VeeshanVault

Is it bullshit or not?

I think that it is a nice guide, but as it stands doesn't work. I do think it'd work nicely as the seeding program for a playoff system. The top 8-10 teams in the BCS may not always be in the exact right order, but they are usually pretty close to being the right teams.

Agree with Sylvus completely.

Unless it conflicts with whatever the hell Ohio State is doing on New Years, I'll be rooting for the Wolverines against USC. I hate the Wolverines most of the year, but they're still Big 10!!!

Although I would much rather have a playoff system, I believe it is much better than what we had before. It is certainly not perfect and there will always be controversy but I think LSU and OK are the top two teams based on their schedule difficulties.

Here is the easiest method of fixing the current BCS mess...

1. Go back to the traditional matchups in the four major bowls.
2. Let the winners of the four bowls play each other in a playoff.

Three more games would be easy to schedule and it would give 8 teams a shot at the national title.

Thoughts?

Oh yeah, as long as I am posting.....

GEAUX TIGERS!

Back to possibly a split title.. that says it all.

Gogo BCS!

Yes, it's wonderful how the computer polls fucked over the legit #1 team. I hope USC romps all over UM (sorry Blue), just so that they can be the unanimous #1 in the AP poll and not get a single vote in the ESPN/Coaches poll. I'm sure ESPN is so ploud to have their name associated with that!

Bowl Clusterfuck Series, indeed!

Whith out USC and LSU playing each other I don't think anyone could prove either team is better. One Has a very good O and a decent D the other has The best D and a decent O.

No no Kel, no split title.

Let me explain better.

Put the bowls pack to their original pairings (which they are fairly close to this year.) Then take the winners of each bowl and put them in a single elimination bracket to determine a champion. Somthing like this...

(no idea what is causing this blank space above my html table *&^#%*&^#)

<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="90%" >
<tr>
<td width="33%">
<b>Orange Bowl</b> <br>
Miami <br>
FSU</td>
<td width="33%" rowspan="2">
<b>East Semi</b><br>
Winner of Orange <br>
Winner of Sugar</td>
<td width="33%" rowspan="4">
<b>CHAMPIONSHIP</b><br>
Winner of East <br>
Winner of West</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="33%">
<b>Sugar Bowl</b><br>
LSU <br>
Oklahoma</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="33%">
<b>Fiesta Bowl</b> <br>
Kansas <br>
OSU</td>
<td width="33%" rowspan="2">
<b>West Semi</b> <br>
Winner of Fiesta <br>
Winner of Rose</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="33%">
<b>Rose Bowl</b> <br>
USC <br>
Michigan</td>
</tr>
</table>

Not necessarily that format exactly, but something similar. I was just making a quick example.

That way every bowl will be happy because they get their tradition (meaning pre-BCS) match-up.

Coaches wouldnt have to deal with a long playoff, its only three extra games.

All the conferences wouldnt have to agree on whether they all should or should not have a conference championship game.

Eight teams would get a shot at the title instead of two. All they have to do is win the games, no polls or computers involved. (I'm sure there may be controversy over the 8th spot, but thats not nearly as bad as the controversy now over the 1st spot.)

It's a real simple solution that wouldnt require major restructuring and endless tweaking (like the BCS now.)

Oh no I meant now we risk another split title, which the BCS was supposed to avoid.

Sorry, I might not have made that clear

rofl, with 2 votes for No...i think it's a tie...

You can't have a playoff. Then a few schools get more bowl games, and there will be a big fight over the money handed to the schools. Most conferences split bowl earning amongst the entire list of schools in their conference. If these conferences get more games, they get more money, and it will surely doom the smaller conferences even more than they are now.

As for the BCS...its definitely suspect. A computer cannot tell how good a team is. Only the human eye can see player capabilities and things like that. I'm not a big fan of coaches voting either. They usually vote for whomever everyone else is voting for, not really putting much effort into it because they are more concerned with the upcoming game their own team has to play.

Without playoffs, there is no cure. But with college, there can be no playoffs...so...there will always be controversy when it comes to college national champs.

Um, Jassun, you do realize that there are both Kansas and a Kansas St. teams in bowls this year aren't you? I about choked when I saw you had Kansas listed as one of the top teams. Sure they actually had a better year than they have had in many, but it was K St. that beat Oklahoma

i'm not opposed to computerized polls on principle.

But if you look at the variance among the 6 different computer polls, it shows you clearly, that at this point, the broad category of computer polling is much LESS accurate than human polling. Now there may be one or more of those computer polls that is the best way of ranking a team, but in my opinion the best way to determine whether or not a team is the best is to settle it on the football field.

i still have a problem with FSU being ranked higher than Miami in all the polls (computer too). it doesnt make any fucking sense. they will settle it on Jan 2nd though. Fuck the seminoles.

The Criminoles lost to Clemson late, and should have lost to UF. The fact they they are ranked so highly shows you just how far the pollsters have their noses up Fatty's ass.

Kluden, right now a few schools DO get a shitload more money than most, so how would a playoff fuck that up? The teams that don't make the playoff could still have post-season Bowl games; it's not like a playoff and Bowl games are mutually exclusive.

The problem with your bracket, Jassun, is that it would keep players playing all the way through January, which would impact academics in a big way. The finals need to be the first or second week in January, at the latest.

academics ROFL!!!!

Voronwë wrote:academics ROFL!!!!

We must keep up appearances!

i joke.

i did tutor football players briefly in college. and the ones in my classes did go to class, so i think most of them are pretty good.

Voronwë wrote:i joke.

i did tutor football players briefly in college. and the ones in my classes did go to class, so i think most of them are pretty good.

I used to live next to some D linemen in G'ville. These guys would have study parties before tests and stuff, and pretty much anyone in the class would be welcome to come. Even the ones who were NFL prospects was pretty focused on keeping their grades up, and some of those guys were very smart. Good fellas to know, and it's nice to have LARGE individuals at your back when you're throwing the cowboy hats out of your party.

Not all athletes are "slow" when it comes to their studies. There are definitely many who ARE though. I used to have to tutor a teammate in college, and I really wondered how he even got IN to school.

Boogahz wrote:Um, Jassun, you do realize that there are both Kansas and a Kansas St. teams in bowls this year aren't you?

Opps I DID realize that there are two Kansas teams in bowls this year. However, I did NOT realize I mistakenly bracketed the wrong one in a BCS game, heh.

masteen wrote:The finals need to be the first or second week in January, at the latest.

At the latest, it would be over two weeks into January. Just two more weekends of games for two semi’s and a final. It would end even earlier if New Years fell early in the week and the semi's were held that weekend.

Kluden wrote:You can't have a playoff. Then a few schools get more bowl games, and there will be a big fight over the money handed to the schools.

Good point. Money is the very reason that the smaller schools were bitchin to Congress this past year. Money issues in amateur athletics will always cause problems like this, though.