Oklahoma State came REALLY close to the BCS title game

[irafreak]

So you force LSU to win two more games? That's fair.

The Patriots went undefeated and had to try to win three more games. Happens everywhere else.

Doesn't mean it's fair. The patriots were the best team that year. They deserved the title. They just lost at the worst time....oh and they did beat the Giants the week before the playoffs started.

[irafreak]

So you force LSU to win two more games? That's fair.

 

We're not always going to have a situation where there is only one undefeated team.

Exactly. Sometimes the BCS works quite well. Other times a playoff might make more sense. Neither will be the solution everytime but people push a playoff like it is the best way to do it when it's really no more "fair" than the BCS.

[irafreak]

Saban voted Oklahoma St. 4th. :ahhhhhhhh

See this is the stuff the BCS needs to fix...if you're going to change to a playoff but not fix the coaches having a say in who plays for what, you'll end up with the same mess. Have a panel of 10 people. Have them on a salary and all they do is evaluate the teams for the rankings. Have a black and white rule book like the refs do for what "qualifies a team for consideration" then have these 10 voters (or 11) have the tiebreaker.

 

Simple rules such as no team with 2 losses will be considered for the title game as long as a 1 loss BCS team exists...and the same for 1 loss and undefeated.

[strigori]

What the ballots revealed is that among the coaches there was clearly an agenda with a number of the votes. And the Harris Poll is such a joke. We have 2/3 of the system that decides the champion made up of people who didn't watch many games. I would bet there are a number of people on this forum that saw more games than large chucks of the votes in the Coaches or Harris Polls.

 

We need some sort of play off, and I have not always been in this camp. What's to keep every champ game from being two SEC teams now? A playoff would certainly benefit the Big Ten, the Pac 12 and the Big 12. Sure the top of the SEC is tough, but after the top 3 teams its a below average conference, and actually seems harder to get through the other conferences undefeated.

[Lil' Red]

So you force LSU to win two more games? That's fair.

 

We're not always going to have a situation where there is only one undefeated team.

Exactly. Sometimes the BCS works quite well. Other times a playoff might make more sense. Neither will be the solution everytime but people push a playoff like it is the best way to do it when it's really no more "fair" than the BCS.

 

Settling it on the field is less fair than putting teams in the championship based on biased opinions and computers? I understand what you are saying about a playoff not being a perfect system but I think it is much less flawed then the BCS. There is a reason that playoffs create far less controversy compared to the BCS.

[Micheal]

So you force LSU to win two more games? That's fair.

 

We're not always going to have a situation where there is only one undefeated team.

Exactly. Sometimes the BCS works quite well. Other times a playoff might make more sense. Neither will be the solution everytime but people push a playoff like it is the best way to do it when it's really no more "fair" than the BCS.

how is a playoff system where u must win to make the championship is as fair as the BCS?

[SoCal Husker Terry]

Yeah, Saban voting OK state that low is a joke, what a weasil...

[Hercules]

So you force LSU to win two more games? That's fair.

The Patriots went undefeated and had to try to win three more games. Happens everywhere else.

Doesn't mean it's fair. The patriots were the best team that year. They deserved the title. They just lost at the worst time....oh and they did beat the Giants the week before the playoffs started.

By this logic, LSU should be crowned national champion right now, since they already beat Alabama.

 

Nobody deserves anything. You have to win it on the field. If it's not earned on the field, it's not legit.

[Hercules]

So you force LSU to win two more games? That's fair.

 

We're not always going to have a situation where there is only one undefeated team.

Exactly. Sometimes the BCS works quite well. Other times a playoff might make more sense. Neither will be the solution everytime but people push a playoff like it is the best way to do it when it's really no more "fair" than the BCS.

When have you EVER heard NFL fans complain that their system is less fair than the BCS? When have you EVER heard any fan of any other sport complain that their system is less fair than the BCS?

 

Not only does every other level of football (HS, FCS, NFL) use a playoff to determine their champion, but every other level of every sport, whether it's Little League Baseball or NCAA basketball or NCAA baseball or the World Cup uses a playoff to determine their champion, and not ONCE have I heard a single person complain about the unfairness of the playoff system in those leagues.

 

The BCS is a crock, and it has made the bowl system worse instead of better. It used to be that all of the New Years Day Bowls had meaning, because #1 didn't play #2. Go back to 1970, when #1 Texas lost in the Cotton Bowl, #2 Ohio State lost in the Rose Bowl, and all of a sudden #3 Nebraska was playing for a National Championship against LSU in the Orange Bowl. Nowadays, only the BCS title game has any real meaning, and it still routinely fails at the one thing it was designed to do better than the old bowl system - determining the national champion.

[Husker John]

So you force LSU to win two more games? That's fair.

 

We're not always going to have a situation where there is only one undefeated team.

Exactly. Sometimes the BCS works quite well. Other times a playoff might make more sense. Neither will be the solution everytime but people push a playoff like it is the best way to do it when it's really no more "fair" than the BCS.

When have you EVER heard NFL fans complain that their system is less fair than the BCS? When have you EVER heard any fan of any other sport complain that their system is less fair than the BCS?

 

Not only does every other level of football (HS, FCS, NFL) use a playoff to determine their champion, but every other level of every sport, whether it's Little League Baseball or NCAA basketball or NCAA baseball or the World Cup uses a playoff to determine their champion, and not ONCE have I heard a single person complain about the unfairness of the playoff system in those leagues.

 

The BCS is a crock, and it has made the bowl system worse instead of better. It used to be that all of the New Years Day Bowls had meaning, because #1 didn't play #2. Go back to 1970, when #1 Texas lost in the Cotton Bowl, #2 Ohio State lost in the Rose Bowl, and all of a sudden #3 Nebraska was playing for a National Championship against LSU in the Orange Bowl. Nowadays, only the BCS title game has any real meaning, and it still routinely fails at the one thing it was designed to do better than the old bowl system - determining the national champion.

Well stated.....

[irafreak]

So you force LSU to win two more games? That's fair.

 

We're not always going to have a situation where there is only one undefeated team.

Exactly. Sometimes the BCS works quite well. Other times a playoff might make more sense. Neither will be the solution everytime but people push a playoff like it is the best way to do it when it's really no more "fair" than the BCS.

 

Settling it on the field is less fair than putting teams in the championship based on biased opinions and computers? I understand what you are saying about a playoff not being a perfect system but I think it is much less flawed then the BCS. There is a reason that playoffs create far less controversy compared to the BCS.

They create less controversy in other sports because the systems have been around and accepted for a long time. I still say the playoffs diminish the regular season. What's the most interesting thing to follow in the NFL right now (besides off field drama)? The packers are still unbeaten. They've already clinched their playoff spot. The thrill now is that undefeated season. Look at San Francisco...already clinched their division. So what they fight for a home game or a bye week. But really they could lose out now and stil have a championship shot. Boring.

 

Anyone think it was a great matchup to have Kansas losing to that small iowa school? It might have been a neat "upset" but we get those "wow" upsets almost every week in college football. The NCAA has watered down march madness so much that you lost a big matchup when KU got upset like that. Honestly people don't pay to watch George Washington square off againt UCONN. They pay to see the UCONN/NC matchups. I'm concerned that the +1 would turn into an 8 man playoff then 16 and soon you've got schools winning titles with 3 losses or schools with an embarrassing final regular season loss because they rested their guys since they couldn't help their spot in the bracket. We see NFL teams do this. Playing backups and resting the stars. You really want that for college football? To see LSU's 3 string players against Arkansas' first string?

[irafreak]

So you force LSU to win two more games? That's fair.

 

We're not always going to have a situation where there is only one undefeated team.

Exactly. Sometimes the BCS works quite well. Other times a playoff might make more sense. Neither will be the solution everytime but people push a playoff like it is the best way to do it when it's really no more "fair" than the BCS.

When have you EVER heard NFL fans complain that their system is less fair than the BCS? When have you EVER heard any fan of any other sport complain that their system is less fair than the BCS?

 

Not only does every other level of football (HS, FCS, NFL) use a playoff to determine their champion, but every other level of every sport, whether it's Little League Baseball or NCAA basketball or NCAA baseball or the World Cup uses a playoff to determine their champion, and not ONCE have I heard a single person complain about the unfairness of the playoff system in those leagues.

 

The BCS is a crock, and it has made the bowl system worse instead of better. It used to be that all of the New Years Day Bowls had meaning, because #1 didn't play #2. Go back to 1970, when #1 Texas lost in the Cotton Bowl, #2 Ohio State lost in the Rose Bowl, and all of a sudden #3 Nebraska was playing for a National Championship against LSU in the Orange Bowl. Nowadays, only the BCS title game has any real meaning, and it still routinely fails at the one thing it was designed to do better than the old bowl system - determining the national champion.

Well stated.....

See my post above. And as stated earlier...was it fair for the Seahawks to make the playoffs last year? Really? Did we have the top 6 teams from the NFC? So Auburn wasn't the best team last year? And Alabama the year before that? I mean people act like the BCS NEVER gets it right.

[irafreak]

So you force LSU to win two more games? That's fair.

The Patriots went undefeated and had to try to win three more games. Happens everywhere else.

Doesn't mean it's fair. The patriots were the best team that year. They deserved the title. They just lost at the worst time....oh and they did beat the Giants the week before the playoffs started.

By this logic, LSU should be crowned national champion right now, since they already beat Alabama.

 

Nobody deserves anything. You have to win it on the field. If it's not earned on the field, it's not legit.

LSU is the only undefeated team left. Give em the title now. They've earned a share regardless what happens against the team they already beat at their own home.

[VectorVictor]

See my post above. And as stated earlier...was it fair for the Seahawks to make the playoffs last year? Really? Did we have the top 6 teams from the NFC? So Auburn wasn't the best team last year? And Alabama the year before that? I mean people act like the BCS NEVER gets it right.

 

Don't know about that--the year Texas stole its way to the NC game (at the expense of our rightful Big XII title), there were other teams more deserving that would have put up a better fight than the limp-wristed slap Texas gave 'Bama.

 

'Bama may have been the best team, but they sure didn't earn it in the NC game, which kind of defeats the purpose of having said game in the first place.

[Omaha-Husker]

See my post above. And as stated earlier...was it fair for the Seahawks to make the playoffs last year? Really? Did we have the top 6 teams from the NFC? So Auburn wasn't the best team last year? And Alabama the year before that? I mean people act like the BCS NEVER gets it right.

 

Don't know about that--the year Texas stole its way to the NC game (at the expense of our rightful Big XII title), there were other teams more deserving that would have put up a better fight than the limp-wristed slap Texas gave 'Bama.

 

'Bama may have been the best team, but they sure didn't earn it in the NC game, which kind of defeats the purpose of having said game in the first place.

 

The other reasonable options for that game were Florida, Boise and TCU. Texas was the only other undefeated BCS squad. I wouldn't call those 3 more deserving than UT that season.