us One is dead - College football is getting a 4 team playoff

[rightwinger]

Hopefully you will realize that what happened in th 60s in football is irrelevant to the topic?

Are we going to talk about OJ next?

McKay was thinking about the Miami Dolphins.................................

I thought McKay went to Tampa Bay

 

[ginscpy]

like when President Nixon won 48 out of 50 states in 1972 - my first vote -despite Shirley MacLame and the Hollywood liberals campaigning for McGovern.

Actually, this is just as relevant to the topic as your discussion of John McKay.

Let me know when you want to discuss the actual topic of the thread.

McLame was on the cover of SI in 1963 - for a movie called John Goldfarb - Won't You Please Go Home" that made fun of ND football.

That year - they hired Ara P and they went 9-1 in 1964 and John Huarte won the HT.

 

[WinterBorn]

like when President Nixon won 48 out of 50 states in 1972 - my first vote -despite Shirley MacLame and the Hollywood liberals campaigning for McGovern.

Actually, this is just as relevant to the topic as your discussion of John McKay.

Let me know when you want to discuss the actual topic of the thread.

McLame was on the cover of SI in 1963 - for a movie called John Goldfarb - Won't You Please Go Home" that made fun of ND football.

That year - they hired Ara P and they went 9-1 in 1964 and John Huarte won the HT.

Ginscpy, are you aware that Bama has only lost 4 games in 3 seasons? In 3 seasons Nick Saban has coached 36 wins, 4 loses and 2 national championships.

 

[ginscpy]

ND got srewed in both 1964 and 1993.

Hada 17-0 halftime lead at USC in 64. Got jobbed by refs... BAMA WAS the #! after thagt

In 93 - lost on a last second FG to BC - then Florida St won the NC - even thought ND punked them

ANCIENT HISTORY ??????????????????

perhaps.............

 

[samjones]

The NFL has a twelve team playoff structure for a 32 team league
NCAA is looking to pick a four team playoff for over a hundred Div 1 teams

With only four teams , you need to be sure you make a best effort to pick the top 4 most deserving

Having #1, #3, #5 and #6 does not pass muster

You put alot of stock in the BCS rankings. The Coaches are too sentimental, the AP has that famous "East Coast Bias" and the computer rankings don't even agree with each other, much less reflect reality. Even to the extent that the computer rankings work, the BCS removes MOV as a factor which totally destroys any crediibility they may have hoped to have.

Take the 4 best conference champions. It will maximize viewership, intrique and will keep teams from playing each other 3 times in a single season.

 

[rightwinger]

The NFL has a twelve team playoff structure for a 32 team league
NCAA is looking to pick a four team playoff for over a hundred Div 1 teams

With only four teams , you need to be sure you make a best effort to pick the top 4 most deserving

Having #1, #3, #5 and #6 does not pass muster

You put alot of stock in the BCS rankings. The Coaches are too sentimental, the AP has that famous "East Coast Bias" and the computer rankings don't even agree with each other, much less reflect reality. Even to the extent that the computer rankings work, the BCS removes MOV as a factor which totally destroys any crediibility they may have hoped to have.

Take the 4 best conference champions. It will maximize viewership, intrique and will keep teams from playing each other 3 times in a single season.

I would agree with you if there was some parity between the conferences. But in recent years, there has been a movement towards super conferences of 16 teams.
I hate rankings but prefer them to preventing a team from reaching the playoffs because it plays in the toughest conference

 

[kwc57]

What would have been crazy is to not allow Alabama to play because of a rule that didn't exist.

The BCS Championship criteria does not include winning a conference championship. Otherwise, no independent team could ever play for the championship.

The BCS was put into place to put the #1 and the #2 teams in a game for the championship. It did that.

Since the rules change from year to year, they're a moving target.

But the only way to have prevented Bama from playing would have been to change the rules at the end of the season and make them apply instantly. And that would have been seriously screwed up.

We had the #1 and the #2 teams playing. That is what the BCS was set up to do.

Except that WHO was considered #2 was debateable. I get that you can't change the rules at the end of the season. The issue is, at the end of most seasons, they realize what a shitty system it is and change the rules for the following year......only to realize it's still a shitty system and in need of more rule changes. Last year's championship was a prime example.

 

[WinterBorn]

Since the rules change from year to year, they're a moving target.

But the only way to have prevented Bama from playing would have been to change the rules at the end of the season and make them apply instantly. And that would have been seriously screwed up.

We had the #1 and the #2 teams playing. That is what the BCS was set up to do.

Except that WHO was considered #2 was debateable.

Oh? And who would you have put above Alabama?

There were only a few options.

Ok State? They lost to an unranked team that ended the season with a losing record

Stanford? They lost two games, including losing to a team that LSU beat 40-27. (Oh, and they didn't win their conf either)

Oregon? They got beat by LSU 40-27. They were outplayed in virtually every phase of the game.

Arkansas? Another 2 loss team, except these 2 losses were beatdowns by LSU and Bama.


That clears up the top 6 teams. Who else should have been in the BCS Championship?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Now I think an 8 team playoff would be mch better, but at least the BCS system is on its way out and the Plus One would have just been an extension of that.

Let the best teams play and give us a real champion.

Hey why don't we just rid ourselves of the pesky regular season altogether and have a 128 team playoff?

oh well, college football was fun while it lasted. Unique from most other college sports, the regular season was actually more important than the post-season. Fans lived for big regular season match-up, instead of sleeping until the post-season. Soon those will all be entirely meaningless.

The lower divisions started with a 4 team playoff. Now the largest one is at 32. I've no problem with a 4 team playoff - per se - but it won't be long before IA extends to 8 - which IMO isn't SO bad, but the problem is, playoff brackets always get BIGGER - not smaller - so won't be long after that till its 12. Then 16. Then 20. Then 32. After all - every halfway decent team deserves a shot at the title?

I find that most people who desire more than 4 team playoff in CF are't the hard core, born and bred college football fans, whose daddy took them to games and whose grandfather took their daddy to games and who never knew anything different. They are the fans that became CF fans later in life and can't figure out why on Earth CF can't just be like all the other sports and have a 24775 team playoff. They are the same CF fans that thought it was unfair undefeated Hawaii didn't have a shot at the title in 2007 - right before UGA humiliated them in the Sugar Bowl.




Guess what? PLAY-OFFS DO NOT ALWAYS RESULT IN THE BEST TEAM WINNING THE TITLE.

Just ask the New England Patriots about that one.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

But the only way to have prevented Bama from playing would have been to change the rules at the end of the season and make them apply instantly. And that would have been seriously screwed up.

We had the #1 and the #2 teams playing. That is what the BCS was set up to do.

Except that WHO was considered #2 was debateable.

Oh? And who would you have put above Alabama?

No one in their right mind can deny that the BCS didn't work just the way it was supposed to in 2011. Undeniably - the best two teams in the nation were in that game, and the best team won.

 

[ginscpy]

I likred watcheing dBillie Jean King wupp uo on Bobby Riggs in straightsets ........................

 

[kwc57]

But the only way to have prevented Bama from playing would have been to change the rules at the end of the season and make them apply instantly. And that would have been seriously screwed up.

We had the #1 and the #2 teams playing. That is what the BCS was set up to do.

Except that WHO was considered #2 was debateable.

Oh? And who would you have put above Alabama?

"The only team with a remote chance of passing Alabama at the 11th-hour is Oklahoma State should it beat 9-2 Oklahoma impressively this weekend, though it will take a near-universal about-face from the voters, who currently have the Cowboys fifth. (They're third in the overall standings thanks to the computers.) Bring up this possibility to an Alabama fan, and he or she will of course laugh in your face, pointing out first and foremost that Mike Gundy's team lost to Iowa State.

However, if this were the NCAA basketball tournament, where the committee members speak of teams' "bodies of work," they'd be comparing the following two résumés (assuming an Oklahoma State victory this weekend):

• Wins over current BCS Top 25 teams: Oklahoma State: 5, Alabama: 2.

• Wins over current BCS Top 50 teams: Oklahoma State: 7, Alabama: 5.

• Wins over FBS teams with winning records: Oklahoma State: 6, Alabama: 3.

• Conference titles: Oklahoma State: 1, Alabama: 0.

• Losses to Iowa State: Oklahoma State: 1, Alabama: 0.

On paper, the Cowboys will have achieved more than the Tide. In real life, however, this is not a debate that's even being given serious consideration (at least yet) for one simple reason: Alabama has a track record; Oklahoma State does not. SEC teams win national championships. Big 12 teams, at least lately, do not. But let's see what happens Saturday night in Stillwater. Voters can be heavily swayed by last impressions. In fact, that's how this whole SEC domination cycle began, back when Florida jumped ahead of Michigan in 2006, warding off a potential Ohio State rematch.

Ultimately, an LSU-Alabama rematch will neither help nor hurt college football. People will watch. They'll accept the result, even if it's a Tide victory that overrides the first meeting. It's happened before (see Florida-Florida State in 1997) and it may happen again.

But the BCS will need to come up with a new slogan, because its current one will soon ring hollow. Here's a simple alteration: "Every game counts ... except when it doesn't.""


Read more: LSU-Alabama rematch makes mockery of BCS system - Stewart Mandel - SI.com

But I think you already knew that. You're lucky, your team won out on getting to play the championship. If they hadn't, you'd be the one complaining. There is a bias for the SEC, pure and simple and it helped Alabama get the game.

 

[kwc57]

Except that WHO was considered #2 was debateable.

Oh? And who would you have put above Alabama?

No one in their right mind can deny that the BCS didn't work just the way it was supposed to in 2011. Undeniably - the best two teams in the nation were in that game, and the best team won.

We had already seen that game and knew the outcome.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Since the rules change from year to year, they're a moving target.

But the only way to have prevented Bama from playing would have been to change the rules at the end of the season and make them apply instantly. And that would have been seriously screwed up.

We had the #1 and the #2 teams playing. That is what the BCS was set up to do.

Except that WHO was considered #2 was debateable. I get that you can't change the rules at the end of the season. The issue is, at the end of most seasons, they realize what a shitty system it is and change the rules for the following year......only to realize it's still a shitty system and in need of more rule changes. Last year's championship was a prime example.

I'm sorry - but what exactly was up for debate? Alabama beat a 13-0 SEC Champion 21 to zip. As an LSU fan, it pains me to say it, but its pretty clear who the best team in the country was last year.

Seriously, you doubt the result? Who was the "real" #1 then? LSU? The NC game proves that wrong. OSU? Give me a break.

 

[ginscpy]

Anythinh would be better than the last Baba-LSU snoozzzzzzzzeefest6

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Anythinh would be better than the last Baba-LSU snoozzzzzzzzeefest6

Right, because historically non-SEC schools have played the SEC champ really close in NC games.

 

[WinterBorn]

Except that WHO was considered #2 was debateable.

Oh? And who would you have put above Alabama?

"The only team with a remote chance of passing Alabama at the 11th-hour is Oklahoma State should it beat 9-2 Oklahoma impressively this weekend, though it will take a near-universal about-face from the voters, who currently have the Cowboys fifth. (They're third in the overall standings thanks to the computers.) Bring up this possibility to an Alabama fan, and he or she will of course laugh in your face, pointing out first and foremost that Mike Gundy's team lost to Iowa State.

However, if this were the NCAA basketball tournament, where the committee members speak of teams' "bodies of work," they'd be comparing the following two résumés (assuming an Oklahoma State victory this weekend):

• Wins over current BCS Top 25 teams: Oklahoma State: 5, Alabama: 2.

• Wins over current BCS Top 50 teams: Oklahoma State: 7, Alabama: 5.

• Wins over FBS teams with winning records: Oklahoma State: 6, Alabama: 3.

• Conference titles: Oklahoma State: 1, Alabama: 0.

• Losses to Iowa State: Oklahoma State: 1, Alabama: 0.

On paper, the Cowboys will have achieved more than the Tide. In real life, however, this is not a debate that's even being given serious consideration (at least yet) for one simple reason: Alabama has a track record; Oklahoma State does not. SEC teams win national championships. Big 12 teams, at least lately, do not. But let's see what happens Saturday night in Stillwater. Voters can be heavily swayed by last impressions. In fact, that's how this whole SEC domination cycle began, back when Florida jumped ahead of Michigan in 2006, warding off a potential Ohio State rematch.

Ultimately, an LSU-Alabama rematch will neither help nor hurt college football. People will watch. They'll accept the result, even if it's a Tide victory that overrides the first meeting. It's happened before (see Florida-Florida State in 1997) and it may happen again.

But the BCS will need to come up with a new slogan, because its current one will soon ring hollow. Here's a simple alteration: "Every game counts ... except when it doesn't.""


Read more: LSU-Alabama rematch makes mockery of BCS system - Stewart Mandel - SI.com

But I think you already knew that. You're lucky, your team won out on getting to play the championship. If they hadn't, you'd be the one complaining. There is a bias for the SEC, pure and simple and it helped Alabama get the game.

Bias?

Each team had one loss. OK State's loss was to an unranked team. Alabama's loss was to the #1 team in the nation in OT. That is why Bama played for all the marbles. And judging by the results, it was justified.

 

[WinterBorn]

Anythinh would be better than the last Baba-LSU snoozzzzzzzzeefest6

Defense wins championships. And that was a defensive showcase.

 

[WinterBorn]

Oh? And who would you have put above Alabama?

No one in their right mind can deny that the BCS didn't work just the way it was supposed to in 2011. Undeniably - the best two teams in the nation were in that game, and the best team won.

We had already seen that game and knew the outcome.

Obviously not. That you claim you "knew" the outcome is laughable.

 

[WinterBorn]

But the only way to have prevented Bama from playing would have been to change the rules at the end of the season and make them apply instantly. And that would have been seriously screwed up.

We had the #1 and the #2 teams playing. That is what the BCS was set up to do.

Except that WHO was considered #2 was debateable. I get that you can't change the rules at the end of the season. The issue is, at the end of most seasons, they realize what a shitty system it is and change the rules for the following year......only to realize it's still a shitty system and in need of more rule changes. Last year's championship was a prime example.

I'm sorry - but what exactly was up for debate? Alabama beat a 13-0 SEC Champion 21 to zip. As an LSU fan, it pains me to say it, but its pretty clear who the best team in the country was last year.

Seriously, you doubt the result? Who was the "real" #1 then? LSU? The NC game proves that wrong. OSU? Give me a break.

LSU had one of the most dominating defenses in the nation. They also hung 40 points on 4 or 5 teams that were still ranked in the top 25 at the end of the season.

The BCS system put the top 2 teams in a game to determine who won the NC. I can see why it would bother you, but it worked.