BCS championship=A f@ckin joke

[HarveyGlass]

Mandel at SI.com writes an article bashing the BCS, but not for the right reasons. He still doesn't get it, IMO. His main beef is that he thinks all the BCS bowls are all unappealing, and that's why it didn't work. He goes on to insinuate, like all the other good ole boy shills, that WVU, Hawaii, and Kansas aren't any good and will get rolled in unwatchable contests by big-time programs.

I believe the opposite. I think that these are all going to be really good games because they are all so close to one another. And that should be the real focus. All these teams are pretty much even, which is why the championship is even more hollow than usual this year.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...x.html?eref=T1

And of course, like all the other status-quo practitioners, he ends his piece with the obligatory phrase, "A playoff is never-ever going to happen so don't even think about asking for it." LOL Don't fall for it.

[bling49]

I cant believe anyone would still be against a playoff.

I mean even in the NCAA basketball there is always "bubble teams" who dont get in and are pissed.

I guess the answer then is win more games and dont be a bubble team, dont leave it in the hands of a comittee.

Same applies to football and the polls to decide just two teams that should play for the "ship"

A playoff would give the MOST teams a fair shot.

Leaving the bowls in place allows teams to play for a conference championship, then even if you dont win but had a decent season you get to a bowl and the winners to move on for a chance at a national championship.

Were only talking about tweaking the dates on the bowls so the winners can move on and it's adding at most 4 weeks to the season if you advance all the way to the title game.

[HarveyGlass]

32 teams is way too much, IMO. All you really need is an 8-team playoff. Just take every BCS champion and two at-large teams. You don't win your conference, tough. Better pray for an at-large berth.

[bling49]

There are 32 bowl games, that produces 32 winners. If you win your bowl game you deserve to move on.

Cutting it from 32 teams to 8 teams only means playing 2 extra weekends.

Highest seed plays lowest seed just like the NCAA basketball tourney.

[HarveyGlass]

The costs of that big a tournament would be out of the question for most schools. A whole lot of schools lose money on their bowl game anyway. Just one bowl game.
And just winning a bowl game doesn't mean you deserve anything, IMO. How many 7-6 bowl winners are we gonna see soon, too many. I mean, does Kentucky deserve to be in the national championship tournament? They finished tenth in a twelve-team conference. I think not.

Ditch the bowls.

[bling49]

Originally Posted by HarveyGlass

And just winning a bowl game doesn't mean you deserve anything, IMO.

I think that's exactly what you deserve, the chance to play again.

Originally Posted by HarveyGlass

How many 7-6 bowl winners are we gonna see soon, too many. I mean, does Kentucky deserve to be in the national championship tournament? They finished tenth in a twelve-team conference. I think not.

Yes, if they win at 7-6 that's exactly what I think they deserve, a chance to lay it on the line the next week.

So I'm going to use the NCAA basketball tourney as an example.

If a basketball team loses most of their games but by some miracle in their conference tournament it wins it and gets the automatic NCAA berth, even though they were in last place they dont deserve anything for their win.....the chance to move on?

I mean the cinderella story is what makes the NCAA tournament magic.

you want to remove that factor from getting rid of the crap BCS system, install a tournament and take away the best aspect of a tournament.....the appilacian state slaying the Michigan.

(yes, thank you I realize app state is DII but I cant think of a bigger upset)

The bowl games are big time events to some cities, I dont think we should ditch the bowl games. I like the idea of the bowl games being a preliminary to getting into the tournament.

Why wouldnt winning a bowl mean you dont deserve to move on.

That's what competition is all about.

[HarveyGlass]

There are just way too many bowl games(and teams). Bowl games are meaningless except for the extra practice time. There's a new one every year and there are no real qualifications. Basically, if you have a winning record you are guaranteed a bowl(or tourney bid).

Football is just a different animal from basketball. And my point is you just have to cut it off somewhere. If you want cinderella, invite Appy and every DII team too. Logistically, it will be impossible to play that many football games without serious budget adjustments and a lengthening of the season to NFL proportions. And any pro will tell you that the NFL season is loooong.

The regular season in hoops trims 330 teams down to 65. The football season should probably cut out a similar percentage of the 120 or so teams that play DI, but only if it's reasonable to stage such an event.

[Red Alert]

This is the bottom line:

If you accept the current system, you dont care about the integrity of college football.

It's that simple. Of course I'm not naive enough to know that its not about integrity to the people who have the power to change it. It's all about the benjamins baby.

[prudat]

I think every conference should have a championship and the winners get put into a playoff. You then seed the 12 teams. 4 get buys and you have a bracket. Screw the at large it gives every conferences top two teams a chance to be champion.

Leftover teams that did not win their conference can fill various other post sason bowls.

[HarveyGlass]

A good article about the BCS...http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...bcs/index.html