After Week #4, who should be #1?

[cdj]

- Alabama
- Boise State
- Florida
- Nebraska
- Ohio State
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- TCU
- Other

[JeffHCross]

Voting Boise. Ohio State hasn't had enough of a challenge to prove anything yet to me, Alabama didn't look so good yesterday. Boise has had two ranked opponents, and in both games has won with little to no challenge. They won't get another threat until Nevada, unfortunately.

[morsdraconis]

Voting Boise. Ohio State hasn't had enough of a challenge to prove anything yet to me, Alabama didn't look so good yesterday. Boise has had two ranked opponents, and in both games has won with little to no challenge. They won't get another threat until Nevada, unfortunately.

That's been my thought process throughout the season (and thus my reasoning for always voting Boise State as #1).

Alabama hasn't really beaten anyone and they were basically GIVEN the game by Arkansas in the 2nd half and really didn't put up much of a game offensively against a Razorback defense that isn't exactly great.

[CLW]

Alabama. They beat a very good Arkansas team on the road. The SEC is just brutal survive and advance for The Tide.

[JBHuskers]

Bama definitely after a top-10 win on the road.

My top 10:

1. Alabama (--)
2. Ohio State (--)
3. Boise State (--)
4. Stanford (9)
5. Oregon (4)
6. TCU (5)
7. Nebraska (6)
8. Florida (7)
9. Oklahoma (8)
10. Auburn (NR)

Others receiving a thought or two: Utah, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, LSU

Well I jumped ahead of the pollsters in putting Stanford in the top 10, so I'm going to jump ahead of them again and place them ahead of Oregon after an impressive win at Notre Dame. Other than that, not much has changed for me outside of Auburn starting 2-0 in the SEC which is good enough to have them take Arkansas' spot.

[ram29jackson]

based on quality of opponent and wins- and abilty to crush opponent

Boise
Ohio State
Alabama

you say stanford had a quality win against Notre dame?

ND proves to still suck so i'm not sure i would put stanford that high.

Alabama had a good game against Ark. But beating Penn State ment nothing because Penn State isnt showing they are worth a damn yet

[Rudy]

Stanford pounded UCLA and handled Notre Dame on the road easily. They deserve some love.

Bama is still my #1 but I can see Ohio St jumping up there. Boise will be hurt by the fact Oregon St. and VT being disappointments this year.

[JBHuskers]

Stanford pounded UCLA and handled Notre Dame on the road easily. They deserve some love.

Bama is still my #1 but I can see Ohio St jumping up there. Boise will be hurt by the fact Oregon St. and VT being disappointments this year.

Yeah that's why I've been keeping basically a step ahead of the actual polls. If they beat Oregon, I'll probably put them ahead of Boise. Boise's only shot now is if they blow out Nevada. It's good to see two WAC schools in the top 25 right now though.

[steelerfan]

Boise has had two ranked opponents, and in both games has won with little to no challenge.

Did you watch the same Boise/VT game that I did? I'd hardly say it was little to no challenge.

[Rudy]

It's good to see two WAC schools in the top 25 right now though.

I guess that depends on whether you like the WAC. I actually like the BCS and like powerhouses staying powerhouses. I think a 4 team playoff would be OK but I would be dead set against any playoff system bigger than four. I love the pressure the BCS puts on the regular season. If you lose one game you might have blown it. Sure, it does suck when a team goes undefeated and doesn't get a shot but the regular season is so meaningful in college football. It's great.

[JeffHCross]

Did you watch the same Boise/VT game that I did? I'd hardly say it was little to no challenge.:: shrug :: At no point did I feel like VT was going to win. I mean, it was still an impressive win for Boise, and it was still a comeback, you're right. Maybe watching the VT / JMU game colored my memory.


I guess that depends on whether you like the WAC. I actually like the BCS and like powerhouses staying powerhouses.This year, the WAC and MWC are more of powerhouses than the ACC and Big East ...

[steelerfan]

Maybe watching the VT / JMU game colored my memory.

I can definitely see where that could happen, lol.

[morsdraconis]

I guess that depends on whether you like the WAC. I actually like the BCS and like powerhouses staying powerhouses. I think a 4 team playoff would be OK but I would be dead set against any playoff system bigger than four. I love the pressure the BCS puts on the regular season. If you lose one game you might have blown it. Sure, it does suck when a team goes undefeated and doesn't get a shot but the regular season is so meaningful in college football. It's great.

The regular season is still just as meaningful with a playoff system. You go the NFL route and have automatic qualifiers (winner of each BCS conference for example) and then have additional "wild card" spots for the winners of the non-BCS conferences/deserving teams (which would probably mean that the SEC and whatever "powerhouse" conference would end up with two of those spots).

Just completely get rid of the retarded ass poll system. It's a complete fuckin' joke, especially when the preseason poll (aka, what did you do last year and how much television exposure does your team bring to the table with VERY little basis on how good your team is now) plays such a gigantic role in even having a prayer of sniffing a BCS Bowl Game, much less the BCS Championship Game.

Why the big boys can't look at what's happening in the FCS as an example of how it's done is beyond me.

So, with the automatic qualifiers (BCS conference winners), you would have the winners of the Big East, Big 12, ACC, Big Ten, Pac 10, and ACC; thus giving you 6 automatic qualifying teams. From there, you allow 4 extra teams (for a total of 10) from the non-BCS conferences or other BCS conference teams that are deserving (to be determined by the committee, which I talk about below). The 1 and 2 seeds would have a week 1 & 2 bye (making the regular season that much more important since going undefeated in the regular season would be that much bigger since it would likely give you a #1 or #2 seeding) leaving you with seeds 3 through 10 to play in the first round (#3 against #10; #4 against #9; #5 against #8; #6 against #7). The #1 seed would get the winner of the 5/8 and 4/9 matchup and the #2 seed would get the winner of the 3/10 and 6/7 matchups. Then, of course, the winners of those would play for the National Championship.

With the above layout, the regular season still means a WHOLE lot, even more so because of seedings. You take a part from the NCAA Basketball tournament and have a seeding ceremony where the seedings are determined by whatever committee they feel like creating (thus you still have your conference bias that is so damn prevalent). It's highly unlikely that a non-BCS conference team would get a seeding higher than #7, but it would have to be possible (think what will probably happen with Boise State going undefeated this season).

Think of how huge that would be. Four weeks of INTENSE football where it's winner takes all. The games would be played during the same week as the normal bowl games are played (think of them as the NIT of college football) so December would be the March of football. It would be AMAZING.

[Rudy]

I can understand people wanting a playoff system but there is no argument that the regular season stays as meaningful under a large playoff system. It's a real simple formula - the less the playoff teams the more important the regular season. There is no getting around that imo.

For example, ANY playoff system that reward an automatic playoff spot for winning your conference has made out of conference games meaningless. Miami-Ohio State, Penn St-Bama become exhibition games. If OSU had lost to Miami at home they would have blown any shot at the title game this year. But with an AQ, they just win the Big 10 and get in anyways under a playoff system. Some conference winners have had records as poor as 8-4. Why should they deserve a shot?

I know I'm in the minority on this topic but I want a Champion to play like a champion during the regular season and post season. I have a much higher standard for playoff eligibility in sports than the average sports fan. When Arizona gets to the Superbowl with a 9-7 record that's a joke. If they won that Superbowl it would have been cheap and yet everyone would have said "They proved they are the best!" People use the word "playoffs" like it's magic and that it proves everything. It's not magic and it just proves the team that gets hot at the end wins. The NBA and NHL reward over half the teams in their leagues with a playoff spot. Playoff spots in professional sports are as much about money as anything else. When the best team in a regular season wins the championship less than 25% of the time in professional sports I have a problem with that. They add a ludicrous number of teams just to get more TV games and make more money. That doesn't make it right at all. I hope to never see a national champion in college win it all after going 9-3 in the regular season.

Playoff proponents can argue that an undefeated team deserves a shot at the title and that's where the BCS does fail. When Auburn or USC didn't get a shot, that's bad. Boise St. at some point deserves a shot when it goes undefeated and consistently wins it's bowl games. That's why a plus one (4 team playoff) with no automatic qualifiers is OK for me. But any number beyond that or with automatic qualifiers kills it for me. I want to know that a single loss can kill your title dreams. That may be ruthless and unfair but it means that every single game you play is a pseudo-playoff game. You lose and you probably blew it. I never want a big early season game between a Texas and Ohio State to be meaningless. It's like Week 2 in the NFL. Your team loses and the fans just go home early to beat traffic while the players hug and pray at midfield. Nobody cares.

[steelerfan]

I see both sides, but am in favor of playoffs.

The one area where OOC games would still matter for AQ conference teams is with wildcards. Sure, teams would get in at 8-4 etc but ONLY if they won their conference.

[morsdraconis]

It's like Week 2 in the NFL. Your team loses and the fans just go home early to beat traffic while the players hug and pray at midfield. Nobody cares.

I completely disagree. The players very much care, but the beauty of the NFL is the parity of it in that every team can win on any given Sunday. I think we are getting closer and closer to that being the case in college, thus, a playoff being more and more attractive.

[Rudy]

I do think you are right about parity. It does seem to be creeping in more and more. But I still don't want more than a 4 team playoff.

[steelerfan]

the beauty of the NFL is the parity of it in that every team can win on any given Sunday.

Well....not Cleveland. :P

[SmoothPancakes]

Well....not Cleveland. :P

I was gonna say, lets be realistic here. Not quite every team on any given Sunday. :D

[morsdraconis]

I was gonna say, lets be realistic here. Not quite every team on any given Sunday. :D

Except they almost beat Baltimore.

[SmoothPancakes]

Except they almost beat Baltimore.

Almost, but didn't. Besides, even teams are pathetic as the Browns get lucky here and there. But to think the Browns could win on any given Sunday? In my opinion, uh, hell no. Maybe 4 or 5 wins a season, maybe even 8 if they are very lucky and get some breaks, but they are still a bad team, even with Holmgren there.

Hell, unless they knock off Cincy this Sunday, I don't even see them possibly winning until week 11. 100 times out of 100, I would bet against the Browns without a second thought in regards to their upcoming opponents. Atlanta, at Pittsburgh, at New Orleans, New England, NY Jets, I don't see the Browns having a chance. Might they get lucky? Sure, everyone does now and then. But to me, Carolina, Jacksonville, maybe Buffalo are their only true shots at wins this season. Unless they get lucky, have some major breaks go their way, or pull some games completely out of their asses, I don't see them getting more than 3 or 4 wins all season. Hardly any given Sunday.

[steelerfan]

Perhaps the close shave Baltimore experienced is more of an indictment against the Ravens than kudos for Cleveland.

I understand mors line of thinking though. And saying Cleveland can get lucky, or whatever, and beat whomever is really the same as saying "any given Sunday."

I didn't mean to start a debate, I just wanted to take a cheap shot at the Clowns, lol.