- 06/22/2012, 01:56AM ET
Bloggers Needed said 06/22, 01:56 AM
Should the BCS have just one team per conference in the proposed 4-team playoff?
I say yes.
The BCS is looking to have a 4 team playoff to detrmine the national champion. One of the bigger issues is what to do if a conference has 2 of the top 4 ranked teams.
True we have a national champion that does not have a division or a conference banner to raise this year.
The same thing happened in the NFL as well. The only banner the Giants have is the only one that matters.
But here is the problem.
The NCAA is over 100 teams that play up to 12 weeks, and have 4 spots.
The NFL is 32 teams that play 16 weeks, for 12 spots.
Only TWICE has a team with 2 losses won the National Title.
How many times has a Super Bowl champion had TWICE that many?
williewilliejuan said 06/22, 02:29 AM
The BCS should not limit its playoff picture to just one team per conference.
The whole point of having playoff is to try to establish a true "National Champion". Putting pointless restrictions that could eliminate one of the best teams from contention negates the whole purpose of having a playoff. You might as well leave the current bowl system in place.
The beauty of college football is every week matters. Your proposal would eviscerate that aspect of college football. Once it was established that you couldn't finish first in your conference, bring in the backups and get ready for next year. There would be no point in pushing forward; you might as well give the younger guys some experience.
We wouldn't get to see both LSU and Alabama; no chance for Stanford and Oregon. We'll get to see teams from more conferences, but at the end of the day we'll be no closer to establishing a National Championship than we were before establishing a playoff. That makes no sense.
Solutions that result in the same problems as existed before aren't solutions. They're just dumb ideas. Limiting college football playoffs to one team per conference is a dumb idea.
Bloggers Needed said 06/22, 08:50 AM
"Once it was established that you couldn't finish first in your conference, bring in the backups and get ready for next year. There would be no point in pushing forward; you might as well give the younger guys some experience."
Most top-tier teams have their biggest rivals the last few weeks of the season.
Take this past season, Alabama couldn't pull back this year- since LSU has constant problems with Arkansas, who was also highly ranked- they had to keep winning and winning big just in case LSU lost.
Also, there are remaining bowls. Do you think Alabama, or any other team is going to "pull back" and play the backups when it could mean the difference between a Cotton Bowl and the Independence Bowl?
USC is not going to let up one TINY bit if they lose a game when the Rose Bowl is still an option."Oh well, we won't make the title game, the Insight.com bowl is just dandy as long as the freshmen get the reps"
Limiting the field to one team also allows a team to play tougher out of conference teams, LSU has gone on the road early vs tough teams (like Oregon this year) to get ready for a tough slate knowing if you win the SEC you have a title spot.
williewilliejuan said 06/22, 12:46 PM
It's nice that you're trying to put a positive spin on things, but what you're really saying is under the format you're proposing, non-conf games won't really matter. All that will matter is winning your conference. That's particularly the case for teams in strong conferences who don't need to add tough games to their schedule to move up the rankings. The only things they'll matter for is ranking and bowl position for those who don't win their conference. That means teams will probably be just as unwilling to schedule tough teams as they are now.
The format you propose won't necessarily determine a true Nat'l Champion because it may eliminate one or more of the best teams from competition; won't end the debate at the end of each season that a playoff was supposed to fix; and will likely take some of the drama out of the season because losses matter less. Doesn't sound too good to me.
The whole point of having a playoff is to crown a true Nat'l Champion. While you'll always get a little debate about teams that weren't invited to the playoff, that debate will be a whole lot louder if you design a system that potentially eliminates the second-best team from participation.
Bloggers Needed said 06/23, 09:59 PM
So you are perfectly OK with dropping the possibilities for a national "playoff" to 3 conferences? Explain to me why If I'm the ACC, Big lEast or Big 10 why I do this.
If UNC, Louisville or Fla St go undefeated, there is ZERO chance they are a top 3 ranked team over a w-loss LSU/Bama or USC/Oregon (losses only to each other)
Conferences get ZERO dollars if their teams don't play, and Even in a down year the SEC is going to be MILES ahead of most countries and heaven help the rest of the country if UGA ever gets a solid coach and Florida comes back- the SEC might drop the title game to get THREE spots in a playoff.
UGA loses to FLA
Fla loses to LSU
LSU loses to Bama
Bama drops title game to FLA
You got FOUR one-loss SECOND teams. Think any other conference champ is going to crack that? Esp if Oregon has a bad loss after beating USC and Texas drops OK then loses to Texas A&M?
The SECOND has had two of the top 4 spots in the polls more often than not lately, are they the best conference? By far- so should they make their top matchups/title game irrelevant?
You gotta touch'em all to make it count.
williewilliejuan said 06/23, 11:55 PM
In answer to your question, yes, I am ok with limiting the number of conferences that get to participate in the playoff - so long as the teams that are participating are the four best teams in the country. If the playoffs are going to be limited to just four teams, I want those teams to be the best around and I don't particularly care if two of them are from the same conference. The goal is to crown a National Champion and you don't get there by keeping good teams out.
If a team goes undefeated by beating a bunch of crap teams and ends up outside the top four in the final rankings, tough luck. Schedule some games against better competition and prove you belong there. This isn't Pop Warner; everyone doesn't get a trophy.
By your own admission, often the best teams are in the same conference. We shouldn't penalize those who play in a tough conference or reward those who play in weak ones. You don't determine greatness by lowering the bar.
Any artificial limitations put in place that keep one or more of the best teams out of a playoff would negate the whole purpose of having one. Just let the best teams play, regardless of their conference affiliation.
|9||Schad - Notorious Deadbeat||71||43||9||61.4%|
|10||PCH-LEH GO HEAT!||936||1541||408||39.5%|
- Fantasy baseball Prospect Watch: Bogaerts, Sano coming up
- Fantasy baseball Trade Tips: Buy Soriano, sell Headley, hold Castro
- Fantasy baseball Stats Focus: Jackson shows room to improve
- Fantasy baseball Roundtable: Dissecting Myers, Wheeler debuts
- Fantasy football focus: Mendenhall among top 30 running backs
- Awful Announcing
- Free Darko
- Pro Football Talk
- The Big Lead
- Joe Posnanski
- The Sporting Blog
- Big League Stew
- Bugs and Cranks
- Every day Should Be Saturday
- Mr. Irrelevant
- With Leather
- The Sports Hernia