There is a real interesting scenario going on in the BCS right now. As we all know, the six conference winners get BCS bowl bids and then two more go to at-large bids. One of the rules that the BCS has in place is that a team from a non-BCS conference is in the top 6 at the end of the season, then they will get one of the automatic bids. Another rule is that if a team is not a winner of their conference and finishes in the top 4, then they will get an automatic bid. As of right now, the conference leaders are USC, Oklahoma, Auburn, Michigan, Virginia Tech, and Boston College. The top seven teams in the BCS are (in order) USC, Oklahoma, Auburn, California, Texas, Utah, and Boise State. If the season ended today, California and Utah would get the two automatic bids. However, since some of these teams have a game or two left. If a team in the top six would happen to lose and fall out of the top six, then the BCS has a huge problem. Lets say that Texas loses this weekend, Utah would probally move up to number 5 and Boise State would probally move up to number six. Here is the problem, according to the two rules stated above, the BCS would have three teams that they have guaranteed an automatic bid to a BCS bowl game. I am not for sure what the rule is for this situation but it is very possible that they could have a huge problem on there hands here.
BCS
- Thread starter gamecocks
- Start date
Pedro Guerrero
Team HuskerBoard
Utah gets a bid and plays BC that game will prove nothing as far as Utah belonging with the big boys. The Big East having an automatic bid is a joke. Their conference is pitiful. What if ISU upsets Oklahoma in the Big 12? How does that shake crap up? Is Oklahoma far enough ahead where they would only drop a couple stops? If Boise State gets a bid the whole system is a failure.(it might be already)
I think it's a little too early to be figuring on anything, because the only team that is a lock for any of those games is Utah(as sad as that is to say). Texas has a very losable game, Oklahoma could be ripe for an upset, USC plays UCLA and Notre Dame, Auburn plays Tennessee, Cal has Southern Miss. I remember how everything looked pretty neat back in 2001, then it got REAL ugly when no one could seem to win. I am just gonna sit back and enjoy the chaos, gotta love college football!
Boise State got jumped by Georgia in the polls so that will probally give them no chance at getting in the top six unless a miracle happens. Texas is more than likely going to need a victory by Southern Miss to climb into the top four. It looks like the BCS is a complete joke again when a team like Pittsburgh will go to a BCS bowl and Texas will be on the outside looking in again.
I agree that texas should be in it and they are probably the 2nd best team next to okie who beat them close. I don't want a playoff however. I think that is why college football is so great because the regular season means so much and is so important. The regular season just wouldn't mean much if you take 16 teams or even 8 imo. If a team that has 2 losses in the regular season gets a 8 seed and upsets the 1 seed who is undefeated, how is that fair? Every game means something in college football and thats why it's so great. Is the bcs perfect? Not even close, will some teams get screwed once in awhile? ya, but thats life.
I agree with you Benard. The fact that there is no playoff and that things are so jumbled at the end of the year do make it more exciting. You look back 30 years or so, and almost every year 2 teams would split the championship. It's not perfect, never will be.
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree that it makes things exciting, but I would much rather have a true national champion. The playoff would do that. Benard, you said in your post that the regular season games mean so much more right now, and that if a number one seed got beat by a number eight seed it wouldn't be fair. How is a number one seed getting beat in the playoffs different than a team getting beat in the regular season. With a playoff, teams would have to play their best ball during the regular season to get into the playoffs and then would have to continue to play their best ball to win the national championship.
I just love how the regular season means so much and each and every game means so much. I think they should just keep the bcs and do that and have a clause at the end of the year that if there are two teams or more still undefeated then have them play it off. Chances are there aren't going to be more than 2 teams undefeated after the bowl games.
I don't think a playoff would take away from the excitement of the regular season. The best teams would still have to play hard and would still take the best shots from every team that they play. I think that you are right that it is a long shot to have more than 2 undefeated teams at the end of the year. But if there is only one undefeated team and two or more one loss teams we are still going to have a major dilema. A playoff would let the teams settle it the right way (on the field) and we won't have teams running up the score and taking the sportsmanship out of the game now just to impress the voters.
Oklahoma Husker
Well-known member
It's different in the fact that you wouldn't have to play your best every game if we had a playoff. Teams could lose 2 games and get in, then play their best and win the championship. The way it is now you pretty much have to go undefeated through 11 games to get a shot at the national championship...this is how it is and how it should be.
But these year, we could have three teams that could be undefeated at the end of the year. They have done everything that we expect them to do by winning everygame this year. But yet one will be left out because they didn't fit into the formula quite as well as the other two did. That is the reason why the BCS sucks and we need a playoff.