OT The NCAA Football Season Discussion

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 12:45 pm

You can't just say that a team is the best because they are undefeated.
Compare Boise's schedule to Florida's and you'll see how much tougher FL's schedule was. Even OS's schedule was much softer than FL's. I read somewhere yesterday that Ohio State's opponents had roughly a .500 record, where FL's were something like 95-50. Say what you want about the system, but the best team clearly emerged as #1 this year and that's what it's all about.

Brando70 wrote:Could this system be more of a joke? OSU gets destroyed in the title game, LSU and USC have two losses each, and all three get ranked ahead of the lone undefeated team, which had no chance to play for a championship. Those rankings obviously don't matter, but they just show the mentality of the idiots running this system. It's like they got together, ate a box of Wheaties, and said, "Whatever we poop out, that's our championship system."

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 12:50 pm

JackB1 wrote:You can't just say that a team is the best because they are undefeated.
Compare Boise's schedule to Florida's and you'll see how much tougher FL's schedule was. Even OS's schedule was much softer than FL's. I read somewhere yesterday that Ohio State's opponents had roughly a .500 record, where FL's were something like 95-50. Say what you want about the system, but the best team clearly emerged as #1 this year and that's what it's all about.

Jack:

That's not the point. The point is that the current system doesn't let the argument about who's best get settled on the field.

Did anyone outside of Idaho give Boise State a chance against Oklahoma? No. Did anyone outside of Florida and a few sports pundits give the Gators a chance against Ohio State? No.

As the cliche goes, that's why they play the game. But in this system, that game -- Florida against Boise State -- never gets played. Sure, on paper it looks like Florida would beat Boise State, but we have seen two examples in the last nine days of that paper being pretty worthless.

Again, we'll never know. So all last night proved is that Florida was superior in a game between the Gators and Ohio State. It did not prove that Florida was the No. 1 team in the nation.

Only a playoff can do that.

Take care,
PK

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 1:34 pm

I don't think a playoff will ever happen in DIV 1-A and even if it did, it would not solve anything. At most you would have would be 4 teams and then the same arguments would get tossed around about the team left out. This year it would be Boise, no way they deserve a shot in the top 4(pre bowls) over USC, OSU, LSU, Florida, Auburn, Wisconsin, Louisville , WV.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 1:40 pm

Why can't you have eight teams? It would take three weekends, four fewer weekends than the time Ohio State had between its last game and the kickoff for the national title game.

Oh, that's right: The student-athletes need time to study.

Take care,
PK

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 1:40 pm

But how hard would it really be to have a playoff between all of the conference winners? They obviously have plenty of time to get it done considering OSU went around 7 weeks without playing before this game and Florida went around 5. It really isn't rocket science to get a clear national champion. Each conference can be ranked with a modified BCS and the highest conference gets the number 1 seed and the lowest conference gets the lowest seed. Turn the rest of the bowls into something similar to the NIT.

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 1:49 pm

pk500 wrote:Why can't you have eight teams? It would take three weekends, four fewer weekends than the time Ohio State had between its last game and the kickoff for the national title game.

Oh, that's right: The student-athletes need time to study.

Take care,
PK

8 is too many games... You might as well erase the history of college football as all records would be broken. Players would be playing too many games..... The extra game a 4 team playoff would add is already too much. It had nothing to do with Studying, it has to do with history and wear and tear on the body.

"But how hard would it really be to have a playoff between all of the conference winners?"

This would not be fair. Automatic bids would be total crap in a small smalloff.

Likewise the regular season would have less meaning. A loss in the season might not be so bad under a playoff system. However, its almost the death sentence now. Some people will say "but Boise went undefeated so the regular season does not mean much anyways." Hogwash! It just shows you how important the regular season is. Its not only if you win, how much you win by but WHO YOU PLAY. Just look at college Basketball, does anyone realy care before March?

Next argument, DIV I-AA has a playoff..... sure they do, and how much money does DIV-AA make again? College football is the backbone of our collegiate educational system. Without it most people would not be able to afford to goto college.

Post by **Jared** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:13 pm

Four team playoff would cause MORE problems than what there is now, since rarely are there four teams that are clearly deserving. They'd probably use something like a BCS rankings, and the top 4 this year were UF, OSU, Michigan, and LSU. That would leave Boise St. out, as well as Louisville and Wisconsin (both with one loss).

IMO, best system is an 8 team system. The big 6 conference champs get an automatic bid (or maybe an automatic bid as long as they're in the top 15 of the BCS or something). Then any conference champs in the mid-majors or indepedents in the top 8, 10, or 12 of the BCS rankings get in. If there aren't any that fit, you fill the two other slots with at-large teams based on the BCS rankings. Have them play the 1st round at the higher ranked teams home stadium (only conf. champs can host), the week after the conference championship games. Semi-finals have some sort of New Year's bowl tie-in, and then have a national title game.

You'd get something like this in 2006:

Wake Forest at Ohio St
Michigan at Louisville

Oklahoma at Florida
Boise St. at USC

Tie-in the semis to two of the four BCS bowls, and put the losers in the non-playoff BCS bowls.

Only bad thing about this is that LSU would have gotten left out. Though if you tweak the system to give conference champs an auto bid if they're in the BCS top 10, that would take care of it.

Zlax45 · Post by **Zlax45** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:16 pm

LSU didn't win their division...People are forgetting about that!!

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:20 pm

bdunn13 wrote:8 is too many games... You might as well erase the history of college football as all records would be broken. Players would be playing too many games..... The extra game a 4 team playoff would add is already too much. It had nothing to do with Studying, it has to do with history and wear and tear on the body.

Please. The national champion would play 14 or 15 games, one more than they played this year. Guys jump from college to the NFL as juniors and have no problem playing 16 to 20 games per season.

These college players are men, not Pop Warner kids.

As for stats, the postseason stats wouldn't count.

bdunn13 wrote:Next argument, DIV I-AA has a playoff..... sure they do, and how much money does DIV-AA make again? College football is the backbone of our collegiate educational system. Without it most people would not be able to afford to goto college.

You can't be serious, can you? Comparing the marquee value of Montana and Appalachian State to Florida and Ohio State?

The idea that college football is the backbone of our collegiate educational system is misguided beyond belief since only about .01 of the national college population plays the game. But if you're insinuating that the revenues raised by college football help institutions academically, a playoff would make even more money than the bowls and the BCS.

Just look at March Madness.

Those who favor a playoff rely on common sense and a true spirit of competition. Those who disfavor a playoff rely on excuses masked as "tradition." It's that simple.

Take care,
PK

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:27 pm

"a playoff would make even more money than the bowls and the BCS. "

There is no way to tell. But I think it would hurt the regular season tremendously which would cause lost revenue... and yes, the money brought in by football helps to subsidize tuition.

And with any sort of automatic conference bids, non-conference rivalries would be meaningless as only conference games would matter.

"Those who favor a playoff rely on common sense and a true spirit of competition. Those who disfavor a playoff rely on excuses masked as "tradition." It's that simple. "

I know you are a big racing fan. And I remember you getting pretty whacked out when NASCAR changed the rules to get a green finish. I feel the same way about college football.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:41 pm

bdunn13 wrote:There is no way to tell. But I think it would hurt the regular season tremendously which would cause lost revenue ...

No way. You mean people aren't going to show up at Auburn, Notre Dame or Florida State or other powers because the big regular-season win or big loss isn't going continue or end their season?

Not a chance. Football is an American institution. And college football is an institution enhanced by tradition. It's part of people's routines, their lives.

It's why the Indianapolis 500 still gets 275,000-300,000 fans every Memorial Day even though open-wheel racing isn't nearly as popular in the U.S. as it was 15 years ago. Going to the Speedway on Memorial Day weekend is a tradition, an institution, in thousands of Americans lives. It's passed from generation to generation, too.

bdunn13 wrote:And with any sort of automatic conference bids, non-conference rivalries would be meaningless as only conference games would matter.

True. That's why I favor six conference champion bids and two at-large bids. Sadly, one of those bids probably would go to Notre Dame every year, but that's another tale to tell.

The conferences:

SEC
Pac-10
Big 12
Big 10
ACC
Big East

"Those who favor a playoff rely on common sense and a true spirit of competition. Those who disfavor a playoff rely on excuses masked as "tradition." It's that simple. "

bdunn13 wrote:I know you are a big racing fan. And I remember you getting pretty whacked out when NASCAR changed the rules to get a green finish. I feel the same way about college football.

Bad analogy. The NASCAR rules change affected the way races were conducted. A better analogy would be allowing college football teams a fifth down in the last two minutes of the fourth quarter.

A playoff does not change the rules of the game. Mandating green-flag finishes does.

Take care,
PK

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:42 pm

8 is too many games... You might as well erase the history of college football as all records would be broken. Players would be playing too many games..... The extra game a 4 team playoff would add is already too much. It had nothing to do with Studying, it has to do with history and wear and tear on the body.

I'm with Jared. You need 8 teams. And how on earth is even 10 games too much? You have freakishly developed athletes at Div. 1 programs these days, many of whom will be playing 16 game seasons in the immediate future.

I do agree that none of this discussion should include reference to studying, as we should all be realists here.

Likewise the regular season would have less meaning. A loss in the season might not be so bad under a playoff system. However, its almost the death sentence now. Some people will say "but Boise went undefeated so the regular season does not mean much anyways." Hogwash! It just shows you how important the regular season is. Its not only if you win, how much you win by but WHO YOU PLAY. Just look at college Basketball, does anyone realy care before March?

There have been several one-loss National Champions. And seeing as how only 8 teams are getting tourney bids, I can't imagine how that would de-value the regular season in the least. Every game is still enormously important.

As for who cares about college hoops before March, I'd say pretty much every fan who isn't just an office pool playing dilettante. I don't know about down there in SEC country, but Big 10 games are hard-fought and closely followed all season long.

Next argument, DIV I-AA has a playoff..... sure they do, and how much money does DIV-AA make again? College football is the backbone of our collegiate educational system. Without it most people would not be able to afford to goto college.

That last statement is wildly overbroad, as there are thousands of students at non-Div I schools where athletic revenues are minimal or non-existent. Moreover, the recent trend is to pour more and more money back into the athletic programs rather than easing budget problems by spreading the money around like in the pre-title IX days especially.

I daresay that American higher education would continue to lumber forward even in the absence of college football.

And the argument that Div I-AA doesn't make money BECAUSE it has a playoff is post hoc ergo procter hoc. It doesn't make money because there is virtually no national interest in the product, not because it has a playoff.

lexbur · Post by **lexbur** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:42 pm

pk500 wrote: Those who favor a playoff rely on common sense and a true spirit of competition. Those who disfavor a playoff rely on excuses masked as "tradition." It's that simple.

I can see valid points on both sides of this argument. Personally, I'd like to see an eight-team tournament.

But, if you want to go the "traditional" route, I can understand that point of view also, BUT at least go back to the way it was, where it was set in stone that the winner of the Big Ten meets the winner of the Pac Ten in the Rose Bowl, the winner of the Big 12 goes to the Orange Bowl, etc.

That's the only way those bowl games will ever mean anything again. They meant something when that particular bowl game was the highest goal a team could possibly achieve that season.

I watched the beginning of the Rose Bowl this year, saw the 100,000 people in the crowd, the bands, the fighter jet flyover during the national anthem and all I could think was, "Wow, this is alot of hoopla for what is basically nothing but a third-place consolation game."

So I just wish they would pick one or the other, either do a tournament, or go back to the old "traditional" way. This BCS thing isn't working.

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:46 pm

"Football is an American institution. And college football is an institution enhanced by tradition. It's part of people's routines, their lives. "

Exactly, so leave it the hell alone.

"Bad analogy. The NASCAR rules change affected the way races were conducted. A better analogy would be allowing college football teams a fifth down in the last two minutes of the fourth quarter. "

I don't think its bad as both are drastic changes to a sport...

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:47 pm

Anyone see the overnight ratings for last night's game? I'm curious.

Take care,
PK

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:48 pm

lexbur wrote: BUT at least go back to the way it was, where it was set in stone that the winner of the Big Ten meets the winner of the Pac Ten in the Rose Bowl, the winner of the Big 12 goes to the Orange Bowl, etc.

I have no problem with that.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:49 pm

bdunn13 wrote:Exactly, so leave it the hell alone.

So I take it you hate the BCS, right? And if Georgia won a national title via the BCS, would it be cheapened compared to 1980, which was won under the past bowl-poll system?

Take care,
PK

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 3:01 pm

I don't hate the BCS, but I don't like it much either. I would not have a problem going back to the old system. I do hate the special exceptions given to Notre Dame.

"And if Georgia won a national title via the BCS, would it be cheapened compared to 1980"

Lets not worry about that yet

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 3:23 pm

pk500 wrote:Anyone see the overnight ratings for last night's game? I'm curious.

Take care,
PK

19.1.. down from 22.7 last year

2005 title game was 14.7.

bkrich83 · Post by **bkrich83** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 3:27 pm

I am in favor of a playoff. It will never happen. The powers that be simply will not change it. They don't want to give up power to the NCAA.

I will say this. I'd like to see USC play LSU or Florida. Too bad we'll never get to see matchups like that.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 3:28 pm

No other fan base in America would put up with this nonsense. Imagine an NFL system where the teams all played each other and then the writers voted on who got to go to the Super Bowl, while the Cowboys and Steelers always got to go to good bowls because their fan bases travel well.

I would think that an athletic system linked to higher education might be interested in at least progressing to the 20th century in its championship system, but I guess I'm wrong.

I do agree that things were better the old way, because at least those conference-based bowls preserved the rivalries that really matter to college football fans.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 3:34 pm

Brando70 wrote:No other fan base in America would put up with this nonsense. Imagine an NFL system where the teams all played each other and then the writers voted on who got to go to the Super Bowl, while the Cowboys and Steelers always got to go to good bowls because their fan bases travel well.

Worse yet, I thought about this scenario last night: Imagine the Super Bowl taking place 40 to 50 days after the AFC and NFC Championship games.

In that ridiculous format, which is exactly how Division I-A football operates, the Super Bowl would be played Sunday, March 11.

Pure genius. Almost makes the current off week of Super Bowl hype tolerable!

Take care,
PK

bkrich83 · Post by **bkrich83** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 4:02 pm

Ugghh and Ohio St. ends the season #2 in the polls.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:18 pm

NCAA probably gets publicity and attention because of fans frustration about the lack of a playoff system.

For that reason alone, they may never change.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:38 pm

bkrich83 wrote:Ugghh and Ohio St. ends the season #2 in the polls.

The voters were impressed with the way they almost got 100 yds of offense.