- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: For those BCS lovers who think...
Posted on 11/16/10 at 5:58 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
Posted on 11/16/10 at 5:58 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
If you don't fricking like it, DON'T frickING WATCH IT! All the other sports seem to have what you're looking for, just watch them.
I like college football, and I'm an LSU alumn, of course I'm going to watch it. I just don't like how they determine a national champion. Not liking how they end the season has nothing to do with enjoying watching football.
quote:
Why frick it up for the people that do like it, and have always liked it?
You don't keep something around just to satisfy the minority.
0
Posted on 11/16/10 at 6:05 pm to rintintin
quote:
I totally agree, but as I've stated earlier in this thread, the controversy is much less when it's concerning who the number 8 and 9 teams are, rather than the number 2 and 3 teams. Especially when there are multiple undefeated teams, which has happened often lately.
True you did, fair enough. The thread has swelled and I can't remember who said what.
I want to be clear, I'm not a BCS lover and I want there to be a more satisfying way to crown a champion. The only sports that seem to have perfected the way to crown a champion are European soccer and rugby leagues where everyone plays each other home and away and the team with the best record at the end of the season wins. And maybe the logistical fairness in that influences my opinion against playoffs, even though I know that's not a feasible solution in American sports, especially college football.
If it's picking the lesser of two evils, I respect your opinion there. I just don't want a playoff as a reactionary response to the shortcomings of the BCS; in other words, I don't want change for the sake of change as a solution at this point. And I'll leave it at that.
Posted on 11/16/10 at 6:19 pm to nvasil1
quote:
If it's picking the lesser of two evils, I respect your opinion there. I just don't want a playoff as a reactionary response to the shortcomings of the BCS; in other words, I don't want change for the sake of change as a solution at this point. And I'll leave it at that.
Fair enough.
As you are not a BCS lover, I am not a BCS hater, our discussion has just portrayed us that way. The BCS is exciting nonetheless, and it is definitely better than what they did before, with multiple national champions, I just think there is a better way. I'm all for starting at a +1 then working from there. I agree they shouldn't abruptly implement an extensive playoff system just for the sake of change.
Posted on 11/16/10 at 6:25 pm to SaltyTiger53
LSU won its 2 Nat'l Championships because of the BCS. USC and Ohio State would have won under the old formula.
Posted on 11/16/10 at 7:14 pm to LSUandAU
We beat OSU like a drum partner.. What you are saying is wild speculation at best. Besides, you are missing my point. I'm not whining about LSU not getting a fair draw this year. I just hate the system in general.. And always have
Posted on 11/16/10 at 9:33 pm to SaltyTiger53
Salty, you must be a Dan "I know everyfrickinthing" Patrick listener. This “it-makes-the-season-more-exciting” is a bullshite argument.
So, who makes the playoffs this year? Say there is an 8 team playoff. How do you pick the 8, is it by ranking, maybe conference champs.
Let's take top 8. As it stands now, the Big East and ACC champs would be out. With 2 weeks to play, number 16 Va. Tech. would have to move up 8 spots to make the playoffs. Possible, but how likely is that? How about if USCe were to defeat Auburn in the SECCG, could they move up 9 spots? Now you might have a scenerio where the SEC champ doesn't make the playoffs. That would really go over big.
Let's look at it from a conference champion playoff. An unranked Big East champion (like Pitt), and the ACC champ., Va. Tech (or even a lower ranked Miami making it in), displacing a 1 loss LSU, Ohio St., Stanford or Oklahoma. Or, heaven forbid, USCe upsetting Auburn and displacing even AU or LSU. Imagine the uproar over that shite.
Now, anti BCS pundits claim it will make the regular season games more exciting, and it will, for a dozen teams and the last 3 weeks of the regular season. Yea, right, those other teams are playing for a visit to a bowl game. Which one? An 8 game playoff will take up 7 Bowls. That would normally be 14 teams. Most likely the top tier bowls will be used. What does the rest of the field have to play for the last few weeks of the season.
What of the bowl games? This is where the big payouts come from. Traditionally the Sugar has SEC representative, Fiesta has Big 12 and so on. Where is the money going to come from, the sponsors to the games are going to pick up a round one playoff game. I can hear it now, "USF & G First Round Playoff Game".
Where would the games be? What kind of draws will these games have? Are Oregon fans going to travel to the L.A. for round 1, then N.O. for round 2 and then finally Miami for the Championship? I know I could not follow LSU around the country for mutiple games. Hell, I struggle to take my family of four to a Bowl game in N.O. (and I am not leaving them behind so I can trapse around the country). Yea, the playoff works in the minor divisions of college football, but they only play in front of small crowds. Try to get 60 to 90 thousand fans to follow a team around the country for 3 weeks. And say what you want, you are not going to get 80,000 people in LA to attend a 2nd round playoff game between LSU and Nebraska in the Rose Bowl. That is why the Bowls will never agree to it.
OK, let's eliminate the bowls and the BCS and have a playoff system, which brings us back to who goes. The only fair way is to have the conference champs advance to playoffs, just like Div. II. This means a restructuring of the entire FCS conference system. They will all have to add a championship game? Will the conferences have to be realigned? Will big schools leave major conferences for lesser conferences for a better chance for the playoffs? i.e. Arkansas to the Sunbelt or Missouri to the ? And remember, no one can make any of these schools or conferences re-align, or stop them for that matter. Why do you think Notre Dame is still an independent? Bowls are independent, also. No one can make them comply.
So, you “Anti BCS Pundits” STFU! If you don’t like the best traditions sports has to offer, take your anti traditionalist asses to the NFL.
So, who makes the playoffs this year? Say there is an 8 team playoff. How do you pick the 8, is it by ranking, maybe conference champs.
Let's take top 8. As it stands now, the Big East and ACC champs would be out. With 2 weeks to play, number 16 Va. Tech. would have to move up 8 spots to make the playoffs. Possible, but how likely is that? How about if USCe were to defeat Auburn in the SECCG, could they move up 9 spots? Now you might have a scenerio where the SEC champ doesn't make the playoffs. That would really go over big.
Let's look at it from a conference champion playoff. An unranked Big East champion (like Pitt), and the ACC champ., Va. Tech (or even a lower ranked Miami making it in), displacing a 1 loss LSU, Ohio St., Stanford or Oklahoma. Or, heaven forbid, USCe upsetting Auburn and displacing even AU or LSU. Imagine the uproar over that shite.
Now, anti BCS pundits claim it will make the regular season games more exciting, and it will, for a dozen teams and the last 3 weeks of the regular season. Yea, right, those other teams are playing for a visit to a bowl game. Which one? An 8 game playoff will take up 7 Bowls. That would normally be 14 teams. Most likely the top tier bowls will be used. What does the rest of the field have to play for the last few weeks of the season.
What of the bowl games? This is where the big payouts come from. Traditionally the Sugar has SEC representative, Fiesta has Big 12 and so on. Where is the money going to come from, the sponsors to the games are going to pick up a round one playoff game. I can hear it now, "USF & G First Round Playoff Game".
Where would the games be? What kind of draws will these games have? Are Oregon fans going to travel to the L.A. for round 1, then N.O. for round 2 and then finally Miami for the Championship? I know I could not follow LSU around the country for mutiple games. Hell, I struggle to take my family of four to a Bowl game in N.O. (and I am not leaving them behind so I can trapse around the country). Yea, the playoff works in the minor divisions of college football, but they only play in front of small crowds. Try to get 60 to 90 thousand fans to follow a team around the country for 3 weeks. And say what you want, you are not going to get 80,000 people in LA to attend a 2nd round playoff game between LSU and Nebraska in the Rose Bowl. That is why the Bowls will never agree to it.
OK, let's eliminate the bowls and the BCS and have a playoff system, which brings us back to who goes. The only fair way is to have the conference champs advance to playoffs, just like Div. II. This means a restructuring of the entire FCS conference system. They will all have to add a championship game? Will the conferences have to be realigned? Will big schools leave major conferences for lesser conferences for a better chance for the playoffs? i.e. Arkansas to the Sunbelt or Missouri to the ? And remember, no one can make any of these schools or conferences re-align, or stop them for that matter. Why do you think Notre Dame is still an independent? Bowls are independent, also. No one can make them comply.
So, you “Anti BCS Pundits” STFU! If you don’t like the best traditions sports has to offer, take your anti traditionalist asses to the NFL.
Posted on 11/16/10 at 9:42 pm to Nunk Red
Posted on 11/16/10 at 9:45 pm to SaltyTiger53
quote:
Option 2: We have clenched a spot in the playoffs and will be playing Nebraska in Tiger Stadium in 4 weeks for the first round of the playoffs. Also, if we play well, we have a chance to be crowned as NATIONAL CHAMPIONS.
Which would mean these two games are meaningless.
THere's really no way to argue that a playoff makes the regular season better, it definitely doesn't.
Posted on 11/16/10 at 9:45 pm to SaltyTiger53
Option 3: Only conference champions qualify for the plaaoffs and LSU's season is over.
Posted on 11/16/10 at 9:58 pm to Poodlebrain
I brought up the Pats-Giants season bc it is the perfect example of playoffs not being the be-all, end-all, logical conclusion to a sport season. The point was, the playoffs got it wrong that year. The Pats were the best team during the entire season and split the head to head matches 1-1 with the super bowl champs.
There is no perfect way to decide a champion without every team playing each other. The imperfect BCS is as fine with me as an imperfect playoff would be. A person doesnt have to hate the concept of playoffs just bc he is satisfied with the BCS. Just two different systems for crowning a champ, neither perfect.
There is no perfect way to decide a champion without every team playing each other. The imperfect BCS is as fine with me as an imperfect playoff would be. A person doesnt have to hate the concept of playoffs just bc he is satisfied with the BCS. Just two different systems for crowning a champ, neither perfect.
Posted on 11/16/10 at 10:04 pm to SaltyTiger53
quote:
a playoff would kill the regular season, look at our beloved #5 LSU.
Option 1: We have a shot to make the Sugar Bowl unless everyones wheels fall off of the wagon then we MIGHT get a shot at the title, but we have absolutely NO CONTROL OF OUR OWN DESTINY.
Option 2: We have clenched a spot in the playoffs and will be playing Nebraska in Tiger Stadium in 4 weeks for the first round of the playoffs. Also, if we play well, we have a chance to be crowned as NATIONAL CHAMPIONS.
...I take option two every time. The season would be way more exciting because we control our own destiny. Instead of having to root against TCU, Boise, Oregon, and Auburn, we could relentlessly cheer for the Tigers alone with confidence that WE CONTROL OUR OWN DESTINY..
I cannot comprehend the lack of logic that goes into the BCS System, and I hope a playoff is put in play in the near future, regardless of the greedy bastards who are trying to prevent it.
Don't lose to Auburn, it's not a problem. They took care of business, we did not. NCAA compliance issues aside for one moment, there's no reason we should have an equal shot as them if they beat us. That's what makes the college football regular season exciting.
Tonight is the opening night for college basketball. Answer this question- of the games tonight, how many have national championship implications? On the final night of the regular season, how many will have national championship implications?
Posted on 11/16/10 at 10:43 pm to Carlos
Just my opinion here, but I like the bowls over a playoff.
maybe we add a title in 06; but maybe USC beats us in 03 and/or 07. Or maybe someone else wins.
Point is I was very happy in 06 winning the Sugar Bowl, in not being #1 at the end didn't make it any less thrilling to me. I actually was pleased with kicking the ever-loving crap out of Georgia Tech in 08, and that game wouldn't have ever happened with a playoff.
There's too many teams to have a good system- look at this year. How many teams do you let in per conference? The Big 10 may have 3 11-1 teams- do they all get in, or do you tell, say, Michigan St sorry, the polls don't like you, so you're out- and the Big East gets a team with 3 or 4 losses in? For that matter, why continue to have strong conferences like the SEC- LSU can assemble a coalition of nearby schools and promise them a cut of the take (Tulane, La Tech, the UL's, etc), and go make a run to playoffs every year with a schedule like Boise's. Why risk going through the SEC if winning the conference isn't prestigious, but merely a ticket to the playoffs?
maybe we add a title in 06; but maybe USC beats us in 03 and/or 07. Or maybe someone else wins.
Point is I was very happy in 06 winning the Sugar Bowl, in not being #1 at the end didn't make it any less thrilling to me. I actually was pleased with kicking the ever-loving crap out of Georgia Tech in 08, and that game wouldn't have ever happened with a playoff.
There's too many teams to have a good system- look at this year. How many teams do you let in per conference? The Big 10 may have 3 11-1 teams- do they all get in, or do you tell, say, Michigan St sorry, the polls don't like you, so you're out- and the Big East gets a team with 3 or 4 losses in? For that matter, why continue to have strong conferences like the SEC- LSU can assemble a coalition of nearby schools and promise them a cut of the take (Tulane, La Tech, the UL's, etc), and go make a run to playoffs every year with a schedule like Boise's. Why risk going through the SEC if winning the conference isn't prestigious, but merely a ticket to the playoffs?
Posted on 11/17/10 at 1:21 am to Scoob
rintintin
Sorry, next time I will keep it simple so you can keep up.
Sorry, next time I will keep it simple so you can keep up.
Posted on 11/17/10 at 2:54 am to SaltyTiger53
quote:
Option 2: We have clenched a spot in the playoffs and will be playing Nebraska in Tiger Stadium in 4 weeks for the first round of the playoffs.
Top seeds 1-4 would likely be home.
It should keep reg season lively if an 8 team playoff stipulated no more than 2 losses as 1st qualifier and Conf Champ 2nd, and SOS dictated 50% of rank instead of 1/3. I would guess there is some point where SOS would self defeat and have a 3-4 loss team (ND, ISU) as a #1. I guess LSUmatt or other BCS gurus would know more on that.
Something should be done to encourage quality scheduling and keep cupcakes out no matter which system is used for NC.
Posted on 11/17/10 at 4:16 am to Mayhawman
quote:
Let's take top 8. As it stands now, the Big East and ACC champs would be out. With 2 weeks to play, number 16 Va. Tech. would have to move up 8 spots to make the playoffs. Possible, but how likely is that? How about if USCe were to defeat Auburn in the SECCG, could they move up 9 spots? Now you might have a scenerio where the SEC champ doesn't make the playoffs. That would really go over big. Let's look at it from a conference champion playoff. An unranked Big East champion (like Pitt), and the ACC champ., Va. Tech (or even a lower ranked Miami making it in), displacing a 1 loss LSU, Ohio St., Stanford or Oklahoma. Or, heaven forbid, USCe upsetting Auburn and displacing even AU or LSU. Imagine the uproar over that shite.
couldn't have said it any better. Right now people are complaining about the ACC and Big East champions getting automatics bids to BCS games; yet they are willing to let those teams be in an 8-teams playoff. The +1 is probably as far as college football would go, and the reason why the playoffs haven't been implemented yet is because all those advocating for a playoff have failed to come up with ONE plan that everyone can support and be behind. Til then, we'll have to go with the BCS and it's not that bad. Win em all and you're in. (major BCS conferences)
Posted on 11/17/10 at 4:46 am to castorinho
Democracy is the worst system, except for all the others...so said Winston Churchill. That is what I feel about the current system.
Posted on 11/17/10 at 6:15 am to zeebo
There is no good way to decide a champion without every team at least having the potential to play each other via fair playoff system.
Current system is sort of a retarded/dysfunctional regular season playoff...
Current system is sort of a retarded/dysfunctional regular season playoff...
Posted on 11/17/10 at 7:39 am to SaltyTiger53
if we go to a playoff we would only have a +1 system, at-least that's what i've heard and if it where to start today it would be one seed Oregon vs 4 seed Boise and 2 seed auburn vs 3 seed TCU
Posted on 11/17/10 at 7:46 am to SaltyTiger53
one more thing noone ever talks about is education, isn't that what college is all about anyway. Plus we couldn't start the playoffs in 4 weeks that's week after exam week. Players can't practice during exam week that's why the SEC championship is on the 5th the day before exam start so they can have a week off for exams then start to prepare for their bowl game. Many people who are calling for playoffs forget that these are student Athletes. Education must be taken into account when determining if there is a playoff
This post was edited on 11/17/10 at 7:54 am
Posted on 11/17/10 at 8:22 am to rintintin
quote:
but a playoff doesn't have to mean 16 or 32 teams
a. i think the NCAA requires 16 teams for them to recognize their playoff winner as the champ
b. the pro-playoff crowd have argued themselves into a corner where it has to be 12 teams, minimum (for all 11 conferences
quote:
Most would agree that the top 8 teams
just like b above, 8 teams has developed as the ideal in hypothetical world
4 teams is fine
8 is too many
16 is an abortion
but the MAJOR PROBLEM is seen in my little aside here. expansion is inevitable. hell it's happened when we don't even HAVE a playoff (4 teams to 8 teams to now 16-24 teams). when we do have a playoff, expansion will happen
expansion = horrible
Page 8 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News