Notice: All Boston.com forums will be retired as of May 31st, 2016 and will not be archived. Thank you for your participation in this community, and we hope you continue to enjoy other content at Boston.com.

Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending.

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending.

    In Response to Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending.:
    Cripes! More BCS bashing. OK, we'll play it your way. Let's have an 8 team "playoff". Here are some BIG problems that can't be avoided (can you say "controversy"?) : 1) Name the 8 teams then tell the next two, "Sorry, but you weren't good enough.." 2) Now that you have 8 teams, try and seed them with NO TEAM feeling slighted. (Now, tell me that your 1 loss team will be just overjoyed playing a #1 LSU in the Sugar Bowl. No home field advantage there, right?) Do you think that a tream COULD tank it in a late season game to conceptionally drop from, say #2 to #5 to get a better game matchup? NAW!!! 3) What criteria are you going to use to seed the teams? Remember, using any human poll just muddies the waters (favorites, regional slant, the typical "They never say Northwest Central State play!"). Pure computer generated numbers? (Again, see the whine re: Northwest Central State). New whine added: What about those intangibles? 4) (My personal favorite) AFTER the 4 playoff games are played and eh winners advance, how do you seed them? By virtue of their win and their seeding for game #1? Let's speculate that #1 beats #8 by 4 points on a TD scored with 3 seconds left. Do they keep their #1 seed? Then there's the #4 vs #5 tussel, with two apparent evenly matched teams going head-to-head. Say the #5 team crushes the #4 team. Re-seed them? Let's bring in that nasty "human element" again. The BSC came about to match the two best teams in the country at the end of the season. It's all a money grab for the NCAA. As long as the math worked out so a 1 loss team could qualify, what's the big stink? Maybe 3 or 4 undefeated teams mucks things up? Ah! Then let's get "human", and determine that a 12-0 Boise State or TCU doesn't get a shot at the BSC Championship, because their schedules aren't as difficult as a 1 loss Oklahoma. (Then, why don't more of the Big Boys schedule them?) Then, explain why an undefeated Auburn (they of the Southeast Conference, the acknowledged BEST conference in the entire Universe) gets to watch the game because they didn't beat up Alabama or LSU significantly when they went head-to-head. The BSC and any conceivable playoff need to go the way of dinosaurs. As long as there is going to be a human element involved, let's go back to the end of season polls. Let Midwest Northern State claim that they are WAY better than Eastern South Dakota U. WHO CARES? Will this change my life? Would I still watch the bowl games? Only the schools and alumni really give a rat's posterior. (UConn in a BSC game???? REALLY????) "Out of order came chaos! And they will waffle on how good it is!
    Posted by AZPAT


    I don't really see those things as problems. Most reasonable people would probably agree that a BCS system is necessary to determine college rankings since there are so many teams playing, with such a large difference in competition level. The problem as I see it is that everyone wants to know who's number one, who's the best team. The ranking system is as good as you could expect for predicting how 2 teams who haven't played each other will fare. But the difference between who's number one or two or three, it's a guess- no system is that precise. Should an undefeated team be 1st, or 3rd or 4th? You look at NCAA basketball and there are still teams who are upset about not getting in the tournament but nobody cares because whether your the 64th or 65th best team your not arguing about number one, and they really didn't have much of a chance. An 8 game playoff just moves the controversy from who's number one and two, to who's number eight and nine. And since almost nobody cares about being the 8th best team, there will be far less controversy. I think the simple solution is you seed 8 teams based on BCS rankings, those rankings continue throughout the playoffs and the final game is on a neutral field. I don't think teams will throw games any more than NFL teams do to get better match ups. The rankings are too unpredictable to take that risk, and they are playing to be the best anyway so eventually you have to beat the best. I'd be willing to bet that the number one and number two ranked teams would not face each other in the championship every year and that is exactly the problem everyone has with the system now. But IMO its about money, they like their system and ultimately they're more interested in maximizing dollars than anything else.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from p-mike. Show p-mike's posts

    Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending.

    I've never been entirely sure why there is so much clamor for a playoff anyway. It's probably a generational thing, but I was weaned on bowl games that produced actual conference rivalries and even then, the "national championship" was largely mythical . . .  being the product of dubious "polling." Count me as one who doesn't want college football to be just like the NFL. To be sure, there's a lot more money involved nowadays and this idea that "the bowl games themselves get most of that" . . .   well, if you think the boosters aren't in bed with the promoters, I know of a very fine bridge for which I could get you a good price.

    All that said, we're already seeing the genesis of the super-conferences and once you get that, a 16-team tournament is a fait accompli.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from user_3993225. Show user_3993225's posts

    Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending.

    In Response to Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending.:
    In Response to Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending. : You look at NCAA basketball and there are still teams who are upset about not getting in the tournament but nobody cares because whether your the 64th or 65th best team your not arguing about number one, and they really didn't have much of a chance. An 8 game playoff just moves the controversy from who's number one and two, to who's number eight and nine. And since almost nobody cares about being the 8th best team, there will be far less controversy. 
    Posted by shenanigan


    Couldn't have said it better myself.  Has there been any season in recent memory where the BCS controversy over the NC game extended beyond the top 8 teams?  I can't think of one.  At the very least this would solve all the issues with more than 2 undefeated teams.
     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from brdbreu. Show brdbreu's posts

    Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending.

    In Response to Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending.:
    I never saw a replay that showed the ball crossed the goal line.  Perhaps the replay official saw something we didn't see.  Since the play on the field was ruled no TD then i didn't see enough to overturn it.  Other than the fact the officials had to find a way off the field in E.Lansing had they ruled no TD and the sparties lost.
    Posted by MichFan


    espn spent a half hour on showing the video frame by frame and froze it when the ball was clearly across the goal line.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending.

    In Response to Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending.:
    In Response to Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending. : Here is my theory on why this hasn't changed and why the SEC fans in particular, from my experience, like it how it is now as they try to deflect and control the status quo: This is their baby. The South still isn't completely past the idea that pro sports originated in the North.  So, they hang on to college sports. NASCAR, college basketball and football are the southern instituions, generally speaking.  All pro franchises are relatively new, especially with regards to hockey and even the NBA, so it's college football and basketball, as well as NASCAR. So, they see their college instiutions as pro sports franchises. If these things change, or if the SEC loses this power surge, it's seen as an attack on their pride, tradition, etc.  Yup, it goes back to inferiority complexes and the Civil War.  Yep. There is no other real explanation why any college football fan wouldn't want a playoff for the betterment of the sport.  The NCAA continues to ignore what's godo for the sport and fans because it's about money to them.  I get it. I do. But, if I was a diehard college football fan, I'd be beyond annoyed at this point. So, in turn, diehard SEC fans or any diehard fan of any conference, is being taken for a ride because the current system is a boon and a slam dunk way to generate strong profits, but at the expense of the purity of the game they claim is so great. This isn't 1984.  All bowl traditions have eroded. There are arguments every year where peopole are ranked, who is the best, who should play in the title game, etc. It's annoying. Look at this thread. Z and Cowards are arguing over who should be ranked where, etc, and this argument wouldn't exist if there was a playoff. It wouldn't matter, really, where you were ranked if there was a playoff. Maybe the top 4 teams get a Bye week as a bonus for that ranking, but if you had a top 12-16 type playoff, no one would be arguing. The only arguments would be the 17-25 rankings, but if there was no cupcake games on a schedule, it would come down to teams that would be losing say, 3 or 4 games that would be ranked in that pocket anyway, with teams only losing 2 or 3 games in the 12-16 range. Get rid of the cupcakes, implement a round robin playoff and shorten the season by 1 game if you need to. I am tired of the excuses from the NCAA. "They have exams."  "Holiday season."  BALONEY So, there'd be very little complaining or whining, certainly a lot less than now. And the big bowl boys like the Rose, Fiesta, Orange, Cotton, Sugar, etc, would all get their same bids, etc, they'd just be competing for which one would be the host that year, which would actually give the NCAA even MORE money. Eliminate the Blockbuster Video bowl on Dec 22 (example), that no one I know cares about.  Right now, the product is watered down. They'd bid for example based on perceived ratings potential, say the Rose is a host for the title game one year, and the runners up fall in line hosting the quarters and semis, etc. It'd be so easy and people would love it.  You'd also have no conference changes with teams like we see now chasing money and we would see FAR LESS coach hopping, the latter being the real elephant in the room.  What message does it send to students recruited to play, when the coach bails the nesxt year because he can double his salary? I mean, I get it, but that wouldn't happen if the money was more evenly spread out and growth was attainable.  It's flat out of hand and this is a microcosm of what is wrong with our society. Sell out and cash in and who cares about the reality.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing


    re:

    "

    Here is my theory on why this hasn't changed and why the SEC fans in particular, from my experience, like it how it is now as they try to deflect and control the status quo:"

    this is exactly opposite of the truth. in a true playoff ie like div 1a, (where  not just 8 teams get in), 4-6 sec teams many or most years would likely go deep in the playoffs, thereby showing exactly how they stand against teams around the country instead of them being ranked much lower (in a top 20 or top 30) due to losses they receive becasue of playing weekly in the sec. also, on more occasions than the rest of college football would feel comfortable, there would be 2 sec teams playing for the championship. so you see you are exactly 180% wrong in this case. sec fans will be greatly advantaged for there to be a playoff in ncaafb.


     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending.

    In Response to Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending.:
    In Response to Re: Thoughts on Wisconsin/MSU ending. : I would agree but every SEC fan I know is against my suggestion for a playoff format and I could never figure out why other than the theory I suggested above. I am not wrong if I want more competition for the sport, dude. Talk to stubborn SEC and college football traditionalists, not me.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing

    re:
    "I am not wrong if I want more competition for the sport, dude.

    Talk to stubborn SEC and college football traditionalists, not me."

    i am on the same page about the increased competition.

    i accept you may have sec friends or contacts that may not want a playoff. i see no reason to be against it other than either just going with the flow or being a traditionalist over reasonable sense, ie every pee wee league up to dv 2 and 3 cfb has a complete playoff.

     
Sections
Shortcuts