Are you guys enjoying this bowl season?

[solo]

Is it me or are there almost zero intriquing matchups this year? I think that having 32 bowl games is actually detrimental to college football. Sure, the games generate revenue, but from a fans perspective, this has got to be the lamest bowl season I have ever seen.

Other than USC-Michigan and Florida-Ohio State, is there another game that you are truly excited about? Sure, as an ND fan, it's always great to see ND play in January. But I'm not really thrilled about the potential blowout and what appears to be to be another collossal mismatch. And watching all these 6-6 and 7-5 teams play each other the past week has been nauseating. This is mediocrity at it's finest.

Not even the BCS bowls look interesting.

Wake Forest-Louisville.....who cares?

LSU-ND....sure hope we show up

Boise State-OK....Does anyone get excited fro a Boise State game?

The games have no sex appeal whatsoever. While sitting here watching these uninteresting games, I can't help but to think about how muach better a playoff would be.
But regardless of your thoughts on a playoff, is this just a particlualy boring bowl season?

 

[Fighting_Irish9]

PLayoff fans.....

I love college football the way it is and am a HUGE fan of the game, the regular season and the Bowls...watch as many as I can

The Regular season has TONS of playoff atmosphere games all through out the season, not to mention the Battles of the IU's fighting for that Bowl spot, putting a lot of meaning on a 5-6 football team in their last game of the season...

If you don't think there are any interesting matchups....IMO you think this because you don't really follow CFB all that closely...

TCU vs Northern Illinios......TCU looking for that rare top 25 finish going up against one of if no the best running backs in college football...

BYU vs Oregon... BYU also looking for a rare top 25 finish, playing against a more talented Oregon Team who is down. A chance to watch Beck play and pick a part a BCS conference team...

Rice vs Troy...Not an "exciting" matchup...However some very exciting players, and Troy did pull off the upset in winning their first ever bowl game....You have any idea how exciting that is for Troy....They had NEVER won a Bowl before...but because it isn't 2 top 5 teams in a playoff....you don't care.

South Fla vs E. Carolina...an up and comer in USF vs a solid Mid Major, was a fun game to watch, You can really see USF is heading in the right direction

New Mexico vs San Jose State.....true nothing "flashy" here, but if you watched those fans you saw the excitement in their faces as it was the first ever bowl for them. Again, just because it doesn't have NC implications doesn't mean it doesn't mean anything...

Arizonia State vs Hawaii....If you weren't excited to watch Brennan and Hawaii's offense against a BCS Program in a Bowl game you missed some great football including a TD record breaking day...

UCLA vs Florida State....Yea who wants to see the first ever matchup against these two programs. Was a damn good game. FSU stepped up and played like they should, while UCLA continied to play over their heads and give it there all...

Alabama vs Oklahoma State....this is an outstanding B12 vs SEC matchup...true the two teams are underachievers but there is a ton of talent and both programs trying to salvage a season with a bowl win....will be a great game.

Texas A&M vs California....Yea nothing to get excited over when two top 25 teams go at it to cap off there season with a bowl win. You should tune in...Marshall Lynch, not to mention you should catch this McGee kid for A&M. He is damn fun to watch.

Rutgers vs Kansas State....yea who wants to see if Rutgers can finish their Dream season with a bowl win....(and if you think its in the Bag...you haven't watched KSU this year)

Kentucky vs Clemson...a pretty good ACC vs SEC matchup, curious if you have ever seen this Woodsen kid for Kentucky play Not to mention Proctor to Stuckey

Oregon State vs Missouri...both programs fighting for a possible top 25 finish which could be huge for the building projects they have going on, and have you seen this Daniel kid for Missouri play...he is a gamer, and this could be an exciting upset.

South Carolina vs Houston...Don't look down on Houston, I wouldn't want us to be playing them this year, Kolb is the real deal and this game is going to be a shootout.

Boston College vs Navy....NAvy with a shot at a 10 win season AGAIN...and their 3rd straight Bowl win... A LOT on the line for Navy, and BC just lost their coach in disarray could really use this bowl win.

Texas vs Iowa....sure likely a blowout....but if this was a regular season game you would be damn excited about the possibility of this B10 team pulling off the upset...Its not likely but its possible. Iowa has talent.

Georgia vs VaTech...how is this game not exciting...Georgia is looking to salvage their season, and VaTech looking to make a statement in a "rebuilding year"

Miami vs Nevada....Now I think Miami wins big, but HOW GREAT would it be they lose this one....

Tennesse vs Penn State....what football fan doesn't want to watch that one...can Penn State finally beat a top 25 team (0-4 against the top 25)

Auburn vs Nebraska....Come on man...Another SEC vs B12 battle...these teams matchup well...you should tune in to catch Nebraska's new offense.

WVU vs Georgia Tech....I can't wait to see how WVU handles GaTech's Blitzing Defense...should be a lot of fireworks in that game.

Arkansas vs Wisconsin....11-1 Wisconsin left out of the BCS taking on #2 in the SEC....what a boring matchup...

Michigan vs USC...two top 10 teams going at it.. Need I say more...

Oklahoma vs Boise State....why shit on Boise State, they had an amazing season, can they cap it off with a miracle win against the tradition rich Oklahoma Sooners and cap their best season in the history of their program?

Louisville vs Wake Forest......this game could suck, and it could be an amazing battle in which Wake Forest caps yet another of college football cinderella seasons.

Notre Dame vs LSU....RESPECT!!!!!!!!!!!

Ohio State vs Florida....the two teams with the best seasons going at it to crown the National Champion....

 

[solo]

Well...Maybe it has something to do with expectations rather than just story lines. In all other sports, the post season is reserved for the best teams. You expect to see the sport played at a very high level. That's not what I have seen thus far. I have seen a lot of mediocrity. And looking forward, I see potential for a lot more to come. That's what happens when you let more than 50% of the teams into the post season.

It's not enough for me to just see good players playing on mediocre teams or to see a competitive battle between 2 teams that really aren't that good. I want to see the best teams playing the best teams. That's what most post seasons are about.

I will watch underachieving Okla State play underachieving Alabama simply because there is no other football to watch. But this game (and many others) does not at all embody my vision for what a post season should be. I think about the top 16 teams playing it off and all the great games that this would produce and compare that to the current, outdated, bloated bowl system, and I can't help but to imagine how much more exciting it all could be.

I also think about all those teams that were cheated out of title shots and all the teams that had to be "co-national champs" and wonder what the players on those teams would want. Holding to an archaic tradition merely because it generates a lot of revenue seems selfish. That may not be why you like the bowl system, but I guarantee you, that is why it has not been replaced.

 

[Junkhead]

I've been watching most of them. The bowls seem too spread out. We are still like 11 days from the NC game...

 

[solo]

I've been watching most of them. The bowls seem too spread out. We are still like 11 days from the NC game...

Yes, I agree. Even though I think that the BCS is a step in the right direction from the old bowl system. I must say that January 1st was much more exciting back in the day when all the big bowls were played that day. Then you went to bed not knowing for sure which team won the NC.

 

[Fighting_Irish9]

Well...Maybe it has something to do with expectations rather than just story lines. In all other sports, the post season is reserved for the best teams. You expect to see the sport played at a very high level. That's not what I have seen thus far. I have seen a lot of mediocrity. And looking forward, I see potential for a lot more to come. That's what happens when you let more than 50% of the teams into the post season.

Its obvious you just don't get it then.....you don't care how excited a program like San Jose is to be playing in one of these exibition games. You don't see how a program like Purdue is thrilled at the amount of Bowls they have gone to... Not Every Program in College football is going to have Notre Dame expectations, you know how excited a IU will be when they get in a Bowl????

As for the "post season being reserved for the best teams"....welcome to College football, the only sport that rewards the two teams with the two best seasons, and not just the team that gets hot late...(I.e. My St. Louis Cardinals and their just above .500 season winning a World Series)


It's not enough for me to just see good players playing on mediocre teams or to see a competitive battle between 2 teams that really aren't that good. I want to see the best teams playing the best teams. That's what most post seasons are about.

good/great players on Average teams......why would you not want to watch that...would you rather watch Ice Dancing or a STrong Man comp??????????

As for the "best teams playing the best teams".....you will be seeing that, you will see top 10 teams go at it, you will see Conf Champs playing each other, get ready for some great games.....
Or you could always Tivo some Poker and watch that instead.....

I will watch underachieving Okla State play underachieving Alabama simply because there is no other football to watch. But this game (and many others) does not at all embody my vision for what a post season should be.

WHAT A GREAT GAME it was too.........and you know what, those kids loved every second, their fans were excited...but yea....lets take that away and only let 16 teams play....how exciting....

I think about the top 16 teams playing it off and all the great games that this would produce and compare that to the current, outdated, bloated bowl system, and I can't help but to imagine how much more exciting it all could be.

Yes a 16 game playoff would make for some good games,,,,,,however it would RUIN THE EXCITEMENT OF the REGULAR SEASON......EVERY SINGLE BIG GAME DURING THE SEASON WOULD MEAN NOTHING......

USC vs UCLA to finish the year.....NOTHING
ND vs USC....NOTHING
UF vs Arkansas....NOTHING
Michigan vs OSU...NOthing
ND vs Michigan to start the year....NOTHING
UF vs Tennessee...NOTHING
OU vs Texas...NOTHING

the list could go on for pages and pages of HUGE great games that would all of the sudden mean little to nothing at all as it wouldn't matter who won....

College football is so amazing because EVERY SINGLE GAME can define your season.....and you want to change that.....

I also think about all those teams that were cheated out of title shots and all the teams that had to be "co-national champs" and wonder what the players on those teams would want.

I'm sure there are players who got cheated by refs in playoff games that would love another shot....I'm sure there are teams that have by far the best season but due to a death to the coaches son....all of the sudden one playoff game and they don't get a shot...

Every way of doing things will have someone sad in some way or another....however College football rewards the team that had the best overall season...you can't argue this...there are some that had a close second....but the BCS winner = Best overall season...Period....

God forbid we reward a team for doing it from the start to the end and not just a team that gets hot late...

Holding to an archaic tradition merely because it generates a lot of revenue seems selfish. That may not be why you like the bowl system, but I guarantee you, that is why it has not been replaced.

Wanting to throw away a 100 years of tradition and excitement simply so you can have and exciting month of December and not have to be bother following the ENTIRE SEASON IMO seems selfish....

 

[Fighting_Irish9]

Yes, I agree. Even though I think that the BCS is a step in the right direction from the old bowl system. I must say that January 1st was much more exciting back in the day when all the big bowls were played that day. Then you went to bed not knowing for sure which team won the NC.

That is one thing I don't like about the BCS....New Years Day isn't what it used to be...

I'd love all the BCS bowls all on the 1st finishing the day with the NC game (add the gator or something or get rid of 5th bowl...

 

[solo]

I'm afraid that we just don't see eye to eye. I truly believe that you are the one that doesn't get it. When Auburn went undefeated a couple fo years ago, can you honestly say that the other 2 teams who played for the NC had better seasons? Was Florida's season really any better than Michigan's this year? With parity in college football, it is getting harder and harder to just pick "2 teams that had the best seasons". Could you imagine the NFL scrapping the playoffs and at the end of week 16 just picking 2 teams to play in the Superbowl? The concept really is somewhat absurd.

You make reference to all the great regular season matchups. Guess what, those games would be just as big if we had a playoff. OU still hates TX. Auburn still hates Alabama. ND and USC are still arch enemies. Every other sport that has playoffs also has rivalry games and those games are not at all diminished by the fact that a playoff exists.

Do I care if Rice and Troy are pumped to be in bowl games? No, I don't. I saw enough teams like Rice and Troy during the regular season. The post season is supposed to be about the best teams playing the best teams. It is supposed to be about determining a true champion. It is supposed to be about rewarding a team for an excellent season. I simply don't believe in rewarding mediocrity. When you let more than 50% of the teams into the post season, that is exactly what you are doing.

You will claim that the regular season is a 12 game playoff. That's just horseshit. Tell that to Boise State. Tell that Michigan. Why is it a playoff that is single elimination for some (Michigan, Louisville, Wisconisn), but double elimination for others (Florida) and still others don't stand a chance no matter what they do (Boise State)? That is one screwed playoff if you ask me.

Let's go back to Boise State. You said that they had a fine season and they did. What if they BLOWOUT Oklahoma in the bowl game? What if they beat OU by 3TD's? Would you think that they deserved a title shot? Would you think that they might be the best team int the country? It wouldn't matter because they would never get a chance to show you. It must be pretty anticlimactic playing in a non BCS conference where you know before the season starts that even if you win every game you have zero shot at being crowned champion. All any team can do to prove that they are the best team out there is to win every game. I'm not saying that Boise State deserves a title shot. But with the current system, we will never know. And that's why they call it the MYTHICAL national Champion in college football.

What about the years when we have "co-national champs"? Is that really fair? Did you ever play sports at any level? If you did, I can imagine that your competitive nature would not want to end a season in a tie? The current system still leaves room for that. Sure, we have a BCS champ, but the AP poll still crowns their champ too. Co-national champs has gotta be somewhat like kissing your sister.

A playoff gives us true champion. A championship determined on the field and not by pollsters. A playoff gives us a more exciting post season. A playoff only rewards those teams that truly deserve being rewarded.

So you can get excited about watching 2 mediocre football teams play that are "really happy and excited to be there" and can revel in the mediocrity that is the bowl system. But to truly believe that this is the best way to determine a champion is naive. Every other sport at every other level tells me that Div 1 a football has it wrong. That doesn't mean that college football is not a great sport. I find it to be the best sport going. I just think it could be even better if the post season wasn't tainted by the greedy bowl system.

 

[scooper]

I don't often agree with FI9. But here I do. Call me crazy, but I love the bowls. I don't give a crap about clarity at the top. Outside of the champion, who cares. I enjoy watching college football games. Bowls give us matchups of at least decent teams from different part of the country playing many different styles of football. I find it entertaining.

No, I don't watch every bowl, but I watch a lot of them. That's just the college football junkie in me. And obviously there are enough like me out there. College football is huge and continues to grow.

The NFL gives me my playoff fix.

 

[solo]

I don't often agree with FI9. But here I do. Call me crazy, but I love the bowls. I don't give a crap about clarity at the top. Outside of the champion, who cares. I enjoy watching college football games. Bowls give us matchups of at least decent teams from different part of the country playing many different styles of football. I find it entertaining.

No, I don't watch every bowl, but I watch a lot of them. That's just the college football junkie in me. And obviously there are enough like me out there. College football is huge and continues to grow.

The NFL gives me my playoff fix.

I think your stance is a reasonable one. Some people just like the bowl system. It is what they have always known, they have always enjoyed it, and they don't want to see it change. They get a high degree of entertainment out of the bowl games. That's understandable.

It's the person that touts the current system as the best way of doing it that I just can't understand. The current system is clearly inferior to a playoff if your goal is to determine a true champion. Every other sport at every level has a playoff to determine the champ. It's the fair way to do things. So to say that the current system is a 12 game playoff or to call it the best way to do it is just BS. The bowl system may be just as entertaining and even more entertaining to many people. But it's not the best nor the fair way to determine the champ.

 

[scooper]

That's fair. I just don't care much if a "true champion" is crowned as the playoff proponent define it. At the end of the day, #1 plays #2. Sure, there is often debate about who is #2. But after all is said and done, the winner of that game will print up t-shirts and hats and put a big trophy in their case. And many of the other bowls will be good games with nice story lines. Just as it has always been. And yet nobody is quitting on college football.

 

[jerseyborn1971]

College Football is NOT the NFL. We can not equate the two or expect the two to work the same. The NFL has means to try to keep teams even in terms of talent and facilities. College football is not built like that. Academic requirements, geographic locations, money allocated to sports programs are all different at each school. Polls will STILL have an effect on a playoff system since they will be determining who gets in and who doesn't. Those pre-season rankings we all complain about will keep someone deserving out and let someone less deserving in(and they may be ND).The college football system as a whole is not set up to be fair, thus, throwing in a playoff system will only generate new things to argue about and not just solve the old things. Ironically, these "mediocre" bowls generate the money smaller programs need to try to compete with the teams in the "good" bowl games.

Bowl games were NEVER intended to determine who the best teams were. They were and still are played, with the exception of the national championship game, to generate money for schools to either feed the machine or feed the up and comers.

 

[solo]

College Football is NOT the NFL. We can not equate the two or expect the two to work the same. The NFL has means to try to keep teams even in terms of talent and facilities. College football is not built like that. Academic requirements, geographic locations, money allocated to sports programs are all different at each school. Polls will STILL have an effect on a playoff system since they will be determining who gets in and who doesn't. Those pre-season rankings we all complain about will keep someone deserving out and let someone less deserving in(and they may be ND).The college football system as a whole is not set up to be fair, thus, throwing in a playoff system will only generate new things to argue about and not just solve the old things. Ironically, these "mediocre" bowls generate the money smaller programs need to try to compete with the teams in the "good" bowl games.

Bowl games were NEVER intended to determine who the best teams were. They were and still are played, with the exception of the national championship game, to generate money for schools to either feed the machine or feed the up and comers.

Sure, there will be inequities with any system. But a playoff has the fewest and is the most fair. Even if the college football system is not set up to be fair, it is moving in that direction. We presently have limitations on scholarships to make it more fair. We are implementing limitations on scholarships for low graduation rates. The BCS was aput in place to be more fair/objective. All schools will never be equal, but we are moving towards a system that is more fair. A playoff is the next logical step.

And just because bowl games were never intended to determine the best teams, it doesn't mean that this can't change or that we can't try to do things differently. Change is not necessarily bad and a more fair system to determine the champ is certainly a noble cause, isn't it?

 

[jerseyborn1971]

Noble, sure. But college presidents are not interested in noble when it comes to athletics. On the whole, they are more interested in $$$$$.

I don't think the number of scholarships does anything to even the playing field. 64 five star players is better than 64 2 star players. That's another one of the problems. The NFL has a draft and salary caps. A college football team can theoretically go sign all of the top players in the country.

A play-off is more fair I guess, but without completely changing the entire system regarding recruiting, money alotted to the programs, television deals etc, a play-off will still only truly benefit 20 or so teams that will be in it every year. It would be easier to just say here are the 20 teams eligible for the playoffs. The top 8 or 16 in any given year get in. Not really, but outside of these teams, who else could expect be in the play-off ahead of at least 8 of these teams in any given year. If voters knew the top 8 or 16 get in a play-off, they would vote differently. I don't think teams like Boise St or Utah would get as high as they do just because of their record against weak schedules.

Notre Dame
Texas
USC
tOSU
Michigan
LSU
UF
FSU
Tennessee
Oklahoma
Georgia
Alabama
West Virginia
Miami
Virginia Tech
Auburn
Nebraska
Penn St
Wisc
Cal

 

[solo]

Noble, sure. But college presidents are not interested in noble when it comes to athletics. On the whole, they are more interested in $$$$$.

I don't think the number of scholarships does anything to even the playing field. 64 five star players is better than 64 2 star players. That's another one of the problems. The NFL has a draft and salary caps. A college football team can theoretically go sign all of the top players in the country.

A play-off is more fair I guess, but without completely changing the entire system regarding recruiting, money alotted to the programs, television deals etc, a play-off will still only truly benefit 20 or so teams that will be in it every year. It would be easier to just say here are the 20 teams eligible for the playoffs. The top 8 or 16 in any given year get in. Not really, but outside of these teams, who else could expect be in the play-off ahead of at least 8 of these teams in any given year. If voters knew the top 8 or 16 get in a play-off, they would vote differently. I don't think teams like Boise St or Utah would get as high as they do just because of their record against weak schedules.

Notre Dame
Texas
USC
tOSU
Michigan
LSU
UF
FSU
Tennessee
Oklahoma
Georgia
Alabama
West Virginia
Miami
Virginia Tech
Auburn
Nebraska
Penn St
Wisc
Cal

The obstacle to a playoff is deciding how to implement it so that the conferences make as much money. That's the real challenge. The rest can be worked out.

Would a playoff only benefit the 20 or so programs you named? Not any different than the current system that permits 10 schools to go to BCS bowls. It's often the same 10-15 teams year in and year out in the BCS games. And even though those programs must share the revenue with their conference, the power teams still make more money. So the fact that the powerhouse programs will make more money is no different than it is now.

Again, we need a revenue sharing program that can spread the wealth to each conference while rewarding the teams that make it deep into the playoffs. It could be done.

 

[jerseyborn1971]

The obstacle to a playoff is deciding how to implement it so that the conferences make as much money. That's the real challenge. The rest can be worked out.

Would a playoff only benefit the 20 or so programs you named? Not any different than the current system that permits 10 schools to go to BCS bowls. It's often the same 10-15 teams year in and year out in the BCS games. And even though those programs must share the revenue with their conference, the power teams still make more money. So the fact that the powerhouse programs will make more money is no different than it is now.

Again, we need a revenue sharing program that can spread the wealth to each conference while rewarding the teams that make it deep into the playoffs. It could be done.

Exactly. It's no better than it is now. It could be done, however, what's the incentive for the high power teams and indys like ND to share the revenue? Nobility? Something tells me the University presidents won't go for that.

If we just take a 4 team play-off of BCS bowl game winners then the WISC & Auburn's of the world who were left out by BCS rules are crying. And teams like Wake Forest of Louisville are getting in instead of other higher ranked teams.

I just don't see that there is any play-off system that would work for college football that would cause less controversy than we have now. Someone will always feel like they got screwed.

 

[IRISHDODGER]

The bowls are definitely too spread out. I thought we were concerned w/ the season going too long & affecting the classroom?

The BCS championship game shouldn't be played a month or more after the last regular season game. Two weeks at the most. It takes the most important game of the college year out of the flow of the season.

 

[solo]

Exactly. It's no better than it is now. It could be done, however, what's the incentive for the high power teams and indys like ND to share the revenue? Nobility? Something tells me the University presidents won't go for that.

If we just take a 4 team play-off of BCS bowl game winners then the WISC & Auburn's of the world who were left out by BCS rules are crying. And teams like Wake Forest of Louisville are getting in instead of other higher ranked teams.

I just don't see that there is any play-off system that would work for college football that would cause less controversy than we have now. Someone will always feel like they got screwed.

The benefit of a playoff is easy: if we can generate the same amount of revenue for the conferences, we can have a true champion without sacrificing financially. And trust me, ND IS sharing the revenue, in a way. No longer does ND get $15M when we reach a BCS bowl. That figure has been reduced to $4.5M. So it's kind of like we are giving the other $10M away, just like a BCS conference champ would give that portion to the conference.

Would a playoff have more controversy? I can't possibly imagine how. Under a playoff system, Boise State and Michigan of 2006 get their chance.Utah of 2004 gets a shot. Undfeated Auburn of 2004 gets a shot. Miami doesn't shafted in 2000 by an FSU team that they beat in the regular season. In 2003 USC gets their shot instead of being ousted by an OU team that got blown out in the Big 12 title game. How could a playoff be more controversial than what we have today?

 

[solo]

I went back and researched the last 7 seasons to see how much controversy existed with the BCS. Pretty much, 5 of the last 7 title games have been surrounded in controversy. Could a playoff really do worse or be more comtroversial?

2000: FSU gets the nod over Miami for the title game despite Miami winning head to head
2001: Nebraska gets in over Oregon despite getting crushed in Big 12 title game
2002...No controversy
2003: OK gets the nod over USC despite losing it's title game
2004: Undefeated Auburn and Utah get shafted
2005: No controversy
2006: Florida gets a controversial nod over Michigan

In each and every case from above, these issues would not exist with a playoff. Would other controversies exist? Probably. But they couldn't possibly be worse than the above. The controversy with a playoff team would be with the "bubble teams" that wouldn't really stand much of a shot at winnint it all anyway.

 

[scooper]

And yet, college football thrives. In some respects, controversy helps. It keeps people talking.

 

[solo]

The bowls are definitely too spread out. I thought we were concerned w/ the season going too long & affecting the classroom?

The BCS championship game shouldn't be played a month or more after the last regular season game. Two weeks at the most. It takes the most important game of the college year out of the flow of the season.

"Too long a season" and "impacting the classroom" are all just excuses, smoke and mirrors. If they could create a scenario that makes each program an extra few million, they would play football year round. There are a few schools that are truly concerned about the student athlete and academics, but in general, college football is simply a huge money making machine. Under academically qualified yet highly athletic "students" are given a free ride and in many cases not even forced to make use of the education opportunity in order to make millions for the university. Athletes that really aren't interested in getting an education or qualified to attend the school they are at are getting getting scholarships and using the university as a means to the NFL. The universities are using the athletes and the athletes are using the universities. It's a "mutual use" and one of the biggest shams going.

That said, it's highly entertaining and the best sport out there.

 

[Fighting_Irish9]

How is a playoff "more fair"???????

Lets look at MLB....My St. Louis Cardinal were average all year...They lost over 82 games (including playoffs), they snuck into the playoffs due to a poor division, got on a little streak and pulled out a Championship...

They weren't even close to having the best season, just a team that snuck into the playoffs and got hot...how is that fair to the teams that had a much better season....all those games I guess mean nothing because STL got hot during the right 15 game stretch

Personally I love the system that rewards the team that did it all year long, not just in the end

 

[Fighting_Irish9]

"Too long a season" and "impacting the classroom" are all just excuses, smoke and mirrors. If they could create a scenario that makes each program an extra few million, they would play football year round. There are a few schools that are truly concerned about the student athlete and academics, but in general, college football is simply a huge money making machine. Under academically qualified yet highly athletic "students" are given a free ride and in many cases not even forced to make use of the education opportunity in order to make millions for the university. Athletes that really aren't interested in getting an education or qualified to attend the school they are at are getting getting scholarships and using the university as a means to the NFL. The universities are using the athletes and the athletes are using the universities. It's a "mutual use" and one of the biggest shams going.

That said, it's highly entertaining and the best sport out there.

If all this is true.....the answer isn't to say screw it and turn it into a Mini NFL....its to go the other direction

 

[jiggafini19]

Money money money money....

Moooooonnnneeeeyyyyy!!!

 

[solo]

If all this is true.....the answer isn't to say screw it and turn it into a Mini NFL....its to go the other direction

In my opinion, the real answer is for the NFL to have it's own farm system. This would to a large degree eliminate the students that are merely just athletes posing as students. But it aint gonna happen so long as the NFL has a free farm system in the NCAA. Once again, it's all about dollars. Universities are willing to look the other way for the payday and the NFL is happy to keep it's free farm system going.

 

[solo]

How is a playoff "more fair"???????

Lets look at MLB....My St. Louis Cardinal were average all year...They lost over 82 games (including playoffs), they snuck into the playoffs due to a poor division, got on a little streak and pulled out a Championship...

They weren't even close to having the best season, just a team that snuck into the playoffs and got hot...how is that fair to the teams that had a much better season....all those games I guess mean nothing because STL got hot during the right 15 game stretch

Personally I love the system that rewards the team that did it all year long, not just in the end

Yes, a playoff system does favor a team that "gets hot" at seasons end. But a playoff also gives every team that had a nice season an equal chance to win the title. That's fair. With parity in sports as well as a huge diversity in schedule, it is almost impossible to know who the best teams are. Is it really fair to just pick 2 teams to play for the title when in any given season we can't really decipher between the 2nd, 3rd and 4th best teams? Some teams schedule up and others schedule down. The best teams in the big conferences are afraid to schedule each other. Some people on this board think the SEC is the best conference and others think it is average. Some people think the Big East is a quality conference and others think it's not good at all. The best teams in the Big East ended up playing a bunch of patsies OOC. So did the best SEC teams. So did the best Big 12 teams. How do you know who is good? Wisconsin finished the season rated #5. But guess what, their schedule ranked 84th out of 119 teams. Are they any good? You really think that it is fair to just pick 2 teams to play for all the marbles we really can't accurately determine who thebest 2 teams are?

The bowl system doesn't necessarily reward the 2 teams that had the best seasons. It rewards the 2 teams that LOOKED like they had the best seasons. A playoff makes them prove it.

 

[KMac151993]

What a comeback to tie the game to go to OT by Texas Tech.

 

[ojo_223]

It took a while, but the bowl season is finally starting to get interesting. It seemed like all of the games were blowouts early on, but over the last few days there have been some good, close games. This Texas Tech-Minnesota game was great! (Although, it looked like another blowout early on.)

FI9, solo; I can see both of your arguments. I agree that college football is the only sport in the country that EVERY regular season game counts. This is what makes it so much more competitive and exciting than the NFL. I also agree that 32 bowl is overkill. To set up your championship where every game counts and you can't afford to lose and then reward teams that go .500 on the year with a bowl is a little ridiculus. I think that they should change the rule to a four loss maximum rather than a six win minimum and cut off about ten bowl games, but they will do what they will do. This is just my opinion. I have thought for the last couple of seasons that the 4 BCS bowls, the Capital One, the Holiday and the Cotton have the best teams. Maybe those bowls could be incorporated into a playoff format someday, but I'm not sure if I'd like to see that.

As far as split National Champs, this is where the extra game should come in. Even if there is controversy over how the teams split, if they played each other, at least there would just be ONE champ.

Just my 2 cents.

Enjoy the rest of the bowls, everyone.

GO IRISH!!!

 

[IRISHDODGER]

"Too long a season" and "impacting the classroom" are all just excuses, smoke and mirrors. If they could create a scenario that makes each program an extra few million, they would play football year round. There are a few schools that are truly concerned about the student athlete and academics, but in general, college football is simply a huge money making machine. Under academically qualified yet highly athletic "students" are given a free ride and in many cases not even forced to make use of the education opportunity in order to make millions for the university. Athletes that really aren't interested in getting an education or qualified to attend the school they are at are getting getting scholarships and using the university as a means to the NFL. The universities are using the athletes and the athletes are using the universities. It's a "mutual use" and one of the biggest shams going.

That said, it's highly entertaining and the best sport out there.

I agree & the classroom thing was tongue in cheek. I especially agree w/ the statement about college football being "the best sport out there". I was always an MLB fan 1st growing up but have evolved into a college f'ball fan 1st over the last 13 yrs or so.

 

[Fighting_Irish9]

Yes, a playoff system does favor a team that "gets hot" at seasons end. But a playoff also gives every team that had a nice season an equal chance to win the title. That's fair. With parity in sports as well as a huge diversity in schedule, it is almost impossible to know who the best teams are. Is it really fair to just pick 2 teams to play for the title when in any given season we can't really decipher between the 2nd, 3rd and 4th best teams? Some teams schedule up and others schedule down. The best teams in the big conferences are afraid to schedule each other. Some people on this board think the SEC is the best conference and others think it is average. Some people think the Big East is a quality conference and others think it's not good at all. The best teams in the Big East ended up playing a bunch of patsies OOC. So did the best SEC teams. So did the best Big 12 teams. How do you know who is good? Wisconsin finished the season rated #5. But guess what, their schedule ranked 84th out of 119 teams. Are they any good? You really think that it is fair to just pick 2 teams to play for all the marbles we really can't accurately determine who thebest 2 teams are?

The bowl system doesn't necessarily reward the 2 teams that had the best seasons. It rewards the 2 teams that LOOKED like they had the best seasons. A playoff makes them prove it.

no, it rewards the two teams that had the best season....two teams playing each other proves nothing....

The "best" team doesn't always win, on top of that there are matchup issues etc etc etc...

College football takes the two teams with the best season and have them play each other, the winner can claim to have had the best season in college football...

There isn't a single BCS champion that didn't have the best overall season in college football, its pretty rare for the team with the best overall season to win in any of the other sports....

Personally I want to reward the team with the best ENTIRE SEASON, and not the one that got hot late