College Football BCS sucks

Sun, 12/05/2004 - 21:36 — charlie.collins

College football rant:

I must admit that I am more of an NFL fan than a college fan, but still good football is good football. There is a lot of good football in college ranks. The issue I have with it all is that there is no playoff. I know this isnt news to anyone, the BCS sucks and everyone on the planet knows it. So when is the NCAA going to do something about it?

This year the big game will be USC and OU. At least this year they get to face each other - both undefeated. But there are other undefeated teams that will be left out.

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to not have a playoff system. Send one team from each "conference" (after we clean up exactly what that means) and then send a few wildcards. Have 16-20 teams and then PLAY IT OFF!

I think so many more people would be MUCH MORE involved and excited about college football that the entire thing would just be a %1000 better. They would make MORE money, so that argument is nonsense. They could have a "final four" style system which some other college sport seems to be able to use, hmmmm? So the "we cant do it logistically" argument is nonsense. And there are several ways to schedule it, it is completely feasible.

Yet every year there is a ton of whining and bitching and every year it stays the same, some teams that lose zero games dont get a shot, there is no playoff and truly there never is a champion (not a real one, IMHO).

Whether USC or OU wins they still arent the undisputed champions of college footbal, number one "BCS" rank or not.

(And no I have no affinity for Auburn or any other college team, I probably would have a favorite if I could get into the game more, but with this BCS nonsense I just cant.)

Entertainment

Add new comment

Comments

Sun, 12/05/2004 - 23:58 — Andy (not verified)

RE: College Football BCS sucks

I totally agree that the BCS blows, but to be honest I think it would be a bit hard to design a better system.

While a bracketed playoff system would work well, the 16-20 games that would require would be too much for college players. These guys go to school as well, so they pretty much need to wrap everything up in a single semester.

Even if you just did a small playoff with the winners of each conference, it would be hard to say that would be putting the "best teams" in the playoffs. For instance, Pittsburg won the Big East. Do they deserve a playoff spot more than say the second-place team in a much tougher conference like the SEC?

It's just tough when you have so many different teams and you need to come up with a short list of the "best". It can't just be based on record (look at Boise State). There are just a lot of factors that play in like strength of schedule, etc. I think the BCS honestly tries to factor a lot of these things in, but it can't be perfect.

With that said, I'm happy with the BCS results because of how VT fared. While Auburn fans probably felt like they got shafted, I'm excited to see us play them in the Sugar Bowl.

Mon, 12/06/2004 - 07:40 — jeepmutt (not verified)

RE: College Football BCS sucks

I like the "top 8" or even "top 4" of the existing ranking system. I think that the BCS stuff probably gets the top ten pretty close to right. But after that, let them play.

Mon, 12/06/2004 - 09:50 — Shmooze (not verified)

RE: College Football BCS sucks

Come on Andy - you've got that big ass computer up there with nothing better to do than run iTunes, surely you can have it spit out a solution that will please everyone. I would vote for a top 8 type solution as well - it's college and one of the best things about college is the whole 'root for the under dog'. Who wouldn't want to see Utah or Boise State knock off an Auburn or Oklahoma? Sure it would only happen once a decade or so, but still it would energize the whole process.

Mon, 12/06/2004 - 11:53 — atrox (not verified)

RE: College Football BCS sucks

I agree with Schmooze, is that big ass Apple thing just for headlines or do you actually use it, come on.

I said 16-20 but of course that would mean reorganizing a bit of the "regular" schedule. Just something, do something already it would be so much better.

And Boise State and Utah are EXACTLY the reasons I would be that much more involved.

Somehow college basketball can manage it but for football its "too much"?

Mon, 12/06/2004 - 13:00 — Andy (not verified)

RE: College Football BCS sucks

Hahaha, I think its just there to be perpetually upgraded. Maybe they'll use it to crawl www.pricewatch.com for the next upgrade.

But seriously, I'd have no problem if Boise St. or Utah made it to a playoff game, but we just admitted that a 16-20 game schedule is unreasonable, so that means Boise St. and Utah are taking a spot away from teams like Georgia, Tennesee, etc.

Mon, 12/06/2004 - 18:08 — Scott (not verified)

RE: College Football BCS sucks

The BCS system tries to please everyone and ends up pleasing pratically no one. It's just too complicated. Get rid of the computers or eliminate the input of the coaches and AP. If there are going to be four bowl games set aside for the BCS then send the top eight teams to them.

I was most upset with how Cal got screwed. The Texas coach even felt sorry for them...however not enough that he did not refrain from lobbying other coaches and reporters on how Texas deserved to be ranked better. If the BCS succumbs to political maneuvering or coaches find they need to run up the score on weak opponents to maximize their computer rankings the whole system will become a joke.

Tue, 12/07/2004 - 09:47 — Shmooze (not verified)

RE: College Football BCS sucks

News flash Scott...

The whole system is a joke.

Tue, 12/07/2004 - 13:12 — atrox (not verified)

RE: College Football BCS sucks

Just to be pedantic, I did not say 16-20 games, I said 16-20 TEAMS. That would mean 4 or 5 games for the "playoff" (assuming we dont play non first place games, sort of like the NFL playoffs, single elimination). And maybe mutts idea would work too, just take the top 8 from the BCS and have a 3 game playoff.

Or maybe somebody that knows a hell of a lot more about it than me can come up with (keyword coming) *something*.

It would just benefit the schools, players, fans, stadiums, towns, everyone so much more if it were a playoff type system. IMHO.

Tue, 12/07/2004 - 15:14 — Andy (not verified)

RE: College Football BCS sucks

And just so that I am pedantic as well, I meant 16-20 games being for the entire season, NOT just for playoffs. The log(teams) playoff games on top of the 11 or so regular season games is what I was saying would be too many games.

Tue, 12/07/2004 - 16:25 — atrox (not verified)

RE: College Football BCS sucks

oh.

Tue, 12/07/2004 - 16:29 — Shmooze (not verified)

RE: College Football BCS sucks

I think the problem is, everyone says they don't want to mess with the bowl games - but the truth is these teams all take December off. If there were an 8 team playoff it could start in December for round 1, then round 2 on New Years day and the final game a week after that. I don't think that would be to hard on anyone - hell those kids are only there to play football anyway.
The whole bowl think has been screwed up anyway - it used to be you could set aside New Years day and catch all the games now there is a game on the 2nd a game on the 3rd - they are pushing it out further on their own!

Sun, 01/02/2005 - 00:08 — anonymous (not verified)

RE: College Football BCS sucks

well, not sure if you guys know it, but Div. IAA, II, and III all have at least 16 team playoffs. And I could be wrong, but I think acedemics mean a lot more to these people who aren't going pro and actually care about graduating. So there's time and precedent.

Wed, 04/13/2005 - 13:26 — anonymous (not verified)

Screaming Penguin - Source Does Matter

Navigation

User login

Quote