View Full Version : Florida vaults to No. 2 in BCS, will play Ohio State
jcollins28
12-03-06, 06:51 PM
http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-bcs4dec04,1,1169106.story?coll=la-headlines-sports&ctrack=1&cset=true
coolhand
12-03-06, 07:58 PM
DO WE need a new thread for each article?
ferrarigod
12-03-06, 08:03 PM
DO WE need a new thread for each article?
Do we have to constantly hear from whining usc fans in every new thread?
:gomer:
jcollins28
12-03-06, 08:29 PM
DO WE need a new thread for each article?
Do we need to call the WABULANCE for you? You seem to be really bitter about something today? Whats under your skin? Something gone wrong in the last 24 hours or so? Were all friends here anything you want to talk about or share? No need to go on complain about such trivial matters about posting of articles in new threads. Just let out what is bugging you. I think you will find you will feel a lot better.
ferrarigod
12-03-06, 08:42 PM
Do we need to call the WABULANCE for you? You seem to be really bitter about something today? Whats under your skin? Something gone wrong in the last 24 hours or so? Were all friends here anything you want to talk about or share? No need to go on complain about such trivial matters about posting of articles in new threads. Just let out what is bugging you. I think you will find you will feel a lot better.
lmfao.:D
It's official. The computers had UM and Fla. dead even. The polls put Fla. over the top.
Here's a link that doesn't require registration.
http://www.bcsfootball.org/cfb/story/6235580
I have to say, there's some voters that need to be ashamed of themselves. Especially the clown that gave Florida a #1 vote. How does a team drop two spots in the rankings without playing anybody (and without any of the teams below them having a dominant victory).
While I understand the whole "We don't want to see a rematch" mentality, who the heck are they kidding? Watch a Rocky movie for crying out loud!
Michigan/Ohio State I was one of the rare events that lives up to the hype, with the outcome in question until the very end. I don't think anybody on either side of the rivalry walked away thinking anything other than, "Holy crap, that was awesome!"
The chance to do it again, in a neutral site with even more on the line would have been a game of epic proportions - bigger than anything we'll see The Powers That Be finally realize they need a playoff.
Instead, we'll see Ohio State beat the crap out of Florida, and USC get exposed again - leaving Ohio State and Michigan #1 and #2. Right back where they were the day after The Game.
I have to say, there's some voters that need to be ashamed of themselves.
That's one way to look at it. Another way is that the voters saved us from a game that the majority of the nation didn't want to see. Under the current system, UM had their chance... they lost and have to deal with it.
Michigan/Ohio State I was one of the rare events that lives up to the hype, with the outcome in question until the very end.
Isn't the consensus that once they took the lead, OSU had the game in hand?
The Powers That Be finally realize they need a playoff.
Amen to that. :thumbup:
Instead, we'll see Ohio State beat the crap out of Florida, and USC get exposed again - leaving Ohio State and Michigan #1 and #2. Right back where they were the day after The Game.
That is why they play the games. What if Florida and USC win, then the Big 10 gets exposed. The only way to see if the Big 10 is as good as you think they are is for them to play the other conference winners. Key point being conference winners... of which UM is NOT.
Lastly, keep talking up OSU as that will only help Florida.
And uber-lastly, there is no way that UF's defense is giving up 500+ yards and 42 points. :p
And oh yeah, uber-uber-lastly, if Zook can play OSU tough... :gomer:
I have to say, there's some voters that need to be ashamed of themselves. Especially the clown that gave Florida a #1 vote. How does a team drop two spots in the rankings without playing anybody (and without any of the teams below them having a dominant victory).
"Good evening. Tonight on 'It's the Mind', we examine the phenomenon of déjà vu. That strange feeling we sometimes get that we've lived through something before, that what is happening now has already happened. Tonight on 'It's the Mind' we examine the phenomenon of déjà vu, that strange feeling we sometimes get that we've ... Anyway, tonight on 'It's the Mind' we examine the phenomenon of déjà vu, that strange..."
racermike
12-04-06, 01:23 PM
BCS rules or not, its not fair to Ohio State to have to beat Michigan twice to get a National title, while Michigan would only have to win once. (and this is comingn from someone who likes Michigan more than Ohio State .. I wanted Michigan to win that game)
chop456
12-04-06, 01:50 PM
When some of the different computer rankings are wildly out of step with each other, it pretty much proves that it's nonsense.
devilmaster
12-04-06, 02:00 PM
BCS rules or not, its not fair to Ohio State to have to beat Michigan twice to get a National title, while Michigan would only have to win once.
True. The way this has worked out, its not fair to anyone. And this is why the BCS blows and why I've lost interest in bowl games because of it.
They need to have a playoff system. 8 teams is very doable, before the bowl games. Is it a perfect system? Of course not. There will be alot of fighting for that 8th spot.
But the rediculousness of this year can easily be repeated next year. What happens of OSU and Mich are again 1 & 2, both undefeated when they meet in Ann Arbor? And what if Michigan pulls out a squeaker? Now OSU gets screwed out of their deserved title game because fan balloting says 'we don't want a rematch'.
That is why they play the games.
Gotta disagree. Musburger said the same thing Saturday. In this system, they don't play the games. They power up computers and programs with algorythms to figger out who has done what in this system.
Gotta disagree. Musburger said the same thing Saturday. In this system, they don't play the games. They power up computers and programs with algorythms to figger out who has done what in this system.
I think I see what you are saying. My point wasn't that they are playing the games that need to be played to determine a national champion (we need a playoff and the current system is crocked and crooked).
Rather, my point was to counter JoeBob's opinion that OSU will "beat the crap out of Florida, and USC get exposed again."
We won't know if he is correct until those games are played.
devilmaster
12-04-06, 02:36 PM
I think I see what you are saying. My point wasn't that they are playing the games that need to be played to determine a national champion (we need a playoff and the current system is crocked and crooked).
Rather, my point was to counter JoeBob's opinion that OSU will "beat the crap out of Florida, and USC get exposed again."
We won't know if he is correct until those games are played.
I knew what you were saying. It was just your comment was a natural segway for the comments I needed to make. Thanks for that ;) :)
I've heard worse ideas than JB's. What if (and i know, but play along) OSU has a terrible game, UF wins, and UofM handily beats USC. I have actually heard sports writers talk about co-champions again. :irked: If the whole point of the BCS is finding a National Champion, then doesn't the BCS completely fail when it has co-champions?
A playoff format of the top 8 would have so many interesting challenges and stories. What if Boise State is good enough? Doesn't 4th ranked LSU deserve better than 11th Notre Dame? What if, after its all said and done, OSU and Michigan are left standing. Then a final match for all the marbles would rival, IMO, the Superbowl for fan interest. Then the teams that are deserving would truly be deciding the games on the field.
^^^ :thumbup:
I would love an 8-team playoff like you propose.
Also, I can easily see the AP naming UM the national champs if UF beats OSU. I'm fine with that as it would further illustrate the mess that is the BCS.
as far as the BCS goes, prior to BCS we would have the following:
Rose: 2-loss USC vs. tOSU
Fiesta: 2-loss OU vs. at large
Sugar: 1-loss UF vs. at large
Orange: 1-loss L-ville/2-loss Wake vs. at large
undefeated and at some random worthless bowl: Boise (whose win over Oregon St is more impressive than Utah's '04 wins over aggy at home and John Bunting coached UNC on the road)
left out:
1 loss teams: Wisky, Michigan
2 loss teams top 10: Auburn, ND, LSU
can't really say the BCS has ruined anything, it's not a good system, but it's improved the old status quo in terms of a title game, as for the rest of the bowls, yea, it's somewhat of a bummer.
Michigan's signature win was against ND, an ND who can't even hang with any top 15 quality team. The big 10 is uber-weak with respect to depth as well. UF meanwhile tore through an SEC schedule that is undoubtedly tougher. Michigan lost by 3, but the final TD was garbage against a prevent D. That Hoplite defense of Michigan gave up 500+ yards and how many TD's? Michigan had trouble putting away Ball State and Northwestern at home, and didn't exactly roll the Hawkeyes either. Just like UF has looked shaky at times, UF did win in Neyland, showed up solid in Jordan-Hare w/o having to rely on Auburn miscues to keep it close, and did take down LSU who has the fastest, biggest, hardest-hitting defense I've seen this year (opponents are 3-8 the following week, 2 of those wins vs. D1-AA & Buffalo)
I would prefer a Michigan title to the Civil War betwen the Jorts Capitals of North & South we're about to witness. I'd prefer a Michigan title to most any year the 'Horns are out of it. But the "Michigan is undoubtedly the 2nd best team in the country" talk, to me, is based on preseason biases (Notre Dame's quality) and smoke and mirrors (3 point loss to tOSU vs garbage TD, 500+ yards on D). While UF's SEC preformance was dissected week in, week out, Michigan's kept cruising along on the "blew out Notre Dame who has Heisman winner Brady Quinn" tag, impervious to any critical analysis.
I think Michigan could hang on a neutral field. I think Florida could hang on a neutral field. But I know Florida's emerged from a much tougher schedule and proven more on the field this year.
Sucks for Michigan. :thumdown: But look at it this way, you have something in common now with your bretheren from Oregon, USC, Ohio State, Miami, and Washington ;)
^^^ :thumbup:
I would love an 8-team playoff like you propose.
Also, I can easily see the AP naming UM the national champs if UF beats OSU. I'm fine with that as it would further illustrate the mess that is the BCS.
UF, USC, Boise all win.
Boise State 2006 National Champions!!! :D
devilmaster
12-04-06, 03:23 PM
To be honest on a couple points, yes I'm a Michigan fan, and also, I would still rather prefer the old system where since Michigan lost this year, they don't go to Rose and are out. I liked the old system alot better than what they have now.
But the belief is that we need to have a National Champion. That's fine, but this system they have now truly doesn't crown one. It relies too much on Strength of Sked and personal opinion of voters. Now if you use SoS to figger out who's the top 8, and then you let them play it out on the field, NOW you have a true National Champion.
the 8 team system is not a perfect system. There will still be teams that felt they deserve a spot on the top 8. But i'd rather have teams argue out who is number 8 than who is number 2. There is talk that a few people out there have voted florida #2 because they didn't want to see a rematch. Not knocking UF, but if that comment is true, then the BCS is a complete total sham farce.
A playoff system of 8 would only require 2 more games between now and the BCS bowls. It can be done. This would rival or exceed March Madness for the excitement (and number of pools ;) ), and in the end, you would truly have a Champ.
To me its the only way to go.
You could go 8 teams, 16 teams, 32 teams, heck, even 64 teams and people would still bitch and moan about a deserving team not making the playoffs. (See also: Tournament, NCAA National Basketball.)
The expanded regular season schedules really limit the flexibility of the NCAA in terms of implementing a playoff. To have a playoff, you are going to have to eliminate at least one, maybe two or three, regular season games. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of teams will never make it into a playoff and will forfeit a lot of money with the loss of at least one home game.
There will never be a perfect system. People would complain if God Himself came down in a vision and revealed a perfect system to the powers that be. But the idea isn't to eliminate complaining. The idea is to crown a national champion. And to do that you have to have the two teams most deserving of a national championship playing each other.
Michigan is not one of those teams. Ohio State proved it is a clearly superior football team. Is Florida deserving? I have certainly heard plenty of convincing arguments that it is. It is, as they say, up for debate. But I cannot think of a single team that is more deserving, except perhaps Boise State.
I don't like the fact that so much emphasis is placed on strength of schedule. The problem with that is that it becomes a self-fulfilling vicious cycle. Boise doesn't get to go to the national title game because it plays in a weaker conference, so the top recruits go to schools in the major conferences, leaving the scraps for the WACs of the world, which never get a chance to become a top conference.
I would prefer a 4 team system in that most likely no 2 loss teams would be included. LSU is ranked #4 right now, but the 3rd best team in the SEC doesn't belong in a playoff with 5 other major conferences + an undefeated Boise.
4 team: tOSU, UF, Michigan, then the cry-fest between L-ville, LSU, OU, USC, Wisky, Boise for the 4th spot.
8 team would require the conf winners, which then begs the requirement of the mid major conf winners which invariably leads to a 16 team playoff which is far too inclusive imo.
8 team: tOSU, USC, OU, UF, L-ville, Wake + Michigan, LSU? Wisky? Boise?
w/ the current BCS rule of a mid major ranked above a conf champ, Boise makes it to the exclusion of 4th ranked LSU & 1-loss Wisky.
I think the litmus test for any playoff idea would be to compare it to end of season polls/selection criteria for the past 10-15 years, then see what matchups & selections would result.
Dr. Corkski
12-04-06, 04:02 PM
They should just have a 3-team playoff for the NC between tOSU, UF, and FSU just so ferrarigod wouldn't hurt himself jumping on and off his bandwagons.
devilmaster
12-04-06, 04:12 PM
You could go 8 teams, 16 teams, 32 teams, heck, even 64 teams and people would still bitch and moan about a deserving team not making the playoffs.
Agreed. There will still be people who bitch about it. I stick by my comments that say I'd rather listen to people argue about who's number 8, than who's number 2, or 3, or 4.
The expanded regular season schedules really limit the flexibility of the NCAA in terms of implementing a playoff. To have a playoff, you are going to have to eliminate at least one, maybe two or three, regular season games. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of teams will never make it into a playoff and will forfeit a lot of money with the loss of at least one home game.
I don't believe you have to give up games. I still feel there is plenty of time to fit 2 more weekends from now until Jan 1. Hell, people used to say you couldn't have a bowl game after new year's day and now they have the big one an entire week after it. The interviewer on Fox last night said it best. OSU has over 50 days between its last game and its bowl game, enough time for 14 days to help decide the Champ.
There will never be a perfect system. People would complain if God Himself came down in a vision and revealed a perfect system to the powers that be. But the idea isn't to eliminate complaining. The idea is to crown a national champion. And to do that you have to have the two teams most deserving of a national championship playing each other.
With a playoff, instead of 2 teams most deserving of a national championship, you now have 8 teams that can be argued deserving, and then you let those 8 teams decide it where it should be decided. On the field.
Michigan is not one of those teams. Ohio State proved it is a clearly superior football team. Is Florida deserving? I have certainly heard plenty of convincing arguments that it is. It is, as they say, up for debate. But I cannot think of a single team that is more deserving, except perhaps Boise State.
There's my rub. No one will ever know if Boise was a true underdog, cinderella team that could play with the top conferences. What if Boise wins their bowl game. They will be an undefeated team that could rank under a 2 loss UF team when its all said and done.
What if, in a playoff system, Boise wins its 2 games, and OSU wins its 2 games? The two undefeated teams, facing off for the crystal. Now that would be awesome.
I don't like the fact that so much emphasis is placed on strength of schedule. The problem with that is that it becomes a self-fulfilling vicious cycle. Boise doesn't get to go to the national title game because it plays in a weaker conference, so the top recruits go to schools in the major conferences, leaving the scraps for the WACs of the world, which never get a chance to become a top conference.
IIRC, thats what some argued the BCS would try and solve when it first was implemented. Boise proves that the big boys remain the big boys and the scraps to the rest.
A playoff system would give the top 8 teams (based on votes and strength of sked) to decide the true champion amongst themselves. On the football field. To me, its better than what we have now.
You could go 8 teams, 16 teams, 32 teams, heck, even 64 teams and people would still bitch and moan about a deserving team not making the playoffs. (See also: Tournament, NCAA National Basketball.)
The expanded regular season schedules really limit the flexibility of the NCAA in terms of implementing a playoff. To have a playoff, you are going to have to eliminate at least one, maybe two or three, regular season games. The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of teams will never make it into a playoff and will forfeit a lot of money with the loss of at least one home game.
There will never be a perfect system. People would complain if God Himself came down in a vision and revealed a perfect system to the powers that be. But the idea isn't to eliminate complaining. The idea is to crown a national champion. And to do that you have to have the two teams most deserving of a national championship playing each other.
Michigan is not one of those teams. Ohio State proved it is a clearly superior football team. Is Florida deserving? I have certainly heard plenty of convincing arguments that it is. It is, as they say, up for debate. But I cannot think of a single team that is more deserving, except perhaps Boise State.
I don't like the fact that so much emphasis is placed on strength of schedule. The problem with that is that it becomes a self-fulfilling vicious cycle. Boise doesn't get to go to the national title game because it plays in a weaker conference, so the top recruits go to schools in the major conferences, leaving the scraps for the WACs of the world, which never get a chance to become a top conference.
If the hypocritical NCAA hadn't added a 12th game for the 'student athletes' to play during the regular season, there would only need to be one extra game for two teams to play. But now that the genie is out of the bottle, two teams would need to play 15 games in an eight game playoff. Thus supporting the 2A's argument that a playoff would be too much of a burden on the 'student athletes'. :irked:
Now they'll never take away the 12th game. So I think the best they could do now would be to create a +1 game using the BC$ bowls as a semi-final and the +1 as the final. And now that the Jan 1 bowls are spread out over the first week of January (as well as a couple of the minor bowls?), the argument that the season would last too long doesn't hold up anymore.
-Kevin
as far as the last point in your and rabbit's post, CFB has been around for 110+ years, BCS for less than 10.
TheBCS wasn't around for 100+ years holding back little mid-majors. I've enjoyed watching Boise for 5+ years now w/ their Chameleon offense, but schools like Boise bring around D1A programs b/c they want the $$$ to in turn fund the rest of their ath dept.
That $$$ availability is the sole doing of the major conferences and major programs over the course of the past century. The Boises of the world were the Boises before the BCS, and will remain so after the BCS. It's possible to pull a Miami or L-ville and make your way into the national picture, it's just not easy. It requires consecutive years of success. Something Boise & TCU have accomplisihed, to their credit.
But these schools are usually smaller, in smaller markets, less alumni base to pay for facilities, less history (except for TCU & SMU), and even in a BCS world will be left out. Baylor, Kansas, Vandy, Duke... There might be a better chance of pulling a BYU '84, than of going the Baylor route to the title game...
Insomniac
12-04-06, 04:30 PM
BCS rules or not, its not fair to Ohio State to have to beat Michigan twice to get a National title, while Michigan would only have to win once. (and this is comingn from someone who likes Michigan more than Ohio State .. I wanted Michigan to win that game)
Wouldn't that mean the regular season is the play-offs then? I think the right 2 teams are playing, but I don't buy that OSU has to beat UofM twice to with the title and UofM has to beat them once. In the first game, they knew what was at stake (winner plays for an opportunity to win the national title). In the national title game, they know the stakes are the national title.
as far as the last point in your and rabbit's post, CFB has been around for 110+ years, BCS for less than 10.
Yes, but the media exposure in each of the past 10 years has been heightened beyond the 100+ years combined. The 2A has simply created a monster, and they now need to find a way to control it. As I like to say, be careful what you ask for, you might just get it.
-Kevin
devilmaster
12-04-06, 04:35 PM
Especially the clown that gave Florida a #1 vote.
I just looked this up. Someone in the harris game Florida a #1 over OSU? :shakehead
That is the perfect reason ^ right there why I detest the BCS as it stands.
Politics and BS get in the way of deciding who is the true champion.
Yes, but the media exposure in each of the past 10 years has been heightened beyond the 100+ years combined. The 2A has simply created a monster, and they now need to find a way to control it. As I like to say, be careful what you ask for, you might just get it.
-Kevin
The NCAA neither created the monster nor the BCS system. TV and the Presidents/AD's respectively.
I just looked this up. Someone in the harris game Florida a #1 over OSU? :shakehead
That is the perfect reason ^ right there why I detest the BCS as it stands.
Politics and BS get in the way of deciding who is the true champion.
there are a lot of goofy votes, that UF #1 is balanced by a UF #5, then there's the guy who voted L-ville #2, etc.
selection committe > polls for playoff selections + harris poll == joke. master coaches survey > all : http://www.mcspoll.com
if you peruse the coaches votes you'll find it's all regional as well, all the MAC coaches voted up Michigan, Bob Stoops voted OU as if they were 1-loss
The NCAA neither created the monster nor the BCS system. TV and the Presidents/AD's respectively.
It's all part and parcel. My reference to the 2A is college foosball in general, and not the organization.
-Kevin
CFB in general has orchestrated the status quo. They can sit back and not do a damned thing and everyone will still be sucking down the $$$.
Insomniac
12-04-06, 04:49 PM
I think all of DI-A would need to be revamped to have a fair play-off at the end. You're going to have an argument about how to determine those 8 teams and then there might not be a problem say in the top 4, but then below it, teams will have arguments for why they should be or shouldn't be in. It will be the same old nonsense. The rankings are the real problem. As long as humans get to decide who is better than who without them having to play, it's not going to be 100% fair.
With that said, if they do a play-off, they should cut the season back to 10 games (9+1 if you have a conf. championship). They should not allow a DI-A school to play a non-DI-A school.
Ideally, the only way to do it right is to create a bunch of conferences, have conference champions and have them play in a play-off. Problem is, no one would ever do that.
In any case, we'll all be back next year, and the year after and we'll all make the same exact post next December. Rinse and Repeat.
devilmaster
12-04-06, 04:58 PM
http://www.mnsi.net/~smicalef/bcs.jpg
to quickly throw my idea out there, top 8 make playoffs. That leaves us with 2 undefeated, four 1-loss teams and two 2-loss teams.
Everyone will argue which 2 loss teams are deserving, and thats fine by me - don't want to be on the outside looking in? Don't lose 2 games or else be willing to play a stronger schedule when you make your sked for next year.
each of the 8 teams play 2 playoff games regardless if they win or lose. first round 1 vs 8, 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5 and 2 vs 7. winner or 1-8 plays winner of 3-6 etc.etc. A true bracket. Is this perfect? Hell No. But the teams who, by their play, are deserving - get to play it out instead of sitting around a fox camera with Chris Myers waiting to see.
TrueBrit
12-04-06, 05:00 PM
"Good evening. Tonight on 'It's the Mind', we examine the phenomenon of déjà vu. That strange feeling we sometimes get that we've lived through something before, that what is happening now has already happened. Tonight on 'It's the Mind' we examine the phenomenon of déjà vu, that strange feeling we sometimes get that we've ... Anyway, tonight on 'It's the Mind' we examine the phenomenon of déjà vu, that strange..."
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
the problem right there is the inclusion of Wisconsin.
devilmaster
12-04-06, 05:09 PM
the problem right there is the inclusion of Wisconsin.
Well, apparently to the voters, including boise was bad too, cause they both voted boise 9th - only the puter put them 8th.
coolhand
12-04-06, 05:13 PM
No playoff :thumdown: It would be as cheap copy of the Big Dance. Football has its own imperfect methods and stronger traditions.
Dr. Corkski
12-04-06, 05:22 PM
Boise had the 99th ranked scheduled while Wisconsin had the 84th ranked schedule and didn't have to play tOSU. If anything the teams will schedule even weaker teams because a win against weak teams will help more than a loss against a good team (or a loss thanks to dumbass Pac-10 officials).
exactly, OU is excluded b/c of the homerism in Autzen while playing UT, NU, Aggy. SEC: UF, Auburn, LSU, Arky played round robin, Tenn played UF, LSU, Arky & Cal. Pac10 & Big East are round robin
Wisky's only opponent of note, however, is Michigan, they get to escape tOSU.
Boise has a weak WAC sched, but they did play, and beat, 9 win Ore St.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Colin Cowherd ! ! ! (http://espnrad.vo.llnwd.net/o10/espnradio/insider/herd/herd_12042006_3.mp3)
Lot's of funny callers trying to make the case for Michigan.
"Urban Myer is 12-0 in big games... your coach is under .500."
Cowherd's one of the biggest bags of hot air, on the air.
Coach who voted UF number 1 hates the Gators. (http://www.ajc.com/services/content/sports/stories/2006/12/04/1204walden.html?cxtype=rss&cxsvc=7&cxcat=21) :rofl:
I spent four years coaching at Miami and if you think I like voting for that damn team to be No. 1, you're crazy. They are the least liked team out there. I can't stand them.
...Florida deserves to be the No. 1 team. Ohio State is one of the weakest No. 1 teams in 25 years. Look at who they played. They played one of the softest schedules of any No. 1 team in memory. They had all summer to get ready for Texas. Then they had 11 weeks to get ready for Michigan.
:gomer:
Insomniac
12-04-06, 07:14 PM
the problem right there is the inclusion of Wisconsin.
And USC who lost to 2 unranked teams. And you can't leave out ND. They system would have to be Top 7 teams and ND if they're in the Top 15.
coolhand
12-05-06, 12:33 AM
And USC who lost to 2 unranked teams. And you can't leave out ND. They system would have to be Top 7 teams and ND if they're in the Top 15.
Conference Champion
chop456
12-05-06, 02:26 AM
Notre Dame should have their own bowl. They don't even have to play any regular season games, just show up Jan 1 for a home game against whatever school's willing to play them for a 5% share of the revenue. On Saturday afternoons during the year, NBC can play highlights of past seasons, talk about how great Ron Powlus is and have Charlie Weis catch jelly donuts in his mouth two at a time.
coolhand
12-05-06, 03:56 AM
Ron Powlus lol
Insomniac
12-05-06, 09:14 AM
Conference Champion
Michigan and Wisconsin aren't conference champs. I suppose someone else should get bumped so the ACC champ gets in too.
ferrarigod
12-05-06, 09:33 AM
Biggest.
Idiot.
Ever.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=2685195
Michigan didn't do a thing wrong. And yet Carr was the one who had to console his team Sunday night. He did it, but here's guessing he wasn't Mr. Congeniality.
ummmm they lost already to Ohio State, thats one wrong thing.
-Nobody wants to see a rematch.
Just asking, but how did Ali-Frazier II and III work out? Or that Georgetown-Villanova Final Four?
Are you f****ing kidding me? That is your rationale?
Carr had to do what Auburn's Tommy Tuberville did two seasons ago. Tuberville's team finished the regular season 12-0, but was left out of the Tostitos BCS Championship Game in favor of undefeated USC and Oklahoma.
Of course the difference between Tuberville/Auburn and LLLLLLLLLoyd/scUM is that Tuberville was 12-0 in the regular season, and Carr lost the last game of the regular season.
Tuberville won the SEC, LLLLLoyd lost the Big Ten.
Other than that, yea, Auburn getting screwed is exactly the same as a 1 loss team getting 'screwed,' even though said one loss team had an opportunity to go undefeated and lost.
IDIOTS.
Tifosi24
12-05-06, 11:52 AM
I would love to see a four or eight team playoff, but it just isn't going to happen because of all the money and the NCAA having nothing to do with crowning the D-IA champion. No matter if you went with a four or eight team format the problem at the end of the day is how you select the field. Personally I am partial to a full computer system ala college hockey's PWR Ratings, but everyone else in football thinks that is a bad idea (Wisconsin would drop to 10th, but the Fighting Weises would move up to 8th). The eight team format would make the most sense from a competition standpoint, but if you go to this number all the major conferences, and Notre Dame, are going to crow about how they deserve an automatic bid. The playoff format works in all other divisions of college football, but the politics are just too strong in D-IA. The only way I can see a playoff coming to fruition is if some kind of poll fixing scandal or something came about, but I am not holding my breath.
coolhand
12-05-06, 12:45 PM
http://sportsline.com/columns/story/9848889/1 :rofl:
Andrew Longman
12-05-06, 01:14 PM
Perfect world?
The NCAA does their job of regulating college football so that all student athletes and schools have a fair chance of winning and all are playing on a safe and level playing field. That doesn't mean some schools and conference can't spend more money or be significantly better year after year. Just that if you are D1 then you are D1 and everyone is treated equally.
Next, conferences actually mean something more than just a way to organize TV contracts. Conference champions are automatically given a spot in a championship playoff. So thats
Big East
SEC
ACC
Big 11
Big 12
Pac 10
Conf USA
WAC
Mountain West
Sun
Mid American
Thats 11. Add an Independent (which means ND since Army, Navy and Temple are the only independents left) and you have 12.
Add 4 "wild cards" and you have 16. No one could say they were denied a national championship. That's a 4 game playoff and it would be exciting as heck with more than one big upset each year.
Add that to a 12 game season and you have 16 weeks of football.
Some would say that's too much, but it may just have to be the way it is if you want both "big time college football" at your school and you want fairness.
The choices would be to shorten the regular season to, say 10 games, but then that calls for not having any conferences bigger that 10 teams (which is fine with me). That means conferences shedding some poor performing teams (see Temple)
It might also mean some conferences being dumped from D1 (see Mid American, WAC, Sun, Conf USA) in order to put more wild cards in the playoff, but I actually think it will make programs at these schools stronger because recruits there will know they have a chance to play in the championship playoff no matter where they go to school. And under this system a Boise St will beat a Ohio St some years just because it can happen.
Anything less is a sham.
But the NCAA is in the business of making money and hype and buzz makes money for them, in their minds, much more than actually overseeing a fair and competitive football competition.
You know you have to admire the Ivys. Even though Princeton was ranked high enough to make the D1AA playoffs, they were happy to be co-Ivy champs and having beat Havard and Yale. The Ivys accept no post season games. Finals, you know.
BCS teams won't sacrifice the millions they reap from every home gome to accomodate a 10 game season. 2 home games == at least 8M for UT. The extra home games bring money directly to the ath dept's, as opposed to having to split with every mid-major and with the TV partner as well
Also how are fans going to manage travelling for all these games? They have to be home games instead of neutral site, they'll be short notice games on top of that. I'd rather be chilling with Hawkeyes in San Antonio on Dec 30th in the Who Gives a S*** Bowl than hosting some MAC team at Texas Memorial Stadium for a playoff. The atmosphere of CFB is unique, and unless it's a short playoff at neutral site you begin to kill that with a sterile NFL-style culture, no way.
Dropping some conferences from d1 football means you're killing a revenue generator for their ath dept's and that's unfair to all the students at every mid-major in an olympic or non-revenue generating sport.
The upside to conf champions only rule is that we'll see more solid out of conference games scheduled amongst teams, the revenue incentive of hiring patsies is balanced by the visibility of a marque match-up
coolhand
12-05-06, 01:25 PM
Once you give these teams ways to make more money you cannot take it away from them
Andrew Longman
12-05-06, 01:44 PM
No doubt the current economics make doing anything close to the right thing almost impossible. The amount of money floating around to both give to underserving coaches and fund other athletics is staggering.
You want neutral sites? No problem. There are enough bulls**** bowls already scheduled in December to handle rounds one and two (12 are needed). Third and fourth rounds would rotate between Rose, Sugar, Orange.(alright add Fiesta, and rotate one of the four out to round 2 every year).
The leap of faith required is whether the hoopla that could be generated around a month of college bowls an playoffs will provide enough greater revenue and revenue certainty to make up for the potential loss of revenue from sharing the current BCS and/or winning 6 lousy games and going to a weedwhacker bowl.
using the current bowls you still have fans needing to schedule 1-3 flights/hotels for a 1-3 week span on a couple week's notice. fans use away games/bowl games as mini-vacations, that's a few days off w/in 2-3 weeks time. then you have folks who have been donating for years for good seats & postseason/away game priority, they won't tolerate having to miss a single game for whatever reason.
your northern schools will whine about having to come south for a "neutral" site when it might be in someone's backyard, ala Texas vs. Washington @ Cotton Bowl
You could use, capone, cotton, gator/holiday/outback as round 2 bowls, but 4 weeks & 16 teams is just too big...
You could use, capone, cotton, gator/holiday/outback as round 2 bowls, but 4 weeks & 16 teams is just too big...
8 is as big as ya can get, and that is stretching it with a 12 game regular season. Like I posted before, the 2A let the genie out of the bottle when they added the 12th game. You'll never get her back in the bottle now. :\
-Kevin
A college football playoff will bring in so many millions of dollars for everyone involved that there will be absolutely no excuse for not paying the players.
And that is why it will never happen.
Insomniac
12-05-06, 07:08 PM
A college football playoff will bring in so many millions of dollars for everyone involved that there will be absolutely no excuse for not paying the players.
And that is why it will never happen.
Not for the teams who are home.
Sean O'Gorman
12-05-06, 07:39 PM
Not for the teams who are home.
That should be their incentive to suck less.
Not for the teams who are home.
conferences would just mandate that revenues be split amongst the member institutions equally as it is with the current system.
JB hits on the point of Presidents fighting the tail from wagging the dog. Presidents have regents, legislatures, endowments, capital fund-raising campaigns, etc. to deal with. They don't want to deal with even bigger athletic budgets and further out of control athletic departments/boosters when their university, students, or faculty won't see a single cent of it.
That is unless your name is David Boren and you're president of the University of Oklahoma, in which case you waste time writing letters to every official who will listen, whining about football record books & officiating errors. That's mobilehoma for ya...
Insomniac
12-05-06, 11:28 PM
That should be their incentive to suck less.
Sure, but won't be the incentive for them to agree to it in the first place.
Insomniac
12-05-06, 11:31 PM
conferences would just mandate that revenues be split amongst the member institutions equally as it is with the current system.
Are you sure it's split equally?
Are you sure it's split equally?
It is in the Big 10+1.
-Kevin
Coach who voted UF number 1 hates the Gators. (http://www.ajc.com/services/content/sports/stories/2006/12/04/1204walden.html?cxtype=rss&cxsvc=7&cxcat=21) :rofl:
Why does this guy remind me of the PE teacher in Seinfeld? "Can't stands ya!" :saywhat:
BTW. once The OSU dispatches the Goters, they will be the only team to have beaten 3 #2 teams in a single season. :eek: :D
-Kevin
Are you sure it's split equally?
for every BCS conference, yes, and I'm sure it's the case for the smaller conferences since conferences are the ones who negotiate their bowl contracts. same with television revenues/contracts as those are negotiated by the conference as well.
there's enough inequity in place wrt alumni bases & history/tradition to allow the Joneses to accumulate extra $$$ via season ticket sales, mandatory donations in order to qualify for said season ticket sales, luxury boxes, and corporate sponsorships
LSU, being the 2nd SEC team in the BCS, won't be bringing home however many million each BCS team qualifies for, it's just an extra couple hundred thousand I believe, or it was before this new Fox contract.
ND receives 4.5M for BCS bid, 1M every year they don't, old contract they took home the entire 14M. New BCS contract the mid-majors receive a larger guaranteed sum as well but not the 15+M. The WAC's probably ecstatic over Boise's bid.
Why does this guy remind me of the PE teacher in Seinfeld? "Can't stands ya!" :saywhat:
BTW. once The OSU dispatches the Goters, they will be the only team to have beaten 3 #2 teams in a single season. :eek: :D
-Kevin
Bring it on Homeslice ! ! ! ! :D
ferrarigod
12-06-06, 02:27 PM
Why does this guy remind me of the PE teacher in Seinfeld? "Can't stands ya!" :saywhat:
Make sure you return Tropic of Cancer:D
BTW. once The OSU dispatches the Goters, they will be the only team to have beaten 3 #2 teams in a single season. :eek: :D
-Kevin
tOSU still didn't have as hard as a schedule as Michigan, USC, Rutgers, and Boise State.
Stewart:
Some people dread tax day in April. Others loathe their annual visit to the dentist. Me? Having experienced nine of them, I can safely say my least favorite day of the year is the Monday after the BCS and other bowl pairings are announced.
While the exact nature of the controversy changes from year to year, the reaction is more predictable than The Real World's casting methods. Sports columnists who haven't written about college football all year will suddenly come out of the woodwork to proffer their annual "Scrap the BCS" diatribe. Coaches from the teams that got shafted will rant about the unfairness of the system (many of them are the same coaches who, two years earlier, when their team wasn't that good, were saying what a "great reward" it was to play in the Sun Bowl). And worked-up fans will flood my inbox with their thoughtful but not-exactly-original proposals for how a college playoff would work.
:laugh:
Ed_Severson
12-07-06, 12:22 PM
This (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/56174) should put an end to all of the arguments. :)
Andrew Longman
12-07-06, 12:33 PM
This (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/56174) should put an end to all of the arguments. :)
Of course their football budget, $25.7M, is tops in the country. By a lot
Texas= $14.4M
USC= $16.7M
WV=$11.3M
Rutgers=$12M
http://www.nj.com/search/index.ssf?/base/news-10/1164956906189200.xml?starledger?ntop&coll=1&thispage=2
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.