Ass(u)me the Best or Worst
by Mulliganville on Dec 1, 2009 2:51 PM CST
Email
PrintI know most of you know where I stand on this issue. I certainly do not need to author another "BCS is garbage" Fanpost as it has been played more times than Sergio Kindle's blasting of Taylor Potts. Oh, what the hell...this never gets old: Enjoy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8dCZIgMXWo
Back to the point at hand, based on last season and this season (there are so many others, why list them all), it appears we will be mired in controversy more often than not. Which brings me to my question: Seeing how a playoff would have benefited us last season, but could be a hindrance to the ultimate goal this season, would you take an 8 team playoff right now for this season as at the risk of Texas being knocked off by #7, #3 or #6 in the 2nd round? Of course I would, as the Horns would be beneficiaries more often than not. Assuming Cincy, TCU, Texas, Florida, and Boise win out, with 5 unbeatens, aren't the Horns, Gators, and Tide simple beneficiaries of high preseason rankings? Each has struggled with mediocre teams this season. Are the big three truly that more deserving than TCU and Cincy? Boise, I do not have a problem with based on this:
http://www.broncosports.com/SportSelect.dbml?db_oem_id=9900&spid=4061&spsid=48555
Bronco fans, your schedule is beyond pathetic. One win over Oklahoma and two over Oregon does not make you a contender. If Boise was in the Big XII, they would be TT...a very nice 8-4 to 9-3 team. Enjoy your middle tier bowl game were you to reside in a REAL conference.
Florida and Bama, you both have benefited from, shall we say, home cookin' to ensure your cementing at the top of your conference. No conspiracy here...just an observation.
So, check out the poll...
All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.
13 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Playoff is bad for Texas
The system is currently inherently biased towards the premier programs. Why change that is you are one of the haves. Let the have not’s bitch all they want.
Texas plays a difficult enough schedule due to their conference. With a playoff, Texas would actually be penalized while the teams in the smaller conference with a much greater disparity of talent between individual teams would actually be helped.
To make the playoffs work, Texas would lose at least the Big 12 title game and 2 non-conference games. Those 2 non-conference games is where Texas loses SOS while the smaller conferences gain SOS by playing their non-conference games.
All this really does is make the large schools schedules that much harder, add that much more possibility for injury and does nothing to the teams in the small conferences. They are already replacing their lost non-conference games (that would normally boost their SOS) with other games along lines or slightly higher than the SOS it would require to get to the BCS.
All a playoff does is help the small conferences unless the seeding is so heavily swayed towards the current premier conferences that it would make very little difference in public perception about the “big boys” keeping out the small conferences. A playoff would be nice, but unless you can devise a way to either completely eliminate the non-conference schedule and do a selection show like is done for the NCAA B-Ball tourney, it will make no real difference.
JD’s like, "you want some fucking pitching? Here’s all the pitching you can stand. Now choke on it, bitches!"- RCCook
Actually a playoff doesn't change the status quo...
A playoff would probably be built to continue the bias towards the premier programs. I would think any initial playoff scenario would have to include autobids for the current BCS conferences. An 8 team playoff would then only leave 2 at-large spots and in most years a non-BCS school is going to be lucky to get one of them, though I suppose the rules might give them an auto-bid if they are ranked above a certain threshold (I am sure ND would be given that exception as well). I would think an 8 game playoff might make the regular season one game shorter, but I doubt the powers that be will get too bent out of shape if 2 teams end up playing 15 games and 2 others play 14.
I like a 12-team, NFL style playoff myself. You give the top 4 teams a bye. You take the 6 BCS conference champs and 6 at-large teams, which leaves plenty of room for the non-BCS teams (especially if you keep a 2 or 3-teams-per-conference limit).
A playoff isn’t completely about protecting the big schools, nor should it be. A playoff is about getting rid of this silliness of trying to pick 2 teams out of 120 and then trying to sell the majority of fans the idea that this gets you a legitimate champion. It gets especially bad when you add in teams like TCU and Boise State who literally play glorified FCS teams for half of their schedule and then expect to be in the championship game. A playoff system selection system will take some tweaking, but it won’t take long for the TCUs and BSUs to get left out if they can’t get past their first round games.
I would love to see Texas and TCU battle it out...
and Florida against Boise and Cincy, and so on… I’m tired of hearing the Frogs complain, even though I really enjoy their team and program. As I’ve been saying lately, “Hate the game, not the player” – Texas is certainly enjoying its good PR and top-tier status, something that TCU will never get unless it switches conferences.
The only way the TCUs, Boises, and Cincys of the game can get a shot is through a playoff system, plain and simple.
Still, I voted for less than 8 teams, because these kids don’t need an extra couple of games to stress about. Between practice, class, and games, it’s already taxing on them. But all the same, I think many of the players on the have-nots teams would jump at the chance to play two or three more games a season in order to prove they’re the national champions.
Three points
1. I don’t understand the purpose of continually posting about BCS vs Playoffs, its not like there’s people on the fence of the issue that I know of. Some are OK with the BCS, some are not, and no one really changes sides, and we can’t affect the status quo. This issue has been talked to death this year as it has every year, and as you say by several of your fanposts/comments in particular.
2. A main argument you have, as I have read, is objective vs subjective, saying that a playoff gives you objective results while the BCS MNC does not, and yet, you want to discard the Broncos based on your opinion of the schedule. How is that not introducing a very similar subjectivity into the discussion as the one you are trying to eliminate?
3. The merits of a system should be evaluated independent of the effect on your person. For instance, supporting a return to the legal BAC limit to 0.12 because you are a fully capable driver at that level does not make it a universally good idea. Evaluating a system based on how it personally benefits you is again being subjective, where you should instead be in favor of a system because it is objective.
by BoddickerIsClutch on Dec 1, 2009 3:49 PM CST reply actions
Why post about it?
Same reason you must remove your belt and shoes at airports: one nutjob ruined it for the rest of us. That nutjob in football is the BCS. It will be talked about until it is corrected. There is more parity these days. Regarding Boise and my assumption of their schedule being unworthy, you make a valid point. Slot ’em at 8 if you must and let them get FL out of the gate. If they can win three in a row against teams ranked ahead of them, them they earned it.
"Stats are for losers. I like winning games." - Will Muschamp
"Somebody will always break your records. It is how you live that counts." - Earl Campbell
by Mulliganville on Dec 1, 2009 6:10 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
I think an 8 teamer is the way to do it... (assuming Florida beats Bama and Cinci beats Pitt, it would look like this)
I. Florida (SEC Champ) vs. 8. Georgia Tech (ACC Champ)
2. Texas (Big 12 Champ) vs. 7. Ohio State (Big 10 Champ)
3. Cincinnati (Big East Champ) vs. 6. Oregon (Pac 10 Champ)
4. TCU (BCS at large) vs. 5. Alabama (BCS at large)
The only team that gets screwed is Boise State (since I don’t see Bama falling below them even if they lose to Florida). How awesome would that bracket be?
Second Round:
1. Florida vs. 4. TCU
2. Texas vs. 6 Oregon
MNC
Florida vs. Texas (Florida would end the year beating Bama, Georgia Tech and TCU. Texas would beat Nebraska, Ohio State, and Oregon). We would have a clear champion.
Two things...
1. Bracket basically makes the SEC title game irrelevant – and would probably do so just about every year. If I were Meyer or Saban, I would seriously considering resting some players, at least players still recovering from nagging injuries over the course of the season. The drop from 1-5 doesn’t really cause that much of a problem. In fact, in your bracket, if Alabama won, they would just play again in the playoffs anyway! Why expose your game plan in the SEC title game when it doesn’t really count?
2. Right now, the title comes down to SEC champion vs. Texas – and so does your bracket. The SEC title game is already functioning as a de facto playoff. You could argue that this bracket at least helps out TCU, but at the cost of including the undeserving Yellow Jackets, Buckeyes, and Ducks (who get in despite losing to undefeated Boise State).
I’m not totally opposed to a playoff, but I think an 8 team playoff has the risk of coronating a team who just happened to get hot at the right time. And if it doesn’t, then it just ends up confirming the title we already were anticipating.
All the reasons you just stated
are why I love March Madness. I have NOOOOO problem with this system.
by ElMariachiLoco on Dec 1, 2009 6:44 PM CST up reply actions
Selection committee
And NCAA basketball uses a selection committee to pick the teams, not BCS rankings.
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. If they get mad, you're a mile away AND you have their shoes.
I am not sure how many coaches would just glibly toss away a conference title...
You still have to win three games against top teams you aren’t familiar with, why would a coach give away a championship trophy on the rare hope that he might win the next three straight?
This is also the reason why I like a 12 team playoff. The SEC championship game this year would be a playoff for a bye week. The loser has to play 3 games rather than 2 to reach the championship. This scenario would give you first round action as follows (team in parens would be the teams if you limited each conference to 2 spots):
5 Bama v. 12 Virginia Tech (BYU)
6 Boise State v. 11 Penn State (Virginia Tech)
7 Oregon v. 10 Iowa
8 Ohio State v. 9 Georgia Tech
The next round could be:
1 Florida v. 8 Ohio State
2 Texas v. 7 Oregon
3 TCU v. 6 Boise State
4 Cincy v. 5 Bama
I know some would be disappointed to see a Bama/VTech rematch, but perhaps the voters would drop Bama further in hopes of avoiding this possibility. Anyway I would watch all these games which would mean I would be watching a lot more college football than I currently do in December and January. I think bowl games are generally horrible. I have sat through too many games watching one or both teams just go through the motions. The games that end up actually being decent are few and far between. Give me games that matter pitting the best teams in the country against each other and I’ll watch as many of them as I can.
I love the 12 teamer idea...
but I am wary that will never occur.
"Stats are for losers. I like winning games." - Will Muschamp
"Somebody will always break your records. It is how you live that counts." - Earl Campbell
by Mulliganville on Dec 2, 2009 8:51 PM CST up reply actions
Oh, I agree it will never happen...
I just think it solves all the various problems both in getting the politics lined up (BCS conferences get their automatic share, but it opens up enough slots to ensure the non-AQs a good shot of getting in), but also in overcoming some of the supposed problems that a playoff might cause with the regular season (the byes for the top teams really makes it hard to throw a game at the end by resting player if you want one of the cherry spots). We have already seen the two ACC division winners basically ‘throw’ their end of season games knowing they will still have a shot for their conference title and an auto-BCS bid, I don’t understand why that makes it any worse when it comes to a playoff.
I would like to see a 128 team format
covering the final 7 games of the season. The first game matchups would be based entirely on rankings submitted by the Hooters girls who would also provide beverages and entertainment during the selection show. This would follow the first 5 games against rivals or whoever. The final 7 games you would never know who your next opponent was each week.
At least it would take the politics out.
by SpiritOfTheFedora on Dec 3, 2009 10:07 AM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
