B.C. the red headed stepchild...

unforgiven108 said:
Playoffs will not fix it. Look at the two above that have very large amounts of teams, NCAA-Basketball and baseball...there are still large arguments about seeding, and bubble teams. And the reason there is less arguments is because of the SIZE of the tournaments. For the NCAA-BB you cut the field in half, this gets 64 teams (a lot closer to the 32 teams for the other pro sports).

The way to get NO controversy is not to have playoffs, but to have less teams in a pool to get a shot at the NC. NFL, MLB, NBA all have less than 32 teams. This eliminates a lot of doubt from people's minds.

If you had just the Big 12, SEC, and the ACC, would there be much doubt as to which teams should be in the MNC?

You'd have conference championships to eliminate 3 of the top teams, and then out of those top 3 you can look at the body of work, there would be VERY little controversy most years.

It is not the lack of a playoff system that creates the controversy it is the quantity of teams all trying to get the same 'prize'.

Either lower the size of the amount of teams going for the NC, or have a 64 team playoff, which is absurd.

Even with a 64 team playoff you'd still have ALL kinds of controversy about the 'bubble teams'. It just wouldn't be on the national spotlight.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree. You think there is controversy as to who is the National Champion in College BB because some 18-14 team didn't make it in as a 10 seed? I would like to see these people who are upset about controversy in College BB that you are talking about. There is no controversy as to who is the National Champion in sports that have playoffs. Period!! Name one specific instance please. I like to hear the reasoning from folks who are anti-playoffs.

You still haven't answered my question. Do you think that all playoff based leagues (every ball league besides FBS college football) have it wrong? Obviously one is more right than the other and you are claiming that bowls are the way to go. So do you propose that NFL, MLB, College basketball, etc. should switch to a bowl system?

To this day, the only arguments that makes sense to me for bowls is money and tradition.
 
Also, go to this wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythical_national_championship

Isn't it odd how many controversial championships there were in College Basketball before playoffs? Now there aren't any.

Isn't it odd how:

n the earliest days of the National Football League, the NFL championship was determined by a formula and by the votes of the NFL owners. In two instances, 1921 and 1925, this led to disputed titles. In 1932, two teams tied atop the standings led to a one-game playoff for the championship, which was made permanent the next year. There has been some sort of NFL playoff ever since, and as the league grew, so too did the tournament, which eventually took form as the single-elimination tournament it is today.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. No more NFL controversy anymore ... why is that? Maybe it's due to the playoffs ....


I personally don't like the current BCS system that will eternally pit an SEC champion against some other team.
 
GTSaxophone said:
The game in question was a rivalry game, and I think that both sides wanted it pretty badly. Also, in the NFL, you have byes to play for, so an 11-3 team would probably need to win out to have a chance to gain one of those byes, unless there is a rare instance where all the other teams can't finish better than 10-6.

Also, you never addressed my point: The regular season is NOT currently the end all that people make it out to be now. As it stands, if Boise, TCU, Iowa, Cincy, and Fla/Bama go undefeated, THREE OF THOSE TEAMS WILL NOT GET A SNIFF AT A TITLE. How can you say that the regular season means everything, when doing all that is asked of you in the regular season still doesn't allow you to compete for a championship?

As a college football fan, I value teams competing for a title over the fleeting excitement of one game. I think a playoff setup would absolutely be a Godsend to Tech, as our offense gets better over the course of the year. Also, the structure of college football already lends itself to preventing a situation where teams can afford to shut it down at the end of the season.
Click to expand...

Occasionally an 11-3 team could have a shot at a bye, but they could also be in a conference with two teams that are 13-1 and hold the head to head, the fact remains that coasting is often an option.

You make all this noise about how 80 undefeated teams kills the idea of the season being an end all, but there has only been one season in the BCS era where >2 teams who actually played in a competitive conference got to bowl-time undefeated.
And I think the most important lesson to learn from that 04 Auburn team is that an OOC sched of UL-Monroe, The Citadel, and Louisiana Tech, all at home, is a good way to diminish an undefeated season.

Lastly, as is, competing for a title is spread out over 12 games instead of, oh say 4, with a playoff.
 
cajunjacket said:
Even if you did a 8 or 16 team playoff, it wouldn't devalue a season. It isn't easy to be top 8 or 16 at the end of the season. But according to all the folks who say it devalues a season, you all think that what GT has done so far is simple I guess. Do you honestly think that being top 8 isn't an accomplishment?
Click to expand...

UF-Bama would have millions less viewers in a playoff system with at large bids. A 12-1 SEC team would be a shoe-in for an at-large bid and everybody would know it doesn't mean much more than seeding or home field advantage.

It's these games between two top 5 or top 10 teams that draw tons of viewers not affiliated with either school. We watch UT-Oklahoma, UF-LSU, USC-Oregon, whoever else because it has NATIONAL TITLE, not playoff, implications.

There's a real danger for conferences to allow at-large teams in a playoff. They have sounded open to a "plus-one" system, which sounds kind of dumb but is a step in the right direction. The fact that the presidents are even open to that shows there's hope. But they will not sacrifice the importance of their conference schedules.
 
cajunjacket said:
I completely disagree. You think there is controversy as to who is the National Champion in College BB because some 18-14 team didn't make it in as a 10 seed? I would like to see these people who are upset about controversy in College BB that you are talking about. There is no controversy as to who is the National Champion in sports that have playoffs. Period!! Name one specific instance please. I like to hear the reasoning from folks who are anti-playoffs.

You still haven't answered my question. Do you think that all playoff based leagues (every ball league besides FBS college football) have it wrong? Obviously one is more right than the other and you are claiming that bowls are the way to go. So do you propose that NFL, MLB, College basketball, etc. should switch to a bowl system?

To this day, the only arguments that makes sense to me for bowls is money and tradition.
Click to expand...

The controversy just moves, no one argues over the champion, instead they argue about who should be in the playoffs.

With a football playoff, we wouldn't be dealing with 12 seeds here, we'd be arguing over who the 16th best team in the country is. However, the entire premise of WE NEED A PLAYOFF!!1! is centered around the idea that these 16th best teams totally could win the playoff because they're the best team.
 
YellowJacketDave said:
would Louisville be ACC material,they would be dynamite in Mens and Womens basketball
Click to expand...

No. Louisville is a commuter school only a notch above the likes of UCF and MTSU. It would easily be the worst academic school in the ACC. SEC schools laugh at Louisville academics.

I like the way you think as far as profile for another ACC school (strong basketball). If I had to make a choice it would be UConn. Maybe the best mens/womens basketball programs in the country. Solid football. NYC demographic. I wanted UConn over BC from the get go.

If you want to keep the footprint in the south (which I prefer), what about UAB? Not a bad school. Respectable basketball program. Could improve at football but not terrible. Again, moving into SEC territory is a trump card.
 
cajunjacket said:
Also, go to this wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythical_national_championship

Isn't it odd how many controversial championships there were in College Basketball before playoffs? Now there aren't any.

Isn't it odd how:

Hmmm. No more NFL controversy anymore ... why is that? Maybe it's due to the playoffs ....


I personally don't like the current BCS system that will eternally pit an SEC champion against some other team.
Click to expand...

Eternally clearly means dating all the way back to 2005
 
cajunjacket said:
I completely disagree.
Click to expand...

It happens. :)

You think there is controversy as to who is the National Champion in College BB because some 18-14 team didn't make it in as a 10 seed?
Click to expand...
I didn't say there was controversy about the NC, I said controversy about the seeding. I think that by the time the playoffs wear down (takes a long time) most of those guys have lost their steam. I can see the same thing in a 16 team NCAA playoff, the 17 ~20 teams will bitc* about why they didn't get seeded, and by the time the playoffs are over, people will have forgotten, doesn't mean there wasn't controversy, just that it wasn't at the national stage.

I would like to see these people who are upset about controversy in College BB that you are talking about.
Click to expand...
Watch the selection process sometime. And read the MANY articles about the 'shunned' teams afterwards. Biggest 'shuns' is real popular.

There is no controversy as to who is the National Champion in sports that have playoffs. Period!! Name one specific instance please. I like to hear the reasoning from folks who are anti-playoffs.
Click to expand...
I didn't disagree that there was no controversy over those sports. Just that I don't think it's a great thing for NCAA. Controversy builds rivalries. The rivalries in pro sports are just not as good as in college. The Boston/Yankees come close, but even then it's not as good. (Yes I know that's a biased opinion). :)

You still haven't answered my question. Do you think that all playoff based leagues (every ball league besides FBS college football) have it wrong? Obviously one is more right than the other and you are claiming that bowls are the way to go. So do you propose that NFL, MLB, College basketball, etc. should switch to a bowl system?
Click to expand...
I don't think they have it wrong, I think that every sport is unique. NFL, MLB, and NBA don't have it wrong, and I don't think NCAA has it wrong now. The BCS fields the top 2 teams against each other. After the playoffs are winding down, they field the 2 top teams against each other. It's just the 'selection' process that bothers people. I think that every SELECTION process has it's own unique issues. NFL, NBA, and MLB you don't see as much probelms with the selection process because of the QUANTITY of available teams. I'd bet there would be a lot more issues if the NFL had 120 teams.

I think the quantity of teams in division 1-A football, or FBS if you prefer, is what is causing the problems. And I don't think a 4,8,16 team playoff will solve the issues, because there are too many teams.

Take NFL as a model. They get 12 teams into a playoff. That's nearly half the teams in the field.

Take MLB as a model. They get 8 teams into a playoff, that's about 1/4 of the teams but then again they have 162 games to get those 8 teams.

Take NBA as a model. They get 16 teams into a playoff, that's over half of the teams in the field. *edit* It's been a long time since I watched NBA playoffs, so I'm not sure that it really is 16 teams, but I think it is. *edit*

NCAA-Basketball. They get 65 teams into a playoff (counting play-in game). That's about half of the teams in the field.

16/120 is about 1/8th of the teams in the field. To minimize the fallout of teams complaining about the 'selection' you'd have to get a lot more than 1/8th of the teams in the field playoff chances.
 
Last edited:
SeePops said:
The controversy just moves, no one argues over the champion, instead they argue about who should be in the playoffs.

With a football playoff, we wouldn't be dealing with 12 seeds here, we'd be arguing over who the 16th best team in the country is. However, the entire premise of WE NEED A PLAYOFF!!1! is centered around the idea that these 16th best teams totally could win the playoff because they're the best team.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't get this either. Why do people put playoffs to such a high standard? Because the current system does such a fabulous job of selecting the best team?

No system selects the best team, including playoffs. But a playoff levels the playing field for teams who don't have the reputation of ND, Texas, or, yes, Colorado. Wouldn't a playoff, any playoff, had been better that year than getting beat by a team allowed five downs to get 10 yards?
 
floridajacket said:
Sorry, I don't get this either. Why do people put playoffs to such a high standard? Because the current system does such a fabulous job of selecting the best team?

No system selects the best team, including playoffs. But a playoff levels the playing field for teams who don't have the reputation of ND, Texas, or, yes, Colorado. Wouldn't a playoff, any playoff, had been better that year than getting beat by a team allowed five downs to get 10 yards?
Click to expand...

I'm a bit confused by your tac-tics

But really, The BCS woulda been all "GT and Colorado should play" and ND woulda been all "WTF no" and then the holding call that wasn't on Rocket's punt return would have happened against Nebraska or somebody.
 
BC is good in multiple sports, combined with a very nice degree. If we were to get rid of them we dould have to find a way to fill those vacancies. WVU doesn't bring anything to the table besides football. Yeah they've had a nice little run in basketball, but that's not going to last.

Just say no to WVU.
 
I would just like GT to rejoin the SEC. South Carolina should go back to the ACC. That is the way it should be.
 
I'd rather have Pitt than WV, simply because Pitt has standards and WV makes U[sic]GA look like Harvard.

The only real advantage of adding WfVU to the conference is that if you are at least 6 feet tall you and at some point find yourself surrounded by WfVU fans, you'll be the best looking and tallest person around.

I'd rather have BC in the league than most schools, but I'd love to drop VT for Pitt.

As far as "rejoining" the SEC, that's a joke. So long as no GT president destroys GT's academic reputation, the faculty will never allow it to happen, and they have the ability to stop it.
 
YUCK!
WVU is the LAST team I would want to play on any kind of regular basis. They're fans are the worst I have ever been around...and I'm sure our band wouldn't enjoy another deification atop their seats
 
TechSBP said:
I'd rather have Pitt than WV, simply because Pitt has standards and WV makes U[sic]GA look like Harvard.

The only real advantage of adding WfVU to the conference is that if you are at least 6 feet tall you and at some point find yourself surrounded by WfVU fans, you'll be the best looking and tallest person around.

I'd rather have BC in the league than most schools, but I'd love to drop VT for Pitt.

As far as "rejoining" the SEC, that's a joke. So long as no GT president destroys GT's academic reputation, the faculty will never allow it to happen, and they have the ability to stop it.
Click to expand...


Would you want Louisville,Cincinnati,East Carolina or South Florida?
 
kirbee said:
No. Louisville is a commuter school only a notch above the likes of UCF and MTSU. It would easily be the worst academic school in the ACC. SEC schools laugh at Louisville academics.

I like the way you think as far as profile for another ACC school (strong basketball). If I had to make a choice it would be UConn. Maybe the best mens/womens basketball programs in the country. Solid football. NYC demographic. I wanted UConn over BC from the get go.

If you want to keep the footprint in the south (which I prefer), what about UAB? Not a bad school. Respectable basketball program. Could improve at football but not terrible. Again, moving into SEC territory is a trump card.
Click to expand...

UAB is also a commuter school and while perhaps an academic notch above UofL it'd still be the worst school in the conference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top