Talking BCS with Harvey Perlman...

[HuskerGBR]

Sorry Jen but you just make it sound so easy.

It would be easy to institute play-offs. What makes it "hard" is a certain segment of society wants to keep a stupid and inherently flawed system in place.

There are so many holes with what you just said that I don't even want to think about it or go to far into it.

Name them.

Keep the smaller bowls you say and only the fans of that team will watch it.

And you are basing this on what exactly? Seems to me as though you are projecting what you do to every other college football fan. Personally I love college football and I'll watch the FAU Owls play Toledo, I'll watch San Diego State versus Boise State, etc.

Everyone else will be more concerned about the playoffs and guess what...we don't want an NFL system and no one cares about Div- 1AA and that they have a playoff. You said they fill their stadiums...oh yeah 16k people...congrats.

The actual number isn't the point: It's the fact that the stadium is sold out or close to it.

You say award automatic playoff berths to conference champions. I hope you are assuming every conference would have a conference championship or that none would. Also what happens if say they do have a CCG and Colorado beats Oklahoma somehow and Colorado was number 24 in the polls. So they should get to the playoffs automatically? And if you did away with CCG's then how would you determine the winner of the conference?

In your sCUm and OU scenario, if the Buttaloes were to somehow beat OU in the conference title game then yes, as conference champs they'd go to the playoffs.

Yes every conference would have a title game or none would.

Are you aware that the Pac 10 and The Big 10+1 are two conferences that somehow determine a conference champion without a title game? So it can be done...crazy I know.

Just too many holes in a playoff system for college football so I am against it for those reasons

Again with the "holes." All you've done is vaguely hint around at all the holes without any specific examples to support your position. So again, what "holes" are you talking about?

and the fact I love college football because there is no playoffs. I watch pretty much every game I can (except the dumb Tuesday night games) during the regular season and honestly I don't do that for any other sport out there.

So if there were playoffs you'd stop loving, and watching college football, simply because a playoff system was instituted?

The "holes" I am talking about is can you guarantee me that every game would matter, revenue would be generated for the cities that hold the bowl games to the extent it is with the bowl games now, and they would play no more than 14 games in the season (14 is already high for these STUDENT athletes). How would you determine the real conference winner without a regional playoff that would make a playoff a little more fair which adds more games and goes back to every game wouldn't matter? How would you deal with OOC games which is nice for schools of other conferences to get a chance to play each other? How would you determine the schools that go to the playoffs...would you take the top 8 that is based on bias polls like it is now? What if a top 8 school didn't win their conference...do they still go? Those are just some questions that spring to mind that nobody seems to answer...I said I didn't want to go too far into it, but apparently you want me to.

So you would watch the FAU owls huh? You just get that name, because we have them on the schedule?

Chances are you don't really watch them and the only reason most people do is because they are the only game on. The majority of people don't really care to see those types of matchups which would put you in the minority and in this country majority rules. Fact is when you watch those teams...you are not really emotionally invested in that game. Mostly what I was saying was most people won't TRAVEL to the bowl games (if there is a playoff) unless they are loyal fans of that team.

And yeah sherlock I am aware that the pac-10 and big 10 have no title game. Did you know that they play everybody in their conference too? And I would stop loving and watching if they decide to just go with a playoff without thinking things through and just doing it, because of a bunch of cry baby fans. Maybe we should just put in a rule where everybody plays and everybody is a winner and not keep score while we are at it.

 

[huskerswrkhavoc]

The posts like these really annoy me.

Then why have this debate?

Show me where I said anything remotely close to "it has to be 100% my way." Oh that's right you can't because I didn't. Stick to the facts of what I said and stop inventing ways to pretend you're all butt-hurt.

I'm simply sick and tired of all the excuses as to why there isn't a true play-off system in college football. And that's all the anti-playoff crowd can give are excuses.

"NEXT"

Simply implies that you are right, the other end is wrong, plain and simple.

And I'm simply sick and tired of the thoughts that a playoff is a fool-proof system. And all the PRO-playoff crowd can give is speculation.

See? That can go two ways.

Now, how about you actually give ways around my post instead of just ripping on me.

 

[hskrpwr13]

I'll continue to not understand how schools like Utah and Boise St can scream about access when they haven't "earned" it like the old guard has. Programs like NU's are the reason college football is the money maker it is today, not the now termed "non-BCS" programs.

...

Honestly, I don't know what the "non-BCS" schools would have to do "earn" it in my mind. Maybe they need to sell their product to a "major" bowl to get a contract, just like the old guard conferences had to do.

The problem I have here is that they honestly don't get much of a chance to earn it. An "Old Guard" program has little to gain from scheduling teams like Utah and Boise St.. If you lose to them, you get ripped because you lost against a non-BCS team. If you win the game, it's not a big deal, because it's not like they were a "major" BCS team.

I really don't know what more Utah could do to earn it. They went undefeated through their schedule (in which their Out-of-conference games were not easy at all) and then beat a highly ranked Alabama team in a BCS bowl game. It's hard to say they should make their schedule more difficult, because until a conference invites them they can't change their conference schedule, and you can't say they should schedule harder games OOC, because most "Old Guard" schools have at least 2 cupcake games on their schedule.

Big, you're bringing a different argument to the table. Utah isnt so much PO'd about the fact that they didn't get a "fair" chance to "win" the NC last year. That's the mask their using. The real issue, from their perspective, is that they don't have equal access to the BCS money. Win a BCS conference and you're guaranteed a BCS birth payday. Win a non-BCS conference and your BCS money hopes are based off the wims of the voters and the Bowl's selection committee. If a playoff is instituted, the Bowl's selection committee is removed from the process.

If the MWC decided to reach a deal with the Fiesta Bowl, for example, so that the MWC champ would play the Big12 champ every year (just like the Rose with the Pac10/Big10), they'd quit their bitching and fall right into line with the corporate answer of all the other BCS conferences.

The problem is that they know they're not marketable enough yet to get a BCS deal like that even with the handouts from the NCAA in terms of scholly reductions and ESPN's marketing gift. And you're correct! The BCS conferences certainly aren't going to "help" them by giving them the opportunity to better market themsleves by scheduling high profile games against them.

 

[hskrpwr13]

Haha. "Holes in the playoff system." =)

I get a chuckle out of these arguments against a playoff. If I ever doubted that people were gullible, the bowl system would erase all doubts. The fact that people continue to buy into the pablum being given out by the bowls shows just how little ability people have to think critically.

There's a reason that nearly every major and minor sport IN THE WORLD uses a playoff-based system of determining a "champion." It's not because it's foolproof, or that it always crowns the best team, it's because it's the least faulty system man has developed.

Nobody ever said playoffs would solve everything. It's simply that they solve more problems than any other system, ESPECIALLY the bowl system. :lol:

LOL Knapp, you and I have already had the playoff discussion, so won't go down that road again. But I will call you out on your reason that other sports have playoffs. (we may have discussed this too. lol)

You're correct that its not foolproof or the best team gets crowned, but it also has nothing to do with it being better than polling. MONEY! MONEY! MONEY! is the only reason playoffs exist how we know them in big time sports. First, the powers that be aren't concerned about championships and fairness. Thats for us knuckleheads that give them money for the entertainment value of it all. Second, like someone else brought up earlier, did we need a playoff to determine that the Patriots were the best team in football in '07? Of course not! Even the most avid Giants fans I know admit to that. Does baseball, after 100+ years of crowning a champion without the need for "wild cards" now feel that they've mistakenly used an unfair process all of these years, thus the creation of wild cards? No! TV playoffs are in place because of the profit it brings. There is no FACT that supports the notion that we'll have a "more deserving or "more fairly crowned" champion because of playoffs. Its strictly a notion.

For those who are for a playoff, you'll get your playoff when the current powers determine that they'll keep the same percentage of the profits (money = power/control) that they currently do. Everyone may get richer with a playoff, but if the money is more evenly split, the power will shift.

 

[HUSKER 37]

Wow!

There's still a lot of passion about this tired topic.

I mean, I can sorta understand the passion of the the people on here that are trying to defend our favourite sport and don't want to mess anything up or make it as dull as the NFL or the rest of the sporting events that have a playoff.

But why is it so important to the pro playoff crowd?

Is it really that important to crown the "right team" Champion?

Even with a playoff, you're going to run into the Rock State/Paper A&M/Scissors U. thing where so much of your success would depend on who (or where) you would draw as a playoff opponent. (Also..Not always the best team wins).

Before we got into the habit of losing more than two or three games per season, I'd almost pass out while watching each game (from holding my breath when we were on Defense or shouting when we had the ball)...I miss that..And if we had a playoff to fall back on, I'm afraid none of us would ever get that back.

I love the fact that I can still get into a shouting match with a Penn State fan or a Mechicken fan about who (would've) won in a head to head in '94 or '97...It'd be almost anticlimactic if we'd actually proved it on the field.

"The post-season debate over Who's No. 1 is the essence of college football, the jewel cleverly disguised as flaw..."

...I'm simply sick and tired of all the excuses as to why there isn't a true play-off system in college football. And that's all the anti-playoff crowd can give are excuses.

As opposed to what?

 

[knapplc]

Haha. "Holes in the playoff system." =)

I get a chuckle out of these arguments against a playoff. If I ever doubted that people were gullible, the bowl system would erase all doubts. The fact that people continue to buy into the pablum being given out by the bowls shows just how little ability people have to think critically.

There's a reason that nearly every major and minor sport IN THE WORLD uses a playoff-based system of determining a "champion." It's not because it's foolproof, or that it always crowns the best team, it's because it's the least faulty system man has developed.

Nobody ever said playoffs would solve everything. It's simply that they solve more problems than any other system, ESPECIALLY the bowl system. :lol:

LOL Knapp, you and I have already had the playoff discussion, so won't go down that road again. But I will call you out on your reason that other sports have playoffs. (we may have discussed this too. lol)

You're correct that its not foolproof or the best team gets crowned, but it also has nothing to do with it being better than polling. MONEY! MONEY! MONEY! is the only reason playoffs exist how we know them in big time sports. First, the powers that be aren't concerned about championships and fairness. Thats for us knuckleheads that give them money for the entertainment value of it all. Second, like someone else brought up earlier, did we need a playoff to determine that the Patriots were the best team in football in '07? Of course not! Even the most avid Giants fans I know admit to that. Does baseball, after 100+ years of crowning a champion without the need for "wild cards" now feel that they've mistakenly used an unfair process all of these years, thus the creation of wild cards? No! TV playoffs are in place because of the profit it brings. There is no FACT that supports the notion that we'll have a "more deserving or "more fairly crowned" champion because of playoffs. Its strictly a notion.

For those who are for a playoff, you'll get your playoff when the current powers determine that they'll keep the same percentage of the profits (money = power/control) that they currently do. Everyone may get richer with a playoff, but if the money is more evenly split, the power will shift.

The money argument falls apart when you look at sports like city-rec basketball leagues, or beer league softball around the country. If they determine a champion, they use a playoff. And money is not the reason they're using a playoff - they're doing it because it's the best system out there.

Again, nobody is saying playoffs are foolproof, or that they always determine the "best" team, or any such thing. Playoffs are simply the least fallible of the choices available.

 

[HuskerGBR]

The money argument falls apart when you look at sports like city-rec basketball leagues, or beer league softball around the country. If they determine a champion, they use a playoff. And money is not the reason they're using a playoff - they're doing it because it's the best system out there.

Again, nobody is saying playoffs are foolproof, or that they always determine the "best" team, or any such thing. Playoffs are simply the least fallible of the choices available.

City rec basketball and beer league softball doesn't bring in the money like college football does. Plus those are more fun (no doubt they are still competitive), but it's more for people who like to play. They use a playoff, because what...are they going to use a bowl system for these leagues? Would teams sign a contract with the Yankee bowl? Besides those leagues don't have 120 teams and the win/loss records are a little more cut and dry in softball leagues.

Look I understand the reasons why people want a playoff...I do. But the fact is you can't have both the bowl games and a playoff like people are saying. You either do a straight playoff with regional playoffs to decide who goes to the playoffs or I could see a +1 scenario MIGHT be able to work if done right. If you do straight playoffs then the regular season games won't matter anymore.

The money you talk about is important. Those vendors, hotels, restaurants, etc, depend on that income from the bowl games. Not to mention the tax dollars the city receives.

 

[HuskerJen]

For some reason I can't use the quote function so Husker37's post is in bold and italics.

Wow! There's still a lot of passion about this tired topic. Is it really that important to crown the "right team" Champion?

Well gee I don't know...

* Is it really that important to make sure an HR manager hires the best, most qualified, person?

* Is it really that important when you take your vehicle to a mechanic that he fixes it right the first time?

* Is it really that important to do your job to the best of your abilities?

* Is it really that important for the Nebraska coaches to follow all NCAA guidelines for recruiting?

The point: If you're not going to do something right then why do it at all?

Even with a playoff, you're going to run into the Rock State/Paper A&M/Scissors U. thing where so much of your success would depend on who (or where) you would draw as a playoff opponent. (Also..Not always the best team wins).

A vast majority of the time the best team does win.

And taking your point about the best team not winning well that's happening right now: I believe that Nebraska was better than Texas Tech and Virginia Tech last year and we still lost, so what's the difference?

I love the fact that I can still get into a shouting match with a Penn State fan or a Mechicken fan about who (would've) won in a head to head in '94 or '97...It'd be almost anticlimactic if we'd actually proved it on the field.

Yes because pointlessly debating that is sooo much fun.

As opposed to what?

As opposed to giving sound reasons, based on logic and facts which actually can stand on their own merits.

The anti-playoff crowd are probably the same type of people who fought, resisted and argued against the introduction of fire, the wheel and indoor plumbing.

 

[krc1995]

Someone enlighten me as to how a playoff will diminish the regular season? With a playoff, your team loses one or twice you can still fight your way back. You still have to get to the playoffs. As it is now, if you lose, in all probability you are not playing for a NC.

 

[Apathy]

I have a solution to this problem instead of doing a playoff system..............................wait for it..................how about the NCAA conduct an online poll on who they think should be in the National Championship game. We'll win the poll every year so just bank on playing in the Title game every year whenever the poll comes out!!!!!

:snacks:

 

[HuskerJen]

I have a solution to this problem instead of doing a playoff system..............................wait for it..................how about the NCAA conduct an online poll on who they think should be in the National Championship game. We'll win the poll every year so just bank on playing in the Title game every year whenever the poll comes out!!!!!

:snacks:

I know you were being sarcastic, but in essence that's sort of what we have right now with preseason polls. The polls are nothing more than a popularity contest

 

[Apathy]

I have a solution to this problem instead of doing a playoff system..............................wait for it..................how about the NCAA conduct an online poll on who they think should be in the National Championship game. We'll win the poll every year so just bank on playing in the Title game every year whenever the poll comes out!!!!!

:snacks:

I know you were being sarcastic, but in essence that's sort of what we have right now with preseason polls. The polls are nothing more than a popularity contest

Ya I was being sarcastic. I just threw that out there because whenever a poll comes out someone on this board will post the link so we can win that poll. Thats the only reason why I said what I said and through out that poll voting idea :lol:

 

[HuskerGBR]

The "holes" I am talking about is can you guarantee me that every game would matter, revenue would be generated for the cities that hold the bowl games to the extent it is with the bowl games now, and they would play no more than 14 games in the season (14 is already high for these STUDENT athletes). How would you determine the real conference winner without a regional playoff that would make a playoff a little more fair which adds more games and goes back to every game wouldn't matter? How would you deal with OOC games which is nice for schools of other conferences to get a chance to play each other? How would you determine the schools that go to the playoffs...would you take the top 8 that is based on bias polls like it is now? What if a top 8 school didn't win their conference...do they still go? Those are just some questions that spring to mind that nobody seems to answer...I said I didn't want to go too far into it, but apparently you want me to.

So you would watch the FAU owls huh? You just get that name, because we have them on the schedule?

Chances are you don't really watch them and the only reason most people do is because they are the only game on. The majority of people don't really care to see those types of matchups which would put you in the minority and in this country majority rules. Fact is when you watch those teams...you are not really emotionally invested in that game. Mostly what I was saying was most people won't TRAVEL to the bowl games (if there is a playoff) unless they are loyal fans of that team.

And yeah sherlock I am aware that the pac-10 and big 10 have no title game. Did you know that they play everybody in their conference too? And I would stop loving and watching if they decide to just go with a playoff without thinking things through and just doing it, because of a bunch of cry baby fans. Maybe we should just put in a rule where everybody plays and everybody is a winner and not keep score while we are at it.

@Jen

You still keep saying that we don't have valid reasons for not doing a playoff, but you don't answer some of the questions like I said (see above post) or what Huskerswrkhavoc has said. You give no answers to why we should have a playoff other than it would determine the real national champs. We might be able to get the best of the bowl games with a playoff, but the only way I see that is if we do a +1 type situation which would still have it's flaws, but might stop some of the doubting on who is the national champs.

Playoffs are best determined by regional playoffs and then the real playoffs. That is the least flawed system in a playoff scenario. That would do away completely with bowl games and add a LOT more games so I don't think they are even considering this option. That also means that the regular season wouldn't matter as much as it does now.

If we go with no CCG's then that would mean the conferences with 12 teams would have to play everyone in that conference. There goes OOC games for those schools. If we stick with CCG's then that would mean that you would probably have to go with the two best schools in the conference so last year it would have been Texas vs. Oklahoma (there would be more of a monopoly in this scenario because you want the best teams in the playoff which means better recruiting and TV time/money for them), but they already played each other in the regular season which gives pac-10 and big-10 conference champs an edge unless you make them play a CCG too. Also that reduces the OOC games they play and guess what...that means schools like Boise State, Utah, etc wouldn't even get a shot, because they wouldn't be able to play any of the big boys.

If they do anything I wouldn't mind agreeing on a +1 type situation where everything is thought out and they covered most of the bases. I don't want to see them rush anything. There has to be a compromise that most fans can agree on and what the pro-playoff people want is too much while the anti-playoff people is not enough so we need some type of middle ground. The pro-playoff people don't realize that you would have to rework almost the entire system that college football has in order to have a "fair" playoff system even with just an 8 team playoff (which wouldn't be a true, fair playoff system). That includes conference and OOC play plus how many games they play.

@krc-

That's exactly what a playoff would do and I agree that, for the most part, once you lose in this system now then you probably won't be playing for the NC.

 

[HuskerJen]

@Jen
You give no answers to why we should have a playoff other than it would determine the real national champs.

Is any other reason really needed here?

 

[HuskerGBR]

@Jen
You give no answers to why we should have a playoff other than it would determine the real national champs.

Is any other reason really needed here?

You bet. Like I said the only way to determine the real champ in a playoff system is to do a full blown playoff system. Regionals and all of it. Which would mean completely changing college football. You won't be able to do bowl games and once again an 8 team playoff wouldn't be a fair playoff and would have just as many problems as the current system. Just getting tired of you saying we don't have valid reasons not to do a playoff and we won't back anything up, but you are doing the same thing not giving reasons why we should have one. The real champs thing is all you say which I already covered why we can't have a real champ without the full blown playoff scenario and that would ruin college football. We have to think about the big picture here and not focus in on just one aspect.