Why college football is better off without the BCS

[Redux]

I could live with the recently deceased system being called a play off if not for one thing. 2011 Alabama vs LSU. That game alone proved the the regular season does not count as much as they told us it did. A regular season rematch in the top game of all college football? If its a playoff or not, it wasnt that year.

[Notre Dame Joe]

Skipping the semantical yammering, there were fewer teams eligible for a national title after the bcs came into existence. Underf the old NYD bowls, @ 6 teams in the big 5 had a chance for a natty if the things worked out.

 

And btw, college ball used a meaningful regular season to crown a champion. Wins in Jan are not naurally better than ones in September.

[Michiganball]

Skipping the semantical yammering, there were fewer teams eligible for a national title after the bcs came into existence. Underf the old NYD bowls, @ 6 teams in the big 5 had a chance for a natty if the things worked out.

 

And btw, college ball used a meaningful regular season to crown a champion. Wins in Jan are not naurally better than ones in September.

 

O please, There was a controversy every single year on who should be in the game, every single year. You know why? Because it was all opinions and those are like what? That's right, like as$%oles and we all have them. Not to mention that any system that picks by a regular season record, in any team sport in the world would get it's finalists wrong virtually every year compared to when those teams have to actually EARN the right to be in the championship by playing other top teams. And yes wins in January are much better then those in September since in January you would play the best of the best while only mostly scrubs in September.

 

Bottom line when it comes to these old silly systems is that in a couple years no one is going to take any of the old championships seriously, they will be the archaic pre playoff jokes from the past. Even this 4 team playoff will be considered to retro once they see the cash and go to 8 teams.

[dutch91701]

All you are doing is playing with words, while ignoring the essence of the thing itself. We all know what a playoff is, it is multiple teams playing in order to reach quarter finals, semifinals and then the finals. In some cases this is subdivided further or to a lesser degree. However in general knowledge terms a playoff is not 2 teams playing in a final. It's a cute play on words and misdirected logic your using, but that's all it is.

 

All you are doing is spreading a misconception. Playoffs can exist with any number of teams but 1. Any post-season, championship-determining game, or series of games, is a playoff. The two best teams "play off" for a title. That's where the term originated. To say that I'm the one contorting it is completely off base. Fans may use the term to reference a specific style of postseason (same style, just bigger), but it means the same thing as it did initially. I've given a dictionary definition, outlined the logic I used (and you can too!), given hypothetical as well as real world examples. You can't just say I'm wrong and you're right because you feel like being right. "We all know what a playoff is" is not an argument. In fact, as you and several others have proven, it's absolutely untrue.

 

Typing enough convoluted BS I can also turn the mating of the wild otter into a college football playoff, but it would still be BS. No point arguing further, this is like going in circles with someone who doesn't believe that there were moon landings.

So because you lack the intelligence to keep up with the conversation, I'm equated to people who don't believe in moon landings? My argument is not convoluted. In fact, it's the opposite. If you'd like I can create an outline for you...or perhaps a pop-up book is more your speed?

[dutch91701]

I could live with the recently deceased system being called a play off if not for one thing. 2011 Alabama vs LSU. That game alone proved the the regular season does not count as much as they told us it did. A regular season rematch in the top game of all college football? If its a playoff or not, it wasnt that year.

I don't have the issue with that one that many had. The first game finished 9-6 (I think) in OT. For the cast majority of the history of college football, that would have been a tie. College overtime is such a ridiculous crapshoot it's not even funny (unless it's a MWC game that goes into OT at 63-63, then it's hilarious) so I didn't mind seeing that. Especially since OK State had a chance to be in it and sh#t the bed.

[Michiganball]

All you are doing is playing with words, while ignoring the essence of the thing itself. We all know what a playoff is, it is multiple teams playing in order to reach quarter finals, semifinals and then the finals. In some cases this is subdivided further or to a lesser degree. However in general knowledge terms a playoff is not 2 teams playing in a final. It's a cute play on words and misdirected logic your using, but that's all it is.

 

All you are doing is spreading a misconception. Playoffs can exist with any number of teams but 1. Any post-season, championship-determining game, or series of games, is a playoff. The two best teams "play off" for a title. That's where the term originated. To say that I'm the one contorting it is completely off base. Fans may use the term to reference a specific style of postseason (same style, just bigger), but it means the same thing as it did initially. I've given a dictionary definition, outlined the logic I used (and you can too!), given hypothetical as well as real world examples. You can't just say I'm wrong and you're right because you feel like being right. "We all know what a playoff is" is not an argument. In fact, as you and several others have proven, it's absolutely untrue.

 

Typing enough convoluted BS I can also turn the mating of the wild otter into a college football playoff, but it would still be BS. No point arguing further, this is like going in circles with someone who doesn't believe that there were moon landings.

So because you lack the intelligence to keep up with the conversation, I'm equated to people who don't believe in moon landings? My argument is not convoluted. In fact, it's the opposite. If you'd like I can create an outline for you...or perhaps a pop-up book is more your speed?

 

You made a poor argument that's all, I'm not the only one to have pointed that out to you, but you insist you are the most intelligent human being in the world and we just don't get this truly dizzying intellect of yours. To be fair I'm not going to attack it as you would likely freak out completely and honestly it would serve no purpose or be entirely factual since I don't know you well at all.

However my comparison to those who don't believe in moon landings is based on exactly the pattern you are exhibiting which sadly is culminating with the proclamation of a superior intellect and how we just don't get it, so meh.

[Notre Dame Joe]

Every program treasures their old titles except the ones that didn't win any.

[Michiganball]

Every program treasures their old titles except the ones that didn't win any.

 

I'm sure everyone who played in the game does, maybe even those who attended the school at the time and watched it in the stadium, other then that most with titles or not think it's a farce and the tv ratings spoke volumes, which is the only reason we are getting these little playoffs, give it two years tops and the mocking of these championships you hear now will be ten fold.

[JTrain]

Wow, logic left the building looong ago.

[Redux]

I could live with the recently deceased system being called a play off if not for one thing. 2011 Alabama vs LSU. That game alone proved the the regular season does not count as much as they told us it did. A regular season rematch in the top game of all college football? If its a playoff or not, it wasnt that year.

I don't have the issue with that one that many had. The first game finished 9-6 (I think) in OT. For the cast majority of the history of college football, that would have been a tie. College overtime is such a ridiculous crapshoot it's not even funny (unless it's a MWC game that goes into OT at 63-63, then it's hilarious) so I didn't mind seeing that. Especially since OK State had a chance to be in it and sh#t the bed.

 

I couldnt tell you if it went to OT because I fell asleep halfway through. Easily the most boring game I saw that year yet the commentators at CBS treated it like it was the Battle at the Alamo. You could see the fix was in considering Gameday was there for the game and it wasnt even on their network.that night.

 

I didnt want to get into this argument but here goes. Alabama should have sh#t the bed with the loss to LSU. BUT because SEC perceived perception is so durn important they slid in without winning their division. Oklajoma State on the other hand had a rough week where a faculty .ember died and they lost a close actually exciti g game to an underrated ISU team that woulda been ranked 12th if their logo said SEC and not Big XII. Okie State won their conference. Alabama did not. Alabama got in. LSU earned their spot by going undefeated and winning the SEC. Alabama blew it. Okie State ended up knocking off Stanford. LSU didnt bother to show up for the Championship getti g shutout by Bama.

 

This game proved perception is more important than the regular season.

[BigRedBuster]

Skipping the semantical yammering, there were fewer teams eligible for a national title after the bcs came into existence. Underf the old NYD bowls, @ 6 teams in the big 5 had a chance for a natty if the things worked out.

 

And btw, college ball used a meaningful regular season to crown a champion. Wins in Jan are not naurally better than ones in September.

 

There is absolutely NOTHING that diminishes the regular season with a play off of 4 teams. If you move it to 8 team and make it 6 conference champions plus two wild cards then it even makes the regular season even MORE exciting. It creates an atmosphere where if you are in contention to win your conference, then you are in contention for an NC. That is huge and right now, most conference champions have absolutely no chance of an NC.

[California Husker]

So I went and read the definition of "playoff" in several sources and Dutch is correct. It can be one game or a series of games. I'm not sure why people feel that they can use their perception to argue facts. You can say that you (and all your friends) believe that in essence 2+2=5...but it doesn't change the fact. A table can have one leg, two legs, 4 legs, 6, 8, etc...it's still a table. You can't make up your own definitions. So then, if by definition, a playoff can be a game or series of games that determines a champion, then the only thing the NCAA is doing next year is expanding the playoff.

[dutch91701]

I could live with the recently deceased system being called a play off if not for one thing. 2011 Alabama vs LSU. That game alone proved the the regular season does not count as much as they told us it did. A regular season rematch in the top game of all college football? If its a playoff or not, it wasnt that year.

I don't have the issue with that one that many had. The first game finished 9-6 (I think) in OT. For the cast majority of the history of college football, that would have been a tie. College overtime is such a ridiculous crapshoot it's not even funny (unless it's a MWC game that goes into OT at 63-63, then it's hilarious) so I didn't mind seeing that. Especially since OK State had a chance to be in it and sh#t the bed.

 

I couldnt tell you if it went to OT because I fell asleep halfway through. Easily the most boring game I saw that year yet the commentators at CBS treated it like it was the Battle at the Alamo. You could see the fix was in considering Gameday was there for the game and it wasnt even on their network.that night.

 

I didnt want to get into this argument but here goes. Alabama should have sh#t the bed with the loss to LSU. BUT because SEC perceived perception is so durn important they slid in without winning their division. Oklajoma State on the other hand had a rough week where a faculty .ember died and they lost a close actually exciti g game to an underrated ISU team that woulda been ranked 12th if their logo said SEC and not Big XII. Okie State won their conference. Alabama did not. Alabama got in. LSU earned their spot by going undefeated and winning the SEC. Alabama blew it. Okie State ended up knocking off Stanford. LSU didnt bother to show up for the Championship getti g shutout by Bama.

 

This game proved perception is more important than the regular season.

You have a point. Alabama DID lose. Now, I argue that it was to the #1 team, who did go undefeated. That wasn't necessarily based on perception. 13-0 is 13-0. The argument could (and was) definitely made for OKState, who certainly had a great season. Personally I think the 9-6 game was a good game. I enjoy solid defense, but if you're an offense guy, then that's your right. The entertainment factor of the game isn't really the issue. I will DEFINITELY not argue the SEC bias.

[dutch91701]

 

I have to provide citations for breaking down a process logically? It doesn't matter how many people say it, it's fact. There is a playoff RIGHT NOW. All that 2014 changes is doubling the size of the playoff. Want proof? 4 team playoff bracket...how many rounds are there? 2 right? Four teams play to get to two teams, two teams play for champion. Unless you're saying that the teams would play one playoff game and one bowl game? That's really your only argument here without conceding that I'm right.

 

 

I'd agree with you if there were cross conference games played before the championship...but there aren't...so while you technically are correct...it doesn't feel correct at all.

Well thank you. There are non-conference games. Here's the thing: at the end of the year, there are usually one or two legit undefeated teams at the end of the year. If you win all your games in an AQ conference, you deserve to get in. If you lose, you subject yourself to the randomness of the postseason selection process. That doesn't change with expanding the playoffs.

[Redux]

The SEC bias ultimately made the choice. It just pains me that winning a conference title left them out in the cold. Granted Bamas loss was to #1 but when comparing accolades OkieSt wins by comparison.

 

By Leavi g a team out with a conference crown on the year was just robbery