NCAA says yes to playoff? Does BCS Initiate?

  The BCS, in some form or fashion, has pitted #1 vs #2 since 1992. Before they came along I believe #1 vs #2 occurred like 6 times in the history of college football yet so many knuckleheads slam them. I don't get it!

The BCS matches the teams they say are #1 and #2 in a bowl.  

Would a playoff be better? Probably but all these people argueing over who is #1 and/or #2 are clueless to what existed in college football before they came along.

We all know what we had prior to the BCS.   System that crowned a national champion(s) at the end of the bowl season.   The BCS does that as well right?  The only difference is the BCS tries to tell who the two teams are that get to play for a NC and the old system waited to look at the entire body of work and decided.

At least under the old system, deserving teams still had a shot of splitting the NC at the conclusion of the bowl season rather than be excluded all together.
   
     

Also, with your thinking we don't know if Alabama is better than any team they didn't play so that means we're unsure of about 109 teams. I don't know about you but I'm smart enough to know what teams Bama is better than without playing them and I include Ok ST on that list!  

I'm a Michigan fan and I'll never say another team is better.  No matter how many times I say it though, doesn't mean it's true.  







          


      

I'm a Michigan fan and I'll never say another team is better.  No matter how many times I say it though, doesn't mean it's true

So you don't think Bama will beat Michigan in Arlington next year? I do!   And I'm going to say it over and over until it is true!   

So you don't think Bama will beat Michigan in Arlington next year? I do!   And I'm going to say it over and over until it is true!        

I'm just hoping I can get tickets. I live in San Antonio and it would be a travesty of near biblical proportions if I can't watch them.






        

<blockquote class="QuoteMessage">2. Using the current ranking system the best 4 teams, that follow rule 1, enter the post season.<br />

<blockquote class="QuoteMessage"> The 5th place team will complain but the majority of the country won't care.</blockquote>

</blockquote>

<br /> In this whole debate about how to format post-season play it never ceases to surprise me how people can hold, in this writer's opinion, what seems like two contradictory thoughts.  I suppose, from the perspective of the fans only, it would be interesting to know where people stood on the matter of the <em>NFL post-season format</em> vs. <em>FBS post-season format</em>.  Many fans accept that the NFL gets it right in the manner in which they determine their season's champion.  I love it.  It takes the guesswork out of who's in and who's out.  No one cries foul when the Super Bowl matchup is devoid of #1 vs. #1.  Yet, many of these same people are also fine with the FBS system of using a subjective ranking system in which teams can leapfrog over each other because of some perceived deficiency -- won by too small a margin, didn't score enough points, etc...  A  lot of posters cite <em>tradition</em> as a reason to keep bowls and polls.  I would be interested in knowing how others fall on this issue -- FBS system OK with minor tweaks while striving to maintain tradition of utilizing polls and other subjective criteria for determining champion OR should a complete overhaul be the goal in which the end result is a more objective system, similar to the NFL's post-season?  Obviously, it's easier in the NFL with two 16 team pools to utilize objective tie-breakers.<br /><br />

Question: Which method identifies truly the best team? Or put another way, if it's the objective to find the best team which way is better? I say it's the BCS.

The NFL will find the hottest team through those 2 or 3 weeks. I think every game does count much more than NFL. The Giants were 7-7 through 14 games. Does that look like every game counts to you? Did they deserve to be in?  The Giants weren't in until the last game.  I don't care who they played down the stretch or how hot they got. 

OH please.  STOP!  Just stop!

Your team, Bama, just happened to get hot in the right game, the BCS game.  but they lost the first game.  Had other teams not helped, Bama would have lost their chance to be in that BCS game.  In truth, had the voters not helped, Bama wouldn't have been in that game.  If anything, it proves that a playoff is needed, because any tema can slip here and there.

But the whole, "which is the best team" is an obfuscation of the real intent of sports, which is to crown a champion, not find out who is the best, because in sports, the best don't always win.  That's the plain and simple truth...the best don't always win.  Just like Bama is the better team but they didn't win the first game vs LSU.  It happens.  That is the whole point of sports.  As the old saying goes, "it's why you play the game."

The point of a championship game isn't to pit the two best teams against each other either. It's to crown a champion.  This whole notion of pitting #1 vs #2 as a Frankenstein compromise because there was no playoff and often the #1 and #2 team would iwn their bowl games and people said, "How do you know that the #1 team was really the #1 team?  How do we not know that the #2 teams is really the #1 team?  This move was putting a bandaid on a gaping chest wound.

LSU was better than OSu when they met in the BCS.  But LSU had two losses.  What if USC only had one that year?  What if WVU had not lost to Pitt.  What if Mizzou had not lost to OU.  Had that been the case, LSU would not have been in the game.  It would have been OSU vs Mizzou or WVU.  Or if both WVU and Mizzou had not lost, those two would have been in the BCS Championship game.  LSU would not have been there.

So the simple fact is, the BCS is nowhere near superior at figuring out who is #1.  It simply pits the perceived #1 vs the perceived #2.   THAT IS ALL.

So you don't think Bama will beat Michigan in Arlington next year? I do!   And I'm going to say it over and over until it is true!   

Odds are heavily in favor of Bama winning.  Until the effects of years of oversigning wear off, the SEC West teams are going to be heavy favorites against anyone they play.  This will be the second year of supposedly no oversigning.  Give it one more year and it might start to level out between these teams.

chief if you want tickets you better get them asap the prices will be crazy the closer it gets to gametime

I'm always happy to find someone else who rejects the "best team" nonsense that infects college football. No matter the size of any playoff, the purpose of competition is simply to determine a winner. Competition is not about proving, identifying, or validating anyone's opinion about the best team. What are the rules and whch teams accomplished the most according to those rules is what should matter. Instead, we have so many fans constantly asking which teams are better than which as an argument for or against any format when the answer is we don't know and its irrelevant even if we did. 

Odds are heavily in favor of Bama winning.  Until the effects of years of oversigning wear off, the SEC West teams are going to be heavy favorites against anyone they play.  This will be the second year of supposedly no oversigning.  Give it one more year and it might start to level out between these teams.

BUCKinFla

Not picking on you in particular but it is funny how it goes from one thing to another (usually w/B1G fans) on why the SEC is the strongest conference and wins all the BCS championships. Let me see if I can list them, not in any particular order.

   1. media bias.
   2. all bowl games are in warm weather in SEC back yard. I believe playing LSU in New Orleans was big time unfair? Didn't seem to both Bama.
   3. over signing.   
   4. we all pay our recruits   

Could it be, just possibly, the football is king down here which trickles down from high school kids all the way down to pee wee football. That kids work hard to be the best in this sport in the south.  

As for your comment about BCS or NFL playoffs, I get your point. To piggy back on that thought,however,  any format to determine a champion could be different with any bounce of the ball. it will always take some luck to become the champion. I realize your differnece in a champion and "best" team but it is nice when the champion does happen to be the best.

As for your perceived #1 and perceived #2, I personally think they have gotten it right a whole lot more than they got it wrong. You use LSU's two losses as an example but there are always exceptions. Always! 

   

This message has been removed by the administrator.