I say make the kids demonstrate their academic ability prior to putting on the pads.
BCS is a joke again
- Thread starter jlhugh
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 91
- Views 9K
Well the Bcs is still a joke!! Texas should not be ranked in the top ten. I hope they get a better QB!!
Ohio state and WV!!
Ohio state and WV!!
I think Texas's QB will do fine, but not till next year, though he is getting better, well see at the end of the year when they play a team again, in a bowl game.
Jimbo
Get a better QB? What are you talking about. They got what they got and he is going to be pretty good. I don't guess you are watching the same games I am.
While I see the loss in revenue, I did 12 to hold the integrity of the reg season. 4 less teams in the tourney (with strict 2 team conf rule, you'd be reaching to fill the spots), and 4 schools who benefit with a bye because of a outstanding reg season.
I am not for having every conf have a auto bid, which I believe that a 16 team tourney would require with the non bcs shools. A Sun belt or Conf USA champ shouldn't get automatic bid. Plus, you are almost assurring that you can't have more than 2 losses to qualify (expect for the major BCS conf champs in some seasons).
One thing I hate about the pro's is seeing a 8-8 or a 9-7 team have a shot at a title. That is the one thing that the current CFB system preserves and I'd like to try to keep that in play. 16 is too much IMO. 12 is about the max I'd go; gives every valid team a shot.
Think about two years ago, both Utah, Boise St and Lousiville would have qualified! Good Non-BCS teams would get a shot in this structure, but only the valid ones!
Then you'll just have the 13,14th, 15,and 16th places saying theres not that much difference between us and them.
But you'll have that anyway you set it up.
I just figured 16 because it works well in the BB tournament, 12 would be fine with me too.
Jimbo
True, you will have it no matter how you set it up. I like the face that there is some reward to the top 4 teams, where a 16 team tourney would require 4 games for the top 4. Plus, an scouting advantage too. With a 16 team, you'd either have to give more auto bids to non-bcs confs, more that two teams per conf or allow some 3 loss teams in the tourney to fill the spots, all of which i'd like to avoid.
Teams will bitch and here is what i'd say:
1) you should have finished top 12 in the BCS
2) So you are the 3rd highest ranked team in your conf and are ranked in the top 12.....tough luck......you should have finished 2nd in your conf.
On that last one, I am ok with BCS conf setting their some rules with the bids. Example, SEC. Team A and Team B are in the SEC title game. Team B loses and now is ranked below Team C, whom lost H2H to team B in the reg season. Conf reserves the right to remove Team C for Team B if Team B still meets at large qualifications. (i.e The tennesse factor from my orig post)
That might be reaching but I can almost see where going to a conf title game might not be in your team's best interest. WIn and in. Lose, and a team below you can sneak in, a team whom wouldn't have if there was no conf title game.
This is why I suggested earlier that they do away with Conference title games. I still think you should be be able to have 3 from your conference IF they are in the top 12. If they are in the top 12 they may be better than another conferences # 2 team.
Ya know, we should be submitting these ideas !!!
Jimbo
We should
I like the 2 team conf rule that they have in play now. The rule now is mainly there to prevent conf from hogging the BCS money, as every game outside the title game is all about money.
Even for the playoff, there are years when the SEC could have 3-4 teams in the top 12. Part of the reason for the high ranking is based off their SOS (ie conf schedule). I don't think that a conf, no matter what their rankings is, should have 1/3 or 1/4 of the available spots. A team can control their OOC games, but they can't control their conf schedule. If a B10 or SEC team loses out on a 3rd or 4th team, so be it.
Remember, that 3rd team that get cut off could have handled it on the field with the other two conf qualifiers. We have H2H to determine that where the majority of the time when we compare two teams from different confs, they didn't play.
I can see your argument, but only way I wouldn't even consider 3 teams is in a 16 team playoff. Or if another team isn't in the top 16 of the BCS (i.e no one to fill the 3rd team's slot)
If things went to a playoff, I think evan an 8 team playoff would work. You could take the 6 conference winners, and then have whatever method for selecting the other two. If a team ends up as the 9th team, they can't really complain(they will anyway) because they could have done something better to get into the playoff. The only team that had a very good legitimate complaint about the BCS was Auburn. There was absolutely nothing they could have done to win the title a couple of years ago. They won every game in a tough conference and that wasn't enough. If there was an 8 team playoff and;
1. You don't win your conference - you can't complain.
2. You have at least one loss - you can't complain.
3. You are from a small conference that has a 1-23 record out of conference - you can't complain.
With that system anyone left out could have done something better themseleves to get into the playoff.
1. You don't win your conference - you can't complain.
2. You have at least one loss - you can't complain.
3. You are from a small conference that has a 1-23 record out of conference - you can't complain.
With that system anyone left out could have done something better themseleves to get into the playoff.
We should
I like the 2 team conf rule that they have in play now. The rule now is mainly there to prevent conf from hogging the BCS money, as every game outside the title game is all about money.
Even for the playoff, there are years when the SEC could have 3-4 teams in the top 12. Part of the reason for the high ranking is based off their SOS (ie conf schedule). I don't think that a conf, no matter what their rankings is, should have 1/3 or 1/4 of the available spots. A team can control their OOC games, but they can't control their conf schedule. If a B10 or SEC team loses out on a 3rd or 4th team, so be it.
Remember, that 3rd team that get cut off could have handled it on the field with the other two conf qualifiers. We have H2H to determine that where the majority of the time when we compare two teams from different confs, they didn't play.
I can see your argument, but only way I wouldn't even consider 3 teams is in a 16 team playoff. Or if another team isn't in the top 16 of the BCS (i.e no one to fill the 3rd team's slot)
I wasn't so much argueing for a 3rd team, as much as seeing a team ranked 12th not make the playoffs.
Jimbo
yea, i know who he is talking about. who can they get that is better. another freshman? you got to give this kid some time. he has been getting better as the year goes along.
I also think that every conference should have a championship game. That is an extra game right there for some teams. All or nothing.
The Big Ten already has a championship game...it's called Michigan vs. Ohio State. I wouldn't mind seeing a Big Ten "championship game" added if Notre Dame were ever to join the conference. To be honest, I like the traditional bowl games...most conference championships are asinine; popularity polls should only be conducted after the season has played out; and student athletes should...well, should actually be students first and athletes second.
If they should be "students" (You ever check out what they're majors are?", why not make freshman inelidgable, and give them five year scholarships? You know the answer to that one already.
Even this set up has its flaws. While I see no prob with a 8 team playoff, I don't think that you can make it that simple to qualify. To automatically state that the 6 BCS conf winners qualify wouldn't be right with the limited # of spots available.
Remember 2004? would it have been fair for a BE champ, that isn't even in the top 25 of the BCS, take a spot just because they won the BE? If there were 12 or 16 spots open, then maybe. Taking 6 out of 8 bids and automatically reserving them to the BCS conf champ with no oversight, would be a mistake IMO. You would have to have some rules in place to qualify (i.e require a certain BCS ranking). Plus, as sad as it is, you can't forget about ND. They will require some sort of way to guarentee a bid, which now only leaves one at large that is truely at large.
I know what people will say "Well screw ND" but what happens if Weiss can get his boys to run the table one of these years and they are #1? They will say screw the playoff and go to a bowl, win, and now you have a controversy on who is #1 (basically a 2003 senerio).
BCS conf strength varies year to year. Look at the BE now compared to 2004. ACC now compared to last year? With more at large bids, you make room for these fluxuations while still giving the conf champs at chance to win it all.
Also, the #3 statement is a little off IMO. You really can't help what your conf does, but can control your OOC games. Say for example Boise St ran the table with USC's OOC games (at Ark, ND, Neb), are you telling me that Boise shouldn't get in cause they are from a crappy conf?
Only if ND joins IMO.
IF so, then I'd set the divisions up like this.
Div A:
OSU
MICH
MSU
IND
NW
IOWA
Div B:
PSU
ND
PUR
MINN
WISC
ILL
5 intra-divsion games, 1 locked cross division game, and 2 rotating cross division games.
Righ now, there are two teams that evey B10 is guarenteed to play every year, while the others rotate with 2 teams you don't play.
My lock game:
PSU-OSU (lock game now)
MICH-MINN (little brown jug)
Wisc-Iowa (rival game now; forgot the prize they fight for)
ILL-NW (interstate)
ND-MSU (play every year now)
Purdue-IND (interstate)
I know what some of you will say: Why put MICH and OSU in the same div? Well, Real OSU and MICH fans will tell you that "THE GAME" should never be played twice! That is one thing I hate about the ACC and Miami/FSU. I see why they did that (money and ratings) , but to play your rival twice is just BS; it dimishes the reg season game. I would NEVER want to devalue that game that happens every 3rd weekend in Nov.
Imagine OSU/MICH winner playing the ND/PSU winner in the title game. Or a IOWA or WISC sneeking in on a up year. Either way, your going to get a great conf title game!
Plus, the div are pretty balanced for MBB too
That is the point that we were both trying to make, I think the kid will do fine, just needs time to grow.
Jimbo
Last edited:
