like. At the most there would be 16 teams, like in 1-AA, but I doubt that would happen. An 8-team playoff would be a lot better. Boise State was the only team to finish the season undefeated last year, and they didn't even get a whiff of the title. An 8-team tournament makes sure undefeated mid-majors get their shot.

by the end of the year there aren't 8 teams that deserve a shot at the NC. Boise State shouldn't have been in a BCS game last year and we probably shouldn't have either. Florida would have crushed both schools. Most years it's not to hard to see who the two best teams are. I've never seen a year where it's a 4 team debate. The closest was 03 with OU, USC, Auburn, and Michigan and there's no way in hell Michigan belonged in any game that had title implications.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 01:27 PM

by the end of the year there aren't 8 teams that deserve a shot at the NC. Boise State shouldn't have been in a BCS game last year and we probably shouldn't have either. Florida would have crushed both schools. Most years it's not to hard to see who the two best teams are. I've never seen a year where it's a 4 team debate. The closest was 03 with OU, USC, Auburn, and Michigan and there's no way in hell Michigan belonged in any game that had title implications.

This post is the entire reason why I hate the current system. It's based on OPINIONS. People just sitting around saying, "Team A would beat Team B by 30, but Team C would probably beat A and lose to Team B." How do you know Boise State would have been waxed by Florida? Because Florida dominated Ohio State and Boise dominated the WAC and barely beat us? That's a really weak way to determine who is worthy and who is not. Michigan was almost voted into the title game last year. What a great system.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 01:38 PM

How do you know Boise State would have been waxed by Florida?

I've been blessed with common sense.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 01:39 PM

Michigan was almost voted into the title game last year. What a great system.

well I almost slept with Jesica Alba.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 01:40 PM

I've been blessed with common sense.

Congratulations.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 01:42 PM

well I almost slept with Jesica Alba.

You missed the entire point of my entire post, but whatever. I guess if you run out of reasonable points to discuss you can always revert to this.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 01:42 PM

This post is the entire reason why I hate the current system.

well when you enough money and pull you just run right out there and change it. :D Until then keep calling up Craig Humphies and getting your heart rate up over something you can't do anything about.

or you could sit back and enjoy the season.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 01:48 PM

well when you enough money and pull you just run right out there and change it. :D Until then keep calling up Craig Humphies and getting your heart rate up over something you can't do anything about.

or you could sit back and enjoy the season.

I never said I could change it and I never said I don't enjoy football the way it is. And I don't even listen to the Urinal, so don't even bother with that crap. You can keep calling up the Pac-10 commissioner and telling him to keep up the good work in his fight against a playoff.

I can deal with it, but I'd rather see a playoff. Just because I don't like the bowl system it doesn't mean I don't enjoy college football. It's by far my favorite sport to watch, but that doesn't mean it's perfect.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 02:01 PM

thank you for sharing.

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 02:08 PM

most playoffs are retarded and so people who think that a playoff is settling it on the field is naive.

Well, then. I guess it's settled.

blah, blah, blah

Way to NOT address a single point I made.

This post is the entire reason why I hate the current system. It's based on OPINIONS.

Opinions are fine until some jackass starts acting like THEIR opinion is actually a fact. Anyone who thinks Boise St didn't at least deserve a shot at the NC last year is obviously not a fan of competitive sports.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 02:08 PM

thank you for sharing.

Thank you for being smug.

This argument could go on forever and neither side would budge, so whatever.

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 02:10 PM

This argument could go on forever with one side making valid points and the other being obtuse, so whatever.

Fixed.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 02:14 PM

I never said I could change it and I never said I don't enjoy football the way it is. And I don't even listen to the Urinal, so don't even bother with that crap. You can keep calling up the Pac-10 commissioner and telling him to keep up the good work in his fight against a playoff.

I can deal with it, but I'd rather see a playoff. Just because I don't like the bowl system it doesn't mean I don't enjoy college football. It's by far my favorite sport to watch, but that doesn't mean it's perfect.

the day that I let a radio show get to to the poing of having to refer to the Sports Animal as the Urinal and get so mad about so little is the day, I go for my reality check.

OK you've guys convinced me. I'm now a playoff guy.... playoffs for everyone.!!!!!!lets end war and challenge the Mid East to playoffs, throw in Africa as a wild card.

BTW have fun this year at the playoffs and send me a post card as I will be attending the Bowl Games. :texan: :eek:

deweydw

9/19/2007, 02:14 PM

This post is the entire reason why I hate the current system. It's based on OPINIONS. People just sitting around saying, "Team A would beat Team B by 30, but Team C would probably beat A and lose to Team B." How do you know Boise State would have been waxed by Florida? Because Florida dominated Ohio State and Boise dominated the WAC and barely beat us? That's a really weak way to determine who is worthy and who is not. Michigan was almost voted into the title game last year. What a great system.

Remember, Ohio State had not played a game in a month. So they came into that game cold. IMO, Boise could have beaten Ohio St..

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 02:19 PM

the day that I let a radio show get to to the poing of having to refer to the Sports Animal as the Urinal and get so mad about so little is the day, I go for my reality check.

OK you've guys convinced me. I'm now a playoff guy.... playoffs for everyone.!!!!!!lets end war and challenge the Mid East to playoffs, throw in Africa as a wild card.

BTW have fun this year at the playoffs and send me a post card as I will be attending the Bowl Games. :texan: :eek:

None of that makes any sense. Congratulations yet again on avoiding the point of the discussion by being smug and condescending.

I'm not getting mad about so little, so save your reality check for yourself.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 02:20 PM

Fixed.

obtuse?
http://www.edsel.com/pages/shawshank.jpg

BTW if this thread was a playoff. I would win. But the competition isn't that strong. I feel like Kramer taking Karate with those kids. :texan:

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 02:20 PM

Remember, Ohio State had not played a game in a month. So they came into that game cold. IMO, Boise could have beaten Ohio St..

That's the Big Ten's fault for not scheduling any games after Thanksgiving. The Pac-10 has adapted, so they only have themselves to blame.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 02:24 PM

None of that makes any sense. Congratulations yet again on avoiding the point of the discussion by being smug and condescending.

I'm not getting mad about so little, so save your reality check for yourself.
Oh I've told you plenty times why I like it the way it is and don't like playoffs. But you can't seem to read past don't like playoffs, so now I'm just toying with you and your playoff gangsters, like a cat toying with a mouse, a whale tossing around a baby seal, like a pitbull toying with a kitten.

playoffs sucks

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 02:25 PM

OK you've guys convinced me. I'm now a playoff guy.... playoffs for everyone.!!!!!!lets end war and challenge the Mid East to playoffs, throw in Africa as a wild card.

BTW have fun this year at the playoffs and send me a post card as I will be attending the Bowl Games. :texan: :eek:

No, no, no. Your sarcasm has convinced ME!! I'm now a Bowl guy! Bowls for everyone! Every team gets to go to a bowl game! There are no losers!

And since all we have are bowl games, I guess we shouldn't try to change it. I mean, it's not fan discontent has ever made a difference in post-season play before, right?

Good points, usmc. I don't know why I didn't see it before. I'll send you a postcard from the "<Insert Startup Company Name Here> Bowl"!

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 02:27 PM

BTW if this thread was a playoff. I would win. But the competition isn't that strong. I feel like Kramer taking Karate with those kids. :texan:

Dude, you brought a knife to a gun fight .... and a rather dull one at that.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 02:27 PM

Oh I've told you plenty times why I like it the way it is and don't like playoffs. But you can't seem to read past don't like playoffs, so now I'm just toying with you and your playoff gangsters, like a cat toying with a mouse, a whale tossing around a baby seal, like a pitbull toying with a kitten.

playoffs sucks

:rolleyes:

Let me know when you can say something more than "playoffs sucks because the NFL sucks".

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 02:28 PM

Good points, usmc. I don't know why I didn't see it before. I'll send you a postcard from the "<Insert Startup Company Name Here> Bowl"!

thanks, I'll send you one from the BCS Bowl I go to.

you guys keep coming with this weak stuff and I feel obligated to keep beating you down.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 02:30 PM

Dude, you brought a knife to a gun fight .... and a rather dull one at that.

so the fact that I won should show you guys how weak you are. Go back and practice, get Humpries thoughts on it and come back in a week.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 02:32 PM

thanks, I'll send you one from the BCS Bowl I go to.

you guys keep coming with this weak stuff and I feel obligated to keep beating you down.

This post is like Aggy saying they had the Most Powerful Offense in the World and saying they had better talent than OU overall before the season started.

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 02:33 PM

thanks, I'll send you one from the BCS Bowl I go to.

you guys keep coming with this weak stuff and I feel obligated to keep beating you down.

Damn, I messed up again. I keep forgetting that the very reason we like the bowl system is because it favors our team and other "big name" schools while effectively locking out everyone else.

You're right again. I'll see you at the BCS Bowl that OU plays in almost every year. Let those freakin losers with undefeated records go to the "<Insert Startup Company Name Here> Bowl". What a buncha wanna-bes.

We rule. Others drool. Damn, I miss the 3rd grade.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 02:34 PM

Why do we get all worried about BCS, Heisman watch and other bs after 3 games? Enjoy the games, guys...save your energy to hate the whorns!

While the BCS and polls are in place, I'm not going to worry about them until November. As for the Heisman...meh, USC can have it every year. It's based on hype more than anything.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 02:38 PM

We rule. Others drool. Damn, I miss the 3rd grade.

You'll be saying the same thing next year about the 4th grade when you start the 5th.

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 02:38 PM

so the fact that I won should show you guys how weak you are. Go back and practice, get Humpries thoughts on it and come back in a week.

I think I'm catching on. Claim supriority and declare victory without having to back it up with an actual performance. I can see why you like opinion polls so much better than head-to-head competition.

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 02:40 PM

You'll be saying the same thing next year about the 4th grade when you start the 5th.

Weak sauce. If you're gonna bring it, bring it.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 02:55 PM

I think I'm catching on. Claim supriority and declare victory without having to back it up with an actual performance. I can see why you like opinion polls so much better than head-to-head competition.

I don't know I got to admit beating you head to head was pretty fun. :texan:

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 02:58 PM

Seriously though you view this as a competition and you want me to bring it.

Let me go get taped up, stretch and break out my typing gloves.

Good Gawd people.

I don't want a playoff, I've told you why. Seriously what more do you people want. Blood? Debateoff? Post opposing points of view? Duel at 50 paces? fisticuffs? dog fights?

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 03:02 PM

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 03:12 PM

It was a discussion about the playoff/bowl debate until you veered off course and stopped adding to the discussion. I don't mind smartassery and whatnot, but if you don't have anything to add to a very legit argument, why even post? You don't like the playoffs because you think it would be too much like the NFL or March Madness. Okay, we got that. You only need to say it once. I happen to think there are far more points for a playoff than against one, which is why I tried to keep it going but you ran out of points to discuss.

there's a lot of other things I don't like about it as well. Small college teams don't travel like the Major colleges, I can't attend a 2 playoffs and a championship, that alone is going to shoot it down for most people. It's just unnecessary. It's already decided on the field from Weak 1 to Weak 14 why do we need a playoff to validate what we already know. I think college football is pretty unique in the fact that it rewards it's team for it's entire body of work. That's just how things work in the real world as well, everything is based on someone higher ups opinion. A playoff is an extra burden, play hard every week and you don't have to complain about playoffs.

I quit being serious when you guys started taking it too personal. Which happens 9 times out of 10 when guys feel like "they've got the answer"

My biggest question is why fix it when it's not broke. College football is the most watched sport in America, it doesn't need to be changed.

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 03:16 PM

My biggest question is why fix it when it's not broke. College football is the most watched sport in America, it doesn't need to be changed.

And yet it is changed. Every year.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 03:21 PM

One of the problems with rewarding teams for playing well for their 12-game (or 13-, if they play a CCG) season, is that there are 120 teams split into 11 conferences with 3 independents. The schedules are so different that you can't objectively say that because, for example, Oklahoma is better than Boston College because they went undefeated in the Big 12 as opposed to going undefeated in the ACC. For all we know, Boston College could beat Oklahoma. Or West Virginia. Or USC. Instead of taking the 8 best teams or however you want the playoff to work, we just say, "LSU and USC are obviously the two best teams so they get to play for all the marbles". Life isn't fair by any means, but that doesn't mean that some football teams should be getting screwed out of playing for the title if they've got a good enough record.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 03:22 PM

And yet it is changed. Every year.

really I must have been too young to remember the old playoff days

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 03:25 PM

Thanks for getting back to business.

there's a lot of other things I don't like about it as well. Small college teams don't travel like the Major colleges, I can't attend a 2 playoffs and a championship, that alone is going to shoot it down for most people.

A playoff would (IMO) require that the initial rounds be home games for the higher seeded teams. I agree that it would be impractical to ask any team's fans to attend 3 away games in a row.

It's just unnecessary. It's already decided on the field from Weak 1 to Weak 14 why do we need a playoff to validate what we already know.

That's your opinion, and that's fine, but I disagree. There is debate almost 50% of the time over who is the "real" NC or who should have been in the NC game but wasn't.

I think college football is pretty unique in the fact that it rewards it's team for it's entire body of work.

IMO, a 4 or 8 team playoff doesn't change that. People like to use the NFL as an example of how the regular season becomes less meaningful, but the NFL takes 50% of its teams to the playoff. CFB would take about 7%. Huge difference. You would *probably* make it with 1 loss, but you'd almost certainly be left out with 2 losses. Which is exactly what we have now. I can *maybe* make it to the NC game with 1 loss, but unlikely to make it with 2. No real difference IMO.

A playoff is an extra burden, play hard every week and you don't have to complain about playoffs.

Disagree. See: Boise St. They played hard every week and won every week. There's evidently more to it than just "play hard and win".

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 03:28 PM

really I must have been too young to remember the old playoff days

If the bowl system were perfect, the Bowl Coalition and Bowl Alliance would not have been started. The BCS would not have been created. It would not need to be changed every other year.

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 03:32 PM

really I must have been too young to remember the old playoff days

There you go again. What's with the attitude?

I was obviously referring to the addition of the BCS and the "tweaks" that are made to it every year. Include the AP, exclude the AP, include the SOS, exclude the SOS, include Computer A, exclude computer B, etc, etc, etc.

Not to mention the rule changes that are made year in and year out. College football is dynamic. It's full of changes. Every year.

There is absolutely no reason to believe that it can't (and won't) be changed again in the future. Maybe it'll be a small change to a "Plus 1" format (already under discussion) which essentially creates a 4 team playoff. Maybe they'll do something more drastic like an 8 team playoff.

I'm not going to go so far as to say "it's broke", but there is certainly still room for improvement. That's why they keep changing it. Every year.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 03:38 PM

That's your opinion, and that's fine, but I disagree. There is debate almost 50% of the time over who is the "real" NC or who should have been in the NC game but wasn't.

debated by who sports talk shows and the media, disgruntled homer fans? I think it's been pretty clear ever since the BCS started. The media started trying to plant this thought but it's not true. It's true when you have a split NC, but really who does that bother. Certainly not me. Now if you go pre BCS I'd agree, no way was BYU a NC.

Disagree. See: Boise St. They played hard every week and won every week. There's evidently more to it than just "play hard and win".
Boise State wasn't that good. As much as it pains me to say we weren't super good that year. The B12 was terrible. Boise State had a great year and all but it took PT's worst game of the year, our best WR going down, hooks and ladders and statue of liberties just to keep it close with us. Nobody and I mean nobody is debating whether Boise State would've beaten the Gators.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 03:42 PM

also just to add
I'm very good at the smack.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 03:44 PM

Boise State wasn't that good. As much as it pains me to say we weren't super good that year. The B12 was terrible. Boise State had a great year and all but it took PT's worst game of the year, our best WR going down, hooks and ladders and statue of liberties just to keep it close with us. Nobody and I mean nobody is debating whether Boise State would've beaten the Gators.

Why do mid-majors even field teams then? Those guys work their asses off the same as any other program and if a team like Boise State goes undefeated, why don't they get a shot? Should we just take all the non-BCS conferences and make them Division 1-B?

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 03:51 PM

Why do mid-majors even field teams then? Those guys work their asses off the same as any other program and if a team like Boise State goes undefeated, why don't they get a shot? Should we just take all the non-BCS conferences and make them Division 1-B?

their schedule was not worthy of playing for a NC.

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 03:53 PM

debated by who sports talk shows and the media, disgruntled homer fans? I think it's been pretty clear ever since the BCS started. The media started trying to plant this thought but it's not true. It's true when you have a split NC, but really who does that bother. Certainly not me. Now if you go pre BCS I'd agree, no way was BYU a NC.

The media and homer fans are the only ones who care about CFB. So yeah, that's who debating it. The BCS was a big step in the right direction. It eliminated many of the conference bowl tie-ins and guaranteed that the top 2 ranked teams will play at the end of the year. It is, in fact, a 2 team playoff with a ranking system that determins the 2 teams. The other BCS games are more interesting than the old bowls because they are guaranteed to get top teams instead of simply following conference alignments.

What I would like to see now is another nudge in that direction. Call it a "Plus 1" game if you want, but it will be a 4 team playoff. That may or may not satisfy me. It's hard to tell until I see it.

Boise State wasn't that good. As much as it pains me to say we weren't super good that year. The B12 was terrible. Boise State had a great year and all but it took PT's worst game of the year, our best WR going down, hooks and ladders and statue of liberties just to keep it close with us. Nobody and I mean nobody is debating whether Boise State would've beaten the Gators.

I don't think that there is any question whether Boise St could beat the Gators. Of course they could. As I stated before, that doesn't make them the better team. But again, the point (IMO) isn't to select the "best" team. That's too subjective. The point is to crown a "Champion". And that is the team that played well enough all year to make the playoff, then went out and won playoff games when it really mattered.

And not to be an ***, but I need to point out the logical inconsistency of your arguement. You say "work hard and win and you don't need to worry about a playoff". You also say that "It's already decided on the field from Weak 1 to Weak 14". Then you turn around and say "Well, nobody really thinks Boise St could be Florida". Which means that winning isn't enough, and it's not decided on the field. It's based on people's opinions. Just like figure skating.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 03:55 PM

their schedule was not worthy of playing for a NC.

Yet they still went undefeated. The problem with the bowl system is still the fact that not only do you have to win all of your games, but you also have to impress the media, coaches, and guys that make computer formulas. There is something wrong with that.

If the bowl system is going to stay in place, then the NCAA might as well split up the haves and have-nots again and just let the BCS conferences enjoy their party without those pesky Broncos or Utes coming in and gate-crashing.

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 04:00 PM

The media and homer fans are the only ones who care about CFB. So yeah, that's who debating it. The BCS was a big step in the right direction. It eliminated many of the conference bowl tie-ins and guaranteed that the top 2 ranked teams will play at the end of the year. It is, in fact, a 2 team playoff with a ranking system that determins the 2 teams. The other BCS games are more interesting than the old bowls because they are guaranteed to get top teams instead of simply following conference alignments.

What I would like to see now is another nudge in that direction. Call it a "Plus 1" game if you want, but it will be a 4 team playoff. That may or may not satisfy me. It's hard to tell until I see it.

I don't think that there is any question whether Boise St could beat the Gators. Of course they could. As I stated before, that doesn't make them the better team. But again, the point (IMO) isn't to select the "best" team. That's too subjective. The point is to crown a "Champion". And that is the team that played well enough all year to make the playoff, then went out and won playoff games when it really mattered.

And not to be an ***, but I need to point out the logical inconsistency of your arguement. You say "work hard and win and you don't need to worry about a playoff". You also say that "It's already decided on the field from Weak 1 to Weak 14". Then you turn around and say "Well, nobody really thinks Boise St could be Florida". Which means that winning isn't enough, and it's not decided on the field. It's based on people's opinions. Just like figure skating.

If Boise State played a Pac 10 schedule, a B12 schedule, SEC schedule then sure let them play. They didn't, they couldn't beat Florida at home on their best day. You look at the schedules and Florida won it on the field. If you're argument is that BSU vs Florida is supposed to convince me well it to me it makes your point look painfully weak. That's the deal breaker, BSU didn't get a shot at the title, oh the horror.

Really nothing you say is going to switch my positions. You can ride that Craig Humpries bandwagon into the ground. That's fine. You like it one way, I like it the way it is.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 04:03 PM

I didn't know Craig Humphries is the only person that has ever wanted a playoff. Man, I should listen to the Animal more often.

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 04:04 PM

If the bowl system is going to stay in place, then the NCAA might as well split up the haves and have-nots again and just let the BCS conferences enjoy their party without those pesky Broncos or Utes coming in and gate-crashing.

One could argue that if the Broncos or Utes put together several "successful" seasons, they could eventually break into the BCS mix. However, that turns the BCS into a multi-year system, which I don't favor.

Given that you have to schedule teams so far in advance, there is really no way to know how good they will be when you get around to playing them. Did we know Miami was going to suck this year? Should we be left out of the NC hunt because of it? Should the Broncos just join a BCS conference if they want to play for the title? Which BCS conference is going to take them? Why are there BCS and non-BCS conferences anyway?

That's what I don't like about a 2 team system. It's possible to "play hard every week" and still get left out. Many of these kids only get one or two years to grab that golden ring. I think the NC should be determined based on single-season performance, and decided on the field. IMO, that's not what we have now.

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 04:09 PM

I agree with all of your points, Dawg. It's one of the least fair systems in sports in regards to the "little guys". MLB not having a salary cap is right up there, but at least every once in a while, teams like the Marlins win the World Series.

Stoop Dawg

9/19/2007, 04:12 PM

If Boise State played a Pac 10 schedule, a B12 schedule, SEC schedule then sure let them play. They didn't, they couldn't beat Florida at home on their best day. You look at the schedules and Florida won it on the field. If you're argument is that BSU vs Florida is supposed to convince me well it to me it makes your point look painfully weak. That's the deal breaker, BSU didn't get a shot at the title, oh the horror.

That's not the point at all. Let me try to be more clear (if that's possible).

The non-BCS conferences essentially have no shot at the title game. Normally, I'd agree with you and say "cry me a river, join a BCS conference or schedule tougher opponents". But there's the rub. Can they just go join a BCS conference? Can they schedule tougher opponents? Will the tougher opponents agree to it? Will the tougher opponents actually be "tougher" in 4 years when the game rolls around?

But that's not the worst of it. Teams in the BCS conferences can (and do) also get left out due to scheduling. Who knew that Miami would suck balls this year? Should OU get left out because of it?

Really nothing you say is going to switch my positions. You can ride that Craig Humpries bandwagon into the ground. That's fine. You like it one way, I like it the way it is.

I don't listen to talk radio. I don't know who Craig Humpries is. I suppose he's some guy that favors a playoff. I'm not trying to change your opinion, I'm trying to see if there are legitimate reasons why people favor the current system over a playoff. There are so few of you that do, that I find it interesting to discuss when I actually come across someone who likes the current system.

Intown

9/19/2007, 04:54 PM

I think Notre Dame has a contract that says they get an automatic bid if there are no undefeated teams.

(Please don't taze me)

usmc-sooner

9/19/2007, 06:38 PM

silverwheels and SD

sorry if me being stupid and screwing around with you all day has made you mad.
You guys make good points. Some of them even I don't disagree on. I'm just not a big change things type of guy. Anyways you guys have a good season. I'm impressed you guys didn't start negging the crap out of me. It's happened before.

Ardmore_Sooner

9/19/2007, 06:59 PM

MITSooner

9/19/2007, 07:16 PM

well that was entertaining...

Sooner_Havok

9/19/2007, 07:18 PM

One could argue that if the Broncos or Utes put together several "successful" seasons, they could eventually break into the BCS mix. However, that turns the BCS into a multi-year system, which I don't favor.

OK, so it would take sustained success for the Bronco or Utes to get a BCS NC game right? Again, this isn't just a problem at the non-BCS conference level either. Let's not kid ourselves here, if Kansas runs the table this year, and LSU, USC, OU, and Florida have losses, does KU get to go to the big game? If by big game you mean Fiesta Bowl then yes, but they don't go dancing in New Orleans, not this year anyways. It would take at least two years of sustained success for any team that starts outside the top 25 to get to a NCG.

mhackl

9/19/2007, 07:37 PM

silverwheels

9/19/2007, 10:28 PM

Stoop Dawg

9/20/2007, 10:32 AM

silverwheels and SD

sorry if me being stupid and screwing around with you all day has made you mad.

Rest assured, there is no way that anyone on any internet message board on the planet can make me mad.

Stoop Dawg

9/20/2007, 10:37 AM

OK, so it would take sustained success for the Bronco or Utes to get a BCS NC game right? Again, this isn't just a problem at the non-BCS conference level either. Let's not kid ourselves here, if Kansas runs the table this year, and LSU, USC, OU, and Florida have losses, does KU get to go to the big game? If by big game you mean Fiesta Bowl then yes, but they don't go dancing in New Orleans, not this year anyways. It would take at least two years of sustained success for any team that starts outside the top 25 to get to a NCG.

OU barely made it in 2000 and we were ranked, what, close to 20 at the beginning of the year? If you recall, there were quite a few who thought we didn't "deserve" to be there. And we have "tradition" on our side. So yeah, I think it's safe to say that it's impossible for a team ranked outside the top 25 in the preseason to win the NC.