GatorBait19 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Who do you think is the true National Champ, yes I know Florida and OU haven’t played yet, but an ESPN writer is saying it should be the Utes He goes on to say, they beat 4 top 25 teams, beat Oregon State who beat USC, they beat formerly ranked no. 1 Alabama, and they finished 13-0! But here is the thing, Oregon State got blown out by Penn State who then went on to beat Ohio State (a BCS game player even if it should have been someone else) and then USC went on to blow out both of those team Now these are just points and yes they won out the whole year but how big where there wins? they did beat Michigan at the big house but who didn't this year and by just two points, and only beat Oregon State and TCU which both games where at home by 3 points each, and almost lost to New Mexico State (13-10 was the finally score) Now once again they did go 13-0 and it doesn’t matter how close the win is because a win is still a win Then it comes to the last two teams they beat, BYU lost to Arizona, who was beat by USC and Oregon State so now after all the arguments people can make and say this is why they should be, people can trump them with what I just wrote, so my question is instead on the BCS should a playoff system be put in place Here are two different playoff formats I thought up 1) 8 teams (6 conf. champs, and 2 at large with best record) go to the play Or 2) Top 8 teams and who do you think is the true national champ after the national title game no matter who wins, because if OU wins, Texas fans are going to say hey we beat you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CQI13 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Problem is, you can't use the logic of A beat B, and B beats C, so A should beat C. Oregon State beat USC, and USC beat Ohio State. Not sure that Oregon State would beat Ohio St. Maybe they could, but you can't know for sure. Yes, there should be a playoff (every other football division has it). However, I wouldn't trust them to run it properly. I'd revamp the bowl system (there are way too many bowls right now). Use one of the bowls for the National Title, another bowl for 3rd place, and the other 2 bowls you use for conference champs that didn't make it to the playoffs. I wouldn't keep the 30 or so bowls that they have now. That's around 60 teams (even if it's less, it comes to close to that) and there's less than 120 in Division 1. Everyone makes it to a bowl. What's so meaningful about that? In the current format, you can't say with certainty that Utah should be the champs. But in a playoff, you should certainly invite them. That's how you get people to know about a school, so it builds a national following. Look back at Miami (FL) prior to say '83. Pretty sure you wouldn't see much Canes gear outside of Miami before then. As for real national title, whomever wins the game on Thursday will be it. That's what the system determined, that's the only thing we have to go on. Because if the Queen had balls, she'd be the King. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattitudeV2 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 Problem is, you can't use the logic of A beat B, and B beats C, so A should beat C. Oregon State beat USC, and USC beat Ohio State. Not sure that Oregon State would beat Ohio St. Maybe they could, but you can't know for sure. The Oregon State loss was a road loss might i add and they beat to of the Big Ten's best players at home(Rose Bowl is USC Home turf).So as far as I'm concerned USC doesn't deserve any recogintion.They beat 4 decent teams in a crappy confrence and beat OSU and PSU @ home.Meaning they have 0 quality wins.If I was USC I would try to play tough teams on the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 good point, but i was reading somewhere that if OU won most of the coaches were going to vote Texas as 1 and OU 2 and try to get a share of the NC and Oregon State lost to Penn State, but I still don't truly believe Oregon S. would beat OSU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 The Oregon State loss was a road loss might i add and they beat to of the Big Ten's best players at home(Rose Bowl is USC Home turf).So as far as I'm concerned USC doesn't deserve any recogintion.They beat 4 decent teams in a crappy confrence and beat OSU and PSU @ home.Meaning they have 0 quality wins.If I was USC I would try to play tough teams on the road. Um, yeah but their conf. went 5-0 in bowl games so i can't agree with that completely yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattitudeV2 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 good point, but i was reading somewhere that if OU won most of the coaches were going to vote Texas as 1 and OU 2 and try to get a share of the NC and Oregon State lost to Penn State, but I still don't truly believe Oregon S. would beat OSU Also I always here the USC has the west coast bias the last time I checked they been in the Top 5 the past 7 seasons and everybody said Texas was going to blowout Ohio State hmm...Texas beat a supposed strugling BCS Buckeyes by 3.Jim Rome also needs to keep his west coast mouth shut because the PAC ten played nobodies whille the Big Ten played the SEC and Big 12 and all the bowl teams competed while the Pac Ten was playing the Mountain West and The Big East to no so go conferences.Rome needs to be Fired! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 well Texas should have beat OSU bigger than what they did, but anything can happen came day USC might have the West Coast Bias but with the Top 5 in 7 years is well deserved, but Idk because they played ND even when they were good, and they play a Big Ten school at least once a year, and yes their conf. isn't the best, but I believe they would still contend in the SEC of Big 12, they wouldn't be top 5 team every year anymore, but they would still be a NC contender Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthsiddus2 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 this is why we should have a Plus-1 system or a system like College Basketball. if it works for College basketball why can't it work for college football? if that was going on we wouldn't have this conversation now. it would've been Texas vs Oklahoma for the national championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 Why Texas vs OU? we saw that once why not Florida vs USC or USC vs OU or USC vs Texas or Texas vs Florida Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthsiddus2 Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 that would be the logical choice with the current BCS system but if we had the playoff system as I've suggested we would most likely see those scenarios Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Peck Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 This subject is why I cannot ever get into College Football, nothing makes sense!!!..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted January 7, 2009 Author Share Posted January 7, 2009 Why does it not make sense? I find it more fun to watch than NFL most days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CQI13 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Because big teams tend to play patsies. You let computers decide who goes and who stays. That'd be like last year saying "Well, the Giants played better, but I like the Pats more." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cappyboy Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 This subject is why I cannot ever get into College Football, nothing makes sense!!!..... You know that may be a little extreme. But it does seem sometimes like it takes more digging than should be necessary to find the sense. Why does it not make sense? I'll give you some examples of why it doesn't seem to make sense. Every year you have these guys like Utah and USC and Texas who could have potential claims to the title. Some years, like this one, it seems there are more of those guys than there are slot in the supposed title game. At least back before the BCS when the title was mythical, everyone was in this boat. But trying to grasp why Florida and Oklahoma are so special they can try to prove it where these other guys don't? Unless you are fully and deeply invested in one of the 100+ schools involved, forget it. Too frustrating. Which is how I end up on the outside looking in. Closest thing to a D1, FBS, whatever they want to call it now team I have a connection to is fricking Navy. And tell me the last time they were in something other than one of the December finger bowls. Which make another good example. Especially this year with the horrible straits our economy is in, it is an absolute insult to sensible thought to be holding these little piddly finger bowls where the winner gets the honor of being two games over .500. Whoo ha. I am so impressed. Get all these jokers off my screen and give me some real bowls if I'm going to watch them. When I growing up, New Year's Day was one big football feast and I would gravitate toward these geographically oddball matchups. I couldn't wait to see USC and Penn State in the Rose Bowl, Georgia/Hawaii in the Sugar Bowl and like Texas Tech/Boston College in the Fiesta Bowl. Those games always felt compelling because you wouldn't often see such geographic pairings except for that one day a year. Now none of the bowls feel special because they are so spread out. Screw all these finger bowls and this nonsense of having a "national championship" game on my brother's birthday tomorrow sans a playoff system. And oh by the way, it's a "bowl" to boot. All these excess finger bowls have taken much of the football holiday feeling out of New Year's Day and I unapologetically resent that. That Michigan/Appalachian State game to start the 07 season. Can someone explain to me why a game like that should count toward anything? I get that A State is a power at the next level down and as such could be seen as a good tune-up. And I have no problem with a game like that being used as part of a college pre-season. But come on, give me a break. 99 times out of a 100 that kind of deal proves nothing. If Michigan had been ECU or Wake Forest, another North Carolina school okay. it would still have been pretty silly but there would have been something of a point. A State could have laid reasonable claim to being the best college team in North Carolina that way. But with it being Michigan, that holds no value. These "cupcake" games just serve to make all the big schools who play them look silly. Like they are ducking real competition that week. Or here's my favorite in that vein. All the college football fans and the media types like to gush about how every game means so much. That's probably one of the biggest nonsensical turn-OFFS in my mind. So I'm Expectation State and I stub my toe Opening Day against Rice. You're telling me that the fact that lone misstep costs me a shot at the title if three other teams go undefeated is a GOOD thing? That my whole season is out the window because of one fluke loss is a GOOD thing? I have a hard time buying that at all. Now you can usually fault the NFL for the lack of value some of their late season games have I grant you. But I'd much rather watch football under a system where the Pittsburgh Steelers can catch fire at the end of the season a couple years ago and ride it to a Super Bowl. Where the San Diego Chargers can catch fire late and make the playoffs when they were left for dead. Early season college games are FAR too overvalued and that just drives me nuts. I'm sure I could give you more examples of why it doesn't APPEAR to make sense. But that should be enough for you to chew on for now. I find it more fun to watch than NFL most days I guess I can understand that after a fashion. The whole "these guys are trying to prove themselves" argument. And maybe frustrations like the ones listed above play in to my perspective some. But I'd much rather see the best of the best go at it than a bunch of pretenders who are going to go on and become doctors and businessmen and such. And there's only one place to see the best of the best. That's the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 I guess I can understand that after a fashion. The whole "these guys are trying to prove themselves" argument. And maybe frustrations like the ones listed above play in to my perspective some. But I'd much rather see the best of the best go at it than a bunch of pretenders who are going to go on and become doctors and businessmen and such. And there's only one place to see the best of the best. That's the NFL. Yeah the NFL has the best but the rivialries is what I think makes college so much different from NFL, plus you don't see a lot of players b**** (T.O) and they don't have the money yet so they are playing there butts off, and tell me why College football teams who constantly win 8-10 games a year don't fire there coaches? I mean there are what 66 BCS schools who take a shot at the NC and there are only 32 teams for the superbowl now i get it not everyone of those 66 teams are good, but it's still the point, Bob Stoops has lost what 4 out his last 5 BCS bowl games, in Tampa they fired Dungey because he made a team better than what it ever was, but just because he couldn't win the big one. Just a thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 and quick add in, ESPN has a report about Adam Jones being cut by the Cowboys about an incident that happened in 2007 at an ATL night club, three men said Pac Man order a man to shot at them because he got into an arguement with him, but nothing came about because they didn't see the shooter so why now after a June 2007 shooting which is 6 months away from being 2 years old. Why now are these three guys just coming out to say that he was the reason they were shot at Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthsiddus2 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 that wasn't the reason they cut Pac-man. they cut him because of an incident with the Cowboys security detail assigned to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDE71 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Why is it that all the other divisions of NCAA football can have a playoff, but the big boys can't? For that reason alone, I personally don't care who wins Thursday night as it means nothing to me. All it does is say team A beat team B. If the other divisions can have a 16 team playoff then that is what the big boys should have. Until there is a 16 team playoff system for major college football, it will be meaningless to me who they "claim" to be the champion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 I dont know about the Pac-Man thing, the article said it was because of this new event and College D-1 wont do a playoff system because of money, I sat in an interview a couple months ago with Jeremy Foley the Florida AD, and he went on to say the reason he thinks there wont be a playoff is because of the money, because each bowl games has a sponsor and the BCS has a sponsor along with BCS bowl game sponsor, and that would all go away with a playoff system, and then something about to many games I could believe the sponsor thing but to many games is crap, but he also went on to say, that by that time College Basketball is starting to go full speed as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthsiddus2 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 here's the thing with the playoff system...... the entire country EXCEPT ONE CONFERENCE wants it. and I think it was the ACC who didn't want it. I say if there is a playoff system have each round as a bowl game. then after the winners of the bowl games are declared then the winners of that face off against each other in another bowl. then the winners of that face off in the finals. that way the sponsors can get their money and fans are happy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CQI13 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 It wouldn't be financially feasible for the fans. Especially if you have to travel long distances. (You can't ask Ohio State fans to go to the Cotton Bowl for the first game, then travel to the Fiesta Bowl for the next game and then the Orange Bowl for the title game). Have the first two rounds as a home game for the higher seed. Have the final game in the big bowl (3rd place in another bowl). Let whomever doesn't make it to the playoffs play in the toilet bowl or the punch bowl, or whatever bowl they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GDE71 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 The other division have the better seeds host all but the championship game. The bowls are an outdated pos. You could easily get someone to sponsor the whole playoffs. 15 games=tons of money. The other FIFTY bowl eligible teams can still go to there meaningless bowl games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 Yeah, but what about the other teams like the Tulsa, TCU, Arizona, Kentucky, Vandy, USF. Teams who fought hard to get to the bowls games, plus bowl games help more than just schools, they help cities. Think about it, in Florida alone they have like 8 bowls or something along that number, and I believe out of all those games 2 teams played from in state, and Florida State is a go 6 hour drive from Orlando so fans might still want to stay But not only that I think it also gives you a chance to see games you wouldn't, I loved the Boise State vs OU and the statue of liberty play a couple of years ago but the BCS has to be change, did they get the title game right this year, for some reason I do believe so because to me know two teams were hotter down the stretch than OU and UF, but I could defiantly make an argument for Texas, but whatever happened to the good only 1 vs 2 in the polls, and not just any poll, the coaches poll I mean these guys and their team go out there week in and week out and bust their ass, just to have 6 other polls and a computer make them seem like nothing, the coaches know these teams better than anyone, so why can't they decide the title game? And yes I get that some coaches would be bias but if they had the right to pick the two contenders I don't believe they would be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickC13573 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Who do you think is the true National Champ, yes I know Florida and OU haven’t played yet, but an ESPN writer is saying it should be the Utes He goes on to say, they beat 4 top 25 teams, beat Oregon State who beat USC, they beat formerly ranked no. 1 Alabama, and they finished 13-0! But here is the thing, Oregon State got blown out by Penn State who then went on to beat Ohio State (a BCS game player even if it should have been someone else) and then USC went on to blow out both of those team Now these are just points and yes they won out the whole year but how big where there wins? they did beat Michigan at the big house but who didn't this year and by just two points, and only beat Oregon State and TCU which both games where at home by 3 points each, and almost lost to New Mexico State (13-10 was the finally score) Now once again they did go 13-0 and it doesn’t matter how close the win is because a win is still a win Then it comes to the last two teams they beat, BYU lost to Arizona, who was beat by USC and Oregon State so now after all the arguments people can make and say this is why they should be, people can trump them with what I just wrote, so my question is instead on the BCS should a playoff system be put in place Here are two different playoff formats I thought up 1) 8 teams (6 conf. champs, and 2 at large with best record) go to the play Or 2) Top 8 teams and who do you think is the true national champ after the national title game no matter who wins, because if OU wins, Texas fans are going to say hey we beat you A) it should be Utah, B) it should be 16 team playoff, all 11 conference champions and 5 at large bids Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GatorBait19 Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 why do you think it should be Uath, just because they are 13-0? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.