2009 NCAA Football Thread

[SkinsKY]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

That doesn't really speak to the obvious problem. Florida was a great team this year, they got beat by a greater Alabama team. They deserve a BCS Bowl far more than some team who played ToadSuck Tech each week. Florida had the 4th hardest schedule in all of college football. Boise State had the 94th hardest. TCU had the 69th hardest. Letting them in for a title shot is obscene.

I think you're doing a disservice to ToadSuck Tech. They try really hard.

I want the traditionalist system i mentioned(and has been discussed), but I'm fine with the BCS since they've spread out the weighting of the system.



Well, thats too bad. TCU and Boise State don't play in BCS conferences and are ineligible to play for the title. If you're going to open it up to any conference, then the Sun Belt, Conference-USA and Mid-American conferences have to go to the playoff also and Navy/Notre Dame have to join a conference.

I want Navy and ND to join a conference. I'm not sure how not being in a BCS conference makes them ineligble to play for a title. I also don't see how six BCS conference winners and two at larges means the Sun Belt or them would have to be included.

The further problem is that you cannot possibly create a playoff system that won't exclude good teams. So, a playoff changes nothing.

I don't believe you can include all good teams. Impossible to do. We agree. A playoff will not change that, but I don't think that makes the status quo the best option.

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by SkinsKY

I think you're doing a disservice to ToadSuck Tech. They try really hard.

They never should have hired Charlie Weis.

Originally Posted by SkinsKY

I want Navy and ND to join a conference. I'm not sure how not being in a BCS conference makes them ineligble to play for a title. I also don't see how six BCS conference winners and two at larges means the Sun Belt or them would have to be included.

Because either you limit the entrants to certain conferences, or every conference has to be allowed to try and play for the title. You can't go halfway on letting conference champions in.

Originally Posted by SkinsKY

I don't believe you can include all good teams. Impossible to do. We agree. A playoff will not change that, but I don't think that makes the status quo the best option.

But a playoff is based on the premise of supposedly eliminated inequity by letting teams play for a title. The selection of the playoff teams would be as arbitrary as the BCS is, and someone will be whining about being kept out of the playoffs.

[SkinsKY]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

They never should have hired Charlie Weis.

They didn't budget enough for food.

Because either you limit the entrants to certain conferences, or every conference has to be allowed to try and play for the title. You can't go halfway on letting conference champions in.

I don't think that has to be true. Small conferences don't get auto bids to BCS bowls currently. I don't think they'd suddenly have to if there was a playoff.

But a playoff is based on the premise of supposedly eliminated inequity by letting teams play for a title. The selection of the playoff teams would be as arbitrary as the BCS is, and someone will be whining about being kept out of the playoffs.

I think the two at-large teams might be, but I think the result of a playoff is more solid. If TST beat Alabama, I don't care if Florida was in there because Alabama beat Tebow. If Urban whines about being left out, he should have beat Bama (or at least kept his players from falling asleep at stoplights).

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by SkinsKY

I don't think that has to be true. Small conferences don't get auto bids to BCS bowls currently. I don't think they'd suddenly have to if there was a playoff.

Then we're back to:
Alabama
Ohio State
Oregon
Ga Tech
Cincy
Texas
and pick two out of:
Florida, Nebraska, TCU, Boise State, Iowa

Originally Posted by SkinsKY

I think the two at-large teams might be, but I think the result of a playoff is more solid. If TST beat Alabama, I don't care if Florida was in there because Alabama beat Tebow. If Urban whines about being left out, he should have beat Bama (or at least kept his players from falling asleep at stoplights).

Thats not the issue, the issue is why Toadsuck tech gets a chance over Florida, and if its because they were 12-1/13-0 in a crap conference that they won, then that's an inequitable as the BCS is.

[SkinsKY]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

Then we're back to:
Alabama
Ohio State
Oregon
Ga Tech
Cincy
Texas
and pick two out of:
Florida, Nebraska, TCU, Boise State, Iowa

That's what I'd like to see. I think that makes a great field. Plenty of good games.

Thats not the issue, the issue is why Toadsuck tech gets a chance over Florida, and if its because they were 12-1/13-0 in a crap conference that they won, then that's an inequitable as the BCS is.

Florida's chance came in the SEC championship and they lost. If they're in at-large bid. I'm okay with that. It's not what I would do personally, but I wouldn't argue it.

I'm not really concerned with who the tourney leaves out. My primary concern is that whoever lifts the trophy is deserving. That's not always certain, from year to year, in the current system.

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by SkinsKY

That's what I'd like to see. I think that makes a great field. Plenty of good games.

Florida's chance came in the SEC championship and they lost. If they're in at-large bid. I'm okay with that. It's not what I would do personally, but I wouldn't argue it.

I'm not really concerned with who the tourney leaves out. My primary concern is that whoever lifts the trophy is deserving. That's not always certain, from year to year, in the current system.

Except that the only reason to complain about the BCS and harumph for a playoff is that the system is supposedly inequitable by who it leaves out. A playoff system is equally inequitable.

[SkinsKY]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

Except that the only reason to complain about the BCS and harumph for a playoff is that the system is supposedly inequitable by who it leaves out. A playoff system is equally inequitable.

But it leaves out fewer teams.

[Fathead]

The system I said allows any team in the country the ability to make the field. The big 6 (should be the big 4 and just have 4 at larges in reality) need to win their conference to have a shot at the title.



I'd even be open to making the playoff only open to conference winners.

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by SkinsKY

But it leaves out fewer teams.

No, its doesn't. There's what, 3 undefeated teams not in the the title game? No one's claiming that Florida or Ohio State or Oregon deserved to be in the title game. If you had an 8 game playoff along the lines I mentioned, anywhere from 3-8(Florida, TCU, BSU, Iowa, Oregon State, Oklahoma State, Nebraska and more) teams could lay a "legitimate" claim to one of those final 2 playoff spots.

[SkinsKY]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

No, its doesn't. There's what, 3 undefeated teams not in the the title game? No one's claiming that Florida or Ohio State or Oregon deserved to be in the title game. If you had an 8 game playoff along the lines I mentioned, anywhere from 3-8(Florida, TCU, BSU, Iowa, Oregon State, Oklahoma State, Nebraska and more) teams could lay a "legitimate" claim to one of those final 2 playoff spots.

Again, I know it leaves good teams out. But as you move down the ladder, it becomes less significant to me than leaving out an undefeated winner of a BCS conference.

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by SkinsKY

Again, I know it leaves good teams out. But as you move down the ladder, it becomes less significant to me than leaving out an undefeated winner of a BCS conference.

Well, thats only Cincy, and they played a weak schedule(which is even more amazing since they played some good teams in the Big East).

[Fathead]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

Well, thats only Cincy, and they played a weak schedule(which is even more amazing since they played some good teams in the Big East).

This year. Auburn did it before, also you get the situations like the 3 1 loss teams, etc. etc.

[BurgundyNGold]

Originally Posted by akhhorus

Except that the only reason to complain about the BCS and harumph for a playoff is that the system is supposedly inequitable by who it leaves out. A playoff system is equally inequitable.

A playoff system is inequitable, true. Any system that didn't include every single team would be inequitable to someone, though the prospects would be ludricrous. Still, the current system is more inequitable. A playoff would actually be diminished inequitibility. Currently, only 2 teams get a shot at the title. A 8 team playoff would allow 8 teams a shot at the title. One team each from the 8 major conferences (SEC, ACC, BIG12, BIG10, PAC10, WAC, Big East and Mountain West), resultant from that conference's title game. If very good teams like Florida aren't in the playoff, well, that's too bad. They should have won the conference championship.

Besides, it's not like the national championship would (or perhaps even could) ever be between 2 teams in the same conference because to be ranked sufficiently high to end up 1-2, those two teams would have had to face each other in their conference championship where one would lose. Just like this year. #1 Florida lost to #2 Alabama. They won't be meeting again this season even if everyone knows that Florida and 'Bama are both better than Texas.

Florida would still have to sit home even if there was a playoff because they didn't take care of business in the conference championship game. Complaining wouldn't get them anywhere under the current system, so why should we care about their perceived disenfranchisement, for lack of a better word, if the same scenario unfolded under a playoff system?

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by Fathead

This year. Auburn did it before, also you get the situations like the 3 1 loss teams, etc. etc.

Auburn got hurt by their schedule that year. This is why they scale the BCS through two human polls, a computer poll, quality wins and strength of schedule.

[akhhorus]

Originally Posted by BurgundyNGold

A playoff system is inequitable, true, but the current system is moreso. A playoff would actually be diminished inequitibility. Currently, only 2 teams get a shot at the title. A 8 team playoff would allow 8 teams a shot at the title.

I'm not repeating myself, see my previous posts lol.

Originally Posted by BurgundyNGold

One team each from the 8 major conferences (SEC, ACC, BIG12, BIG10, PAC10, WAC, Big East and Mountain West), resultant from that conference's title game. If very good teams like Florida aren't in the playoff, well, that's too bad they should have won the conference championship.

That more inequitable than the current system: to let the WAC/Mountain West have a playoff spot and no spots for any great at-large teams who, potentially, only lost one game(costing them the conference title). The reason the NFL playoff structure works is because all the divisions could be as good as the other. Not all conferences are equal, and rewarding non-BCS conferences full of crap teams is more inequitable then the BCS not picking Boise State or TCU or Ballsack State because they didn't play many games against remotely good competition.

Originally Posted by BurgundyNGold

Besides, it's not like the national championship would (or perhaps even could) ever be between 2 teams in the same conference because to be ranked sufficeintly high to end up 1-2, those two teams would have had to face each other in their conference championship where one would lose. Just like this year. #1 Florida lost to #2 Alabama. They won't be meeting again this season even if everyone knows that Florida and 'Bama are bother better than Texas.

See above.

Originally Posted by BurgundyNGold

Florida would still have to sit home even if there was a playoff because they didn't take care of business in the conference championship game. Complaining wouldn't get them anywhere under the current system, so why should we care about their perceived disenfranchisement, for lack of a better word, if the same scenario unfolded under a playoff system?

As I've said: a playoff is based on the concept of equity. You can't change the BCS to a hypothetical 8 team playoff to help equity only to:
1-pick the teams along arbitrary lines
or
2-tell any teams(like Florida) who had a great season, but lost their conference because of a single loss that Toadsuck Tech got their spot in the playoff because they went undefeated beating 6 glorified community colleges, 1 team from a good conference and 4 schools that offer enrollment for various physical disabilities lol