KNIGHTTIME Wrote:

Cubanbull Wrote:to me if you dont win your conference then you have no business playing in a championship game.
So sorry Kansas and Georgia but you guys would not be considered for it in my book.

But the SEC/ACC/Big 12 all play an extra game that makes it tougher.

Nobody put a gun to those conferences heads and forced them to play an extra game. It's not even required that you have a conference championship game just because you have 12 teams.

Those championship games were and are a money grab. If it costs teams a championship, they can cry all the way to the bank.

The biggest problem they'll have with a playoff is similar to the complaining that goes on with teams that are left out of the NCAA tournament. I think this is where the point about not winning your conference will come into play. I think we all know that what's going to happen is that the 11 conference champions will be joined by 5 at-large teams to make it a 16 team tournament. When people scream about being excluded, that's where the point will come up - "if you didn't want to be excluded, you should have won your conference."

USFFan

usffan Wrote:

KNIGHTTIME Wrote:

Cubanbull Wrote:to me if you dont win your conference then you have no business playing in a championship game.
So sorry Kansas and Georgia but you guys would not be considered for it in my book.

But the SEC/ACC/Big 12 all play an extra game that makes it tougher.

Nobody put a gun to those conferences heads and forced them to play an extra game. It's not even required that you have a conference championship game just because you have 12 teams.

Those championship games were and are a money grab. If it costs teams a championship, they can cry all the way to the bank.

The biggest problem they'll have with a playoff is similar to the complaining that goes on with teams that are left out of the NCAA tournament. I think this is where the point about not winning your conference will come into play. I think we all know that what's going to happen is that the 11 conference champions will be joined by 5 at-large teams to make it a 16 team tournament. When people scream about being excluded, that's where the point will come up - "if you didn't want to be excluded, you should have won your conference."

USFFan

Amen, I get sick of hearing about how it's not fair that some conferences have a championship game and others don't when the sole purpose of the extra game is to pad the pocket of the respective conference. If they think it's unfair then drop the game otherwise STFU.

LaRue777 Wrote:

mpurdy22 Wrote:I think a plus one model will be fine, but the way it is set up in the article is still an issue with me. The Non-BCS schools will still have no shot a title. If Hawaii were to beat Georgia using this year's matchups, you know the voters still wouldn't put Hawaii even in the Top 4. I think the most fair way to all is to still utilize the BCS bowls (5 of 'em). Then after the bowls are over, you simply match up the two team with the best record, so if Hawaii were to be undefeated including a win in a BCS bowl game, they have proven they deserve a shot. If by chance of the 5 winners that 2 or more had the same record, then you use a final BCS points to determine the matchup.

IF Hawaii were to beat Georgia I agree that I they probably have shown they deserve a shot at the NC. While it is probably true that they don't have the talent of a top BCS school maybe they are the type of team that just knows how to win. That is what being a champion is all about. When teams like Utah and Boise State are winning their BCS bowl they certainly are making a statement for non-BCS schools.

The problem is that Hawaii wouldn't get the NC game even with a win. Two of the BCS teams winning their BCS bowl ranked ahead of them would get the chance. You could see the same thing happening to a BE team too down the road.

You need a set-up where every conference champion and highly rated non-BCS school at least has a shot.

That is why I said the two teams with the best record first then by rankings for a tie breaker. At this point Hawaii is the only undefeated team, and would have THE best record after beating Georgia and be guaranteed a spot in the title game.

I also like the idea of reducing the non-Conference games back to 3 for an 11 game season and start the season one week earlier (to compensate for the playoff schedule).Then have your 11 conference champions and 5 at large teams for a playoff, but also make it mandatory the conference champion have at least 8 wins, if not the spot is open for other at large teams. If this were implemented I would also keep the bowl games but reduce that number of games. The Bowl games would essentially be the NIT of football.

bearcat65 Wrote:Amen, I get sick of hearing about how it's not fair that some conferences have a championship game and others don't when the sole purpose of the extra game is to pad the pocket of the respective conference. If they think it's unfair then drop the game otherwise STFU.

:uberbow:

mpurdy22 Wrote:That is why I said the two teams with the best record first then by rankings for a tie breaker. At this point Hawaii is the only undefeated team, and would have THE best record after beating Georgia and be guaranteed a spot in the title game.

I see your point. I was thinking rankings and you were talking about the best record. I guess the BCS has me brainwashed.

I assume you have to win your bowl game because Hawaii would still have one of the best two records even if they were blown out by Georgia.

LaRue777 Wrote:

mpurdy22 Wrote:That is why I said the two teams with the best record first then by rankings for a tie breaker. At this point Hawaii is the only undefeated team, and would have THE best record after beating Georgia and be guaranteed a spot in the title game.

I see your point. I was thinking rankings and you were talking about the best record. I guess the BCS has me brainwashed.

I assume you have to win your bowl game because Hawaii would still have one of the best two records even if they were blown out by Georgia.

Yes you have to win the BCS bowl game. You look at the 5 winners and match up the two with the best records, if there is equal records, then you look at a final BCS ranking for a tie breaker.

Screw the BCS. Dump it for the good and benefit of all and institute a REAL playoff. :noisycricket:

mpurdy22 Wrote:I also like the idea of reducing the non-Conference games back to 3 for an 11 game season and start the season one week earlier (to compensate for the playoff schedule).

Some schools make $3 Million - $5 Million off the extra 12th game (home game) and once addicted to that kind of $$$$ that will easily pay for a majority of their Olympic Sports program by holding just 1 more home football game per year...I don't see any BCS Conference ever giving up that extra game.

12 regular season games are here to stay...and 7-8 HOME games per year is now the norm at many schools.