BCS

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Bigsmc

Amen to eliminating the creampuff filler. Cut the season shorter.

no doubt the creampuffs who depend on those games to make their budget would appreciate the cut.

and comparing football to other sports doesn't make much sense. pro football plays 16 games a year, you expect college kids to do the same? how many basketball games are there in the pros? you can't compare them, everyone knows football is a killer on the body.
hey, i can see having the top teams play for #1-but they need to limit it to the top four, or top eight at most. as for the money, how many bowls are there? how much revenue? like i said this time last year when it all came up, if the schools and ncaa thought that a playoff system would make them more money then the current bowl system, they'd change-so obviously it's not comparable.

[Bigsmc]

Originally Posted by Danzig

no doubt the creampuffs who depend on those games to make their budget would appreciate the cut.

Those creampuffs will have to tighten their budget and play each other like the schools do in every lower division (II, III, NAIA or whatever they are called these days).

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Bigsmc

Those creampuffs will have to tighten their budget and play each other like the schools do in every lower division (II, III, NAIA or whatever they are called these days).

why? those schools live for games like michigans big loss last year, bamas loss to ulm. sorry, i disagree with much of what's contained in this thread.

[Danzig]

besides...how many tough games would a team schedule if a playoff was instituted? think about it-right now, you have to play some tough teams, or your strength of schedule (or lack thereof) keeps you too far down in the polls to compete for the top spot. so everyone limits it to a few, while playing some tougher non conference opponents. as people say, it's a playoff every week, as most cannot afford to lose even one game-look at usc for instance....or boise st for example, who is undefeated, but is faced with not having a tough enough schedule to get a top bowl bid-and rightfully so-they'd most likely be exposed liked hawaii was.
so, let's say you have a playoff system, and the winner of each conference gets a spot-so, they play say four conference games a year. who do you think they'd face in the other games? tough, non conference opponents? hell no. they'd play every cream puff they could, to pad their stats, and to take it easy in between conference must-wins.

basically what everyone wants is a league like what you've already got-the nfl. but it's not the nfl, it's college.

now, go back through the threads, and tell me how many are about college football-how many discussions about who's the best? what is one of the things that keeps everyone's interest piqued? the current system. the money is there now, the level of interest is unequalled. if it aint broke, the ncaa won't be fixing it.

[ddthetide]

Originally Posted by Danzig

why? those schools live for games like michigans big loss last year, bamas loss to ulm. sorry, i disagree with much of what's contained in this thread.

Bama will play 14 games this year. Cincinnati will play 14 games. of Bamas 14, 9 will be conference games. that leaves 5 out of conference. cut the season back to 10 games, like it used to be. that still leaves 2 OOC + the conference championship. 16 team tourney would put 2 teams at 14-15 games. those not in the playoffs get the remaining bowl bids. the BCS games are the semis and finals on a rotating basis.
16 teams would be the fairest to all conferences. all 11 conferences would be represented with 5 at large bids. that covers runner-up in the SEC and when necessary the Big 12, ACC and ND (NO time soon).
Div 2, 3 and 1AA are already playing it this way and the winner in 1AA usually has more that 1 lose.

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by ddthetide

Bama will play 14 games this year. Cincinnati will play 14 games. of Bamas 14, 9 will be conference games. that leaves 5 out of conference. cut the season back to 10 games, like it used to be. that still leaves 2 OOC + the conference championship. 16 team tourney would put 2 teams at 14-15 games. those not in the playoffs get the remaining bowl bids. the BCS games are the semis and finals on a rotating basis.
16 teams would be the fairest to all conferences. all 11 conferences would be represented with 5 at large bids. that covers runner-up in the SEC and when necessary the Big 12, ACC and ND (NO time soon).
Div 2, 3 and 1AA are already playing it this way and the winner in 1AA usually has more that 1 lose.

The University won't agree with that, Tide (unless they can capitalize on that somehow as well.) Those extra season games mean more money in their pockets.

[ddthetide]

Originally Posted by Cajungator26

The University won't agree with that, Tide (unless they can capitalize on that somehow as well.) Those extra season games mean more money in their pockets.

they wouldn't miss the money from those games. a 16 team playoff will be worth fort knox just like march madness. ncaa could split it up amongst the div 1 teams.
the ncaa opened the schedule up three times that i remember. 10 with the option for the 11th. then 11 w/option for 12. now 12 w/option for 13 regular season games. the option game was and still is how Hawaii gets all the home games they do.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by ddthetide

they wouldn't miss the money from those games. a 16 team playoff will be worth fort knox just like march madness. ncaa could split it up amongst the div 1 teams.
the ncaa opened the schedule up three times that i remember. 10 with the option for the 11th. then 11 w/option for 12. now 12 w/option for 13 regular season games. the option game was and still is how Hawaii gets all the home games they do.

do you really think that? they make tons of money on these games, of course they'd miss it. that's why they added a few more, more revenue.