GO GATORS
Bad Andy
Everyone, Registered Users Posts: 848
Bad Andy
Everyone, Registered Users Posts: 848
Bad Andy
Everyone, Registered Users Posts: 848
Comments
Just my opinion.
I could live that to an extent but at some point it will have its own faults, worse case scenerio...you have 3 or 4 or even 5 undefeated teams after bowl games...it is highly unlikely but you never know.
Try maybe an 8 team playoff...8 conference champions from 8 conferences...they could still play in their bowl games and you could have some of the runners-up from each conference maybe play a bowl too since there are so many bowls now.
It's a true playoff, no polls or computers involved. And it could still be done in about the same amount of time as they are using now. None of this 'well they haven't played a game in 7-8 weeks, thats why they lost', they forgot how to play in that time...whatever, BS.
Generally, though, I see no way of eliminating the controversy from the national championship. Even if they go to a full playoff system, they're just pushing the controversy back one step. Instead of being directly about who the nat'l champ is, the controversy will be about who didn't get into the playoffs, just like in college basketball.
Oh, and on your distinction between the BCS and the NFL, maddy, I would say the BCS is no more a government entity than the NFL is. The NFL's monopoly (and therefore its very existence, as we know it) is a product of federal legislation.
I do and actually feel college basketball is the best sport in the US currently
Before the BCS, teams were playing 11 game schedules, and there were almost no conference championship games. The last bowl games of the season took place on January 1st. The separate polls crowned separate champions, and everybody argued that there had to be a better way. However, calls for a playoff were rejected because it would extend the season, and it was unacceptable to play more than an 11-game schedule and then a bowl game, and students couldn't be expected to continue playing football beyond January 1st.
Since that time, teams were allowed to add a 12th game to the schedule, but could only do so every other year (and now, they play 12 games each year). All eligible conferences (12+ teams) are now holding a conference championship game. The last bowl of the season was held on January 8th. There are complaints that the long time that elapses between the end of the season and the bowl is bad for the players and for the quality of the games.
Now, it is possible for a team to play 14 gamse (12 game schedule, conference championship, and bowl game). This is 2 more games than the previous maximum when schedules "couldn't be expanded any further." Also, the bowl season has been extended a week beyond its traditional last day.
Now, the BCS is tossing around the idea of a "plus one" final championship game. This means that 2 teams will play a 15-game schedule.
So, arguments against an 8-team playoff are baseless. Cut the schedule back to 11 games, and you immediately buy yourself a game. Under an 8-team playoff, all but 2 teams will play the exact same number of games (14) as they do under the current system. These last 2 teams will play one extra game, giving them a total of 15 (the same as they would play under the "plus one" system).
My system works as follows:
After the 11-game schedule, and conference championship games, you put togetehr the playoffs like this:
1. Any team which has not yet suffered a loss is automatically included in the playoff.
2. Conference champions from the 6 BCS conferences receive an automatic birth, in the order of their final BCS ranking (if there are 3 or more undefeated non-BCS teams, you'd have to trim the likes of Virginia Tech and Cincinnati this year... I think we could all live with that).
3. Any remaining spots in the 8-team playoff are filled based on the final BCS rankings.
Seedings for this playoff are also based on the BCS rankings.
This playoff gets the championship out of the hands of voters and under the control of the teams, where it belongs. If you don't get into the playoff, and you think you received an unfair BCS ranking, you still have no valid complaints. Any team that has suffered a loss has not done everything within its control to make the playoff, and therefore has no case for being "snubbed" by not being included. If you want in, win all your games. If you lose a game, you take what you get. Just like the playoffs.
Now, if you want the argument for why Utah is better than all of this year's BCS teams, and therefore the best team in the nation, all you have to do is apply basic transitive relationship:
Utah beat Alabama beat Mississippi beat Florida beat Oklahoma
Utah beat Alabama beat Mississippi beat Texas Tech beat Texas beat Ohio St Utah beat Oregon St beat USC beat Penn St Utah beat Alabama beat Clemson beat Boston College beat Virginia Tech beat Cincinnati
Are there any other teams for which this can be done? (let me save you some time. Nobody beat Utah, so the answer is "no").
The problem with polls is that they measure "talent" instead of "team." Football is a team game, and the "champion" shouldn't simply be the team with the best players, but the team which can go out against a given opponent, put together a plan, and execute that plan to a level that results in victory. No team did that with more success this year than Utah.