‘Death to the BCS:’ Nonsense rules

Enough of this ****. Is it a 16-team playoff? Yes or no?

Does it provide for conference champs to get automatic bids? Yes or no?

If you answer no to either question, then tell us the real answer.

And if you want your system to be some closely guarded secret, why?

 

My postseason suggestion is something that would never happen, because every year would be different. Although, it would solve the annual controversy without taking away from the "every week is a playoff" regular season we currently have, which I love, but the powers-that-be would never go for it.

I'm not in favor of an 8 or 16 team playoff, contrary to what you might believe through this discussion. My argument has been that a playoff (of at least that size) would create more parity across the CFB landscape. I think it would be great for CFB in general, but there's no denying the regular season (especially the OOC games) would lose its excitement and relevance.

My argument against the BCS stems from subjective voting and the fact that there are conference affiliations. Sounds ridiculous I'm sure, but ideally, every program should be an Independent like Notre Dame et al, schedule whoever (I have a suggestion on how schedules should be done too), then be ranked according to record, SOS, and maybe some kind of MOV rating capped at 20 points or so. Beyond that, perhaps quality wins and such - how ever much info is needed to separate the pretenders from the contenders without opinions as a component. The NFL has an opinionated power poll that means nothing. CFB can have the same.

 

Here is what you wrote:

Gee, that sounds like you are suggesting a playoff with automatic bids to conference champs. Does it not?

And since there are more than eight conferences, there is little choice but to believe you are suggesting a playoff with at least 16 teams. (Sure, we could have a 12-team playoff, but logistically you may as well have 16 teams.)

Again, this is typical of playoff proponents: They can't even lay down some basic tenets. You tried to say that a playoff would create more parity, but your playoff idea relies on automatic conference championship berths to do that. But that is not possible with an eight-team playoff, a crucial pitfall that you now want to deny.

But wait, you now are saying that all this doesn't matter, because your playoff idea is completely infeasible -- the powers-that-be will never go for it. But I already told you that!

So your ideas have been a total ****ing waste of time. You can't tell us how teams are selected, other than some mumbo-jumbo about SOS, MOV ratings, and what have you. (But I thought conference champs were going to get automatic bids.) You can't even tell us how many teams. (I asked you point-blank how many, and you couldn't answer.)

Now, like most playoff proponents, it is time for you to get in a huff, throw your arms up in the air, and belt out the usual ad hominem attacks. "Ohhhhhh, you're so mean, Lizard! You don't get it, Lizard! Why should I have to explain it to you, Lizard. You're always like this, Lizard."

Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's not that I don't get it: You can't ****ing explain it. And none of your cheerleaders can either.

 

My postseason suggestion has never been proposed by anyone, so it's atypical of "playoff proponents."

 

In other words...

 

So Leroy you truly believe what we have in place works? I mean we might be #1 in the BCS because people are more impressed with our opponents, and not because we actually beat those teams on the field. Does that seem right to you? Let's look at how we judge teams these days. Nebraska beats KSU 48-13, which beat UCLA, which beat texas, so everyone assumes that Nebraska will destroy Texas....did that happen? Then we add in scores, conferences, whether a team played on a neutral site, and all sorts of other bull**** and thats how we come up with our champion. LSU got in over a 1 loss team because "no one bested them in regulation" LOL.

 

I don't get why people even try to have discussions with Leroy anymore.

 

Let's see...

College football enormously popular for over 100 years. Check!

Yes it has worked. Is it perfect? Depends on what you want. To me, college football is about the games and rivalries... the stories and the plays. It is plenty exciting as it is. The fact that OU didn't win the so-called national title in 1973 hasn't lessened my enjoyment of the game. Otherwise I would have quit watching a long time ago.

If you value those things, college football has delivered in a big way for a very long time.

Now, if all you care about is settling who is #1, I suggest visiting www.nfl.com. They have the perfect game for you.

 

Yep, it's starting:

 

I wouldn't have said anything at all if not for all of that unnecessary bull**** in that post. Were you born a complete tool or have you worked at it your whole life?

 

Waaah, Lizard's mean!

 

It's clear that you don't want a playoff, but it also seems like your entire argument is that pro-playoff is not a united front and can't decide what it wants. Yet, in your many posts in this thread, you've not stated why what we have is the right system (except, essentially "it works" and is why college football is popular), and when people begin arguing, you say they will begin calling you names, which you then essentially do with posts like the one quoted. So.... well done?

 

The Computer rankings are not an attempt to predict who would win against whom. They are simply a scoring system for what teams have done during the year. As such, they are an attempt to put the teams with the highest score against each other in one championship game.

That's where the whole "Good win" and "Who did you play" argument comes into play. Teams know the rules and need to build their schedules to get the best BCS score if they want to get into the BCS champ game. It's just like teams needing to build their game strategy to cross the goal line more often that the other team in order to win the game. They know the rules of both, so they have to play the game to get to the BCS champ game. But it is not an attempt to determine who would win which game.

 

"Mean"? Hardly. You're just a tool. And that's probably the nicest thing that could be said about you. Get over yourself.

 

No, I have not called anyone names.

Again, we've been through this a million times. And ultimately, the pro-playoff proponents always offer up completely unreasonable ideas, and when I call them on it they get mad. At that point they start in with the same old ad hominem attacks.

IT'S ALWAYS THIS WAY.

For once, I would like to see a playoff proponent offer something up that isn't full of glaring holes. If you are really behind a playoff, why not think things through? Why put something out that you know isn't going to fly or doesn't contradict your own principles?

So in about a week, someone will come in here and say that they want an eight-team playoff while, in the same breath, claim that they want every team in the country an equal shot at winning the national title. The fact that an eight-team playoff is going to almost certainly favor the traditional powers is something that they don't even bother to consider. When I point it out, they promptly switch arguments.

Later, someone will have the PERFECT SOLUTION. Of course, it requires that the University of Oklahoma campus moves to New Hampshire and that the University of Washington and Washington State form a single team, but it works. Pigs will fly before it could ever happen, but it works.

I've posted in here since 1999 (or thereabouts). Do you really think for one minute that your little cheap shot is going to bother me?

 

I say we play rock paper scissors.

 

I don't care if it bothers you or not. I'm just calling a spade a spade. You're free to have your own opinion. That's not why people dislike you. People dislike you because you either argue for the sake of arguing or if you really do believe in your side of the argument, you act like you're the smartest person on the planet and disregard anyone else's opinion on the matter and treat them like morons. That's being a tool.

 

To answer your question: The fact that it works and that college football is tremendously popular cannot be so easily dismissed. We must preserve the integrity, excitement, and color of the game while, at the same time, do our best to ensure that student-athletes can succeed academically.

I see no benefit in having a playoff over the current system other than to settle the "Who's #1?" issue. I may be curious to know, but I'm not going to risk all that is great about college football to find out.

 

Which is exactly what I do.

So deal with it.

 

Okay, tool.