I love college football

[BS Miscreant]

The switch from 95 to 85 scholarships has changed college football for the better. I know there are those of you out there that loved being the evil empire and having a few choice, clearly dominant teams year in and year out but I absolutely love where the game is going. The USC/Oregon St and UF/Ole Miss games this weekend are prime examples of what is happening and I just can't get enough of it. I came into this weekend thinking there were maybe four games of any real significance but those two games have me believing that last year was no fluke. It is quite possible that two two loss teams will play in NC game again this year. Parity is great. Gimme some more.

[untateve]

The switch from 95 to 85 scholarships has changed college football for the better. I know there are those of you out there that loved being the evil empire and having a few choice, clearly dominant teams year in and year out but I absolutely love where the game is going. The USC/Oregon St and UF/Ole Miss games this weekend are prime examples of what is happening and I just can't get enough of it. I came into this weekend thinking there were maybe four games of any real significance but those two games have me believing that last year was no fluke. It is quite possible that two two loss teams will play in NC game again this year. Parity is great. Gimme some more.

 

These type of observations are more enjoyable when one's favorite team has not just lost.

 

:tears:

[BS Miscreant]

These type of observations are more enjoyable when one's favorite team has not just lost.

 

:tears:

For what it's worth, I thought of you when I wrote it.

[untateve]

For what it's worth, I thought of you when I wrote it.

 

I thought so. When I looked back, I only saw one set of footprints.

[BS Miscreant]

I thought so. When I looked back, I only saw one set of footprints.

[Menudo]

Very true. This is a lot of fun. However, imagine how fun it would be, if we knew there was an 8 team playoff coming at the end. We are all getting ripped off by this ridiculously stupid ranking system.......... someday, it will change, and we will realize what we have missed.

[BadgerBacker]

Exactly. The parity in college football is exciting and good for the game. But the process for deciding the national champion is obsolete with more parity and a playoff is badly needed.

[cbs0121]

I don' think we'll ever see a college football playoff system unless fans stop complaining and start actually doing something to give a tangible value to their annoyance - namely, stop watching and attending college football games. As long as it's a cash cow for the NCAA, the BCS and it's affiliated conferences and schools, the networks, and ESPN, they have no reason to change it. It's just the way things work - if you don't like buying rotten apples from the store, stop going until they actually start carrying good ones.

[Kid Cid]

I don' think we'll ever see a college football playoff system unless fans stop complaining and start actually doing something to give a tangible value to their annoyance - namely, stop watching and attending college football games. As long as it's a cash cow for the NCAA, the BCS and it's affiliated conferences and schools, the networks, and ESPN, they have no reason to change it. It's just the way things work - if you don't like buying rotten apples from the store, stop going until they actually start carrying good ones.

Bowl games, not the in-season games. Stop participating in the bowl game process to send the message. It won't happen of course, but that's the only way to send a message that the big wigs will understand.

[cbs0121]

Bowl games, not the in-season games. Stop participating in the bowl game process to send the message. It won't happen of course, but that's the only way to send a message that the big wigs will understand.

Yeah, thanks for clarifying what I meant to say!

 

If nobody showed up to the BCS games this year, we would have an eight team playoff next year.

[Rockerbraves]

Exactly. The parity in college football is exciting and good for the game. But the process for deciding the national champion is obsolete with more parity and a playoff is badly needed.

The curent process (like it or not) of deciding the NC is actually one very good reason why college football is so exciting today. To some degree every weekend in college football today is like a playoff.

[Kid Cid]

The curent process (like it or not) of deciding the NC is actually one very good reason why college football is so exciting today. To some degree every weekend in college football today is like a playoff Miss America pageant. She's pretty, she's sexy...who cares if she has genital warts.

Fixed.

[detlef]

The curent process (like it or not) of deciding the NC is actually one very good reason why college football is so exciting today. To some degree every weekend in college football today is like a playoff.

The preceding message has been brought to you by the powers that be in hopes that this time you'll actually believe it. That theory would only hold if nearly every year we had two unbeatens in the NC game. In other words, your entire season is series of single-elimination play-off games. Lose, and go home.

 

However, far more often than not, at least one team has 1 loss, so, for one team or maybe two teams, lose and go home does not apply but for a bunch of others, it does.

 

An 8 team play-off would not render the regular season meaningless because there are enough legit undefeated and one-loss teams that the only way you could totally assure yourself a shot at the title is to not lose. Lose once and you've got to hope for the best. Which is precisely how it is now. Only, instead of the 3rd most deserving team getting shafted, the 9th most deserving team would be. And that's a whole lot easier to swallow.

[policyvote]

College football is broken. "Upsets" aren't exciting when they happen by the dozen, every week, all year long. Last year I was supposed to believe that South Florida was the David knocking off Goliath . . . then the Goliath that got knocked off by a new David . . . then David again a few weeks later. It's ridiculous and pointless. "The Most Meaningful Regular Season" is a joke when every team in the top 80 schedules the softest patsies they can get away with for the first four games . . . and in order to squeeze all those patsies in, the major conferences don't even all play each other anymore. You have no way of knowing who's a national power and who's an also-ran until December, and even then you don't REALLY know until the bowl games are played. Then we can look back in retrospect and wax eloquent about the whole mess . . . blah.

 

Peace

policy

[Rockerbraves]

Not saying a playoff is a bad idea, however you have to admit, ever since the BCS came into being College football has never been so popular. To me a plus one game is all that is needed.

[GWPFFL BrianW]

Not saying a playoff is a bad idea, however you have to admit, ever since the BCS came into being College football has never been so popular. To me a plus one game is all that is needed.

 

Honestly, I think it has nothing to do with the BCS, but more with the media coverage of the sport, particularly ESPN. This is a game that was entirely regional for decades. Now look at it. ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN Classic, and ESPN U all show a game (not to mention if you purchase ESPN Gameplan) ESPN News has College Football Overdrive on all day long. You have Fox Sports also showing regional games, on top of that you have ABC and CBS, and also the VS channel. Combine that with all of the opinion shows throughout the week, Cell Phone updates, the internet. This sport was going to take off whether the BCS existed or not. It's a mixture of the constant 24 hour a day coverage combined with the emotional culture of fans. I mean, honestly, I'm a Kansas City Chiefs fan, but if they lose, I don't give 2 sh|ts. If my Iowa Hawkeyes lose, I'm pretty passionate and upset about it. I think it's that way for a lot of fans. Fans have an emotional attachment to College Football, moreso than any other sport, and the media is just like a drug.

Edited September 29, 2008 by GWPFFL BrianW

[detlef]

Honestly, I think it has nothing to do with the BCS, but more with the media coverage of the sport, particularly ESPN. This is a game that was entirely regional for decades. Now look at it. ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN Classic, and ESPN U all show a game (not to mention if you purchase ESPN Gameplan) ESPN News has College Football Overdrive on all day long. You have Fox Sports also showing regional games, on top of that you have ABC and CBS, and also the VS channel. Combine that with all of the opinion shows throughout the week, Cell Phone updates, the internet. This sport was going to take off whether the BCS existed or not. It's a mixture of the constant 24 hour a day coverage combined with the emotional culture of fans. I mean, honestly, I'm a Kansas City Chiefs fan, but if they lose, I don't give 2 sh|ts. If my Iowa Hawkeyes lose, I'm pretty passionate and upset about it. I think it's that way for a lot of fans. Fans have an emotional attachment to College Football, moreso than any other sport, and the media is just like a drug.

What he said plus the fact that football in general has gotten huge over the last 10-15 years. The product has been marketed perfectly.

 

Besides, even if we can thank the BCS for increasing interest, once could easily argue that it's because we've added a one game play-off so it is a more satisfying conclusion to the season for most fans than the old way. I mean, it makes perfect sense. Those of us who want a play-off want one because we want the title to be more settled on the field than with the voters. Well, the BCS does this better than if you couldn't even get 1 v 2. So, why wouldn't those who prefer the BCS to the old way not also prefer a more expanded play-off to the BCS?

 

There is, of course, a point where too many teams would be included and the regular season would be rendered unimportant. I agree with many that 8 is a perfect solution.

[Rockerbraves]

To me the BCS at least gives us the opportunity to matchup #1 vs. #2. Prior to the BCS it was rare to get a #1 vs. #2 matchup in the bowl games. So while the BCS isn't perfect it sure beats what we had before.

[detlef]

To me the BCS at least gives us the opportunity to matchup #1 vs. #2. Prior to the BCS it was rare to get a #1 vs. #2 matchup in the bowl games. So while the BCS isn't perfect it sure beats what we had before.

I mentioned that possibility above.

 

However, whether or not the BCS is better than not even trying to get the two top rated teams in a game has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not that's where we should stop.

 

Should I begin listing the endless amount of things that were improvements on older models but were, themselves, ultimately shown to be not as good as something that came along afterward?

 

Of course, that doesn't even speak to the fact that the current BCS has been shown to be largely ineffective at accomplishing it's goal while at the same time undermining traditional bowl rivalries. So, one could argue that, like so many other things, you should either leave it alone or go all the way with it.

 

Mr. Miyagi: Karate like road. You walk on one side, you OK. You walk on otherside, you OK. You walk in middle, squash like bug. So either karate yes or karate no. Karate, I guess so, squash like bug.

Edited September 29, 2008 by detlef

[Rockerbraves]

Of course, that doesn't even speak to the fact that the current BCS has been shown to be largely ineffective at accomplishing it's goal while at the same time undermining traditional bowl rivalries. So, one could argue that, like so many other things, you should either leave it alone or go all the way with it.

Assume you are talking about the Rose Bowl. Can only imagine how disappointed they are these past two seasons where in the old days the Rose Bowl would likely have produced the past two National Champions much like the old days. Now the Pac 10 must share playing against the Big 10 Champion.

[detlef]

Assume you are talking about the Rose Bowl. Can only imagine how disappointed they are these past two seasons where in the old days the Rose Bowl would likely have produced the past two National Champions much like the old days. Now the Pac 10 must share playing against the Big 10 Champion.

I'm not even saying I am among those who pine for the old school bowls. Rather that I hear the argument made from time to time. And when you couple that with the fact that there are many of us who feel the BCS is largely a failure at producing a satisfying conclusion to the season for anyone who's not a fan of either of the two schools that get chosen, it bears mention that perhaps it's a half assed solution that fails on both sides.

[Rockerbraves]

Some people may not have liked the outcome of the BCS NC games, but IMO the BCS has done an excellent job of choosing which two teams get into the game based off the results of those seasons. I know many will say USC should have gotten in over the Sooners in 2003 but the truth was that the Sooners were the perceived best team in college football that year even after losing to Kansas State in their conference championship. I recall prior to the announcement of which teams would play for the BCS NC that year that Vegas had the Sooners 7 better than LSU and 9 to 10 points better than USC. Overall I would say the BCS has done a pretty good job of getting the right two teams in the big game again based off of their results during the season.

 

Would I like an 8 team playoff? Of course I would.

 

Playoffs would be great fun, but I still don't think the winner would receive a 100% approval rate from all the college football fans.

[detlef]

Some people may not have liked the outcome of the BCS NC games, but IMO the BCS has done an excellent job of choosing which two teams get into the game based off the results of those seasons. I know many will say USC should have gotten in over the Sooners in 2003 but the truth was that the Sooners were the perceived best team in college football that year even after losing to Kansas State in their conference championship. I recall prior to the announcement of which teams would play for the BCS NC that year that Vegas had the Sooners 7 better than LSU and 9 to 10 points better than USC. Overall I would say the BCS has done a pretty good job of getting the right two teams in the big game again based off of their results during the season.

 

Would I like an 8 team playoff? Of course I would.

 

Playoffs would be great fun, but I still don't think the winner would receive a 100% approval rate from all the college football fans.

Nearly every pairing that has been made for the NC game included two teams that had at least as strong a case considering the parameters as anyone else. I don't think that they've failed to choose two of the most deserving teams in the Nation each year. No team that's gotten snubbed could make a 100% iron clad argument why they should have gone over anyone else.

 

That's the problem. It is usually impossible to take the data at hand and be sure you're grabbing what is certainly the two most deserving teams in the country. Teams don't play each other enough so you're stuck splitting hairs.

[Rockerbraves]

That's the problem. It is usually impossible to take the data at hand and be sure you're grabbing what is certainly the two most deserving teams in the country. Teams don't play each other enough so you're stuck splitting hairs.

Same could be said with the NFL and MLB and NBA as well.

 

Say for example the NFL might have the 2 best teams in the NFC yet the AFC still gets a team in the Super Bowl.

[cbs0121]

I'm not quite sure why everyone seems to have a problem with the simple proposition that there no way to know for sure who is the best team in any league in any sport, barring a few cases where a team is simply so dominant that it's not contestable. And anyways, the idea of a single elimination playoff as the best way to determine the top teams is almost as much of a joke as the current system - just ask George Mason...

Edited September 29, 2008 by cbs0121