Big step toward college football playoff

Discussion in 'Sports' started by VolDad, Apr 26, 2012.

  1. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Can you refresh my recollection on who the unbeaten teams were?
     
  2. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Can you refresh my recollection on who the unbeaten teams were?
     
  3. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    That was the USC team with all the stars and the Vince Young Longhorns.
     
  4. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    I have no issues, though, with a team that has a really weak schedule getting left out despite running the table.

    Did Tulane have a straight-faced argument to play us in '98 instead of Florida State? No, no they didn't.
     
  5. tvolsfan

    tvolsfan Chieftain

    Alabama, Texas, Cincinnati, Boise State, and TCU.

    And even then, I really only needed to see Alabama play Texas to know who was the true champion. I just hate the thought of someone getting left out like Auburn in 2004.
     
  6. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Oh right, Cincy. I think about that bloodbath bowl game, and I forget they were undefeated going in. God the Big East is atrocious.
     
  7. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Yeah, I don't think anyone in the BCS era got a bigger [penis] sandwich than Auburn 2004. A team with an actual legit argument for best team in the country that got left out. And the reason I'm cool with a plus-one, even though I will remain worried about its gateway drug effect.
     
  8. tvolsfan

    tvolsfan Chieftain

    I'm not worried about whether the gateway drug effect will happen. I'm worried about when it's going to happen.

    If we do end up with a big playoff, it should, at the very least, give us a true, NCAA national champion like basketball/every other college sport.

    edit: To clarify, if there is a playoff of 8 more teams, I want it to be an NCAA sanctioned championship with one officially recognized, NCAA determined champion.

    However, I'd like to see it stay at 4 teams. There's no way the NCAA would set up a playoff system for four teams, but it's what I would prefer to see.
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2012
  9. cotton

    cotton Stand-up Philosopher

    Exactly. A different system isn't any better or worse. I don't think playoffs fit college football very well. I think moving to such a system will diminish the importance of the regular season, hurt rivalries, and further relegate any post-season play not included in the playoffs to irrelevancy.

    No, it won't. A system where a regular season is followed by a selection process to choose the two teams that play for the NC is just as legitimate as a single elimination tournament. A plus one is just as legitimate as a 16 team free for all.

    The goal, at least in my mind, should be to identify the team most worthy of hoisting the trophy. Does anyone really want to argue that a single elimination playoff did a better job of doing that in basketball in 2011 or 2010 than the much derided BCS has ever done?
     
  10. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    Eh. I get the injustice, but the sentiment is tempered for me, because they scheduled a bunch of crappy OOC games so they could avoid USC embarrassing them again and be sure to make a bowl.
     
  11. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Why do you care whether or not the NCAA is involved?
     
  12. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Why do you care whether or not the NCAA is involved?
     
  13. tvolsfan

    tvolsfan Chieftain

    It just makes sense to me that the championship is awarded by the association itself.
     
  14. IP

    IP Super Moderator

    KB's avatar makes me feel funny.
     
  15. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    That funny feeling is good.
     
  16. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    The problem with involving the NCAA is that the finances are then going to get channeled through the NCAA (as they do in college hoops). Avoiding the channeling of money through the NCAA is the reason the BCS exists.
     
  17. CardinalVol

    CardinalVol Uncultured, non-diverse mod

    I personally don't mind more teams in the playoffs up to 16. More teams = more meaningful football. I'd honestly prefer a 8 or 16 team playoff and go back to an 11 game regular season. I realize I am in the minority.

    I also think D-1 in college athletics needs a major overhaul, specifically in football. Almost to the point of 1-A, 1-AA, and 1-AAA.

    And if we're going with a 4 team playoff given the current environment, it should be the top 4 teams from the conference champs and Notre Dame.

    I came up with a plan a while back that I think I posted on TOOS, but don't want to post unless people actually care to read it. Takes too long to type.
     
    Last edited: May 1, 2012
  18. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member


    The regular season becomes less meaningful. People rail against this argument, but I buy it. The size of the postseason is inversely proportional to importance attached to the regular season.

    And it just becomes more like the NFL. The NFL is great and everything, but college football has its own thing and I dig that. I dig it more than the NFL, actually.
     
  19. CardinalVol

    CardinalVol Uncultured, non-diverse mod

    See, I don't see it. I think there is a point where it tips and you are correct, but 16 teams isn't approaching it. With 120 plus teams, just over 10% of the field is making the playoffs, not 12 of 32.

    You offer home-field advantage in the line first two rounds, and suddenly you have a bunch of meaningful games.
     
  20. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    There just isn't a point. There has never and will never be a #14-16 team that could be a factor. The parity just isn't there in college football.
     

Share This Page