PDA

View Full Version : BCS is shaping up....



MikeO
11-03-2006, 02:54 AM
BCS--Ohio St vsMich
Rose-Texas vs USC/Cal
Sugar--L'ville vsFlorida
Orange--ACC champ vs ND
Fiesta--Boise St vs Cal/USC

OR

BCS--OhioSt/Mich vs Florida
Rose---OhioSt/Mich vs USC/Cal
Sugar--Texas vs L'ville
Orange---ACC Champ vs ND
Fiesta--- Boise St vs Cal/USC

OR

BCS-Ohio St/Mich vs L'ville
Rose--Ohio St/Mich vs USC/Cal
Sugar--Texas vs Florida
Orange---ACC Champ vs ND
Fiesta---Boise St vs Cal/USC

I mean Florida and Texas could technically be knocked out of their spot if they lose in the conference championship game. But the 3 scenerios above look the most likely as of today.

DonShula84
11-03-2006, 03:24 AM
I'd much rather have ND play the ACC champ then any of the SEC teams or Texas. Though if GT manages to win the ACC I doubt we'd see a rematch.

nyjunc
11-03-2006, 06:13 AM
If OSU plays Mich for the title I will never watch another CFB game again. The BCS is bad but could it be that bad where the loser of that game who will have beaten 1 quality team all year could play their next game for a Championship?

DonShula84
11-03-2006, 06:27 AM
Other predictions. They have predicted ND/UF almost the entire season, I'm scared of that game to be honest.

http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootball/bowls/predictions

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-03-2006, 08:11 AM
Other predictions. They have predicted ND/UF almost the entire season, I'm scared of that game to be honest.

http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootball/bowls/predictions
those would be some pretty interesting matchups. i'd feel bad for brady quinn, though; we'd OWN him. :)

Motion
11-03-2006, 08:57 AM
those would be some pretty interesting matchups. i'd feel bad for brady quinn, though; we'd OWN him. :)
:yes:

I wouldn't mind playing ND though, be much more of a game than Florida/Texas. Of course, I really wanna play OSU.

FLOUNDER
11-03-2006, 09:38 AM
So no chance if we win out that we can go to a BCS game?

Motion
11-03-2006, 09:40 AM
So no chance if we win out that we can go to a BCS game?
I think it depends alot on how ND finishes.

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 09:43 AM
If OSU plays Mich for the title I will never watch another CFB game again. The BCS is bad but could it be that bad where the loser of that game who will have beaten 1 quality team all year could play their next game for a Championship?

Ummm, the BCS gives you a match up between the two BEST teams in football. Right now, Ohio State and Michigan are the two best teams in football. If the game is close or goes into OT, they are STILL the two best teams in college football. And who has only played 1 quality team?


Teams ranked when game was played:
Ohio State - #2 Texas, #13 Iowa, #22 Penn State, #2 Michigan
Michigan - #? Wisconsin, #4 Notre Dame, #1 Ohio State

I fail to see your point

FLOUNDER
11-03-2006, 09:44 AM
But they would have allready played in the regular season....Why would you want to wactch them again???!?!?!?!

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 09:45 AM
those would be some pretty interesting matchups. i'd feel bad for brady quinn, though; we'd OWN him. :)

Exactly how would you "own" Quinn when Florida couldn't stop a weaker Aurburn QB and WR?

Stitches
11-03-2006, 09:45 AM
I think it depends alot on how ND finishes.

If they lose to USC, do they still go to a BCS bowl?

Stitches
11-03-2006, 09:46 AM
But they would have allready played in the regular season....Why would you want to wactch them again???!?!?!?!

Because historically they are close games between two very good teams. Rarely are they not entertaining games to watch.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-03-2006, 09:47 AM
Exactly how would you "own" Quinn when Florida couldn't stop a weaker Aurburn QB and WR?
cox didn't do that great against UF....we lost that game on stupid mistakes.

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 09:47 AM
But they would have allready played in the regular season....Why would you want to wactch them again???!?!?!?!

I'm not saying that I would. But, the BCS says that they will give you the two best teams in the end in a match up. That's it!

We've never had this situation before in the BCS, so relax. It likely will not happen again any time soon. But we have to remember, BEFORE the BCS we rarely saw the two best teams in football square off in the end. The BCS brings that to the table and that is pretty cool.

Motion
11-03-2006, 09:47 AM
Exactly how would you "own" Quinn when Florida couldn't stop a weaker Aurburn QB and WR?
What game were you watching? The Florida defense held Auburn's offense to 4 FGs and 0 TDs. Our offense and special teams lost that game.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 09:49 AM
I'm not saying that I would. But, the BCS says that they will give you the two best teams in the end in a match up. That's it!

We've never had this situation before in the BCS, so relax. It likely will not happen again any time soon. But we have to remember, BEFORE the BCS we rarely saw the two best teams in football square off in the end. The BCS brings that to the table and that is pretty cool.

I'd be willing to argue against that. It's failed a couple times. Not a lot, but a couple. And considering it hasn't had many opportunities to fail, that's a big knock.

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 09:50 AM
cox didn't do that great against UF....we lost that game on stupid mistakes.

Well, believe it or not...good players force you into those "stupid" mistakes. I have a hate for Notre Dame that burns brighter than the sun, but Brady Quinn is a special player and is not easily owned. I.E. - USC vs Notre Dame last year. UCLA Vs. Notre Dame this year. Stanford Vs. Notre Dame last year. ETC, ETC, ETC...

The kid is clutch with ice in his veins...you don't "own" Brady Quinn. You expect him to make the big plays and hope that you can make some bigger plays of your own.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-03-2006, 09:51 AM
Well, believe it or not...good players force you into those "stupid" mistakes. I have a hate for Notre Dame that burns brighter than the sun, but Brady Quinn is a special player and is not easily owned. I.E. - USC vs Notre Dame last year. UCLA Vs. Notre Dame this year. Stanford Vs. Notre Dame last year. ETC, ETC, ETC...

The kid is clutch with ice in his veins...you don't "own" Brady Quinn. You expect him to make the big plays and hope that you can make some bigger plays of your own.
GOD. WHATEVER. it was SMACK TALK TO DS86. GOD. UGH.

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 09:51 AM
I'd be willing to argue against that. It's failed a couple times. Not a lot, but a couple. And considering it hasn't had many opportunities to fail, that's a big knock.

When has it failed to do so?
And the LSU/Aurburn/USC game is not failing. You have 3 pretty equal teams. You have to pick two, you can't have three teams in the same game. One team that was left out was bound to be angry. Tough.

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 09:53 AM
GOD. WHATEVER. it was SMACK TALK TO DS86. GOD. UGH.

Man, if I had a 10 year old sister you'd sound just like her.:lol:
Ease up....it's called a debate.

Motion
11-03-2006, 09:53 AM
Well, believe it or not...good players force you into those "stupid" mistakes. I have a hate for Notre Dame that burns brighter than the sun, but Brady Quinn is a special player and is not easily owned. I.E. - USC vs Notre Dame last year. UCLA Vs. Notre Dame this year. Stanford Vs. Notre Dame last year. ETC, ETC, ETC...

The kid is clutch with ice in his veins...you don't "own" Brady Quinn. You expect him to make the big plays and hope that you can make some bigger plays of your own.
Correct. But your previous post about Florida's defense is completely wrong. Thats the point she was making, the mistakes Florida made against Auburn were on offense and special teams. Cox is not a good Qb.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 09:54 AM
When has it failed to do so?
And the LSU/Aurburn/USC game is not failing. You have 3 pretty equal teams. You have to pick two, you can't have three teams in the same game. One team that was left out was bound to be angry. Tough.

That was one game I was referring to, and I thought I recalled a year when I think it was Oklahoma went ahead of Oregon. But that might not have been the NC now that I think about it.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 09:54 AM
Correct. But your previous post about Florida's defense is completely wrong. Thats the point she was making, the mistakes Florida made against Auburn were on offense and special teams. Cox is not a good Qb.

I second that motion, Motion. :wink:

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 09:55 AM
Correct. But your previous post about Florida's defense is completely wrong. Thats the point she was making, the mistakes Florida made against Auburn were on offense and special teams. Cox is not a good Qb.

I realize that, but I was just saying that Quinn hasn't really ever been "owned" and he has faced better teams than Florida this year. I just haven't really seen a team "own" Quinn and don't think Florida could do so either. He's just good and that is basically all their is to it.

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 09:57 AM
That was one game I was referring to, and I thought I recalled a year when I think it was Oklahoma went ahead of Oregon. But that might not have been the NC now that I think about it.

Yes that was a national championship game. But the BCS that year also took into consideration SOS into their equation. And that year, Oregon's SOS was something like 37 or maybe even higher. It's easy to see how a #2 team is so high when they play no one. IE- West Virginia 2006. :lol:

Stitches
11-03-2006, 09:58 AM
I realize that, but I was just saying that Quinn hasn't really ever been "owned" and he has faced better teams than Florida this year. I just haven't really seen a team "own" Quinn and don't think Florida could do so either. He's just good and that is basically all their is to it.

I don't think Notre Dame has faced better teams than Florida yet this season(as a whole), but I do agree I've haven't seen a team "own" Quinn.

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 09:58 AM
I don't think Notre Dame has faced better teams than Florida yet this season(as a whole), but I do agree I've haven't seen a team "own" Quinn.
Agreed 100%

Stitches
11-03-2006, 09:59 AM
Yes that was a national championship game. But the BCS that year also took into consideration SOS into their equation. And that year, Oregon's SOS was something like 37 or maybe even higher. It's easy to see how a #2 team is so high when they play no one. IE- West Virginia 2006. :lol:

That's why I said I could argue against the BCS, and why I didn't say the system was completely wrong.

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 10:01 AM
That's why I said I could argue against the BCS, and why I didn't say the system was completely wrong.
Well, IMO the SOS and Quality Wins factors were the best part of the BCS and they got rid of both of those factors.

I think teams should be judged on their schedules. (SEC teams would benefit this season) And be rewarded for good wins. (Ohio State would be even further ahead with wins over Texas and Michigan in the future).

So in that sense the BCS is a little flawed. I liked it better in the past. But, it's better than a play off. Listen to Kirk Herbstreit, they should do the BCS and a +1 system. That is the answer.

Motion
11-03-2006, 10:02 AM
I realize that, but I was just saying that Quinn hasn't really ever been "owned" and he has faced better teams than Florida this year. I just haven't really seen a team "own" Quinn and don't think Florida could do so either. He's just good and that is basically all their is to it.

No one's doubting Quinn's ablility, it was just some friendly smack to DS84. And ND has only played one team on Florida's level this year and they stomped them.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 10:16 AM
Well, IMO the SOS and Quality Wins factors were the best part of the BCS and they got rid of both of those factors.

I think teams should be judged on their schedules. (SEC teams would benefit this season) And be rewarded for good wins. (Ohio State would be even further ahead with wins over Texas and Michigan in the future).

So in that sense the BCS is a little flawed. I liked it better in the past. But, it's better than a play off. Listen to Kirk Herbstreit, they should do the BCS and a +1 system. That is the answer.

Like have the BCS games, then have a NC after those games play out? because if that's what you mean, I still prefer a playoff, but that would be better than the current BCS.

Motion
11-03-2006, 10:20 AM
The BCS +1 system is what Herbstreit and Mark May and all them have been hyping all year. Makes sense really.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-03-2006, 10:21 AM
i don't like the +1 idea at all. i say either keep it the way it is, or go all out and do a 16 or more team playoff.

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 10:24 AM
The plus one system would have fixed the LSU/Aurburn/USC controvery and the Oregon/Nebraska/Colorado problem as well.

You play the NC Game and then give the two best teams that survive the bowl games duke it out. Say in this instance, Ohio State plays Louisville in the BCS game. Michigan, Florida, Aurburn, etc all have their bowls. You take the winner of the "BCS Championship" game vs. the most impressive, highest ranked team to settle all bets. It's perfect.

Motion
11-03-2006, 10:25 AM
Every option has its flaws. There is no perfect answer. The current system clearly has a few issues. The +1 idea makes things hard because it would hard for 2 teams to play 2 such big games in a row. Playoff system would take a huge chunk out of the season and take away the popular bowls for the big teams.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 10:32 AM
Every option has its flaws. There is no perfect answer. The current system clearly has a few issues. The +1 idea makes things hard because it would hard for 2 teams to play 2 such big games in a row. Playoff system would take a huge chunk out of the season and take away the popular bowls for the big teams.

If it were a 16 team playoff, you could start it one week(if not the same week) before normal bowls start, it would finish about the same time it does now, and you could still use the current bowl sites to host the games.

And you couldn't complain about the college football season being to long really, since they play less games than the pros, and it still wouldn't be as ridiculously long as the baseball season. Why does it go into ****ing October?

Motion
11-03-2006, 10:36 AM
If it were a 16 team playoff, you could start it one week(if not the same week) before normal bowls start, it would finish about the same time it does now, and you could still use the current bowl sites to host the games.

And you couldn't complain about the college football season being to long really, since they play less games than the pros, and it still wouldn't be as ridiculously long as the baseball season. Why does it go into ****ing October?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for more College Football. But the big thing you have to remember is these are School Football teams, they have final exams in December. The main reason there is such a break between regular season and bowls.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 10:38 AM
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for more College Football. But the big thing you have to remember is these are School Football teams, they have final exams in December. The main reason there is such a break between regular season and bowls.

I take that into account. I also take into account many of these players majors. I saw last night some of the WV db's majors were "athletic coaching studies." I realize it's not everyone's major, but all teams would have exams to focus on, so it's not like some teams would get more time than others.

Also, a lot of people work like 30 hour a week jobs(if not more) to pay for thier schooling, and they still have to find a way to focus on exams. So it wouldn't be so much of a unique situation to the athletes.

MikeO
11-03-2006, 10:39 AM
Ummm, the BCS gives you a match up between the two BEST teams in football. Right now, Ohio State and Michigan are the two best teams in football. If the game is close or goes into OT, they are STILL the two best teams in college football. And who has only played 1 quality team?


Teams ranked when game was played:
Ohio State - #2 Texas, #13 Iowa, #22 Penn State, #2 Michigan
Michigan - #? Wisconsin, #4 Notre Dame, #1 Ohio State

I fail to see your point

Penn St and Iowa aren't very good. Penn St won't finished hte season ranked. And Iowa isn't good at all this year.

MikeO
11-03-2006, 10:42 AM
I'm not saying that I would. But, the BCS says that they will give you the two best teams in the end in a match up. That's it!

We've never had this situation before in the BCS, so relax. It likely will not happen again any time soon. But we have to remember, BEFORE the BCS we rarely saw the two best teams in football square off in the end. The BCS brings that to the table and that is pretty cool.

This is gonna end up like when Oklahoma lgot killed in the Big 12 title game to Colorddo but they still put the Sooners in the championship game.

Bottom line is this.......if Ohio St loses at home you WON'T see a rematch. Because if you lose at home your screwed!!! If Michigan loses a close one on the road to OSU, then you will probably see a rematch!

That's that!

MikeO
11-03-2006, 10:43 AM
I realize that, but I was just saying that Quinn hasn't really ever been "owned" and he has faced better teams than Florida this year. I just haven't really seen a team "own" Quinn and don't think Florida could do so either. He's just good and that is basically all their is to it.

Quinn was god awful vs GT. I think the longest completion he had all day was for 13 yards!

NJFINSFAN1
11-03-2006, 10:45 AM
Bottom line is this.......if Ohio St loses at home you WON'T see a rematch. Because if you lose at home your screwed!!! If Michigan loses a close one on the road to OSU, then you will probably see a rematch!

That's that!

yep, they were saying the same thing on ESPN radio yesterday.

MikeO
11-03-2006, 10:46 AM
The BCS +1 system is what Herbstreit and Mark May and all them have been hyping all year. Makes sense really.

NO it doesn't make sense.

Say, Mich beats Ohio St. Say along the road L'ville loses. Now you have only 1 unbeaten team. Mich goes to the BCS bowl, beats Florida for example.

Now you have a + 1 game. Only 1 unbeaten team. Mich already beat ND, Florida, and Ohio St. Why should Mich have to win another game, they clearly are the champs!!!!!

MikeO
11-03-2006, 10:51 AM
If it were a 16 team playoff, you could start it one week(if not the same week) before normal bowls start, it would finish about the same time it does now, and you could still use the current bowl sites to host the games.

And you couldn't complain about the college football season being to long really, since they play less games than the pros, and it still wouldn't be as ridiculously long as the baseball season. Why does it go into ****ing October?

You will NEVER see a playoff. Because with a playoff that means the Bowls go away. And these bowls have been too good to these college presidents and conferences for over 60 years!!!!!!! The presidents won't ever turn their backs on the bowls.

The day you have a playoff, the bowls go away. IT will never happen. (and baseball is played by PROFESSIONALS) these are college kids playing for "free"

And you can't use the current bowl sites to host games. For example......If your a Michigan fan. In a 16 team tourny that is 4 games. Your telling me the Michigan fans will travel to 4 different sites to watch the team play????? NO CHANCE IN HELL!!! They will wait till the final game and go to that one. One week Michigan is in the Peach Bowl in Atlanta, all the fans will travel there. The following week in San Diego for the Holiday Bowl, all of the fans will pack up 6 days later and travel there. Then the next week to the Orange Bowl in a semi-final, pack up on 6 days notice fly there. Then go where ever for the final game. No normal fans can afford 3 or 4 trips like that to watch their team play.

Not to mention you will give 1 school 4 bowl payouts. While a school who maybe ended the year 9-2 but ranked #17th or #18th and out of the tourney, has NO postseason bowl games and stays at home and collects no money!!! :sidelol: :sidelol: Good luck getting the college presidents to agree to that!

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 10:57 AM
Penn St and Iowa aren't very good. Penn St won't finished hte season ranked. And Iowa isn't good at all this year.

Umm, you will notice that I said their ranking when they played.
And do not diminish the ability of Iowa because of some bad games. Going into Iowa City and leaving with a win is no easy task.

And I notice that you are talking about the schedule of Ohio State here obviously.

Give me a break. By season's end in all likelyhood, Ohio State will have played THREE #1 vs. #2 match ups. Let's not talk about schedule strength. That has NEVER been done before. I'd say that's the schedule that all others are judged by. PERIOD. Not to mention the #13, #22 games when the other teams were played as well.

You have no argument here at all.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 10:58 AM
You will NEVER see a playoff. Because with a playoff that means the Bowls go away. And these bowls have been too good to these college presidents and conferences for over 60 years!!!!!!! The presidents won't ever turn their backs on the bowls.

The day you have a playoff, the bowls go away. IT will never happen. (and baseball is played by PROFESSIONALS) these are college kids playing for "free"

And you can't use the current bowl sites to host games. For example......If your a Michigan fan. In a 16 team tourny that is 4 games. Your telling me the Michigan fans will travel to 4 different sites to watch the team play????? NO CHANCE IN HELL!!! They will wait till the final game and go to that one. One week Michigan is in the Peach Bowl in Atlanta, all the fans will travel there. The following week in San Diego for the Holiday Bowl, all of the fans will pack up 6 days later and travel there. Then the next week to the Orange Bowl in a semi-final, pack up on 6 days notice fly there. Then go where ever for the final game.

Not to mention you will give 1 school 4 bowl payouts. While a school who maybe ended the year 9-2 but ranked #17th or #18th has NO postseason bowl games and stays at home and collects no money!!! :sidelol: :sidelol: Good luck getting the college presidents to agree to that!

I never said they couldn't play other bowls. I just said that only 16 teams would be in the playoff race. As to the 4 bowl payouts, you could just make the payouts in relation to where the team ends up, not 4 payouts. It could be one payout because you made the playoffs, and for example the team that finishes #5 in the playoffs would get more than the #12 team. And I never said the playoff system didn't have flaws either.

And as to the "NO CHANCE IN HELL" fans would travel to 4 sites, you'd be surprised at to what some fans would be willing to do.

Edit: The only reason I mentioned baseball, was because of how long it went, and that I think it is too long. And most college players get thier schooling paid for and some get stipends, so they aren't exactly playing for "free." They do get some compensation.

Motion
11-03-2006, 10:59 AM
NO it doesn't make sense.

Say, Mich beats Ohio St. Say along the road L'ville loses. Now you have only 1 unbeaten team. Mich goes to the BCS bowl, beats Florida for example.

Now you have a + 1 game. Only 1 unbeaten team. Mich already beat ND, Florida, and Ohio St. Why should Mich have to win another game, they clearly are the champs!!!!!
Thats why I said later on in the thread that there is no perfect system.

MikeO
11-03-2006, 11:01 AM
The ONLY answer is this. The ONLY way you can play for the national title is IF you win your conference.

So, that means the year Oklahoma lost the Big 12 title game they shouldn't have played for it all. That means this year the loser of OhioSt/Mich gets no rematch.

If the BCS did that........pretty much all debates would be over. Now, how the conference decides their conference champ is up to them. Some conferences have a title game some don't. But that is up to the conference in the end. So, for example that would mean this year you end up with.....Mich,L'ville,BC,Florida,Texas,Cal. ND get's screwed on this but hey, they can't have their cake and eat it too.

That is 6 schools. Hopefully out of 6 you can figure out the best 2. If not, then you leave the door open to a +1 game. Doesn't mean it will take place every year. But say for this year. You have Florida-Mich in one bowl. And then L'ville-Texas in the other. And Florida wins and you still have L'ville unbeaten. Then do a +1 game a few weeks later.

But say L'ville loses at some point, then the Florida-Mich winner is the champ. No +1 game necessary.

THAT is the answer!!!!! Just have that 1 game in your back-pocket at all times.

MikeO
11-03-2006, 11:03 AM
Umm, you will notice that I said their ranking when they played.
And do not diminish the ability of Iowa because of some bad games. Going into Iowa City and leaving with a win is no easy task.

And I notice that you are talking about the schedule of Ohio State here obviously.

Give me a break. By season's end in all likelyhood, Ohio State will have played THREE #1 vs. #2 match ups. Let's not talk about schedule strength. That has NEVER been done before. I'd say that's the schedule that all others are judged by. PERIOD. Not to mention the #13, #22 games when the other teams were played as well.

You have no argument here at all.

Sure I do. You played iowa and penn st. Where they WERE ranked then and where they finish is important. If both teams finish unranked, then it means they aren't very good. And yes they were ranked when you beat them, that just means they were overhyped and frauds!!!

Meaning your schedule isn't what it looked like it was. Look you won at Texas great win. You have a chance to beat Mich great win. You got LUCKY by not having to play Wisconsin. And the rest of your schedule isn't that impressive.

rafael
11-03-2006, 11:03 AM
I don't think it would make sense to have a +1 game some of the time.

Motion
11-03-2006, 11:04 AM
The ONLY answer is this. The ONLY way you can play for the national title is IF you win your conference.

So, that means the year Oklahoma lost the Big 12 title game they shouldn't have played for it all. That means this year the loser of OhioSt/Mich gets no rematch.

Good post. I definitely agree with this part.

MikeO
11-03-2006, 11:06 AM
I never said they couldn't play other bowls. I just said that only 16 teams would be in the playoff race. As to the 4 bowl payouts, you could just make the payouts in relation to where the team ends up, not 4 payouts. It could be one payout because you made the playoffs, and for example the team that finishes #5 in the playoffs would get more than the #12 team. And I never said the playoff system didn't have flaws either.

And as to the "NO CHANCE IN HELL" fans would travel to 4 sites, you'd be surprised at to what some fans would be willing to do.

.

You can't have a playoff and other bowls. Then you make the other bowls like the NIT in basketball and nobody will care. If your the CAPITAL ONE BOWL, and you have the likes of let's say Pittsburgh vs Iowa playing in it. Why would Capital One put up the money for that bowl nobody will watch or care about??? When they could pull out, take those millions of $$$ and just buy a ton of advertising on TV in the TOURNAMENT GAMES which everyone will be watching.

And no, normal fans can't afford to make 3 or 4 trips across the country to watch their football team play on consecutive weeks. Most "normal" fans have jobs and family's. Making it impossible

Stitches
11-03-2006, 11:06 AM
Good post. I definitely agree.

Only part I don't like with that(the only part) is the other conferences would never have a shot(much like they don't now). I didn't say I don't agree with it, I just said I don't like it.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 11:08 AM
You can't have a playoff and other bowls. Then you make the other bowls like the NIT in basketball and nobody will care. If your the CAPITAL ONE BOWL, and you have the likes of let's say Pittsburgh vs Iowa playing in it. Why would Capital One put up the money for that bowl nobody will watch or care about??? When they could pull out, take those millions of $$$ and just buy a ton of advertising on TV in the TOURNAMENT GAMES which everyone will be watching.

And no, normal fans can't afford to make 3 or 4 trips across the country to watch their football team play on consecutive weeks. Most "normal" fans have jobs and family's. Making it impossible

And I'd still watch and care about the other bowl games. But I do understand what you are saying from a business standpoint.

I agree most normal fans, that's why I said some.

MikeO
11-03-2006, 11:08 AM
Only part I don't like with that(the only part) is the other conferences would never have a shot(much like they don't now). I didn't say I don't agree with it, I just said I don't like it.

Ok, so maybe leave 1 spot open for ND and the Boise St/C-USA/MWC types then. Group them all together and give them 1 spot in this.

rafael
11-03-2006, 11:11 AM
You can't have a playoff and other bowls. Then you make the other bowls like the NIT in basketball and nobody will care. If your the CAPITAL ONE BOWL, and you have the likes of let's say Pittsburgh vs Iowa playing in it. Why would Capital One put up the money for that bowl nobody will watch or care about??? When they could pull out, take those millions of $$$ and just buy a ton of advertising on TV in the TOURNAMENT GAMES which everyone will be watching.

And no, normal fans can't afford to make 3 or 4 trips across the country to watch their football team play on consecutive weeks. Most "normal" fans have jobs and family's. Making it impossible

Does anybody not a Pitt or Iowa fan care now?

Stitches
11-03-2006, 11:11 AM
Ok, so maybe leave 1 spot open for ND and the Boise St/C-USA/MWC types then. Group them all together and give them 1 spot in this.

Can you group the MAC with that? And maybe if there are 2 teams that deserve it, you use a "play in' game like the 16a/16b game in march madness? I know there aren't 2 teams ths year, just at some point there may be 2 undefeateds or something.

MikeO
11-03-2006, 11:12 AM
Can you group the MAC with that? And maybe if there are 2 teams that deserve it, you use a "play in' game like the 16a/16b game in march madness? I know there aren't 2 teams ths year, just at some point there may be 2 undefeateds or something.

yeah whatever. All of thsoe small conferences group them together with ND.

It won't matter 99% of the time. You don't need a play in game becuase its not a tournament. You just look at the conference champs to decide who plays for it all.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 11:14 AM
yeah whatever. All of thsoe small conferences group them together with ND.

It won't matter 99% of the time. You don't need a play in game becuase its not a tournament. You just look at the conference champs to decide who plays for it all.

Well I know it's not a playoff, you just said decide 1 spot from those conferences, and if there were 2 undefeateds, it might be tough(but yes, 99% of the time it won't matter. I just want to see that 1% is all, which is why I want a 16+ team playoff).

finswin56
11-03-2006, 11:14 AM
The ONLY answer is this. The ONLY way you can play for the national title is IF you win your conference.

So, that means the year Oklahoma lost the Big 12 title game they shouldn't have played for it all. That means this year the loser of OhioSt/Mich gets no rematch.

If the BCS did that........pretty much all debates would be over. Now, how the conference decides their conference champ is up to them. Some conferences have a title game some don't. But that is up to the conference in the end. So, for example that would mean this year you end up with.....Mich,L'ville,BC,Florida,Texas,Cal. ND get's screwed on this but hey, they can't have their cake and eat it too.

That is 6 schools. Hopefully out of 6 you can figure out the best 2. If not, then you leave the door open to a +1 game. Doesn't mean it will take place every year. But say for this year. You have Florida-Mich in one bowl. And then L'ville-Texas in the other. And Florida wins and you still have L'ville unbeaten. Then do a +1 game a few weeks later.

But say L'ville loses at some point, then the Florida-Mich winner is the champ. No +1 game necessary.

THAT is the answer!!!!! Just have that 1 game in your back-pocket at all times.To add to that, BCS conferences must do something to balance out the extra top ranked games that the SEC, ACC, and BIG-12 teams face with a conference championship. It's absurd that this game can have such a large effect on those conferences with the other BCS conferences don't do something similar. And don't get me started about the Big-10 schools not even played each team in conference.

MikeO
11-03-2006, 11:16 AM
To add to that, BCS conferences must do something to balance out the extra top ranked games that the SEC, ACC, and BIG-12 teams face with a conference championship. It's absurd that this game can have such a large effect on those conferences with the other BCS conferences don't do something similar. And don't get me started about the Big-10 schools not even played each team in conference.

The conference championship games are something each conference decided to play!! Nobody put a gun to their head and are forcing them to play them. These conferences want the $$$$$$$$$$ though, so they sell their souls with those things.

So, like Oklahoma a few years back. If you lose in that game, under my theory....they would get screwed!

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 12:07 PM
Sure I do. You played iowa and penn st. Where they WERE ranked then and where they finish is important. If both teams finish unranked, then it means they aren't very good. And yes they were ranked when you beat them, that just means they were overhyped and frauds!!!

Meaning your schedule isn't what it looked like it was. Look you won at Texas great win. You have a chance to beat Mich great win. You got LUCKY by not having to play Wisconsin. And the rest of your schedule isn't that impressive.

Why because we'd have another quality win?!?
You're full of it. Ohio State stands heads/shoulder above the rest of the NCAA this year. Call it lack of schedule, but you're the ONLY one saying that and it's the first time I've heard it all season. You're crazy...

But there is NO team that can guard WR's Ginn, Gonzo, Robo...
Troy Smith will beat you with his arm, legs, accuracy, and good decesions. He is a PERFECT college quarterback.
Ohio State's defense is easily the most athletic, fastest defense in the nation.

Call it weak schedule, I'll call it an unstoppable team.
The only team in the nation that has a chance to beat us is Michigan. And we will see that game in 2 weeks. Ohio State will win by over 17.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 12:11 PM
Why because we'd have another quality win?!?
You're full of it. Ohio State stands heads/shoulder above the rest of the NCAA this year. Call it lack of schedule, but you're the ONLY one saying that and it's the first time I've heard it all season. You're crazy...

But there is NO team that can guard WR's Ginn, Gonzo, Robo...
Troy Smith will beat you with his arm, legs, accuracy, and good decesions. He is a PERFECT college quarterback.
Ohio State's defense is easily the most athletic, fastest defense in the nation.

Call it weak schedule, I'll call it an unstoppable team.
The only team in the nation that has a chance to beat us is Michigan. And we will see that game in 2 weeks. Ohio State will win by over 17.

I'd be willing to argue about Ohio State having the fastest and most athletic defense.

NJFINSFAN1
11-03-2006, 12:11 PM
Why because we'd have another quality win?!?
You're full of it. Ohio State stands heads/shoulder above the rest of the NCAA this year. Call it lack of schedule, but you're the ONLY one saying that and it's the first time I've heard it all season. You're crazy...

But there is NO team that can guard WR's Ginn, Gonzo, Robo...
Troy Smith will beat you with his arm, legs, accuracy, and good decesions. He is a PERFECT college quarterback.
Ohio State's defense is easily the most athletic, fastest defense in the nation.

Call it weak schedule, I'll call it an unstoppable team.
The only team in the nation that has a chance to beat us is Michigan. And we will see that game in 2 weeks. Ohio State will win by over 17.

I'm not saying your defense is not one of the best, but wow! Take it easy there!

nyjunc
11-03-2006, 12:11 PM
Ummm, the BCS gives you a match up between the two BEST teams in football. Right now, Ohio State and Michigan are the two best teams in football. If the game is close or goes into OT, they are STILL the two best teams in college football. And who has only played 1 quality team?


Teams ranked when game was played:
Ohio State - #2 Texas, #13 Iowa, #22 Penn State, #2 Michigan
Michigan - #? Wisconsin, #4 Notre Dame, #1 Ohio State

I fail to see your point

If Mich or OSU loses in their last game they do nto deserve to play for a Nat'l Title. In what sport can you lose your last game then play for a Championship in the next game? I do believe OSU is the best team in the Coutnry but they have played 1 good team, Mich is a good team but they have played 1 decent team. Their scheds are creampuffs and w/ those scheds 1 loss should knock them out of any consideration.

It means nothing what the rankings were when they played. teams are overrated early on every year. iowa stinks, PS isn't good, ND is decent but overrated, Wisconsin hasn't beaten a good team yet. The Big 10 stinks this year and OSU and Mich's non-conf scheds are weak outside of 1 game.

finswin56
11-03-2006, 12:11 PM
The conference championship games are something each conference decided to play!! Nobody put a gun to their head and are forcing them to play them. These conferences want the $$$$$$$$$$ though, so they sell their souls with those things.

So, like Oklahoma a few years back. If you lose in that game, under my theory....they would get screwed!

You can't have your cake and eat it too.That's not really my point.
There is already so much subjectivity regarding the BCS. When half of your BCS conferences play an extra game against a quality opponent it just adds another level of inequality to the equation. The more quality opponents a team faces, the more opportunites that team has to lose. Especially when a top team faces a rematch of another top team.
And again, the Big 10 teams don't have a championship game, and yet aren't playing every team in that conference. It's pathetic.

It's about trying to find as much objectivity and equality in a mostly subjective process. This is even more important w/o a playoff system.

BTW, I'm in favor of only an 8 team playoff system, using the bowls as part of that system.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 12:12 PM
If Mich or OSU loses in their last game they do nto deserve to play for a Nat'l Title. In what sport can you lose your last game then play for a Championship in the next game? I do believe OSU is the best team in the Coutnry but they have played 1 good team, Mich is a good team but they have played 1 decent team. Their scheds are creampuffs and w/ those scheds 1 loss should knock them out of any consideration.

It means nothing what the rankings were when they played. teams are overrated early on every year. iowa stinks, PS isn't good, ND is decent but overrated, Wisconsin hasn't beaten a good team yet. The Big 10 stinks this year and OSU and Mich's non-conf scheds are weak outside of 1 game.

It's happened before where a team lost thier last game, then played for the NC.

Motion
11-03-2006, 12:13 PM
I'm not saying your defense is not one of the best, but wow! Take it easy there!

:lol: Where have you been Jersey, this is everyday.

Motion
11-03-2006, 12:15 PM
That's not really my point.
There is already so much subjectivity regarding the BCS. When half of your BCS conferences play an extra game against a quality opponent it just adds another level of inequality to the equation. The more quality opponents a team faces, the more opportunites that team has to lose. Especially when a top team faces a rematch of another top team.
And again, the Big 10 teams don't have a championship game, and yet aren't playing every team in that conference. It's pathetic.

It's about trying to find as much objectivity and equality in a mostly subjective process. This is even more important w/o a playoff system.

BTW, I'm in favor of only an 8 team playoff system, using the bowls as part of that system.

I agree, if they were to put in a playoff system I don't think it needs to be any bigger.

NJFINSFAN1
11-03-2006, 12:15 PM
:lol: Where have you been Jersey, this is everyday.

I can argue that Rutgers has the fastest and most athletic defense in college football. But it does not make them the best.

PS

Who has more sacks on Defense this year OSu or Rutgers???

And who has the smaller more Athletic D-Line???

I know the Answer!!!!

Motion
11-03-2006, 12:17 PM
I can argue that Rutgers has the fastest and most athletic defense in college football. But it does not make them the best.

PS

Who has more sacks on Defense this year OSu or Rutgers???

And who has the smaller more Athletic D-Line???

I know the Answer!!!!

Rutgers, but you know the strength of schedule will be brought up immediately.

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/sortableStatsTeam?div=CFB&stype=DEFENSE&stable=passing&stat=passSck&dir=descending

NJFINSFAN1
11-03-2006, 12:19 PM
Rutgers, but you know the strength of schedule will be brought up immediately.

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/sortableStatsTeam?div=CFB&stype=DEFENSE&stable=passing&stat=passSck&dir=descending

But I can still argue it!:wink:

To say a defense is that easily is just ridiculous, that's my point

MikeO
11-03-2006, 12:31 PM
Call it weak schedule, I'll call it an unstoppable team.
.

After a week of being here in this message board bashing the Big East teams for playing a weak schedule you now say..........call OSU's schedule weak but it doesn't matter because they are an unstoppale team?????

Are you kidding me!! You didn't just say that!!!!!!!!!!

Motion
11-03-2006, 12:32 PM
After a week of being here in this message board bashing the Big East teams for playing a weak schedule you now say..........call OSU's schedule weak but it doesn't matter because they are an unstoppale team?????

Are you kidding me!! You didn't just say that!!!!!!!!!!

:lol:

NJFINSFAN1
11-03-2006, 12:33 PM
After a week of being here in this message board bashing the Big East teams for playing a weak schedule you now say..........call OSU's schedule weak but it doesn't matter because they are an unstoppale team?????

Are you kidding me!! You didn't just say that!!!!!!!!!!

Yes he did!!!

But it suits his needs now! :lol:

MikeO
11-03-2006, 12:37 PM
Yes he did!!!

But it suits his needs now! :lol:

Well his credibility is pretty much SHOT in this message board now. :sidelol: :sidelol: :lol: :lol: He can't be taken seriously anymore

Motion
11-03-2006, 12:44 PM
Well his credibility is pretty much SHOT in this message board now. :sidelol: :sidelol: :lol: :lol: He can't be taken seriously anymore

http://www.finheaven.com/clear.gif

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 01:12 PM
I can argue that Rutgers has the fastest and most athletic defense in college football. But it does not make them the best.

PS

Who has more sacks on Defense this year OSu or Rutgers???

And who has the smaller more Athletic D-Line???

I know the Answer!!!!
You are out of you mind if you are assuming Rutgers has a better D than Ohio State. the amount of sacks a defense means squat. In fact Louisville's so-called defense proved that last night. The ave. 4.5 sacks a game and were less than pathetic on defense.

And yes, I will bring up schedule strength. Sorry, Rutgers playing the New Jersey School of the Blind each week hardly counts in my book as a stat builder.

And yes, Ohio State's defense is the fastest (check thier 40 yrd dashes and compare) and most athletic in the nation.

After losing the most talented defense last year there was question about the void. Only to see this years squad put up better numbers. That's after losing 3 1st round picks to the NFL.

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 01:19 PM
After a week of being here in this message board bashing the Big East teams for playing a weak schedule you now say..........call OSU's schedule weak but it doesn't matter because they are an unstoppale team?????

Are you kidding me!! You didn't just say that!!!!!!!!!!

I'm not the one who said they have a weak schedule there genuis. You did that.
You are having trouble following the flow of the discussion obviously. You said that OSU schedule was in quesion, I said it wasn't.

I responded by saying that YOu were the only person I've heard say anythin about the strength of OSU's schedule, LEADING me to say that, "YOU CAN CALL IT A WEAK SCHEDULE, I'LL IT AN UNSTOPABLE TEAM."

And who are all of you kidding?!?! Like anyone has "credibility" on the internet.

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 01:21 PM
Well his credibility is pretty much SHOT in this message board now. :sidelol: :sidelol: :lol: :lol: He can't be taken seriously anymore

How old are you? Was it really that funny? I mean smileys are kind of dumb anyways, but you wnet above and beyond and put 4 there. You must laugh pretty easy...

305TillIDie
11-03-2006, 01:25 PM
BCS--Ohio St vsMich
Rose-Texas vs USC/Cal
Sugar--L'ville vsFlorida
Orange--ACC champ vs ND
Fiesta--Boise St vs Cal/USC

OR

BCS--OhioSt/Mich vs Florida
Rose---OhioSt/Mich vs USC/Cal
Sugar--Texas vs L'ville
Orange---ACC Champ vs ND
Fiesta--- Boise St vs Cal/USC

OR

BCS-Ohio St/Mich vs L'ville
Rose--Ohio St/Mich vs USC/Cal
Sugar--Texas vs Florida
Orange---ACC Champ vs ND
Fiesta---Boise St vs Cal/USC

I mean Florida and Texas could technically be knocked out of their spot if they lose in the conference championship game. But the 3 scenerios above look the most likely as of today.


how can OSU play Michigan in the championship game if both of those teams play at the end of the season?

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 01:27 PM
how can OSU play Michigan in the championship game if both of those teams play at the end of the season?

Because the BCS says that two BEST teams play in the BCS Championship. It says nothing about win/loss records. If the game is close, chances are they are stil lthe 2 BEST teams in the NCAA.

305TillIDie
11-03-2006, 01:31 PM
Because the BCS says that two BEST teams play in the BCS Championship. It says nothing about win/loss records. If the game is close, chances are they are stil lthe 2 BEST teams in the NCAA.thats stupid..if Louisville win out, it should be Louisville and OSU/Michigan..they both undefeated..if they doesnt happen, you will have a pissed off Louisville team and a messed up BCS system

Alex44
11-03-2006, 01:36 PM
thats stupid..if Louisville win out, it should be Louisville and OSU/Michigan..they both undefeated..if they doesnt happen, you will have a pissed off Louisville team and a messed up BCS system

I think it should be the two best teams, but I agree with you, I mean come on if Ohio State beats Michigan (or the other way around) why have them play again when there are other deserving teams?

I dont think just cause LV is undefeated they should get in though, if someone like Florida dominates an LV just barely wins their games Id vote Florida in even with one loss

MikeO
11-03-2006, 01:55 PM
http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g56/motion23/scratch.gif

I know I know, my bad. he never had any to start with!! lol :sidelol:

OSUDauby
11-03-2006, 03:09 PM
I know I know, my bad. he never had any to start with!! lol :sidelol:

Man, if my warning level wasn't already 100%.
You're a really neat guy...:shakeno:

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-03-2006, 03:11 PM
Man, if my warning level wasn't already 100%.
You're a really neat guy...:shakeno:
100%? :lol: you've only been here 2 months.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 03:14 PM
100%? :lol: you've only been here 2 months.

But Ohio State fans' arrogance(not neccessarily from him) is enough to last a lifetime.

FLOUNDER
11-03-2006, 03:27 PM
Im at 60% right now. Thats just because im a jerk to people:lol:

NJFINSFAN1
11-03-2006, 03:34 PM
You are out of you mind if you are assuming Rutgers has a better D than Ohio State. the amount of sacks a defense means squat. In fact Louisville's so-called defense proved that last night. The ave. 4.5 sacks a game and were less than pathetic on defense.

And yes, I will bring up schedule strength. Sorry, Rutgers playing the New Jersey School of the Blind each week hardly counts in my book as a stat builder.

And yes, Ohio State's defense is the fastest (check thier 40 yrd dashes and compare) and most athletic in the nation.

After losing the most talented defense last year there was question about the void. Only to see this years squad put up better numbers. That's after losing 3 1st round picks to the NFL.

Sacks mean nothing, you just lost all creditability again.

And I never said Rutgers is the best defense, I said they are more athletic and faster then OSU!

You really need to learn how to read posts.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 03:56 PM
Sacks mean nothing, you just lost all creditability again.

And I never said Rutgers is the best defense, I said they are more athletic and faster then OSU!

You really need to learn how to read posts.

Much like Maryland is all about crab cakes and football (it's what they do best :wink: ), reading posts is not one of the things Ohio does best. I'd say we're pretty good at spelling our state name out with band members and having some of the most inconsistent weather anywhere though.

Motion
11-03-2006, 03:57 PM
Much like Maryland is all about crab cakes and football (it's what they do best :wink: ), reading posts is not one of the things Ohio does best. I'd say we're pretty good at spelling our state name out with band members and having some of the most inconsistent weather anywhere though.

:yes: I'm having some tonight!

NJFINSFAN1
11-03-2006, 03:58 PM
:yes: I'm having some tonight!

Spray told me you have crabs!!!!:lol:

Alex44
11-03-2006, 04:01 PM
Id like to see Ohio State vs Rutgers now :lol:

Even though I think OSU would slaughter them it would be fun to see how good Rutgers actually is

Stitches
11-03-2006, 04:04 PM
Spray told me you have crabs!!!!:lol:

How do you think Motion got 'em?

NJFINSFAN1
11-03-2006, 04:12 PM
Id like to see Ohio State vs Rutgers now :lol:

Even though I think OSU would slaughter them it would be fun to see how good Rutgers actually is

The funny thing is when someone makes statements like the best defense in the league easily. You can argue that many teams are the best, its just silly to say.

Stitches
11-03-2006, 04:20 PM
The funny thing is when someone makes statements like the best defense in the league easily. You can argue that many teams are the best, its just silly to say.

But Ohio State is perfect, so there's no use in arguing...:rolleyes:

NJFINSFAN1
11-03-2006, 04:25 PM
But Ohio State is perfect, so there's no use in arguing...:rolleyes:

That's what Maurice Clarrett keeps saying!:lol:

Stitches
11-03-2006, 04:34 PM
That's what Maurice Clarrett keeps saying!:lol:

You're misquoting, Clarrett says "Ohio State Prison is perfect." 3 square meals a day, and all the goo times he could ever want.

Motion
11-03-2006, 04:39 PM
Spray told me you have crabs!!!!:lol:

He would know, Lappy gets around.

DonShula84
11-03-2006, 07:10 PM
I'm sad I missed the early trash talking :( Though I was shocked to see an OSU fan say good things about Quinn

nyjunc
11-03-2006, 07:31 PM
It's happened before where a team lost thier last game, then played for the NC.

It was a joke in '01 w/ Nebraska and '03 w/ Oklahoma. CFB overall is a joke b/c they can't determine a Champ they way it should be determined.

Let's say OSU beats Mich, is it really fair to ask them to do it again the following game?


Because the BCS says that two BEST teams play in the BCS Championship. It says nothing about win/loss records. If the game is close, chances are they are stil lthe 2 BEST teams in the NCAA.

The problem is they aren't the 2 best teams now and won;'t be after their game. I think OSU os the best but I am not impressed w/ Michigan who has been struggling w/ weak Big 10 teams.


Sacks mean nothing, you just lost all creditability again.

And I never said Rutgers is the best defense, I said they are more athletic and faster then OSU!

You really need to learn how to read posts.

How can you tell? Rutgers has played an easy sched for a HS team so of course they should look much faster than their opponents. I am interested to see what they can do next week aaginst their first quality opponent.

DonShula84
11-03-2006, 07:46 PM
Am I the only one who doesnt have a problem with the BCS/Bowl system? I like that every game counts in college football, the entire season is like a playoff and every game is fun and important. You have to be perfect, you dont see that in any other sport. I think you could tweak the system to make sure the best two teams are playing each other, but I dont think I'm for dumping the system and having a true playoff system though I do see positives in that system also. I guess I just dont see why the BCS makes college football a joke.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-03-2006, 07:49 PM
Am I the only one who doesnt have a problem with the BCS/Bowl system? I like that every game counts in college football, the entire season is like a playoff and every game is fun and important. You have to be perfect, you dont see that in any other sport. I think you could tweak the system to make sure the best two teams are playing each other, but I dont think I'm for dumping the system and having a true playoff system though I do see positives in that system also. I guess I just dont see why the BCS makes college football a joke.
i agree completely. i think people that complain about a playoff aren't true college football fans, they're just NFL fans who are starting to get into college for whatever reason. they're SUPPOSED to be different, and i love the tradition of bowls and how every game is EXTREMELY important.

nyjunc
11-03-2006, 07:56 PM
Am I the only one who doesnt have a problem with the BCS/Bowl system? I like that every game counts in college football, the entire season is like a playoff and every game is fun and important. You have to be perfect, you dont see that in any other sport. I think you could tweak the system to make sure the best two teams are playing each other, but I dont think I'm for dumping the system and having a true playoff system though I do see positives in that system also. I guess I just dont see why the BCS makes college football a joke.

Every game doesn't count when Nebraska can get blow out in the Big 12 ttile game in '01 then play for the Nat'l title the next game and when OU can have the same happen to them in '03. Let's not forgt about Co-Champions and big time teams only play maybe 2-3 decent teams a year and maybe have 1-2 really tough games. CFB would be much better w/ a playoff, it would be the next biggest sporting event in the US after the NFL playoffs.

HysterikiLL
11-03-2006, 08:18 PM
Am I the only one who doesnt have a problem with the BCS/Bowl system? I like that every game counts in college football, the entire season is like a playoff and every game is fun and important. You have to be perfect, you dont see that in any other sport. I think you could tweak the system to make sure the best two teams are playing each other, but I dont think I'm for dumping the system and having a true playoff system though I do see positives in that system also. I guess I just dont see why the BCS makes college football a joke.

I agree completely. The reason I love college football is because every single game means something very very important. It sucks that my team could get their hopes dumptrucked in just a few seconds of the end of a game, but that is what makes it so damn exciting to watch. Also, it's on those guys to go out there and get it done, otherwise they don't deserve to play in the championship game.

My only problem is when sometimes the national championship and bowl games don't necessarily seem fair. IMO, they need to fix the system so that the best 2 teams are in the championship each year. How do they do that? No idea.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-03-2006, 08:32 PM
someone today said it best, that in this system, you're going to get AT WORST the 3rd or 4th best team in the country playing for the title. it's never as big of a crime when one team is left out as some people make it out to be.

HysterikiLL
11-03-2006, 08:38 PM
it's never as big of a crime when one team is left out as some people make it out to be.

it is if that one team is my team.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-03-2006, 08:43 PM
it is if that one team is my team.
it's always good when texas is left out! :yes:

besides, you can always count on mack brown begging other coaches to vote for his team to get into a big game.

HysterikiLL
11-03-2006, 08:46 PM
it's always good when texas is left out! :yes:

besides, you can always count on mack brown begging other coaches to vote for his team to get into a big game.


everyone loves mack :wink:


http://www.finheaven.com/clear.gif

DonShula84
11-03-2006, 08:48 PM
everyone loves mack :wink:


http://www.buzz-productions.biz/images/mackBrown_sm.jpg


His finger is eerily long in this picture...

HysterikiLL
11-03-2006, 08:53 PM
His finger is eerily long in this picture...

He needs it for all the championship rings he's going to win in the next few years. :tongue:

Ronnieisabeast
11-03-2006, 10:18 PM
Ummm, the BCS gives you a match up between the two BEST teams in football. Right now, Ohio State and Michigan are the two best teams in football. If the game is close or goes into OT, they are STILL the two best teams in college football. And who has only played 1 quality team?


Teams ranked when game was played:
Ohio State - #2 Texas, #13 Iowa, #22 Penn State, #2 Michigan
Michigan - #? Wisconsin, #4 Notre Dame, #1 Ohio State

I fail to see your pointYeah I agree (even though I think your an OSU fan) Michigan and Ohio State are the best best teams. The loser of that team should still be in the national championship. Both teams have played more then one good team.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-03-2006, 10:29 PM
i hope either michigan or OSU blows out the other team just so i don't have to hear all this rematch nonsense.

DonShula84
11-03-2006, 10:31 PM
i hope either michigan or OSU blows out the other team just so i don't have to hear all this rematch nonsense.

Michigan wins by 30, Quinn wins the heisman and we all end the season happy :)

Alex44
11-03-2006, 11:06 PM
Only time I have a problem with the BCS system is when there are 3 undefeated teams.....I dont think its fair to have a team (Like Utah or Auburn a few years back) win every game and not get a shot to prove they are the best.

I think a small playoff system (Say the top 4 teams) it could also help some guys draft stock

Majpain
11-03-2006, 11:42 PM
Michigan wins by 30, Quinn wins the heisman and we all end the season happy :)

Wont happen:o

MikeO
11-04-2006, 01:00 AM
Am I the only one who doesnt have a problem with the BCS/Bowl system? I like that every game counts in college football, the entire season is like a playoff and every game is fun and important. You have to be perfect, you dont see that in any other sport. I think you could tweak the system to make sure the best two teams are playing each other, but I dont think I'm for dumping the system and having a true playoff system though I do see positives in that system also. I guess I just dont see why the BCS makes college football a joke.

I don't have a problem with it. But if a Big East team is 1 of only 2 unbeaten teams they gotta play for it all. and be in that final game OR......throw the Big East out of the BCS totally.

Ya can't have it both ways!!!!!!!! It must be one or the other. You can't have them IN the BCS but then say if you go unbeaten it doesn't count and you can't play for it all. That isn't right. Either throw them OUT or treat them the same way you treat every other school.

FLOUNDER
11-04-2006, 02:29 AM
I dont care how the rest of the BCS goes, as long as my mountaineers wind up in a BCS bowl game, i really dont care

djfresh47
11-04-2006, 02:30 AM
I don't have a problem with it. But if a Big East team is 1 of only 2 unbeaten teams they gotta play for it all. and be in that final game OR......throw the Big East out of the BCS totally.

Ya can't have it both ways!!!!!!!! It must be one or the other. You can't have them IN the BCS but then say if you go unbeaten it doesn't count and you can't play for it all. That isn't right. Either throw them OUT or treat them the same way you treat every other school.

Exactly, if a major conference team runs the table they should be able to play for the championship. If Louisville and Rutgers both end up with one loss than their is really no fair way of determining who should play the winner of Michigan/OSU. If it's close than the loser has a claim but say if it's Michigan why do they get to play if conference champ Texas wins out? The Sec is the best conference and if they've got a 1 loss team don't they deserve to have a shot? If Usc runs the table which would end up with beating Oregon/Cal/ND why don't they deserve a chance? Even Cal has an arguement. Fans may not want to see Lousiville/Mich/OSU but that opens up a bunch of scenarios where alot of teams can make a legitimate claim. I didn't even mention Notre Dame either. Right now I think the potential spoilers are Rutgers and A&M

Stitches
11-04-2006, 06:20 AM
Michigan wins by 30, Quinn wins the heisman and we all end the season happy :)

Wouldn't that be the truth. :pray:

nyjunc
11-04-2006, 09:34 AM
Yeah I agree (even though I think your an OSU fan) Michigan and Ohio State are the best best teams. The loser of that team should still be in the national championship. Both teams have played more then one good team.

Who are the other good teams they've played?

Outside of UT OSU has played:

Northern Illinois(5-4)
Cincinnati(5-4)
Penn State(6-3)
Iowa(6-3)
Bowling Green(4-5)
Mich State(4-5)
Indiana(5-4)
Minnesota(3-6)

Not one of those teams is currently ranked. yeah that's a rough sched:lol:

Outside of ND(who itself is overrated) Mich has played:

Vanderbilt(4-5)
Central Michigan(5-3)
Wisconsin(8-1, only decent team they have played but of course their 8-1 record is so b/c of the creampuff sched they have played. their biggest win is over 5-4 Indiana)
Minnesota(3-6)
Mich State(4-5)
Penn State(6-3)
Iowa(6-3)
Northwestern(2-7)

Average record for OSU opponents outside of UT: 4.75-4.25
Average record for Mich opponents outside of ND: 4.75-4.125

Motion
11-04-2006, 09:43 AM
i hope either michigan or OSU blows out the other team just so i don't have to hear all this rematch nonsense.

:yeahthat:

Kdawg954
11-04-2006, 10:14 AM
i hope either michigan or OSU blows out the other team just so i don't have to hear all this rematch nonsense.

The fact that we have to hope for this scenario to happen is a reason to get rid of the system all together. Florida has played a ruff schedule to say the least . . . and what? they lost @ Auburn . . . if they win out and win the SEC championship, I'm sorry they deserve to be in the title game . . . even over a unbeaten Louiville team.

However, with the current system . . . if Louville goes unbeaten and they are 1 of 2 unbeatens in a major conference, u have to have them in the national title game . . just wouldn't be fair. The BCS doesn't work, how can a team with a lights out schedule and 1 loss not even be given an oppurtunity to win it all, especially over a team who has had a fairly easy schedule and doesn't have a conference title game to deal with. There needs to be a playoff . . . top 8 teams or whatever . . . 3 week tourney to decide it all. Something has gotta give with having to have certain things happen to make it seem like the BCS got it right . . . and last year they got it right . . . but it should have been cancelled the year Auburn and that monster schedule got denied BCS title game access.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-04-2006, 10:16 AM
there's never going to be a playoff. and getting rid of the BCS would just go back to the old system, which was even more unpredictable and ridiculous and rarely matched up a #1 vs. #2. and the BCS has done that just about every year.

Motion
11-04-2006, 10:16 AM
The fact that we have to hope for this scenario to happen is a reason to get rid of the system all together. Florida has played a ruff schedule to say the least . . . and what? they lost @ Auburn . . . if they win out and win the SEC championship, I'm sorry they deserve to be in the title game . . . even over a unbeaten Louiville team.


:yeahthat: :hi5:

I'm keeping my fingers crossed!

Kdawg954
11-04-2006, 10:25 AM
there's never going to be a playoff. and getting rid of the BCS would just go back to the old system, which was even more unpredictable and ridiculous and rarely matched up a #1 vs. #2. and the BCS has done that just about every year.

That is true . . . hell I remember in 2000 when Miami beat FSU later in the season but lost by like 5 points to high ranked Wasington, at Washington, earlier in the season, and at the end of the season FSU was 2nd and Miami was 3rd. So the Canes got left out of the title game . . . made no sense. Would just kill any contreversy IMO if they got a 8 game playoff. Take the top teams from each conference and throw in 2 wild cards and roll with it, something of that nature.

Definetly don't wanna go back to the old system (Nebraska number one so they get to play in the Orange Bowl, but Penn St. number 2 but since they are a Big 10 team, they HAVE to play in the Rose Bowl.) That system was silly to say the least. But they need to upgrade this system . . . definetly

Stitches
11-04-2006, 10:37 AM
Who are the other good teams they've played?

Outside of UT OSU has played:

Northern Illinois(5-4)
Cincinnati(5-4)
Penn State(6-3)
Iowa(6-3)
Bowling Green(4-5)
Mich State(4-5)
Indiana(5-4)
Minnesota(3-6)

Not one of those teams is currently ranked. yeah that's a rough sched:lol:

Outside of ND(who itself is overrated) Mich has played:

Vanderbilt(4-5)
Central Michigan(5-3)
Wisconsin(8-1, only decent team they have played but of course their 8-1 record is so b/c of the creampuff sched they have played. their biggest win is over 5-4 Indiana)
Minnesota(3-6)
Mich State(4-5)
Penn State(6-3)
Iowa(6-3)
Northwestern(2-7)

Average record for OSU opponents outside of UT: 4.75-4.25
Average record for Mich opponents outside of ND: 4.75-4.125

2 thing: 1- Penn State is ranked #24 currently I believe(but they are an average team).

2- I said this was not a good year for the Big Ten, as far as quality teams go, and some people wouldn't hear that. So I don't know how well your analyisis will hold up, though I agree completely with it.

nyjunc
11-04-2006, 12:03 PM
2 thing: 1- Penn State is ranked #24 currently I believe(but they are an average team).

2- I said this was not a good year for the Big Ten, as far as quality teams go, and some people wouldn't hear that. So I don't know how well your analyisis will hold up, though I agree completely with it.

Penn State is not currently ranked.

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/polls

Stitches
11-04-2006, 12:08 PM
Penn State is not currently ranked.

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/polls

Thanks. I could have swore I saw them at #24. Anyways, that just furthers the case that this year it's a sub-par Big Ten conference.

djfresh47
11-04-2006, 02:51 PM
The fact that we have to hope for this scenario to happen is a reason to get rid of the system all together. Florida has played a ruff schedule to say the least . . . and what? they lost @ Auburn . . . if they win out and win the SEC championship, I'm sorry they deserve to be in the title game . . . even over a unbeaten Louiville team.

However, with the current system . . . if Louville goes unbeaten and they are 1 of 2 unbeatens in a major conference, u have to have them in the national title game . . just wouldn't be fair. The BCS doesn't work, how can a team with a lights out schedule and 1 loss not even be given an oppurtunity to win it all, especially over a team who has had a fairly easy schedule and doesn't have a conference title game to deal with. There needs to be a playoff . . . top 8 teams or whatever . . . 3 week tourney to decide it all. Something has gotta give with having to have certain things happen to make it seem like the BCS got it right . . . and last year they got it right . . . but it should have been cancelled the year Auburn and that monster schedule got denied BCS title game access.

A major conference unbeaten deserves to play for the title over a one loss team. If their are 3 unbeaten teams you've got an arguement but they've gotta reward a team for running the table in a major conference. If Rutgers wins the Big East and goes undefeated they've got as much claim as Louisville or WVU would have had. If a 1-loss team was taken ahead of an undefeated Louisville why Florida and not USC or Texas? USC closes with Oregon/Cal/ND/UCLA wouldn't they have the same arguement as a 1-loss Florida?

nyjunc
11-04-2006, 03:20 PM
Mich is playing another big time team today- ball State and they are struggling again w/ a bad team. yeah this is a top 2 team:shakeno:

MikeO
11-04-2006, 03:48 PM
Mich is playing another big time team today- ball State and they are struggling again w/ a bad team. yeah this is a top 2 team:shakeno:

8pt lead with 8 min to go. Ball St coming on strong here.

And Iowa is losing. And that other Big 10 team having a good year Indiana is getting killed.

Big 10 blows!!!!

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-04-2006, 03:53 PM
UF should be #2 after today. :)

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-04-2006, 04:01 PM
ball state is marching down the field right now with 5 minutes left. unreal.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-04-2006, 04:03 PM
it's on ESPNEWS right now by the way. 2nd and goal BSU.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-04-2006, 04:06 PM
incomplete on 4th down. :(

still, that alone should hurt michigan in the polls. :pray:

DonShula84
11-04-2006, 04:20 PM
incomplete on 4th down. :(

still, that alone should hurt michigan in the polls. :pray:

It wont people want the OSU/UM game to be 1 vs 2 too badly to drop them in the polls.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
11-04-2006, 04:23 PM
those people can kiss my ***.

maybe mack brown can call them up and beg them to downvote UM.

MikeO
11-04-2006, 10:18 PM
Common Opponent that quiets down Ohio St fans and big east bashers

Illinios

Rutgers beat Illinois 33-0
Syracuse beat Illinois 31-21
Ohio St beat Illinois 17-10

A top big east team beat Illinios by more than OSU. A bottom feeder big east team beat Illinios by more than OSU did.

DonShula84
11-04-2006, 10:22 PM
Common Opponent that quiets down Ohio St fans and big east bashers

Illinios

Rutgers beat Illinois 33-0
Syracuse beat Illinois 31-21
Ohio St beat Illinois 17-10

A top big east team beat Illinios by more than OSU. A bottom feeder big east team beat Illinios by more than OSU did.

And ND beat PSU more convincingly than either OSU or UM so ND should play for the national title!

MikeO
11-04-2006, 10:30 PM
And ND beat PSU more convincingly than either OSU or UM so ND should play for the national title!

if every team has 1 loss then that SHOULD work in ND's favor.

My point is that today's games for OSU and Mich should prevent any rematch game between the 2 of them in my opinion. Those close "wins" will hurt both!!

DonShula84
11-04-2006, 10:34 PM
if every team has 1 loss then that SHOULD work in ND's favor.

My point is that today's games for OSU and Mich should prevent any rematch game between the 2 of them in my opinion. Those close "wins" will hurt both!!

I know, I was just kidding. If UL runs the table a rematch shouldnt happen, UL deservers to play for the title.

Majpain
11-04-2006, 10:39 PM
Common Opponent that quiets down Ohio St fans and big east bashers

Illinios

Rutgers beat Illinois 33-0
Syracuse beat Illinois 31-21
Ohio St beat Illinois 17-10

A top big east team beat Illinios by more than OSU. A bottom feeder big east team beat Illinios by more than OSU did.

Whats your point? That makes no sense. Confrence team vs Confrence team, they always play tuff.

MikeO
11-04-2006, 10:48 PM
Whats your point? That makes no sense. Confrence team vs Confrence team, they always play tuff.

My point is the Big East (L'ville in paticular) shouldn't be overlooked. And no rematch between OSU-Mich should take place after today's events!!

Majpain
11-04-2006, 10:54 PM
My point is the Big East (L'ville in paticular) shouldn't be overlooked. And no rematch between OSU-Mich should take place after today's events!!

Oh I agree. I never thought they would have a rematch. It would either be


OSU/Michigan vs Louisville, Gators, ND, Auburn, Texas, and LSU.

DonShula84
11-04-2006, 11:40 PM
Oh I agree. I never thought they would have a rematch. It would either be


OSU/Michigan vs Louisville, Gators, ND, Auburn, Texas, and LSU.

I dont think ND has much of shot, or Texas if OSU gets to the championship game, I dont think people want to see that rematch either. I'd give LSU probably no chance and put USC on the list of potentials.

HysterikiLL
11-05-2006, 12:23 AM
Holy crap, I just had a thought...

With WVU losing, Texas will either be ranked 3rd or 4th next week, and with either Michigan or OSU exiting the picture next weekend, it's quite possible Texas is in the top after championship weekend. National Title repeat? :hump:

brandon1986
11-05-2006, 01:03 AM
i think the bcs is flawed and needs some retooling

i just think when a team in the SEC like florida has beaten

tennessee
alabama
LSU
georgia

when teams like michigan and ohio state beat crappy teams should be left out of the championship game

and the only loss for florida is @ auburn in a close game with some controversy in the last minutes

that is why the bcs should be fixed, after seeing michigan and ohio state struggle against bad teams

i would love to see them play the SEC schedule and come out of it undefeated

DonShula84
11-05-2006, 01:04 AM
Holy crap, I just had a thought...

With WVU losing, Texas will either be ranked 3rd or 4th next week, and with either Michigan or OSU exiting the picture next weekend, it's quite possible Texas is in the top after championship weekend. National Title repeat? :hump:

UL will be 3rd and probably UF 4th. No way should Texas jump to 3. You guys have to jump Auburn also. I think if USC wins out they'll be in the title game. Beating Cal, Oregon and ND would make them jump some other 1 loss teams imo.

MikeO
11-05-2006, 01:09 AM
l still believe that come the final poll out before the BCS selections that it will be OSU/Mich #1 and L'ville #2. Which in my opinion will create that game.

I think at the end of the day the sports writers and coaches will do what's right and put the 2 unbeaten teams #1 and #2. That doesn't mean L'ville is a lock for that final game, I don't know what the computers will do and how it will break things down.......but I think it gives L'vile a better opportunity than some people think.

NJFINSFAN1
11-06-2006, 07:07 PM
You are out of you mind if you are assuming Rutgers has a better D than Ohio State. the amount of sacks a defense means squat. In fact Louisville's so-called defense proved that last night. The ave. 4.5 sacks a game and were less than pathetic on defense.

And yes, I will bring up schedule strength. Sorry, Rutgers playing the New Jersey School of the Blind each week hardly counts in my book as a stat builder.

And yes, Ohio State's defense is the fastest (check thier 40 yrd dashes and compare) and most athletic in the nation.

After losing the most talented defense last year there was question about the void. Only to see this years squad put up better numbers. That's after losing 3 1st round picks to the NFL.


PS

Rutgers 33 Illin. 0
OSU 17 Illin. 10

finswin56
11-06-2006, 09:55 PM
PS

Rutgers 33 Illin. 0
OSU 17 Illin. 10:lol:

DBoston80
11-06-2006, 09:57 PM
PS

Rutgers 33 Illin. 0
OSU 17 Illin. 10


Wow....great point???:shakeno:

DBoston80
11-06-2006, 09:59 PM
I have this funny feeling that if Florida wins the SEC they will sneak in the game......

OSU vs.FLA-would be one heckuva draw.....

PrepDogg
11-06-2006, 10:58 PM
Wow....great point???:shakeno:

It is a good point but OSU was wating for Michigan in 2 weeks.

NJFINSFAN1
11-07-2006, 12:36 AM
Wow....great point???:shakeno:

It is a point, he said Rutgers has a cake schedule, well that is our common opponent!

He started this whole thing, not me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DBoston80
11-07-2006, 12:44 AM
It is a point, he said Rutgers has a cake schedule, well that is our common opponent!

He started this whole thing, not me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I havent read the whole thread..but Rutgers and Ohio State shouldnt even be in the same breathe..

Im just saying it seems like your comparing the teams through final scores vs bad teams.

NJFINSFAN1
11-07-2006, 10:36 AM
I havent read the whole thread..but Rutgers and Ohio State shouldnt even be in the same breathe..

Im just saying it seems like your comparing the teams through final scores vs bad teams.

Nope, just making a point, not comparing!:wink:

NJFINSFAN1
11-10-2006, 12:38 AM
Add Rutgers to the Mix!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

54Fins
11-10-2006, 01:30 AM
I havent read the whole thread..but Rutgers and Ohio State shouldnt even be in the same breathe..

Im just saying it seems like your comparing the teams through final scores vs bad teams.Your mouth and gum shoudl'nt be in in the same breath, But guess what buddy? Rutgers won and they are not to far behind you.FACT!

DeathStar
11-10-2006, 02:38 AM
ohio state 17 - illinois 10.

rutgers 33 - illinois 0.

RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRr!


UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUu!

GO BLUE. GO BLUE. GO BLUE.

Blade
11-10-2006, 03:52 AM
ohio state 17 - illinois 10.

rutgers 33 - illinois 0.

RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRr!


UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUu!

GO BLUE. GO BLUE. GO BLUE.

LOL. wow.

DBoston80
11-10-2006, 07:11 AM
Your mouth and gum shoudl'nt be in in the same breath, But guess what buddy? Rutgers won and they are not to far behind you.FACT!

Well youll likely jump into the top 10 of the bcs...but your not threatining anywhere near the top 5....so NO your not close..sorry fact!

.but hey I wish you were...Id much rather have an easy game vs Rutgers than play Florida or Texas.....

DBoston80
11-10-2006, 07:13 AM
ohio state 17 - illinois 10.

rutgers 33 - illinois 0.

RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRr!


UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUu!

GO BLUE. GO BLUE. GO BLUE.

I was rooting for you..I knew Louisville was a fraud and the last thing I wanted to do was play a cupcake in the Natl title game...Now assuming we win out we'll get a stellar test from a "worthy" team..Go Knights!!! Keep choppin wood.

Motion
11-10-2006, 12:04 PM
Florida got the best news it could possibly hope for. Win out, and the Gators could find themselves playing for college football's national championship Jan. 8 in Glendale, Ariz. (http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sports/stories/2006/11/09/1110florida.html)Undefeated Rutgers' 28-25 upset of No. 3 Louisville on Thursday night put the Gators -- and the rest of college football's big-name once-beatens -- squarely back in the running to play for the championship, likely against the winner of next weekend's showdown between No. 1 Ohio State and No. 2 Michigan. Louisville (9-1) entered Thursday's game holding the all-important third spot in the BCS standings, one spot ahead of Florida (8-1). If the Cardinals had remained unbeaten, they could have been the ones in Glendale. Now, it might be Florida. Or No. 5 Texas (9-1). Or No. 6 Auburn (9-1). Southern Cal (7-1) is back in the race. So are Cal (8-1), Notre Dame (8-1), West Virginia (7-1), Arkansas (8-1), maybe even the Michigan-Ohio State loser. And then there's Rutgers, 9-0 with a big test still to come Dec. 2 at West Virginia.

:D