PDA

View Full Version : Congressman plans hearings on BCS in effort to force playoff



BAMAPHIN 22
01-14-2009, 06:00 PM
The incoming chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform said Wednesday that he will hold hearings and possibly subpoena NCAA officials, college presidents, players, coaches and athletics directors in effort to force a playoff in the Football Bowl Subdivision.

"I think you really do not get a true No. 1 out of (the Bowl Championship Series)," Rep. Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y., told USA TODAY. "Nobody questions the Super Bowl. The team that wins is the best team that year. I think we can do the same thing at the college level where once it's over there is no questions about who is No. 1 and who is No. 2."


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/2009-01-14-bcs-hearings_N.htm

kpcane
01-14-2009, 07:30 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/2009-01-14-bcs-hearings_N.htm

The BCS is legally fraud. It's about time someone in a position of power is doing something about it. And as a college football fan, things are about to get real exciting in the postseason. I hope Congress acts quickly.

X-Pacolypse
01-14-2009, 08:42 PM
Honestly, Congress should have better things to do with their time, but this is the United States government we're talking about here. Anyways, if these hearings can finally kill the BCS, and implement a long sought after playoff system. Congress' apporoval ratings should get a boost from college football fans alone.

HurriPhin
01-15-2009, 01:57 PM
College postseason might actually be fun.

Go Congress!?!?

ThunderDan13
01-16-2009, 05:46 PM
I hate the BCS, but some of you supporting these care to explain how its illegal?

Uneven bargaining positions are what are business world is centered on. It's not enough to be unfair, you have to break the law for congress to need to step in.

You can't use this season as an example of the broken system... had UTAH been #1 most polls and not in the BCS title game... then maybe... IF there is significant detriment.. I don't really know the law.. but really? Is congress necessary? What's next, they step in and change the infield fly rule?

Namor
01-16-2009, 11:01 PM
War,economy in the tank,highest unemployment in 20 years,banks failing,
auto industry and housing failing and Congress is worried about COLLEGE FOOTBALL!!!
Am I the only one that has a problem with this?

HurriPhin
01-16-2009, 11:25 PM
War,economy in the tank,highest unemployment in 20 years,banks failing,
auto industry and housing failing and Congress is worried about COLLEGE FOOTBALL!!!
Am I the only one that has a problem with this?

Yeah! Football is more American than apple pie. Im glad congress has their priorities straight.

Down with the BCS!:titanic:

Namor
01-16-2009, 11:52 PM
TV money is the ONLY chance of forcing a playoff system.

JCane
01-17-2009, 04:45 PM
I will probably get steamrolled for saying this but...

I'm actually against a playoff system.

I like the BCS because it forces you to win your games. And winning should be important. Think about the cons of a college football playoff. You may think there aren't any, but take a look at college basketball. Their postseason is GREAT. Their March Madness tournaments is one of the best times of the year. But take a look at their regular season. It begins in early November and drags on until March. A most of the country says what?

"I don't even watch college basketball until the tournament starts."

That's sad. I love college football. It's an obsession. I don't want my college football regular season to become watered down simply because, and honestly this is rare, the BCS whiffs. Think about when the BCS has really whiffed. Auburn. Auburn was 13 - 0 and didn't get in. Other than that, they've mostly gotten it right. Florida should have played Oklahoma this year. Oklahoma should have gotten in over Texas. Texas played a much worse schedule. And when you schedule scrubs, you should be punished. And then Texas got exposed against Ohio State. I know Texas won the game, but ultimately, they were exposed. And in the end, Texas ended up ahead of Oklahoma in the final BCS standings.

If you ask me, the only reasonable solution is to keep the bowl games but cut out a few. Teams that go 6 - 6 shouldn't get in to bowls. You should have to win 7. If you're 6 - 6 and go to the PoulanPro Weed Eater Bowl, there's a chance you lose, and finish the season 6 - 7. What kind of bowl team finishes with a losing record? Win 7 games. Then go to a bowl. Finally, embrace the Plus One system. Yes, there's a lot of b*tching about the BCS and who gets in so if the top 4 teams are in the title hunt, who can really complain? Take a look at the BCS standings BEFORE the championship game and look at teams ranked #5 or lower and tell me who really had a legitimate gripe about not being in the top 4. USC and that's it. But they lost to Oregon State so they can't complain that much. And don't hand me Utah. If Alabama had shown up to play instead of not caring because they got beat by Florida and had nothing to play for, that game wouldn't have been close. And Andre Smith was a BIG loss.

College football doesn't need a playoff. As fans we would suffer as a result. If we go to an 8 or 16 game format, we're stuck with teams like Cincinnati and Virginia Tech playing just like they did in the Orange Bowl and nobody watched that. People watched the championship game because it mattered. When you take eight to sixteen teams you're taking the top teams and average teams and mushing them all together in an effort to make everyone equal. That's Socialism. College football doesn't need to become Socialism.

TedSlimmJr
01-17-2009, 04:59 PM
I will probably get steamrolled for saying this but...

I'm actually against a playoff system.

I like the BCS because it forces you to win your games. And winning should be important. Think about the cons of a college football playoff. You may think there aren't any, but take a look at college basketball. Their postseason is GREAT. Their March Madness tournaments is one of the best times of the year. But take a look at their regular season. It begins in early November and drags on until March. A most of the country says what?

"I don't even watch college basketball until the tournament starts."

That's sad. I love college football. It's an obsession. I don't want my college football regular season to become watered down simply because, and honestly this is rare, the BCS whiffs. Think about when the BCS has really whiffed. Auburn. Auburn was 13 - 0 and didn't get in. Other than that, they've mostly gotten it right. Florida should have played Oklahoma this year. Oklahoma should have gotten in over Texas. Texas played a much worse schedule. And when you schedule scrubs, you should be punished. And then Texas got exposed against Ohio State. I know Texas won the game, but ultimately, they were exposed. And in the end, Texas ended up ahead of Oklahoma in the final BCS standings.

If you ask me, the only reasonable solution is to keep the bowl games but cut out a few. Teams that go 6 - 6 shouldn't get in to bowls. You should have to win 7. If you're 6 - 6 and go to the PoulanPro Weed Eater Bowl, there's a chance you lose, and finish the season 6 - 7. What kind of bowl team finishes with a losing record? Win 7 games. Then go to a bowl. Finally, embrace the Plus One system. Yes, there's a lot of b*tching about the BCS and who gets in so if the top 4 teams are in the title hunt, who can really complain? Take a look at the BCS standings BEFORE the championship game and look at teams ranked #5 or lower and tell me who really had a legitimate gripe about not being in the top 4. USC and that's it. But they lost to Oregon State so they can't complain that much. And don't hand me Utah. If Alabama had shown up to play instead of not caring because they got beat by Florida and had nothing to play for, that game wouldn't have been close. And Andre Smith was a BIG loss.

College football doesn't need a playoff. As fans we would suffer as a result. If we go to an 8 or 16 game format, we're stuck with teams like Cincinnati and Virginia Tech playing just like they did in the Orange Bowl and nobody watched that. People watched the championship game because it mattered. When you take eight to sixteen teams you're taking the top teams and average teams and mushing them all together in an effort to make everyone equal. That's Socialism. College football doesn't need to become Socialism.

I can see this angle....but at the same time...if all these bowl games are so important, and you're going to have all these bowl games anyway...then they should at least matter...they don't really under the current system...

The BCS was designed to pit #1 versus #2....the rest don't matter...they don't have a legitimate shot at the championship...

The BCS whiffed when they put Nebraska against Miami....

The BCS whiffed terribly in matching up Oklahoma with USC and leaving Auburn out...Oklahoma didn't even win their conference...they got drilled by Kansas St...

The coaches poll being 1/3 of the formula is flawed...the coaches don't even watch all the other teams as much as we do...

kpcane
01-17-2009, 05:45 PM
I don't want my college football regular season to become watered down simply because, and honestly this is rare, the BCS whiffs. Think about when the BCS has really whiffed. Auburn. Auburn was 13 - 0 and didn't get in. Other than that, they've mostly gotten it right. Florida should have played Oklahoma this year. Oklahoma should have gotten in over Texas. Texas played a much worse schedule. And when you schedule scrubs, you should be punished. And then Texas got exposed against Ohio State. I know Texas won the game, but ultimately, they were exposed. And in the end, Texas ended up ahead of Oklahoma in the final BCS standings.


College football doesn't need a playoff. As fans we would suffer as a result. If we go to an 8 or 16 game format, we're stuck with teams like Cincinnati and Virginia Tech playing just like they did in the Orange Bowl and nobody watched that. People watched the championship game because it mattered. When you take eight to sixteen teams you're taking the top teams and average teams and mushing them all together in an effort to make everyone equal. That's Socialism. College football doesn't need to become Socialism.

I cut out two parts of your argument - and I'm going to address the latter part first. First of all - in an 8 game playoff Cincinnati wouldn't have played Virginia Tech. Cincinnati would've played a team like Florida, and Va Tech would've played a team like Texas or USC (Utah being the low seed playing the #1 team Oklahoma). And saying nobody would watch those games, is like saying nobody would watch the first round of an NCAA tournament, where the disparities are even greater! People would most definitely watch every single game of an 8 team playoff.

Now - for the 'BCS whiffs' part. The BCS whiffs every year there is NOT an undisputed national champion. This year qualifies. This is also fraud. This is why Congress is getting involved - the same reason Congress got involved in Enron. The BCS is scamming people by presenting something they are calling a national title game - when it's two arbitrary teams. Tell me why USC doesn't deserve to go in over Florida? USC lost to a better team on the road before Florida lost at home to a slightly lesser opponent. The only real way to settle which is a better team is to make them play each other, which they didn't. Therefore, the game does NOT produce an undisputed national champion, which the BCS is selling to the fans/advertisers/media. The BCS has to change. Whether we go back to the old ways, or we employ a playoff system, something has to be done.

JCane
01-17-2009, 06:00 PM
I cut out two parts of your argument - and I'm going to address the latter part first. First of all - in an 8 game playoff Cincinnati wouldn't have played Virginia Tech. Cincinnati would've played a team like Florida, and Va Tech would've played a team like Texas or USC (Utah being the low seed playing the #1 team Oklahoma). And saying nobody would watch those games, is like saying nobody would watch the first round of an NCAA tournament, where the disparities are even greater! People would most definitely watch every single game of an 8 team playoff.

Now - for the 'BCS whiffs' part. The BCS whiffs every year there is NOT an undisputed national champion. This year qualifies. This is also fraud. This is why Congress is getting involved - the same reason Congress got involved in Enron. The BCS is scamming people by presenting something they are calling a national title game - when it's two arbitrary teams. Tell me why USC doesn't deserve to go in over Florida? USC lost to a better team on the road before Florida lost at home to a slightly lesser opponent. The only real way to settle which is a better team is to make them play each other, which they didn't. Therefore, the game does NOT produce an undisputed national champion, which the BCS is selling to the fans/advertisers/media. The BCS has to change. Whether we go back to the old ways, or we employ a playoff system, something has to be done.

Cincinnati against Virginia Tech was just me throwing two teams out there for the hell of it. I understand that those two wouldn't have played in a playoff THIS year unless those two ended up in the title game. And in a playoff, that is certainly possible. And if it happened, who would watch that lol? If a playoff were implemented THIS year, you probably would have gotten one of two games: Florida v. Oklahoma, Florida v. USC. No one wants to see Utah v. Penn State or Georgia v. Boise State. It's bad for business. And that's what college football is. It's a business. As fans we fail to understand that for the most part.

As far as who loses to who, in the end, Ole Miss turned out to be a pretty good football team. Oregon State did as well, so you have to look at schedules. The Pac 10 doesn't have a title game and is obviously inferior as a conference to the SEC so taking Florida over USC was not really a decision. The decision was Oklahoma over Texas that set everyone off. But again, that comes down to schedule. When you schedule scrubs and don't get in, you really have no one to blame but yourself; not the BCS.

The BCS is certainly not flawless but going to a playoff will take away a lot of the appeal and luster that makes college football so great. You gotta believe that it will. The regular season will no longer mean that much not only to fans but players as well. Not only that but the bowl system benefits the conferences financially and financially, I just don't know if they could build a playoff system that could offer the financial support as the bowl system. A playoff would be one entity which would mean one primary sponsor. Whereas the bowl system has one primary sponsor per bowl game that pays out a certain amount of cash to the school's respective conference. You know me, as a booster, I'm all for funding the schools in any way possible.

kpcane
01-17-2009, 06:57 PM
Cincinnati against Virginia Tech was just me throwing two teams out there for the hell of it. I understand that those two wouldn't have played in a playoff THIS year unless those two ended up in the title game. And in a playoff, that is certainly possible. And if it happened, who would watch that lol? If a playoff were implemented THIS year, you probably would have gotten one of two games: Florida v. Oklahoma, Florida v. USC. No one wants to see Utah v. Penn State or Georgia v. Boise State. It's bad for business. And that's what college football is. It's a business. As fans we fail to understand that for the most part.

As far as who loses to who, in the end, Ole Miss turned out to be a pretty good football team. Oregon State did as well, so you have to look at schedules. The Pac 10 doesn't have a title game and is obviously inferior as a conference to the SEC so taking Florida over USC was not really a decision. The decision was Oklahoma over Texas that set everyone off. But again, that comes down to schedule. When you schedule scrubs and don't get in, you really have no one to blame but yourself; not the BCS.

The BCS is certainly not flawless but going to a playoff will take away a lot of the appeal and luster that makes college football so great. You gotta believe that it will. The regular season will no longer mean that much not only to fans but players as well. Not only that but the bowl system benefits the conferences financially and financially, I just don't know if they could build a playoff system that could offer the financial support as the bowl system. A playoff would be one entity which would mean one primary sponsor. Whereas the bowl system has one primary sponsor per bowl game that pays out a certain amount of cash to the school's respective conference. You know me, as a booster, I'm all for funding the schools in any way possible.

See, but why does it take away from the luster when you have teams with 1-2 losses getting into the national title game?? The college football season will be just as exciting - because only 8 teams would get in. You'd still have to win your conference, or else get an at-large bid. Even this would be tricky, because if we had one this year, who gets the 2 at large bids out of Texas, Alabama, and Utah? I would have to think that Alabama would be the odd team out because they had just lost to Florida the last week of the season. Just for fun - let's set up an 8 team playoff that would have happened this year.
#1 Oklahoma vs. #8 Va. Tech
#2 Florida vs. #7 Cincinnati
#3 Texas vs. #6 Penn St.
#4 USC vs. #5 Utah

Those are based off the final BCS standings, before the bowls. I think those are all pretty intriguing matchups, but the point is, there would be no dispute as to who is the national champion. If you can't win your own conference - you have no claim to a national title, so Alabama's argument is gone. There would have to be special circumstances though, as there are now. For example - a non-BCS school with an undefeated record would have to be included, etc. I don't have all the answers for it, but I'm not working for the NCAA either. It's just clear that what's going on right now is illegal, and it's also not fair to college football fans who are duped into believing that the BCS is producing an undisputed national champion.

JCane
01-17-2009, 07:45 PM
See, but why does it take away from the luster when you have teams with 1-2 losses getting into the national title game?? The college football season will be just as exciting - because only 8 teams would get in. You'd still have to win your conference, or else get an at-large bid. Even this would be tricky, because if we had one this year, who gets the 2 at large bids out of Texas, Alabama, and Utah? I would have to think that Alabama would be the odd team out because they had just lost to Florida the last week of the season. Just for fun - let's set up an 8 team playoff that would have happened this year.
#1 Oklahoma vs. #8 Va. Tech
#2 Florida vs. #7 Cincinnati
#3 Texas vs. #6 Penn St.
#4 USC vs. #5 Utah

Those are based off the final BCS standings, before the bowls. I think those are all pretty intriguing matchups, but the point is, there would be no dispute as to who is the national champion. If you can't win your own conference - you have no claim to a national title, so Alabama's argument is gone. There would have to be special circumstances though, as there are now. For example - a non-BCS school with an undefeated record would have to be included, etc. I don't have all the answers for it, but I'm not working for the NCAA either. It's just clear that what's going on right now is illegal, and it's also not fair to college football fans who are duped into believing that the BCS is producing an undisputed national champion.

Why does a non-BCS school with an undefeated record HAVE to be included? Remember Hawaii last year? They got ROLLED by Georgia. Strength of schedule has a meaning. Sure there would be no dispute as to who the national champion is but the NCAA and BCS doesn't care about what the fans think about the national champion is. It goes down in their record books. If Utah beats Virginia Tech for the national title, sure they're the undisputed champion but no one watched it. People want to watch two powerhouse programs fight it out. They ratings say we want to see it.

Take a look at baseball. And I don't want to hear anyone say, "Baseball sucks anyway. No one watches baseball to begin with." Look at baseball. Ratings are terrible. Tampa v. Philadelphia was a trainwreck in the ratings. But you take Boston v. St. Louis or the Yankees v. the Cubs and the ratings are thru the roof. People want to see big name powerhouses with star players going at it. I still don't know the name of the Utah head coach or quarterback. But I can name all of the starting quarterbacks and head coaches for Texas, Ohio State, Florida, Oklahoma, Penn State and USC. Big names attract big ratings. That's what the NCAA and the BCS are after. College football is great year round. College basketball is only great when the tournament starts.

I like the idea of a playoff but the Plus One system seems to be the best option for everyone. I think with a Plus One you get the undisputed champion. How much claim to a national title can the five seed really have when it's all said and done? The bottom line is win your games and everything else will take care of itself in the current system....unless you're Auburn. That was a major league FAIL job by the system.

Also with the playoffs, you're asking 18 - 21 year olds to pound their bodies thru more physical practices and games. They just aren't built for that yet. It's tough for the NFL players to do it consistently. Watch the Ravens - Steelers game this weekend. I would almost guarantee that the Ravens look physically beaten on the field tomorrow. They played an intense physical game against the Titans and were largely outplayed. The Steelers had a week off the previous week and then played a finesse team in the Chargers. The Steelers should be much more physical tomorrow than the Ravens.

I say implement the Plus One system, require teams to have 7 wins to become bowl eligible and this will eliminate the PoulanPro Wedd Eater Bowl and the Emerald Nut In Your Mouth Bowl along with a few other worthless bowl games.

eric1589
01-17-2009, 07:52 PM
obama wants a playoff system too.
it could happen with high ranking officials pushing for it.

kpcane
01-17-2009, 08:41 PM
Why does a non-BCS school with an undefeated record HAVE to be included? Remember Hawaii last year? They got ROLLED by Georgia. Strength of schedule has a meaning. Sure there would be no dispute as to who the national champion is but the NCAA and BCS doesn't care about what the fans think about the national champion is. It goes down in their record books. If Utah beats Virginia Tech for the national title, sure they're the undisputed champion but no one watched it. People want to watch two powerhouse programs fight it out. They ratings say we want to see it.

Take a look at baseball. And I don't want to hear anyone say, "Baseball sucks anyway. No one watches baseball to begin with." Look at baseball. Ratings are terrible. Tampa v. Philadelphia was a trainwreck in the ratings. But you take Boston v. St. Louis or the Yankees v. the Cubs and the ratings are thru the roof. People want to see big name powerhouses with star players going at it. I still don't know the name of the Utah head coach or quarterback. But I can name all of the starting quarterbacks and head coaches for Texas, Ohio State, Florida, Oklahoma, Penn State and USC. Big names attract big ratings. That's what the NCAA and the BCS are after. College football is great year round. College basketball is only great when the tournament starts.

I like the idea of a playoff but the Plus One system seems to be the best option for everyone. I think with a Plus One you get the undisputed champion. How much claim to a national title can the five seed really have when it's all said and done? The bottom line is win your games and everything else will take care of itself in the current system....unless you're Auburn. That was a major league FAIL job by the system.

Also with the playoffs, you're asking 18 - 21 year olds to pound their bodies thru more physical practices and games. They just aren't built for that yet. It's tough for the NFL players to do it consistently. Watch the Ravens - Steelers game this weekend. I would almost guarantee that the Ravens look physically beaten on the field tomorrow. They played an intense physical game against the Titans and were largely outplayed. The Steelers had a week off the previous week and then played a finesse team in the Chargers. The Steelers should be much more physical tomorrow than the Ravens.

I say implement the Plus One system, require teams to have 7 wins to become bowl eligible and this will eliminate the PoulanPro Wedd Eater Bowl and the Emerald Nut In Your Mouth Bowl along with a few other worthless bowl games.

I bolded the line above as to why undefeated teams have to be in there. It doesn't really matter if they aren't a powerhouse team or not. Did people watch Davidson last year in the NCAA tourney? People love the underdog too, you know.

So if this is about ratings - then absolutely not, don't do a playoff. It could present a ratings problem, like every other major sport (by the way - I'm a huge Phillies fan, and this is the first time I've ever watched all the games of the World Series. I could really care less if people in Chicago, Boston, New York, LA, and Sioux Falls didn't watch it - it was the two best teams in baseball playing for the title - the way it should be). So I guess what I'm saying is - if all the NCAA cares about is money, and not who the best team really is in college football, then keep the current system intact, BUT let the fans know that it's a MNC game, solely for ratings, and not a true national title game.

JCane
01-17-2009, 08:42 PM
The last thing I want President Obama doing is concerning himself with the design of a college football playoff.

JCane
01-17-2009, 08:55 PM
I bolded the line above as to why undefeated teams have to be in there. It doesn't really matter if they aren't a powerhouse team or not. Did people watch Davidson last year in the NCAA tourney? People love the underdog too, you know.

So if this is about ratings - then absolutely not, don't do a playoff. It could present a ratings problem, like every other major sport (by the way - I'm a huge Phillies fan, and this is the first time I've ever watched all the games of the World Series. I could really care less if people in Chicago, Boston, New York, LA, and Sioux Falls didn't watch it - it was the two best teams in baseball playing for the title - the way it should be). So I guess what I'm saying is - if all the NCAA cares about is money, and not who the best team really is in college football, then keep the current system intact, BUT let the fans know that it's a MNC game, solely for ratings, and not a true national title game.

I don't know about you, but I would have no interest whatsoever in watching undefeated Miami of Ohio play for a shot at the national title.

People watched Davidson and George Mason because that's all college basketball has is the tournament. There's all of these teams and so many to root for, etc. The regular season is really overshadowed by the college football bowl season and the NFL playoffs. In college football, we don't really embrace the underdog. Utah gets pounded for not being a BCS team. Same with Boise State. Then again, I've said all along that the Pac 10 should invite those two schools into their conference and have a true conference championship. Everyone wins there. The two schools that complain the most gain BCS invites and the Pac 10 gets a conference title to strenghten the schedule. And you couldn't care less if people in Chicago and New York watch the Phillies because that's your team and you watch regardless. But the ratings are poor and MLB knows that. God knows I'm one of 27 people that still watch the Marlins. But a Marlins v. Blue Jays World Series is bad business. The NCAA has figured out a way to win all across the board in the ratings. We're going to watch the regular season and we're going to watch the bowl season. I don't know how old you are but for me, waking up on New Year's Day and watching bowl games is one of the best days of the year. I'd personally hate to lose that.

kpcane
01-18-2009, 12:14 AM
I don't know about you, but I would have no interest whatsoever in watching undefeated Miami of Ohio play for a shot at the national title.

People watched Davidson and George Mason because that's all college basketball has is the tournament. There's all of these teams and so many to root for, etc. The regular season is really overshadowed by the college football bowl season and the NFL playoffs. In college football, we don't really embrace the underdog. Utah gets pounded for not being a BCS team. Same with Boise State. Then again, I've said all along that the Pac 10 should invite those two schools into their conference and have a true conference championship. Everyone wins there. The two schools that complain the most gain BCS invites and the Pac 10 gets a conference title to strenghten the schedule. And you couldn't care less if people in Chicago and New York watch the Phillies because that's your team and you watch regardless. But the ratings are poor and MLB knows that. God knows I'm one of 27 people that still watch the Marlins. But a Marlins v. Blue Jays World Series is bad business. The NCAA has figured out a way to win all across the board in the ratings. We're going to watch the regular season and we're going to watch the bowl season. I don't know how old you are but for me, waking up on New Year's Day and watching bowl games is one of the best days of the year. I'd personally hate to lose that.

What does it matter what school it is? If it's Miami of Ohio, and they're undefeated, they'd still have to beat 2 of the best teams in the country before they even get to the national title game. And if they do that, don't they legitimately deserve a chance for a national title after going undefeated and beating two of the best teams in the country?

Also, if college football got a tournament, wouldn't everyone then watch those 'lesser' games because 'all college football would have is the tournament' too?

And don't confuse 'underdog' with 'utterly ignored'. Utah was undefeated, and had absolutely no chance to play for a national title. They did get a chance to play a team that was #1 for most of the year, and what did they do with them? I don't know about you, but I want to see if Utah can beat Florida. I'd watch that game.

Lastly, I don't know how you could even say you like New Year's day games anymore! How many quality games are there on New Years? If you had a tournament, you could still have two games, and they'd feature the four best teams in the country. You wouldn't lose anything, but a little Outback Bowl here, a little Gator Bowl there. Like you said, there are too many bowl games already. You could have the first week of playoffs after the last week of the season, start the playoffs up on New Year's day, and the national title game when it's usually been, a week later.

JCane
01-18-2009, 12:39 AM
It matters what school it is for the same reason it matters which teams are in the World Series. No one is going to watch Utah! Utah can't beat Florida. And Utah couldn't have beaten Alabama had Alabama had something to play for. Alabama didn't want to be there. Texas didn't want to be in the Fiesta Bowl. Ohio State played lights out and almost beat Texas. Texas Tech didn't want to play in the Cotton Bowl and they got ROMPED by Ole Miss. And that's one of the flaws of the BCS system. Some teams get into big bowls and have nothing to play for. Alabama lost nothing by losing that game. Alabama had nothing to lose and Utah had everything to gain.

And yeah, people would probably watch the "tournament" games. But not the non-powerhouse teams. No one watched Davidson or George Mason in the tournament until they beat someone. Upsets in a college football tournament are less likely because of the physicality of sport in general. Basketball takes a few lucky bounces and a team shooting lights out like Davidson did last season. I think there's a lot less luck in football.

But the fact remains that having an 8 team playoff is just bad for the kids from a physical standpoint. You and I both watched the Hurricanes all season long. Towards the end of the year, especially the final two, our kids looked worn down and empty. Now most of our team depended on Freshman but you see the correlation. As Freshman, they were used to their seasons in high school and their seasons were over by that time. As it stands now, there's a break in between the final game and the bowl season but with an 8 or 16 game playoff system like most are clamoring for, think about how much longer we would be extending the season to accomodate such a senseless playoff. Either the break between the final game of the season would be shortened, or the break would remain the same and the playoff would extend well into January. In fact, we would probably be watching college football playoffs today. So we're talking about extending the season into the start of the spring semester. These kids are still students first.

Seriously, when you take into consideration all that we've covered, pros and cons, it's tough to argue against the Plus One system. I love the BCS. Always have. I think for the most part that it works but I do understand its flaws. I also understand that the circus will never end until we move to a playoff. I think we need to design some form of playoff but not at the kids expense and not at the expense of college football's appeal.

kpcane
01-18-2009, 11:58 AM
It matters what school it is for the same reason it matters which teams are in the World Series. No one is going to watch Utah! Utah can't beat Florida. And Utah couldn't have beaten Alabama had Alabama had something to play for. Alabama didn't want to be there. Texas didn't want to be in the Fiesta Bowl. Ohio State played lights out and almost beat Texas. Texas Tech didn't want to play in the Cotton Bowl and they got ROMPED by Ole Miss. And that's one of the flaws of the BCS system. Some teams get into big bowls and have nothing to play for. Alabama lost nothing by losing that game. Alabama had nothing to lose and Utah had everything to gain.

And yeah, people would probably watch the "tournament" games. But not the non-powerhouse teams. No one watched Davidson or George Mason in the tournament until they beat someone. Upsets in a college football tournament are less likely because of the physicality of sport in general. Basketball takes a few lucky bounces and a team shooting lights out like Davidson did last season. I think there's a lot less luck in football.

But the fact remains that having an 8 team playoff is just bad for the kids from a physical standpoint. You and I both watched the Hurricanes all season long. Towards the end of the year, especially the final two, our kids looked worn down and empty. Now most of our team depended on Freshman but you see the correlation. As Freshman, they were used to their seasons in high school and their seasons were over by that time. As it stands now, there's a break in between the final game and the bowl season but with an 8 or 16 game playoff system like most are clamoring for, think about how much longer we would be extending the season to accomodate such a senseless playoff. Either the break between the final game of the season would be shortened, or the break would remain the same and the playoff would extend well into January. In fact, we would probably be watching college football playoffs today. So we're talking about extending the season into the start of the spring semester. These kids are still students first.

Seriously, when you take into consideration all that we've covered, pros and cons, it's tough to argue against the Plus One system. I love the BCS. Always have. I think for the most part that it works but I do understand its flaws. I also understand that the circus will never end until we move to a playoff. I think we need to design some form of playoff but not at the kids expense and not at the expense of college football's appeal.

Well, we're just going to have to disagree on all of this.

Although as a cane - I'm surprised you love the BCS after the 2000 season. And with Miami being the most disrespected program in the country by the media, it's bound to happen again.

CedarPhin
01-18-2009, 12:09 PM
Miami has to get there first.

CedarPhin
01-18-2009, 12:11 PM
I hate the BCS, and wish there would be a playoff. It'd be alot more entertaining. I do like Bowl Season, it's one of my favorite times of year, but to have a playoff system would be fantastic.

Miami would have won it all in 2000. And it probably would have been Miami vs. USC in 2002, which would have been a lot better matchup IMO.

kpcane
01-18-2009, 12:11 PM
Miami has to get there first.

It's already happened.

CedarPhin
01-18-2009, 12:16 PM
Well yeah, no kidding. I said in the post below that, they would have won it all in 2000 had they got in.

You had said "with Miami being the most disrespected program in the nation, it's bound to happen to them again". Well, they actually have to get to that apex as a team again, something they haven't shown capable of doing the last few seasons.

kpcane
01-18-2009, 12:39 PM
I know what your point was - it was just a non-sequitur.