I took your comments as hurtful and mean. Of course you may have noticed that I only posted numbers that made my team look goodOriginally Posted by souljahbill
I took your comments as hurtful and mean. Of course you may have noticed that I only posted numbers that made my team look good
If the BCS can agree on it and now take it to the university presidents, why wait til 2014. Just do it now.
They need the extra year to allow as much publicity and media to get their hands on this to drive the price skyrocketing for 2014. That will set the price moving forward and rushing into this year wouldn't make sense from NCAA's standpoint.
A minor thing called contracts are in the way.
When word of this broke yesterday evening, media-types on Twitter were wetting themselves with excitement. (Whether you agree or not with playoffs or the structure, the media has been a huge catalyst in making it happen.) However, as time went on, some media started to question the selection process (committee) and started to claim that the change is only being made for money and it still isn't entirely 'fair.' (Some complaining about OOC scheduling, for example.)Some of them rode this train for years and they just now realized there may be some issues with it? Great work.
Being on the selection committee might be the worst job out there. Get one "controversial" selection and you'll have media and fans digging through your entire life history, trying to establish some tie to that team (or conference) to besmirch your name and qualifications.
Who really honors a contract now a days
iirc,is 14-0 against big10 and sec teams in the bcs era. i'd call that dominance. lol
I saw on The Herd the other day when Les Miles was on the show that one year (09 maybe?), 1-2 would have been easy but 3-4 would have been a headache because there were, like, 5 or 6 schools with 1 loss in the next tier of schools. He was making the point that we'd go from 1 school being pissed off that they got left out to 2, 3, or 4 teams being pissed off that they got left out.
Just take this past year as an example. You would have had LSU at the #1 seed and then had Stanford, Oregon, Alabama, Boise State, and Oklahoma State that would have been fighting for those 3 spots.
Yeah here are the Week 15 BCS standings from '08
1 Alabama 12-0
2 Oklahoma 11-1
3 Texas 11-1
4 Florida 11-1
5 USC 10-1
6 Utah 12-0
7 Texas Tech 11-1
8 Penn State 11-1
9 Boise State 12-0
^^^^
I would HATE to be on the selection committee for THAT!
Especially with 2 undefeated non-BCS teams on there.
Conference champions. They need to have, likes mors has said before, multiple tiers of selection. Tier 1 - Conference champions (in the top 4, top 6, top 8, wherever you want the cut off line). Tier 2 - A non-conference champion in the top 4 (Texas would qualify here if there was still an open slot). Tier 3 - Be in the top 8 or top 12.
If you go with conference champions in the top 6, you have Alabama, Oklahoma, USC, and Utah. Texas, Florida and Texas Tech didn't win their conferences, so they aren't considered in Tier 1 selection.
I don't necessarily agree with the conference champion thing. Without every team that is in contention playing every other team in contention, you really can't punish a team for losing it's conference championship game to team that none of the other teams have played. In the '08 example, say Florida was in the ACC and probably would have went undefeated(simply for argument sake). They would be sitting at 12-0 and probably a lock to make the playoff. But because they are not and were probably the 2nd best team in the country and they lost to the #1 team in the country they don't get in over a Utah team that won a substandard conference.
There's a reason that pro sports have wild card teams and even then, that system isn't perfect and they look to expand more wild card teams.
The problem is, without conference champions being the main barometer, you'll never have a non-BCS team in the playoffs. As much as I love the fact that with WVU in the Big 12, we're guaranteed a spot if we win out (or lose early and then win out), it fuckin' sucks to be someone like UCF or Boise State that doesn't have a prayer of getting into the top 4, no matter if they win out or not.
Last edited by morsdraconis; 06-21-2012 at 03:22 PM.
Well, no system is going to be perfect. But watching Alabama, Oklahoma, USC and Utah would be a lot more fun than watching Alabama, Florida, Texas and Oklahoma in a nothing but Big 12 vs. SEC showdown. Fuck that. What the hell's the point of even playing if two conferences are going to monopolize the entire fucking playoff.
Those type of teams have never really had a prayer regardless. They're elminated from BCS contention before one snap has been taken.
And this is part of the problem. Money and entertainment drive it, but it truly should try to put the best teams in the country against each other. Sports should 1st and foremost be about the players playing the game.
This is why it needs to be more teams, even though you will still have people on the outside looking in. Just like Hoops. Teams get mad they didn't make the bubble, but they at least have more games to "plead" their case. Win more and you're in.
But what if they were the best 4 teams? Do we want the best 4 teams or the best 4 champs?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks