knapplc Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 The deal is that you are going to leave out a LOT of teams that over the years will come out and make a title run with the big boys. In the name of what, exactly? If you want to put the big-time, historical programs on a pedestal, make a list (which is what this is, I suppose)...but actually reducing the league to that, I don't really see what it has to offer. It would stop the pretending, because in the current system those teams that make a title run now don't have a real chance at the title. Boise State last year, TCU a couple years back, Kansas a couple years back, etc. Did any of these teams have a real shot at the title? Really? Quote Link to comment
The Maudfather Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 I can't believe people think it's a good idea. 40 teams is like 80 teams too few. I think it's good how it is now. College Football is a collegiate thing, let's not turn it into the NFL. +1 Couldn't agree more. College football is perfect the way it is, and would hate to see it turn into the NFL. College Football>NFL Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 College Football>NFL Agreed. It's WAY better than the NFL. But it could be better than it is, and I'm just tossing out ideas to make it better. 30-40-50 teams in 1A may not be the answer. But I'd like to see something change that would allow for better champions crowned. Without a real system that doesn't involve excluding teams that have legit arguments for being there (or a way to determine how "legit" that argument even is), we're one step above intramurals. Maybe even half a step. And for a sport we all love so much, I find that unpalatable. Quote Link to comment
The Maudfather Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 College Football>NFL Agreed. It's WAY better than the NFL. But it could be better than it is, and I'm just tossing out ideas to make it better. 30-40-50 teams in 1A may not be the answer. But I'd like to see something change that would allow for better champions crowned. Without a real system that doesn't involve excluding teams that have legit arguments for being there (or a way to determine how "legit" that argument even is), we're one step above intramurals. Maybe even half a step. And for a sport we all love so much, I find that unpalatable. What's wrong with the current system? Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 College Football>NFL Agreed. It's WAY better than the NFL. But it could be better than it is, and I'm just tossing out ideas to make it better. 30-40-50 teams in 1A may not be the answer. But I'd like to see something change that would allow for better champions crowned. Without a real system that doesn't involve excluding teams that have legit arguments for being there (or a way to determine how "legit" that argument even is), we're one step above intramurals. Maybe even half a step. And for a sport we all love so much, I find that unpalatable. What's wrong with the current system? I think a better question would be, "What's right with this system?" Aside from the ridiculously bloated number of teams in 1A, you have vastly different budgets for these teams, no real method of determining a champion (or at least, no method used by any kind of organized sport in history other than Div 1A of NCAA football), out of control TV contracts being signed with specific conferences.... the list goes on and on. Quote Link to comment
huzkerbob Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 The deal is that you are going to leave out a LOT of teams that over the years will come out and make a title run with the big boys. In the name of what, exactly? If you want to put the big-time, historical programs on a pedestal, make a list (which is what this is, I suppose)...but actually reducing the league to that, I don't really see what it has to offer. It would stop the pretending, because in the current system those teams that make a title run now don't have a real chance at the title. Boise State last year, TCU a couple years back, Kansas a couple years back, etc. Did any of these teams have a real shot at the title? Really? If they had been given an equal shoot at one yes. The size of the divisions have little to do with the system the teams play under. Utah by all rights should have played for the Nat. championship last season, but changing the size of the leagues wouldn't have changed the outcome. Only changes to the egregious BSC selection process will change that. And I don't think shrinking the playing field will do anything to help solve that mess. Quote Link to comment
knapplc Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 The deal is that you are going to leave out a LOT of teams that over the years will come out and make a title run with the big boys. In the name of what, exactly? If you want to put the big-time, historical programs on a pedestal, make a list (which is what this is, I suppose)...but actually reducing the league to that, I don't really see what it has to offer. It would stop the pretending, because in the current system those teams that make a title run now don't have a real chance at the title. Boise State last year, TCU a couple years back, Kansas a couple years back, etc. Did any of these teams have a real shot at the title? Really? If they had been given an equal shoot at one yes. The size of the divisions have little to do with the system the teams play under. Utah by all rights should have played for the Nat. championship last season, but changing the size of the leagues wouldn't have changed the outcome. Only changes to the egregious BSC selection process will change that. And I don't think shrinking the playing field will do anything to help solve that mess. They would have an equal shot if they had been given an equal shot, but they weren't? Isn't that what I said? I'm not sure what you mean by "size of the leagues." If you're talking individual conferences, that's not what I'm saying. If you're talking Div 1A as a whole, yes, that's what I'm saying. Pare that down to a manageable level, and you won't need the BCS. But yes, I agree that the BCS has to go. It's a joke, and I've been saying that throughout this and other threads. Quote Link to comment
papersun87 Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Glad to see NU and Clemson made the cut. Maybe now we can play each other every year. Quote Link to comment
killer cacti Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Glad to see NU and Clemson made the cut. Maybe now we can play each other every year. Word. Quote Link to comment
HuskerInLostWages Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Looks like in their mock draft we made the cut at #12. The list is already questionable to say the least as Notre Dame was picked at #9. Live Draft Here Quote Link to comment
killer cacti Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Looks like in their mock draft we made the cut at #12. The list is already questionable to say the least as Notre Dame was picked at #9. Live Draft Here Clemson comes in at #21... Quote Link to comment
Jarred04 Posted August 4, 2009 Author Share Posted August 4, 2009 Kansas fan petitioning not for Kansas, but against Mizzou. Quote Link to comment
papersun87 Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Looks like in their mock draft we made the cut at #12. The list is already questionable to say the least as Notre Dame was picked at #9. Live Draft Here Well, let's be perfectly honest. Can you imagine college football without Notre Dame? Quote Link to comment
HuskerJosh Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 God, Pat Forde is an annoying bastard. He calls Nebraska an afterthought in the Big XII North when we've won at least a share of it in 2 of the past 3 seasons. He's one of the worst homers on ESPN. He had to save Missouri and put them in just before the cut. Quote Link to comment
HuskerInLostWages Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 Looks like in their mock draft we made the cut at #12. The list is already questionable to say the least as Notre Dame was picked at #9. Live Draft Here Well, let's be perfectly honest. Can you imagine college football without Notre Dame? Trust me, I try. Unfortunately they have such a sweet deal on TV I can't miss them without turning off the TV. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.