Congressman plans hearings on BCS in effort to force playoff
- Thread starter BAMAPHIN 22
- Start date
The BCS is legally fraud. It's about time someone in a position of power is doing something about it. And as a college football fan, things are about to get real exciting in the postseason. I hope Congress acts quickly.
X-Pacolypse
Active Roster
Honestly, Congress should have better things to do with their time, but this is the United States government we're talking about here. Anyways, if these hearings can finally kill the BCS, and implement a long sought after playoff system. Congress' apporoval ratings should get a boost from college football fans alone.
ThunderDan13
Windy City Fin-Fan (ie. Lonely)
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2008
- Messages
- 354
- Reaction score
- 0
I hate the BCS, but some of you supporting these care to explain how its illegal?
Uneven bargaining positions are what are business world is centered on. It's not enough to be unfair, you have to break the law for congress to need to step in.
You can't use this season as an example of the broken system... had UTAH been #1 most polls and not in the BCS title game... then maybe... IF there is significant detriment.. I don't really know the law.. but really? Is congress necessary? What's next, they step in and change the infield fly rule?
Uneven bargaining positions are what are business world is centered on. It's not enough to be unfair, you have to break the law for congress to need to step in.
You can't use this season as an example of the broken system... had UTAH been #1 most polls and not in the BCS title game... then maybe... IF there is significant detriment.. I don't really know the law.. but really? Is congress necessary? What's next, they step in and change the infield fly rule?
Yeah! Football is more American than apple pie. Im glad congress has their priorities straight.
Down with the BCS!:titanic:
I will probably get steamrolled for saying this but...
I'm actually against a playoff system.
I like the BCS because it forces you to win your games. And winning should be important. Think about the cons of a college football playoff. You may think there aren't any, but take a look at college basketball. Their postseason is GREAT. Their March Madness tournaments is one of the best times of the year. But take a look at their regular season. It begins in early November and drags on until March. A most of the country says what?
"I don't even watch college basketball until the tournament starts."
That's sad. I love college football. It's an obsession. I don't want my college football regular season to become watered down simply because, and honestly this is rare, the BCS whiffs. Think about when the BCS has really whiffed. Auburn. Auburn was 13 - 0 and didn't get in. Other than that, they've mostly gotten it right. Florida should have played Oklahoma this year. Oklahoma should have gotten in over Texas. Texas played a much worse schedule. And when you schedule scrubs, you should be punished. And then Texas got exposed against Ohio State. I know Texas won the game, but ultimately, they were exposed. And in the end, Texas ended up ahead of Oklahoma in the final BCS standings.
If you ask me, the only reasonable solution is to keep the bowl games but cut out a few. Teams that go 6 - 6 shouldn't get in to bowls. You should have to win 7. If you're 6 - 6 and go to the PoulanPro Weed Eater Bowl, there's a chance you lose, and finish the season 6 - 7. What kind of bowl team finishes with a losing record? Win 7 games. Then go to a bowl. Finally, embrace the Plus One system. Yes, there's a lot of b*tching about the BCS and who gets in so if the top 4 teams are in the title hunt, who can really complain? Take a look at the BCS standings BEFORE the championship game and look at teams ranked #5 or lower and tell me who really had a legitimate gripe about not being in the top 4. USC and that's it. But they lost to Oregon State so they can't complain that much. And don't hand me Utah. If Alabama had shown up to play instead of not caring because they got beat by Florida and had nothing to play for, that game wouldn't have been close. And Andre Smith was a BIG loss.
College football doesn't need a playoff. As fans we would suffer as a result. If we go to an 8 or 16 game format, we're stuck with teams like Cincinnati and Virginia Tech playing just like they did in the Orange Bowl and nobody watched that. People watched the championship game because it mattered. When you take eight to sixteen teams you're taking the top teams and average teams and mushing them all together in an effort to make everyone equal. That's Socialism. College football doesn't need to become Socialism.
I'm actually against a playoff system.
I like the BCS because it forces you to win your games. And winning should be important. Think about the cons of a college football playoff. You may think there aren't any, but take a look at college basketball. Their postseason is GREAT. Their March Madness tournaments is one of the best times of the year. But take a look at their regular season. It begins in early November and drags on until March. A most of the country says what?
"I don't even watch college basketball until the tournament starts."
That's sad. I love college football. It's an obsession. I don't want my college football regular season to become watered down simply because, and honestly this is rare, the BCS whiffs. Think about when the BCS has really whiffed. Auburn. Auburn was 13 - 0 and didn't get in. Other than that, they've mostly gotten it right. Florida should have played Oklahoma this year. Oklahoma should have gotten in over Texas. Texas played a much worse schedule. And when you schedule scrubs, you should be punished. And then Texas got exposed against Ohio State. I know Texas won the game, but ultimately, they were exposed. And in the end, Texas ended up ahead of Oklahoma in the final BCS standings.
If you ask me, the only reasonable solution is to keep the bowl games but cut out a few. Teams that go 6 - 6 shouldn't get in to bowls. You should have to win 7. If you're 6 - 6 and go to the PoulanPro Weed Eater Bowl, there's a chance you lose, and finish the season 6 - 7. What kind of bowl team finishes with a losing record? Win 7 games. Then go to a bowl. Finally, embrace the Plus One system. Yes, there's a lot of b*tching about the BCS and who gets in so if the top 4 teams are in the title hunt, who can really complain? Take a look at the BCS standings BEFORE the championship game and look at teams ranked #5 or lower and tell me who really had a legitimate gripe about not being in the top 4. USC and that's it. But they lost to Oregon State so they can't complain that much. And don't hand me Utah. If Alabama had shown up to play instead of not caring because they got beat by Florida and had nothing to play for, that game wouldn't have been close. And Andre Smith was a BIG loss.
College football doesn't need a playoff. As fans we would suffer as a result. If we go to an 8 or 16 game format, we're stuck with teams like Cincinnati and Virginia Tech playing just like they did in the Orange Bowl and nobody watched that. People watched the championship game because it mattered. When you take eight to sixteen teams you're taking the top teams and average teams and mushing them all together in an effort to make everyone equal. That's Socialism. College football doesn't need to become Socialism.
Pachyderm_Wave
Hartselle Tigers (15-0) 5-A State Champ
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2008
- Messages
- 15,347
- Reaction score
- 13,965
I can see this angle....but at the same time...if all these bowl games are so important, and you're going to have all these bowl games anyway...then they should at least matter...they don't really under the current system...
The BCS was designed to pit #1 versus #2....the rest don't matter...they don't have a legitimate shot at the championship...
The BCS whiffed when they put Nebraska against Miami....
The BCS whiffed terribly in matching up Oklahoma with USC and leaving Auburn out...Oklahoma didn't even win their conference...they got drilled by Kansas St...
The coaches poll being 1/3 of the formula is flawed...the coaches don't even watch all the other teams as much as we do...
I cut out two parts of your argument - and I'm going to address the latter part first. First of all - in an 8 game playoff Cincinnati wouldn't have played Virginia Tech. Cincinnati would've played a team like Florida, and Va Tech would've played a team like Texas or USC (Utah being the low seed playing the #1 team Oklahoma). And saying nobody would watch those games, is like saying nobody would watch the first round of an NCAA tournament, where the disparities are even greater! People would most definitely watch every single game of an 8 team playoff.
Now - for the 'BCS whiffs' part. The BCS whiffs every year there is NOT an undisputed national champion. This year qualifies. This is also fraud. This is why Congress is getting involved - the same reason Congress got involved in Enron. The BCS is scamming people by presenting something they are calling a national title game - when it's two arbitrary teams. Tell me why USC doesn't deserve to go in over Florida? USC lost to a better team on the road before Florida lost at home to a slightly lesser opponent. The only real way to settle which is a better team is to make them play each other, which they didn't. Therefore, the game does NOT produce an undisputed national champion, which the BCS is selling to the fans/advertisers/media. The BCS has to change. Whether we go back to the old ways, or we employ a playoff system, something has to be done.
Cincinnati against Virginia Tech was just me throwing two teams out there for the hell of it. I understand that those two wouldn't have played in a playoff THIS year unless those two ended up in the title game. And in a playoff, that is certainly possible. And if it happened, who would watch that lol? If a playoff were implemented THIS year, you probably would have gotten one of two games: Florida v. Oklahoma, Florida v. USC. No one wants to see Utah v. Penn State or Georgia v. Boise State. It's bad for business. And that's what college football is. It's a business. As fans we fail to understand that for the most part.
As far as who loses to who, in the end, Ole Miss turned out to be a pretty good football team. Oregon State did as well, so you have to look at schedules. The Pac 10 doesn't have a title game and is obviously inferior as a conference to the SEC so taking Florida over USC was not really a decision. The decision was Oklahoma over Texas that set everyone off. But again, that comes down to schedule. When you schedule scrubs and don't get in, you really have no one to blame but yourself; not the BCS.
The BCS is certainly not flawless but going to a playoff will take away a lot of the appeal and luster that makes college football so great. You gotta believe that it will. The regular season will no longer mean that much not only to fans but players as well. Not only that but the bowl system benefits the conferences financially and financially, I just don't know if they could build a playoff system that could offer the financial support as the bowl system. A playoff would be one entity which would mean one primary sponsor. Whereas the bowl system has one primary sponsor per bowl game that pays out a certain amount of cash to the school's respective conference. You know me, as a booster, I'm all for funding the schools in any way possible.
See, but why does it take away from the luster when you have teams with 1-2 losses getting into the national title game?? The college football season will be just as exciting - because only 8 teams would get in. You'd still have to win your conference, or else get an at-large bid. Even this would be tricky, because if we had one this year, who gets the 2 at large bids out of Texas, Alabama, and Utah? I would have to think that Alabama would be the odd team out because they had just lost to Florida the last week of the season. Just for fun - let's set up an 8 team playoff that would have happened this year.
#1 Oklahoma vs. #8 Va. Tech
#2 Florida vs. #7 Cincinnati
#3 Texas vs. #6 Penn St.
#4 USC vs. #5 Utah
Those are based off the final BCS standings, before the bowls. I think those are all pretty intriguing matchups, but the point is, there would be no dispute as to who is the national champion. If you can't win your own conference - you have no claim to a national title, so Alabama's argument is gone. There would have to be special circumstances though, as there are now. For example - a non-BCS school with an undefeated record would have to be included, etc. I don't have all the answers for it, but I'm not working for the NCAA either. It's just clear that what's going on right now is illegal, and it's also not fair to college football fans who are duped into believing that the BCS is producing an undisputed national champion.
Why does a non-BCS school with an undefeated record HAVE to be included? Remember Hawaii last year? They got ROLLED by Georgia. Strength of schedule has a meaning. Sure there would be no dispute as to who the national champion is but the NCAA and BCS doesn't care about what the fans think about the national champion is. It goes down in their record books. If Utah beats Virginia Tech for the national title, sure they're the undisputed champion but no one watched it. People want to watch two powerhouse programs fight it out. They ratings say we want to see it.
Take a look at baseball. And I don't want to hear anyone say, "Baseball sucks anyway. No one watches baseball to begin with." Look at baseball. Ratings are terrible. Tampa v. Philadelphia was a trainwreck in the ratings. But you take Boston v. St. Louis or the Yankees v. the Cubs and the ratings are thru the roof. People want to see big name powerhouses with star players going at it. I still don't know the name of the Utah head coach or quarterback. But I can name all of the starting quarterbacks and head coaches for Texas, Ohio State, Florida, Oklahoma, Penn State and USC. Big names attract big ratings. That's what the NCAA and the BCS are after. College football is great year round. College basketball is only great when the tournament starts.
I like the idea of a playoff but the Plus One system seems to be the best option for everyone. I think with a Plus One you get the undisputed champion. How much claim to a national title can the five seed really have when it's all said and done? The bottom line is win your games and everything else will take care of itself in the current system....unless you're Auburn. That was a major league FAIL job by the system.
Also with the playoffs, you're asking 18 - 21 year olds to pound their bodies thru more physical practices and games. They just aren't built for that yet. It's tough for the NFL players to do it consistently. Watch the Ravens - Steelers game this weekend. I would almost guarantee that the Ravens look physically beaten on the field tomorrow. They played an intense physical game against the Titans and were largely outplayed. The Steelers had a week off the previous week and then played a finesse team in the Chargers. The Steelers should be much more physical tomorrow than the Ravens.
I say implement the Plus One system, require teams to have 7 wins to become bowl eligible and this will eliminate the PoulanPro Wedd Eater Bowl and the Emerald Nut In Your Mouth Bowl along with a few other worthless bowl games.