Big Red 40

It works? Then why don't any other sports, major or minor, in the world use this system? Why have sports been using a form of bracket tournament for millennia? You may be fooling you with this "it works" nonsense, but you're not fooling anyone else. thats just stupid! Yeah im the only guy in the world who thinks the system works. Again i LOL!You didnt disclaim any of the reasons i gave for favoring the current system, and you also didnt argue any of i gave for not liking a playoff system.If it works for other sports good, but i dont like it in college football You may be think that you know what the "rest of the sporting world" wants, but YOU may be the one fooling yourself! I didn't rebut anything you said because you didn't say anything that wasn't obviously easily refutable. The letters TCU kill your argument this year. Florida kills your argument last year - the only loss they had was to Alabama, meaning they have the exact same credentials as Texas. Utah was 13-0 in 2008, yet had no chance for the MNC. Florida had a loss that year (to four-loss Ole Miss), yet was in the title game. Another nail in your coffin. 2007 is an absolute disaster for your argument, where Kansas was the only top-25 team with less than two losses, and they didn't play in the title game. In 2006 another one-loss Florida team won, only this time they only lost two two-loss Auburn. They beat undefeated Ohio State, yet undefeated Boise St. again had no chance at the title. No chance at all. That's the last five years, and you're 0-5. That's a pretty poor track record of "getting it right." Do you honestly think that TCU is the best team in the country this year? Or Utah or Boise in the other years? No way! Again i say if they want to have a legit beef get in a major conference, then go undefeated, which they wouldnt.

A true national champion has never been crowned in college football - at least not Div1A. It's always been based on a popularity contest - votes cast by ballot. That's not winning it on the field, it's a collective guess. Why do you think it's so commonly referred to as the "Mythical" National Championship? You want unique and interesting. The rest of the sporting world wants their team to have a legitimate shot at a deserved title. And it is really failing that bad, and it will be gone. My guess is within a decade. The kinds of money involved in college football put it under the jurisdiction of the Sherman Act. Don't think for a second this is just water cooler talk. Maybe it is for you, but not for those who are serious about the sport. All but one (LSU) of the teams to play in the BCS championship game since its inception were 1 loss or undefeated teams, and most of them were major conference champs too. How much more proof is needed that they were the best? This system puts more emphasis on winning ALL of your games than any other, and also on playing the highest quality opponent possible.Auburn and Oregon won ALL their games (Nobody else did!) and were both major conference champs, meaning they deserved to be there.Boise lost a game, and played in a weak conference, so they dont deserve to play for the championship.Put Boise state in the SEC and we wouldnt be talking about them because they would have lost at least one more game this year. If i was the only person in the world who felt this way (Ha HA), it would have never happened, and would surely be gone by now.It works, and i hope they leave it alone! Wow, really? There really were only two teams this year undefeated? TCU must have lost and invisible game or two in there that the BCS knows nothing about. Most were major conference champs to play in the BCS championship game? Really? In 2001, Nebraska didn't even play in their conference championship game because they lost to CU. In 2003, OU got their a$$es handed to them by KState in the conference championship game. In 2004, Auburn won the friggin SEC (you know the same conference to win the last four NC) and was told too bad so sad even though they were undefeated. You can hope in one hand and $hit in the other. We'll see which one gets filled first. The clock is ticking on the death of the BCS. Again i said MAJOR CONFERENCE teams . TCU would have lost more games in any major conference! Youre always gonna have mismatches and teams complaining even with a playoff.Citing a few times out of 12 years that it was questionable doesnt mean we should scrap the whole thing.

It works? Then why don't any other sports, major or minor, in the world use this system? Why have sports been using a form of bracket tournament for millennia? You may be fooling you with this "it works" nonsense, but you're not fooling anyone else. thats just stupid! Yeah im the only guy in the world who thinks the system works. Again i LOL!You didnt disclaim any of the reasons i gave for favoring the current system, and you also didnt argue any of i gave for not liking a playoff system.If it works for other sports good, but i dont like it in college football You may be think that you know what the "rest of the sporting world" wants, but YOU may be the one fooling yourself!

A true national champion has never been crowned in college football - at least not Div1A. It's always been based on a popularity contest - votes cast by ballot. That's not winning it on the field, it's a collective guess. Why do you think it's so commonly referred to as the "Mythical" National Championship? You want unique and interesting. The rest of the sporting world wants their team to have a legitimate shot at a deserved title. And it is really failing that bad, and it will be gone. My guess is within a decade. The kinds of money involved in college football put it under the jurisdiction of the Sherman Act. Don't think for a second this is just water cooler talk. Maybe it is for you, but not for those who are serious about the sport. All but one (LSU) of the teams to play in the BCS championship game since its inception were 1 loss or undefeated teams, and most of them were major conference champs too. How much more proof is needed that they were the best? This system puts more emphasis on winning ALL of your games than any other, and also on playing the highest quality opponent possible.Auburn and Oregon won ALL their games (Nobody else did!) and were both major conference champs, meaning they deserved to be there.Boise lost a game, and played in a weak conference, so they dont deserve to play for the championship.Put Boise state in the SEC and we wouldnt be talking about them because they would have lost at least one more game this year. If i was the only person in the world who felt this way (Ha HA), it would have never happened, and would surely be gone by now.It works, and i hope they leave it alone!

And you don't have those games in myriad numbers now? 60 teams don't make bowl games this year. That's hundreds of games that have zero bearing on anything. UTEP and Troy can still go to a bowl - only eight bowl games would die in the playoff scenario. So you can still have the Poulon Weed-Eater Bowl and the South-Central Friends of Jim-Bob Jones Bowl and the We Have An Empty Stadium Bowl every year, too. The only difference is that in a playoff scenario, you have a real bona-fide champion, not some beauty pageant winner. Yes, many arguments for a playoff can be skewered. But the one you've chosen holds no water. Boise St. would beat 99% of teams out there this year, and would qualify for a playoff, but this year, because they had one bad quarter, they have no shot at the title. Completely unfair, and you cannot assert with a straight face that Oregon and Auburn are the ONLY teams that deserve a shot. Who's to say that the SEC #2 doesn't deserve at least a shot? Typically the SEC loser has lost one game, has better SOS than most other schools, and lost a close game. This year the Pac-10 #2, Stanford, is a better argument than the SEC loser, since their one loss was to Oregon early in the season. I would rather have a 16-team playoff where every game holds urgency and grabs my attention (because anyone in any of those games could be the National Champion), instead of 7,000 bowl games, 99% of which hold no more drama or impact than regular season games between two C-USA teams. Do you really see drama in the Beef 'O' Brady's bowl? Do you really see drama in the Meineke Car Care bowl? Really, do you care who finishes #8 on a typical year, unless it's Nebraska? If you do you're among the vast minority. The majority of people know two things - who won the national championship and whether their team won their bowl game. Aside from that, the rest of bowl season is just clutter. The BCS works was well at crowning the #1 team as "just the tip" works at preventing pregnancies. If it worked they wouldn't have had to change the formula every year for the last ten years. If it worked people wouldn't be lighting torches and sharpening pitchforks this time every year. If it worked - and this is the most damning point of all - if it worked, someone else would use it to determine a champion. But nobody else does. Nowhere. In any sport. What year can you pinpoint that the true national champion wasnt crowned? The bowl games hold drama for the teams , and their fan bases, and i dont care about them any more than half of the NFL teams that make the playoffs, but it gives THEM a little more to play for. IMO theres no point in letting a whole bunch of teams into the playoffs in the hope that a lesser team will luck out and beat #1. That proves nothing and only adds to the "What ifs". You still only listed a few more deserving teams, not 10 or 12 more. Not really true that everybody else would be doing it if it worked either.Bowl games, conference championship games, and the polls are some of the things that make college football unique and interesting. If it was really failing that bad it would be gone. People will "sharpen pitchforks" etc. based on what their buddies at work, the bar, or internet boards, tell them, without any logical thought or a viable alternative.

For every game like the Giants game there are many that dont matter because the teams are mathematically eliminated, they have home field,and playoff spots locked up already. Giants game would have mattered just as much in the Bcs and so would some of the others.Bengals, Seahawks,etc have been out of it for weeks, but even crappy teams like UTEP, Troy etc in college had a bowl game to play for. Hate those NFL games where the teams are resting the starters at the end of the season. Many arguments FOR a playoff can be easily skewered also.For instance why would you want to drag 12-16 teams into a playoff when only maybe 4 teams have any claim to being good enough to be there. Makes the season way too long, and really doesnt help with the main goal of crowning a champion. People throw out ideas that arent well thought out on either side. IMO the BCS works well at its main goal of crowning the #1 team. Bowl games are also an incentive for lesser teams. Not much reason to change.

Agree with this. 30+ years of watching college football, and i cant ever recall having more than 2 teams who deserved to play in the championship game more than top 2 in the polls. Could probably work this out to keep the bowls and reward teams for a good year, but not string the season out much longer.

I think we have the 2 best teams in the Championship game this year. If TCU can handle Wisconsin (Dont think so), then they have a beef. I dont think they would be either Oregon or Auburn anyway. In the current system winning EVERY game is important. Playoff system, as long as you have enough wins to get in you could take a few games off at the end of the year, making for unwatchable games at the end of the year like the NFL. There is waaay to much time between the regular season and the bowls, and they drag them out far too long also. Should be done New years Day.

Agree on all points. Good post

Ha Ha I loves me some Old Country Buffet!

I would invite the three of you to visit other boards before making statements like this. This sentiment that only Husker fans care about Bo's behavior this season is demonstrably wrong. A few simple google searches will show that most college football fans were aware of Bo's season, and were less than impressed. Didnt say they didnt care, but under the Husker microscope its a MUCH bigger deal than it should have been. I doubt that the ADs of major College football programs are posting their opinions on the web, and i also doubt that his behavior would keep those schools from hiring him if they thought he could win football games for them! Nice use of the word demonstrably too.

Nah. What's naive is to think that because Nebraska has a hard-on for Bo that everyone has a hard-on for Bo. Outside of Huskerdom there's a lot of skepticism about who Bo is and what he's capable of. Is he capable of making a fantastic team out of mediocre players? Maybe. Is he capable of going Woody Hayes on a reporter, referee or (God forbid) a player? Maybe. A lot of eyes were opened about the character of Bo Pelini this year. Think really hard about his season before you start bandying words like "naive" about. Outside of Huskerdom his behavior probably wouldnt have been that big of problem.Coaches yell its not a big deal! Everyone needs to get over it!Agree he went a little too far but bottom line is, hes paid millions of dollars to field the best team possible and win as many games as possible, everything else should be a distant second place.Hes done a very good at his first priority IMO.

ha ha

post

Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner!

The QB is the most important player on the team, and Watson has had to adapt to 5 different ones in 4 years as an OC.(Sam Keller,Joe Ganz,Zac Lee, Cody Green, and T.M.) 6 if you count Healthy Taylor M., and Injured Taylor M. as 2 different players, which they are. Theres much more to the QB position than physical ability as T.M and Joe Ganz showed us. Joe wasnt as physically gifted as Taylor, but he set many records as a QB (With Watson as OC by the way!)by knowing how to read defenses,when to run, when to throw it away, etc. and helped the team with his veteran leadership. Taylor is more physically gifted, but hes not seasoned enough to lead the team yet IMO. If he stays til his Senior year i think he will learn these things and become a truly great QB, and whoever the OC is will look like a hero. Does anyone know ,or care who Auburns OC is? Probably not, because when you have a player like Cam Newton out there, it matters a whole lot less. Thats why i have a hard time blaming Watson for all of the offense problems given the circumstances.

I agree with the posts by hercules, Zoogies and Big willie

I Agree I think so too, but if the Refs made intentionally bad calls to get back at Pelini they should be the ones being disciplined not him.

Definitely agree its the way we lost more than anything. Watching the games, we could have,and should have, won all of them. Our own errors cost us more than the other teams superior play.

Agree with Hercules.

Good post Willie .

well said hanc!

No!All 3 losses were very close. Even a slightly better offense, and we would be undefeated, Watson would be a hero, and no Bo rumors either.Winning changes everything.