If you set up a BCS system, and then give certain conferences status as having auto bids, but then provide no path or mechanism for non-BCS conference teams (except Notre Dame, tell me the system isn't damningly unfair), what you have isn't a sporting or equitable system. If a non-BCS team runs the table, they ought to get to place a BCS team in a BCS bowl. Not another non-BCS team to avoid making the system look bad. And if a team hasn't lost a game in two years, they ought to get a title shot over a one-loss team. That isn't happening with the current system and it is total bullshit.
It may be total bullshit, but I doubt Boise is really that unhappy with it. Putting those schools on an even field as far as selection at the end of the year based on W-L wouldn't be any fairer.
agreed, but let's face it. it's extremely unlikely even the greatest boise of boise's can compete with teh bama's of the world year in and year out so i'm not sure it's completely "unfair." but i fully support them getting their chance. if they can hang than we'll rightfully see more, if they can't we'll see less.
i bet the fans are unhappy, but i bet the administration is perfectly happy. they get to whine about being deserving of a NC bid without having to transverse the mine field like everyone else. the polls are ridiculously biased to record. look at hawaii a couple of years back. i bet half of the sec or pac-12 would have beaten that team.
very lenient. that's how they built a lot of those teams. off of guys that couldn't qualify even at arizona state. during the draft yesterday they said this was the first time in history boise had two top first round picks in one draft. can you believe that shit? Hell cal has had multiple two first round draft pick drafts in our last 5 years of suckatude. let alone bama or USC where that happens every [uck fay]ing year.
Which is a huge deal. And the only reason I have to be against a 4-team playoff. So and so team didn't get in the four team playoff, so let's make it 8.... Next thing you know you've got some douchebag Va. Tech basketball fan [itch bay]ing about how his alma mater with their 9 conference losses and their ugly uniforms didn't get in the NCAA tournament. And that's when the whores come in. Doing their little behind-shake for the men folk...
No, there isn't. The team that gets left out will always be compared against the merits of the last team that got in. So now we ask whether Oklahoma State was worthy to play in the national title game. With a four team playoff -- when Va. Tech (with their shitty conference and their ugly uniforms) gets left out -- it will be douchebag Va. Tech fans [itch bay]ing about "fairness" vis a vis the merits of the last team in. This is how it works. If it were possible to keep the mindset of "what team has a legit claim to the BCS championship under the 2-team playoff system" while shifting to a four team playoff, that would fan-[uck fay]ing-tastic. But the mindset shifts. And a four team playoff becomes 8. Why? Because some Va. Tech fans with their manginas and their ugly uniforms [itch bay] about "fairness". And that's when the whores come in.
The plus one is clearly more fair, but fairness is only part of what the NCAA needs to consider. A team playing in the NC game now plays 14 games total. That's already too much to put on the players, but also not enough to determine a champ. D1 needs to be cut in half probably just for a plus one to truely work. Otherwise we'll continue hearing the same complaints from teams that do not get in.
I find them annoying. I grew up 45 minutes from Blacksburg, and I can tell you that heir fans believe their program to be way better than it actually is. And I mean they really believe it. As such, they don't believe statements of fact such as: your football team was atrocious last year and the only reason it avoided getting exposed as such is because the ACC was a certifiable [dadgum] dumpster fire. You all -- with your dwindling monopoly on Hampton area talent and your ugly uniforms -- would have lost 5 games in the SEC last year before I even had time to research goitre treatment. Also, all of you have small penises, and your coeds are not particularly attractive.
Thanks for illustrating my point: fundamentally a different conversation. There will always be one, but it is now a step removed from the champion.
If I illustrated your point, I got lucky. Because now I'm pretty sure I don't understand what your point is. Is your point: A 4 team playoff is better than a two team playoff because it is better that we are arguing about Va. Tech getting left out than Okie State getting left out? If so, it is only slightly related to my point, which is: the aforesaid Va. Tech argument is no different than the Okie State argument in the sense that both are arguments that invite a more inclusive college football postseason. I am not for a more inclusive college football postseason. I think it should stop at four, as it takes care of the fringe issues without devaluing the best regular season in all the land and taking away from college football what makes college football unique and awesome.
I honestly wish there was a way that you didn't do the four teams thin lg if it wasn't necessary. I realize defining when it would be necessary would be impossible, but for example in 2005 there was no doubt what two teams needed to be playing for the grand prize.
My real issue is the possibility of teams going unbeaten and having no shot at a championship, especially major conference teams. 2009 was the only year (I believe, but I could be wrong) in the BCS era were there were 5 unbeaten teams. I'd rather have complaining for that rare occasion then have an 8 team playoff every year.
I actually have thought this and said almost the exact same thing before, both in terms of the idea itself and how it would never escape controversy.
