Ohio State president E. Gordon Gee: TCU, Boise State not worthy of BCS title shot

[Jon]

But I still see it work great in NCAA basketball. There's plenty of no-namers in the tournament, and sometimes one or two of them become a dark horse and it actually becomes semi-interesting.

That's because they take 33 teams into the tournament, counting wild card spots. There's room for no name teams. Even if a football tournament took 16 teams, about half of the conference champions would not be more worthy than the top 16 from the BCS.

The argument that it'll take too long to complete a tournament with that many teams is not a good one, if it means the NCAA can make more money from it.

Not necessarily. More football = less time/energy to devote to basketball.

 

[Toro]

You've hit the nail on the head. Conferences like the Sunbelt are absolute jokes. Their best team right now is 5-5, and Toro's system would reward that team with a playoff bid. Conference USA, Big East, Mid-American...all these conferences have very weak top teams. There's no logical reason why their "champion" deserves a playoff bid over a team like Alabama or Ohio State.

There's no "logical" reason to vote either. Yet that's what college football has done for decades anyways.

Your argument is based on a logical fallacy. So what if Conference West is weaker than the SEC? Realistically, only two teams from the SEC can play for the national championship as is. It is irrelevant if the third place team in the SEC is better than the best team in the Pac-10 since the third place team has zero, zip, nada chance of playing in the national championship now anyways. And if, as you say, these conferences are crap, then the SEC teams should roll over them in a playoff format. Also, the fact that these conferences are weak now does not mean they will be weak in the future. Florida State used to go 0-11. Who is to say that a generation from now, the Pac-10 won't consistently be better than the SEC?

One way to address your concern is instead of 12 teams, have 16 teams. Have the 12 conference winners and four wildcard teams, maybe the four runners-up in the four most powerful conferences. That way, the top two teams from the SEC can play for the national championship.

But right now, it is bizarre how college football organizes itself.

 

[Meister]

But I still see it work great in NCAA basketball. There's plenty of no-namers in the tournament, and sometimes one or two of them become a dark horse and it actually becomes semi-interesting.

That's because they take 33 teams into the tournament, counting wild card spots. There's room for no name teams. Even if a football tournament took 16 teams, about half of the conference champions would not be more worthy than the top 16 from the BCS.

The argument that it'll take too long to complete a tournament with that many teams is not a good one, if it means the NCAA can make more money from it.

Not necessarily. More football = less time/energy to devote to basketball.

Actually, the "Big Dance" in March has 64 teams.

 

[Jon]

Your argument is based on a logical fallacy. So what if Conference West is weaker than the SEC? Realistically, only two teams from the SEC can play for the national championship as is. It is irrelevant if the third place team in the SEC is better than the best team in the Pac-10 since the third place team has zero, zip, nada chance of playing in the national championship now anyways.

The logical fallacy is yours, friend. My argument is that a playoff system that deliberately rewards spots to less impressive teams is LESS fair than the current system. I never argued that the BCS is perfect as-is.

And if, as you say, these conferences are crap, then the SEC teams should roll over them in a playoff format.

Which is why a better team should have their spot in the playoff.

Also, the fact that these conferences are weak now does not mean they will be weak in the future. Florida State used to go 0-11. Who is to say that a generation from now, the Pac-10 won't consistently be better than the SEC?

If they are, the BCS rankings would show it. Thus, a playoff system based on BCS rankings would be more fair than one that awards berths only to conference champions.

One way to address your concern is instead of 12 teams, have 16 teams. Have the 12 conference winners and four wildcard teams, maybe the four runners-up in the four most powerful conferences.

There is no way a playoff system that would award a 6-6 Sunbelt champion team a berth over, say, a 10-2 Arkansas team that finished third in their conference (*crosses fingers*) is fair.

That way, the top two teams from the SEC can play for the national championship.

They still can. Theoretically, Auburn could lose today and lose to South Carolina in the SEC Championship. LSU could beat Arkansas and still finish second in the BCS if TCU and Boise State each lost a game. It's an outside chance, but a chance none-the-less.

But right now, it is bizarre how college football organizes itself.

Yes, but your system is just as bizarre, if not moreso.

 

[Jon]

Actually, the "Big Dance" in March has 64 teams.

I'm no good with numbers.

And it's 65, with the wild card teams.

 

[Toro]

Yes, but your system is just as bizarre, if not moreso.

If that's true, then every other league is more bizarre than college football. Maybe we should scrap the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, college basketball, college baseball, etc., playoffs, and designate 100 people in the entire country to vote on who plays in the championship games in all these sports.

Just like college football.

Because college football is "fairer."

And every other sport is more bizarre than college football. Because every other sport is wrong.

College football is the only sport I can think of where, at the beginning of the season, not every team involved can be the champions. Every team should be able to start the season at 0-0 knowing that they can be the champions. This is true in every other major sport I can think of. But it is not true in college football.

In every other sport, the division or conference winners advance to the playoffs. But that's not "fair" in college football.

 

[Jon]

Yes, but your system is just as bizarre, if not moreso.

If that's true, then every other league is more bizarre than college football. Maybe we should scrap the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, college basketball, college baseball, etc., playoffs, and designate 100 people in the entire country to vote on who plays in the championship games in all these sports.

Just like college football.

Because college football is "fairer."

And every other sport is more bizarre than college football. Because every other sport is wrong.

College football is the only sport I can think of where, at the beginning of the season, not every team involved can be the champions. Every team should be able to start the season at 0-0 knowing that they can be the champions. This is true in every other major sport I can think of. But it is not true in college football.

In every other sport, the division or conference winners advance to the playoffs. But that's not "fair" in college football.

Again, as Sheldon and I have explained, college football is not the same as those other sports. The closest comparison would be college basketball. However, their playoff system allows for all conference champions to advance because of the number of teams in their playoff bracket. Football can't do that size of a playoff because they can't play multiple games per week.

You're not comparing apples to apples, as much as you'd like to think you are.

I think Sheldon explained it best, allowing the lesser conference champions automatic bids to a playoff is nothing short of affirmative action.

 

[Toro]

Yes, but your system is just as bizarre, if not moreso.

If that's true, then every other league is more bizarre than college football. Maybe we should scrap the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, college basketball, college baseball, etc., playoffs, and designate 100 people in the entire country to vote on who plays in the championship games in all these sports.

Just like college football.

Because college football is "fairer."

And every other sport is more bizarre than college football. Because every other sport is wrong.

College football is the only sport I can think of where, at the beginning of the season, not every team involved can be the champions. Every team should be able to start the season at 0-0 knowing that they can be the champions. This is true in every other major sport I can think of. But it is not true in college football.

In every other sport, the division or conference winners advance to the playoffs. But that's not "fair" in college football.

Again, as Sheldon and I have explained, college football is not the same as those other sports. The closest comparison would be college basketball. However, their playoff system allows for all conference champions to advance because of the number of teams in their playoff bracket. Football can't do that size of a playoff because they can't play multiple games per week.

You're not comparing apples to apples, as much as you'd like to think you are.

I think Sheldon explained it best, allowing the lesser conference champions automatic bids to a playoff is nothing short of affirmative action.

Well ...









maybe...

 

[rightwinger]

Yes, but your system is just as bizarre, if not moreso.

If that's true, then every other league is more bizarre than college football. Maybe we should scrap the NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, college basketball, college baseball, etc., playoffs, and designate 100 people in the entire country to vote on who plays in the championship games in all these sports.

Just like college football.

Because college football is "fairer."

And every other sport is more bizarre than college football. Because every other sport is wrong.

College football is the only sport I can think of where, at the beginning of the season, not every team involved can be the champions. Every team should be able to start the season at 0-0 knowing that they can be the champions. This is true in every other major sport I can think of. But it is not true in college football.

In every other sport, the division or conference winners advance to the playoffs. But that's not "fair" in college football.

Again, as Sheldon and I have explained, college football is not the same as those other sports. The closest comparison would be college basketball. However, their playoff system allows for all conference champions to advance because of the number of teams in their playoff bracket. Football can't do that size of a playoff because they can't play multiple games per week.

You're not comparing apples to apples, as much as you'd like to think you are.

I think Sheldon explained it best, allowing the lesser conference champions automatic bids to a playoff is nothing short of affirmative action.

Then don't give automatic bids...rely on a selection comittee to seed the top 8 teams

It would be bigger than March Madness and get rid of meaningless bowl games

 

[Jon]

Then don't give automatic bids...rely on a selection comittee to seed the top 8 teams

It would be bigger than March Madness and get rid of meaningless bowl games

That's why I say keep the BCS, and let the BCS decide the seeds in the playoffs. Depending on the size of the playoffs (I like 16 teams), it could be limited to the number of teams from each conference (2-3), with no one getting "automatic" bids. This would silence teams like Boise State that think they are being cheated out of a shot at the championship, and it would benefit second place teams in tougher conferences because they won't be excluded because of a single loss.

 

[rightwinger]

Boise lost to Nevada in OT. Looks like alot of this is now moot. See what happens with TCU

 

[Meister]

Boise lost to Nevada in OT. Looks like alot of this is now moot. See what happens with TCU

Yep.

 

[Jon]

Let me pause for a moment to laugh at Boise State's misfortunate.



Ok, I'm done.

 

[Meister]

Let me pause for a moment to laugh at Boise State's misfortunate.



Ok, I'm done.

So you get pleasure in beating down college students?
They are a good team, and so is Nevada, they were on ESPN last night, but I doubt you watched the game. You would see that they play a good brand of football....might have even given them some.....naw, you wouldn't have.

 

[Jon]

Actually, I've never discounted Boise State's talent. I've always said they were OVERRATED, but never said they were a bad team.