1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderIf Oregon and Ohio State win out they face each other in the NCG. What am I missing?
Boise State's "creampuff schedule" is looking a bit less so after Oregon State knocks off previously unbeaten Arizona on the road. And it's not outside the realm of possibility that Virginia Tech will win the ACC.
If the Broncos win out, they should get their shot at a title.
However, if Ohio State so much as loses one game they will not only be out of the NCG, they will miss the Rose Bowl to Michigan State. That is why I am so nervous about next Saturday in Madison. It's probably the best team they have faced all year and in a stadium that they always struggle playing in.
Originally posted by whodeyThey should win. Wisconsin is no match. Could be an upset alert type game, but they should pull it off!
If Oregon and Ohio State win out they face each other in the NCG. What am I missing?
However, if Ohio State so much as loses one game they will not only be out of the NCG, they will miss the Rose Bowl to Michigan State. That is why I am so nervous about next Saturday in Madison. It's probably the best team they have faced all year and in a stadium that they always struggle playing in.
Originally posted by whodeyThe fact that sending a Big Ten team to the BCS Championship game has meant an embarrassing wipe out for years?
If Oregon and Ohio State win out they face each other in the NCG. What am I missing?
However, if Ohio State so much as loses one game they will not only be out of the NCG, they will miss the Rose Bowl to Michigan State. That is why I am so nervous about next Saturday in Madison. It's probably the best team they have faced all year and in a stadium that they always struggle playing in.
How many years does Boise State have to win every game before they get a shot at the title? They've already beaten two teams that were ranked when they played them this year as well.
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
In the absence of a playoff, these debates will linger year after year, to no avail. College football is systemically dysfunctional. Year after year this should be decided on the field and is not.
If the system allows my Ducks and the Buckeyes to play for a NC if they win out, then it does. I'm not going to be unhappy about that. But neither am I condoning a broken system that does not give Boise St. (or Utah, or whoever else) a shot.
Originally posted by no1marauderThey just need to play a schedule where they face at LEAST 4 major contenders in the same season and win them all. All of the others will, and usually do.
The fact that sending a Big Ten team to the BCS Championship game has meant an embarrassing wipe out for years?
How many years does Boise State have to win every game before they get a shot at the title? They've already beaten two teams that were ranked when they played them this year as well.
Plus, blue colored turf should be outlawed. It looks bush league.
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderI am not aruging what should be I am merely stating what IS. 😉
The fact that sending a Big Ten team to the BCS Championship game has meant an embarrassing wipe out for years?
How many years does Boise State have to win every game before they get a shot at the title? They've already beaten two teams that were ranked when they played them this year as well.
As it stands now if the Bucks and Ducks go undefeated it is a rematch.
Boise does not play the schedule that the major conferences play and therefore they simply should not play for a national championship.
For example, Alabama played in consecutive weeks at the #10 team in the nation, then home vs. the #7 team in the nation and then at the #19 team in the nation. Alabama plays two more top ten teams on the schedule (plus perhaps an SEC championship game) and they already played a top twenty out of conference game. Sure injuries will pile up and they lost one of the games, but I am more impressed with the winner of the SEC than some team that plays one or two top 20 teams and rests their players while they play no one week after week.
The Big 10 did well last year in bowl games -- especially so when one recognizes the reality that every single game is a road game in a different climate. Lets see southern teams play the whole year in warm weather and then play outdoors up north. Until the happens, lets talk about the real injustice of college football -- it is not whether some small school who schedules no one gets a chance at the national championship: Southern school (and USC which paid players for the huge "road trip" to the Roe Bowl) dictate the location and climate for bowl games. When they inevitably win slightly more than half of those games, we are constantly told they had better seasons against better competition. If you want a playoff system, for each game in Florida or Texas, let's have one outside up north (maybe even on the Blue turf of Boise).
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
Originally posted by quackquackThis is utter and complete nonsense. The worst sort of babbling. MONEY dictates the bowl system; the fact that it exists and where the bowls exist. Fans do not want their teams to play in Minnesota, they want to be spending their dollars in a more pleasant locale. Bowl organizers know this and schedule as such. Your "real injustice" can't even claim to be a paper tiger - it's completely a non-issue.
... Until the happens, lets talk about the real injustice of college football -- it is not whether some small school who schedules no one gets a chance at the national championship: Southern school (and USC which paid players for the huge "road trip" to the Roe Bowl) dictate the location and climate for bowl games. ...
Originally posted by BadwaterThere clearly is a home field advantage in college football and the bowls are not evenly distributed. To use your language, it is utter and completeness nonsense to think this does not create a huge fairness isssue. I have far more problem with location of bowl games than the exclusion of teams like Boise who simply play significantly inferior teams.
This is utter and complete nonsense. The worst sort of babbling. MONEY dictates the bowl system; the fact that it exists and where the bowls exist. Fans do not want their teams to play in Minnesota, they want to be spending their dollars in a more pleasant locale. Bowl organizers know this and schedule as such. Your "real injustice" can't even claim to be a paper tiger - it's completely a non-issue.
Originally posted by quackquackThe same argument is made year after year and then the bowl games roll around and some undefeated mid-major team dusts a Top 10 team from a BCS conference. After the pounding Utah gave Alabama (a one loss team which took Florida to the wire in the SEC Championship) last year, I'm surprised this crap is still being tossed out.
Boise does not play the schedule that the major conferences play and therefore they simply should not play for a national championship.
For example, Alabama played in consecutive weeks at the #10 team in the nation, then home vs. the #7 team in the nation and then at the #19 team in the nation. Alabama plays two more top ten teams on the schedule (p ...[text shortened]... in Florida or Texas, let's have one outside up north (maybe even on the Blue turf of Boise).
The "bowl games are unfair because they are played in states with good weather" is another yearly argument made here esp. by Big Ten fans to explain their usual cruddy performance in them. If the college football backers up North went to pony up and create bowl games in Minnesota or Wisconsin no one's stopping them.
Of course a playoff with mid major teams eligible for a couple of spots would be the optimum solution. But barring that, there is simply no reason to dismiss out of hand every mid major from EVER playing in the BCS Championship Game. As mentioned, Boise State has already beaten two teams ranked when they played them and may well play a third later this year (Nevada). They started the season ranked in the Top 5 and if they win out they deserve their shot given how teams in front of them have fallen out. If they really don't deserve to be there, they'll get crushed like all the "experts" here believe. They would still be considerably more interesting than serving up more Big Ten fodder in the BCS Championship.
Originally posted by no1marauderI have heard your arguments about teams that continually win games and play insufficient schedules and honestly they bring nothing new to the table. Instead of telling the Big 10 to form its own bowl game let Boise form its own bowl game and play Utah or TCU or the garbage it plays in conference and stop the whinning about not getting a chance to play in bowl games reserved for teams with tough schedules.
The same argument is made year after year and then the bowl games roll around and some undefeated mid-major team dusts a Top 10 team from a BCS conference. After the pounding Utah gave Alabama (a one loss team which took Florida to the wire in the SEC Championship) last year, I'm surprised this crap is still being tossed out.
The "bow ...[text shortened]... nsiderably more interesting than serving up more Big Ten fodder in the BCS Championship.
Play-off fixes the problem. There is no place to hide in a play-off. If you win it, you deserve it. It doesn't mean you played the teams with the right names. It means you faced the best and survived.
I'd say that if you choose the top 16 teams you won't leave any of the top teams out.
Originally posted by EladarA sixteen team playoff will make the regular season meaningless, like the NCAA tournament in basketball. Even in MLB (where the fewest number of teams make the playoffs), the Twins, Rays and Yankees all played below .500 for the last few weeks of the season because they were resting up for the playoffs.
Play-off fixes the problem. There is no place to hide in a play-off. If you win it, you deserve it. It doesn't mean you played the teams with the right names. It means you faced the best and survived.
I'd say that if you choose the top 16 teams you won't leave any of the top teams out.
Why would anyone watch a game like Alabama - South Carolina if Alabama is going to be a top 16 team anyway? Similarly Ohio State, Oregon etc are virtually guaranteed to end in the top 16. I want those teams trying to be #1 all season not resting up for the playoffs and making sure they are top 16. To me the beauty of college foootball season is every game can ruin a season. I have no desire to put three loss teams and no loss teams on equal footing in a playoff.
Originally posted by quackquackI already proposed a solution which addresses that concern: an 8 team playoff with the 6 BCS conference winners and the top 2 independents/mid-majors. That way teams would still have to play to win their conferences or face elimination.
A sixteen team playoff will make the regular season meaningless, like the NCAA tournament in basketball. Even in MLB (where the fewest number of teams make the playoffs), the Twins, Rays and Yankees all played below .500 for the last few weeks of the season because they were resting up for the playoffs.
Why would anyone watch a game like Alabama - South ...[text shortened]... ason. I have no desire to put three loss teams and no loss teams on equal footing in a playoff.