14 Oct 10
Originally posted by no1marauderYour solution gives a huge incentive to be a terrible conference. Why would anyone want to be in the SEC and play a tough schedule each week to fight for the same automatic bid that you would get by playing absolutely no one? The most interesting competition in your 8 team playoff would be to leave real conferences for ones that provide no competition.
I already proposed a solution which addresses that concern: an 8 team playoff with the 6 BCS conference winners and the top 2 independents/mid-majors. That way teams would still have to play to win their conferences or face elimination.
14 Oct 10
Originally posted by quackquackSpot on indeed! BSU really has no business being spoken of in the same breath as the Oregons, Bamas and so on. Until they prove they can handle a tough schedule the eight team playoff group would play poweder puff teams and get in!
Your solution gives a huge incentive to be a terrible conference. Why would anyone want to be in the SEC and play a tough schedule each week to fight for the same automatic bid that you would get by playing absolutely no one? The most interesting competition in your 8 team playoff would be to leave real conferences for ones that provide no competition.
14 Oct 10
A sixteen team playoff will make the regular season meaningless, like the NCAA tournament in basketball.
Repeating the lie does not make it any more true. Basketball's problem is that it has too many regular season games.
College football is generally regional. People have their conferences that they are most interested in. This will not change.
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
14 Oct 10
Originally posted by quackquackNo one "chooses" to be in a "terrible conference". Conferences as a whole go up and down.
Your solution gives a huge incentive to be a terrible conference. Why would anyone want to be in the SEC and play a tough schedule each week to fight for the same automatic bid that you would get by playing absolutely no one? The most interesting competition in your 8 team playoff would be to leave real conferences for ones that provide no competition.
This is another non-issue. I would have thought that the PAC-10 made it abundantly clear that the nature and makeup of conferences will significantly change in the next 10 years. The conference chaos is not over by a long stretch.
14 Oct 10
Originally posted by BadwaterEspecially with conference movement teams certainly do choose their conference. Texas chose to stay in the Big 12, Notre Dame chose to stay independent. Nebraska and Penn State chose to go to the Big 10. Teams choose to go to the Pac 10, teams chose to join conference USA. Teams choose to stay in the SEC even though it is normally the toughest conference. Some teams pick great out of conference games some duck all the competition.
No one "chooses" to be in a "terrible conference". Conferences as a whole go up and down.
This is another non-issue. I would have thought that the PAC-10 made it abundantly clear that the nature and makeup of conferences will significantly change in the next 10 years. The conference chaos is not over by a long stretch.
As a result some teams play much harder schedules than others and those who do not simply should not get an automatic pass to National Championship Game.
14 Oct 10
Originally posted by EladarIt is not a lie. College football makes every game count and that's the number one reason why people care about each game. In college basketball you can play your rival twice and then again in the conference tournament and if you don't play them a fourth time in the NCAA tournament no one think any of the first three games really matter. A sixteen team tournament is the best way to make sure that regular season games stop selling out.
[b]A sixteen team playoff will make the regular season meaningless, like the NCAA tournament in basketball.
Repeating the lie does not make it any more true. Basketball's problem is that it has too many regular season games.
College football is generally regional. People have their conferences that they are most interested in. This will not change.[/b]
15 Oct 10
Originally posted by EladarI am certain not saying that. I am saying that overemphasis on a tournament ruin the regular season and college football has the best regular season.
If what you say is true, then right now people only care about a hand full of teams. Nobody would care about a team that has lost two or more games. The further we go into the year, the fewer teams people would care about.
Clearly this is not the case.
15 Oct 10
Originally posted by quackquackYeah, Utah had no chance against mighty Alabama of the SEC last year. And didn't Boise State get absolutely crushed by Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl a few years back?
Your solution gives a huge incentive to be a terrible conference. Why would anyone want to be in the SEC and play a tough schedule each week to fight for the same automatic bid that you would get by playing absolutely no one? The most interesting competition in your 8 team playoff would be to leave real conferences for ones that provide no competition.
The BCS conferences get an automatic bid; other conferences do not. That's an "incentive" (besides the major incentive: MONEY).
I fail to see why you are so terrified to put an independent or mid-major in the Quarter Finals against a BCS Conference Championship. If the latter are so obviously superior, they'll prove it on the field and the independent and mid-majors will always be eliminated before reaching the semi-finals.
15 Oct 10
2 edits
Originally posted by scacchipazzoIf I recall correctly, Boise State beat Oregon last year (a year Oregon won the Pac-10). So who shouldn't be spoken in the same breath with who?
Spot on indeed! BSU really has no business being spoken of in the same breath as the Oregons, Bamas and so on. Until they prove they can handle a tough schedule the eight team playoff group would play poweder puff teams and get in!
EDIT: And I'm sure Utah shouldn't have been mentioned in the same breath as Alabama on January 2, 2009 but what about on January 3, 2009?http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/04/sports/04iht-college.1.19064661.html
15 Oct 10
Originally posted by no1marauderI am not afraid of playing Boise. I simply look at teams schedules and see that Boise isn't on par with those in major conferences.
Yeah, Utah had no chance against mighty Alabama of the SEC last year. And didn't Boise State get absolutely crushed by Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl a few years back?
The BCS conferences get an automatic bid; other conferences do not. That's an "incentive" (besides the major incentive: MONEY).
I fail to see why you are so terri ...[text shortened]... d the independent and mid-majors will always be eliminated before reaching the semi-finals.
The championship should be for the team that accomplished the most (has the most impressive achievements). Bosie plays New Mexico State, Toledo, San Jose State, Lousinana Tech, Hawaii and Idaho in consecutive weeks. Alabama played Arkansas, Florida and South Carolina the past three consecutive weeks and has two more current top 10 teams on their regular season schedule (plus a possible SEC championship). Boise does not play that type of schedule and as such should not play for a championship. I look foward to them being passed in the BCS standings.
15 Oct 10
Originally posted by quackquackCherry picking; are you always so dishonest in your arguments?
I am not afraid of playing Boise. I simply look at teams schedules and see that Boise isn't on par with those in major conferences.
The championship should be for the team that accomplished the most (has the most impressive achievements). Bosie plays New Mexico State, Toledo, San Jose State, Lousinana Tech, Hawaii and Idaho in consecutive weeks. A ...[text shortened]... h should not play for a championship. I look foward to them being passed in the BCS standings.
Boise has already beaten two teams that were ranked in the Top 25 when they played them. Nobody has beaten Boise for the last two years and that includes last year's winner of the PAC-10.
Your arguments are garbage; if Boise can play and beat the championship teams from other leagues (which they can and have), then they should get their shot. You're repeated claim that Boise can't compete with the best teams has never been proven on the field and has been disproven several times in the last few years.
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
15 Oct 10
Originally posted by quackquackI quoted you. You said "Your solution gives a huge incentive to be a terrible conference." I said no one chooses to be in a "terrible conference". You say teams choose their conference. I didn't say that teams don't choose their conference, I said that no one chooses to be in a terrible conference. I inferred that your rationale of teams having incentive to be in a terrible conference was wholly without any basis whatsoever.
Especially with conference movement teams certainly do choose their conference. ....
Stick to the point.
15 Oct 10
Originally posted by quackquackSo you are saying that if we have a play off system incorporated into the Bowl system that all of a sudden people would only care about the play off games?
I am certain not saying that. I am saying that overemphasis on a tournament ruin the regular season and college football has the best regular season.
I do not believe there is any chance that this would happen.
Basketball's problem is that they play too many games. With so many games, what does any one game mean? Football does not have that problem.
Answer me this: How many games do basketball teams play in one season? How many games does a football team play in one season?
15 Oct 10
Originally posted by no1marauderHey fool, I am not dishonest. Show me how boise plays an SEC type schedule and I'll listen. Of couuse you'd rather insult me because the facts don't favor you. Playing a few good teams over three years does not equal playing six or seven in one year. Alabama has to play guys hurt becuase every game is tough. Boise has three months between tough games. It is not equilavent and the national championship game should recognize this.
Cherry picking; are you always so dishonest in your arguments?
Boise has already beaten two teams that were ranked in the Top 25 when they played them. Nobody has beaten Boise for the last two years and that includes last year's winner of the PAC-10.
Your arguments are garbage; if Boise can play and beat the championship ...[text shortened]... as never been proven on the field and has been disproven several times in the last few years.