But CFB needs a playoff right??

[solo]

Totally disagree with your NFL paragraph - New England won because of a fumbled interception, I watched that game in its entirety - San Diego was a better team but because of yet another New England horseshoe found in their ass (see the Oakland "tuck rule" game) they lost a game they shouldve won.

Also, it isnt a given the Bears are losing this week. New Orleans has to be the most hyped 6 loss team Ive ever seen. They are a dome team, welcome to Chicago with crap weather, real grass, and wind that changes direction every 5 minutes. Chicago is 14-3 and Ive never heard a team get dismissed like them in all my years. A team hosting the NFC title, #1 seed.

Honestly, I don't follow the NFL that closely. But I did watch enough this yeart to know that:

1. Yes, San Diego blew the game. That's why you play them.
2. The Bears will certainly tbe the favorite, I just happen to think that Grossman is due for an implosion game. This is not the dominant bears team like from the mid 80's. This is a good defense, coupled with an erratic offense, and a little bit of smoke and mirros. They simply aren't as good as their record would imply.

 

[weisbankaccount]

Honestly, I don't follow the NFL that closely. But I did watch enough this yeart to know that:

1. Yes, San Diego blew the game. That's why you play them.
2. The Bears will certainly tbe the favorite, I just happen to think that Grossman is due for an implosion game. This is not the dominant bears team like from the mid 80's. This is a good defense, coupled with an erratic offense, and a little bit of smoke and mirros. They simply aren't as good as their record would imply.

I was really wanting to see that AFC title game in San Diego with the Colts coming in.....LT, Manning, Rivers, Harrison - Indy run D vs Tomlinson......man this sucks.

now here we go with Indy vs New England version 700 where Manning craps down his leg, New England wins in unspectacular fashion and ho-hum another New England "Tom Brady is this eras Montana" love fest. brrrrrrraaaaaaghhht

I would argue that the Bears are every bit as good as their record, Im a 49er fan first, Bears fan second. So Im not coming from a homer perspective. They played New england straight up in Foxborrow and lost a close one - the 3rd game of a 3 game east Coast road trip. the NFC was just weak this year.

Getting back on point, the BCS is a pretty good system in my eyes - not perfect but as we see more and more, the playoff system isnt perfect either (st louis cardinals)

 

[Satans Little Helper]

Totally disagree with your NFL paragraph - New England won because of a fumbled interception, I watched that game in its entirety - San Diego was a better team but because of yet another New England horseshoe found in their ass (see the Oakland "tuck rule" game) they lost a game they shouldve won.

Also, it isnt a given the Bears are losing this week. New Orleans has to be the most hyped 6 loss team Ive ever seen. They are a dome team, welcome to Chicago with crap weather, real grass, and wind that changes direction every 5 minutes. Chicago is 14-3 and Ive never heard a team get dismissed like them in all my years. A team hosting the NFC title, #1 seed.

wbankacct.....the bears probably have the worst qb ever to captain a team to the playoffs. Their d is good, but if 3.1 qb rating Grossman shows up, Oakland could beat the bears.

 

[Vince Young]

2. The Bears will certainly tbe the favorite, I just happen to think that Grossman is due for an implosion game. This is not the dominant bears team like from the mid 80's. This is a good defense, coupled with an erratic offense, and a little bit of smoke and mirros. They simply aren't as good as their record would imply.

Good defense with an erratic offense and a little bit of smoke and mirrors? Oh, I don't know, I think the Bears are ready to RETURN TO GLORY.

*cough*

 

[KingAdrock99]

In the NFL, they have better competition so you can get a good gauge on who is #1 and #2 so the college system makes more sense if it was implemented in the pros. But it's not. College teams play weak schedules and it hides who is good and who isn't so you get what happened in this year's NC. A playoff system makes the most sense in CFB and will allow you to find out who really is good and who's just hiding behing a Big Ten schedule.

 

[weisbankaccount]

Grossman has also had some great games and was talked about as a possible NFL MVP after the first 7 weeks of the season.

A lot of people talk about his interceptions, I could take a few interceptions, its those fumbles that are killers. He needs to hold the ball when hes sacked.

He played well yesterday, I actually thought the Bears handcuffed him too much - I think he couldve went for 350 against that secondary. I didnt like all those conservative calls, especially when they stopped Seattle around midfield in regulation and had a chance to seal it then.

as a rule, Im not a fan of former Florida QB's but if he doesnt fumble and doesnt throw into triple coverage, they beat new Orleans. Lets not forget, New Orleans lost 6 games this season, Im not sure why they are the '84 49ers all of a sudden. I think people are in love with the names on that team - like Reggie Bush.

 

[KingAdrock99]

Grossman has also had some great games and was talked about as a possible NFL MVP after the first 7 weeks of the season.

And then he started thinking he was Brett Favre and tried slinging the ball all over the field. If he played within himself, he'd be fine. Trying to throw the ball when you know Peterson is coming off the edge and is bearing down on your throwing hand side is kinda retarded too. Take the hit like a man instead of hanging the ball out there.

 

[weisbankaccount]

I think thats his biggest problem, he doesnt want to get hit. he throws from his back foot instead of stepping into it and taking the hit. Hes gunshy because of all the season ending injuries hes had.

He is really bad in the face of the blitz.

 

[ShivaIrish]

I think thats his biggest problem, he doesnt want to get hit. he throws from his back foot instead of stepping into it and taking the hit. Hes gunshy because of all the season ending injuries hes had.

He is really bad in the face of the blitz.

Which points to why the NFL deems height as a very important factor in drafting QBs (too bad Troy Smith). He's got a good arm, and can make a lot of the throws, but his height limits his possibilities to make some of the throws.

He also needs to keep a hold of the ball better. Too many bad fumbles.

 

[Junkhead]

Which points to why the NFL deems height as a very important factor in drafting QBs (too bad Troy Smith). He's got a good arm, and can make a lot of the throws, but his height limits his possibilities to make some of the throws.

He also needs to keep a hold of the ball better. Too many bad fumbles.

I don't know big of a factor the height thing is. Drew Brees is 6ft even, but he may be the exception.

 

[ACamp1900]

If you aren't willing to discuss a topic, then why bring it up?

Had the bowl system been in place in the NFL, we would have San Diego and Chicago meeting int he Suprbowl. And as it turns out, neither of them will probably end up getting there because they simly aren't good enough. So you can go on crowning paper champions with your bowl system, I prefer the way the NFL does it.

One final thought, I SO would love for you to have a son playing on the Boise State 2006 or Auburn 2004 squads. I am curious how you would look your son in the eye and tell him with a clean conscious that his team didn't deserve a title shot and that the bowl system is superior.

As you can see by my ten posts that my I am willing to discuss it and it was tounge in cheek... I would say I like you to look your son who plays for the San Diego Chargers in the eye and say, "well son you proved it all year but since you didn't get any breaks today it proves your not the best team in the NFL..." The point goes either way, this is why I brought up that my thoughts usually aren't even CONSIDERED due to popualr belief... you're post here only goes further to prove that, all it takes is an open mind... do you have one?

 

[ACamp1900]

In the NFL, they have better competition so you can get a good gauge on who is #1 and #2 so the college system makes more sense if it was implemented in the pros. But it's not. College teams play weak schedules and it hides who is good and who isn't so you get what happened in this year's NC. A playoff system makes the most sense in CFB and will allow you to find out who really is good and who's just hiding behing a Big Ten schedule.

Do i agree with this statement as a whole? Doesn't matter because I LOVE how it ended.... LOL


Cheers kined sir

 

[irishfan]

ah, Browns fan.............. That's pretty common knowledge round here... but yeah, call me a Bolts fan today just to throw out the same shit I've been saying on these boards for about a good year now and make it look like I only said it today... In all honesty, and respectfully, it doesn't fit

Hey sorry, didn't know you were a Browns fan. Just knew that you were from California so I assumed that you were a Chargers fan. Also, I don't keep track of what everyone's favorite NFL team is here. There's no point in starting a thread just to say after, "And don't even bother... you're talking to deaf ears on this one boys..." Just curious, besides me falsely calling you a Charger's fan, do you actually disagree with what I said, or just wanted me to know your a Brown's fan?

 

[ACamp1900]

Hey sorry, didn't know you were a Browns fan. Just knew that you were from California so I assumed that you were a Chargers fan. Also, I don't keep track of what everyone's favorite NFL team is here. There's no point in starting a thread just to say after, "And don't even bother... you're talking to deaf ears on this one boys..." Just curious, besides me falsely calling you a Charger's fan, do you actually disagree with what I said, or just wanted me to know your a Brown's fan?

The deaf ears comment was made early on... as you can see my tone lessened with every post here... I was pretty mad at yet another great season destroyed by a needless round of playoffs...

anyway what was your point again? forgive me for being lazy...lol

 

[polishdomer]

Here...

I have a unique solution...

All the women from the universities meets in a convention center and play this well-known grade school game:

 

[ACamp1900]

I like it!

 

[solo]

As you can see by my ten posts that my I am willing to discuss it and it was tounge in cheek... I would say I like you to look your son who plays for the San Diego Chargers in the eye and say, "well son you proved it all year but since you didn't get any breaks today it proves your not the best team in the NFL..." The point goes either way, this is why I brought up that my thoughts usually aren't even CONSIDERED due to popualr belief... you're post here only goes further to prove that, all it takes is an open mind... do you have one?

My mind id s definitely open. I have actually tried to defend your stance ad defend the bowl system. But any way I slice it, the argument is just doesn't hold ater. You can say that:

1. The regular season is like a 12 week playoff. Good point. Accept that some teams get to lose a game and other don't. And some teams win all their games and still don't get a chance. So if it's like a playoff, it's a very unfair playoff with different rules for differnt teams.

2. You say that the season would be too long. But we just added a 12th game! BYU went 14-1 just a few years ago. Length of the season is not a real concern.

3. You can say that the regular season would lose it's meaning. That the big games would not be big anymore. But is this true in any other sport? When Duke plays UNC in college basketball it's still HUGE. When the Cowboys and redskins square off, it's still a big game. The playoff diminish nothing, they only add to it all.

4. You want to reward only the best teams. Well, how do we know who the best teams are? Nobody plays the same schedule. With 119 teams, the diversity of schedule is tremendous. How can we accurately compare? Before the bowl season ended, many people thought Michigan was thwe 2nd best team. Not just a few but a lot. Parity is taking over. There is really no way to tell who the 2 best are.

You see, one by one I tried to accept the points that the Bowl System advocates would throw out, but one by one their arguments seem to fall apart at some level. With college football being my favborite sport, I would love to love the post season, But I don't. I don't really care for the NFl but admit that their post season is 100 tiems better.

In my opinion. Bowl system advocates really only have 1 point in their favor. That point is that a playoff system favors the team that gets hot at the end of the season. And that is a good point.

So there is one point in faviorof the bowl system and about 20 against it. I wish the bowl system advocate would just come out and say it: "it doesn't make sense the way we do it, but I like it".

At least we'd have honesty at that point...

 

[GoshenGipper]

All the women from the universities meets in a convention center

Oh dear God help us! Nothing would ever get done if this was how things were decided.

 

[ACamp1900]

Okay,

1.) That's where computer rankings WORK... they weed out those teams that play 90th ranked schedules, Boise, and give a little room for error to those who play a top ten, Florida... it works Great for a sport with a hundred plus teams IMO...

2.) I never said that, nothing even close, if you were referring to the generalized arguement I must be honset that one isn't used much to begin with... for what it's worth I think my arguement here is far from the general bowl advocates'

3.) When was the last time UNC played DUKE?... I personally can't remember... Cowboys Redskins? I don't buy it... rivalry games in the NFL don't matter any more... at least not as they should... not like tOSU Mich or Texas Ou and needless to say USC ND do... who the hell would have cared about this year's tOSU Mich game had both already had a spot in a playoff, it wouldn't have mattered a bit... same with last year's ND USC game... that's my stance

4.) It makes more sense than allowing half the sport to "playoff" to decide the "champion" with the enitre regular season really being played for no other reason than revenue and to decide who gets to host what playoff game... And i stand by the fact that a playoff in any sport rarely rewards the best team anyway... Look at your last ten Pro Sports champions, then look at CFB... no arguement can be made that the champions of any given pro sport league for that given year dominated their sport more or as much that given year than the team crowned National Champion in CFB in terms of average... and THAT is the meaning of "Champion"... did it all year! not look we got hot, now behold our trophy... I look at it the same way most playoff people view the BCS, it gets it right on accident every once in a while but that's not acceptable

 

[solo]

As you can see by my ten posts that my I am willing to discuss it and it was tounge in cheek... I would say I like you to look your son who plays for the San Diego Chargers in the eye and say, "well son you proved it all year but since you didn't get any breaks today it proves your not the best team in the NFL..." The point goes either way, this is why I brought up that my thoughts usually aren't even CONSIDERED due to popualr belief... you're post here only goes further to prove that, all it takes is an open mind... do you have one?

By the way, I would look my San Diego Charger son in the eye and tell him that he had a phenomenal season and that I was sorry that his team didn't take care of business in the playoffs. Better luck next year.

That's a lot different conversation than telling your son that played on an undefeated an untied team that they simply didn't look as good as the other teams and didn't deserve a chance to prove it. . You San Diego Charger son at least had a chance to prove they were the best. Your Boise State or Auburn Tiger son didn't get that chance.

In the NFL...all 32 teams have an equal shot at winning the Superbowl when the season starts.

In college football, only 66 of 119 teams have a chance to win the title. The 65 BCS conference teams and Notre Dame. Anyone else is out of luck. They can win their conference, go undefeated, it doesn't matter. The bowl system creates a class system for college football. There are the "haves" (BCS conferences and ND) and the "have nots" (everyone else).

Bowl System advocates simply don't care about fairness.

 

[ACamp1900]

By the way, I would look my San Diego Charger son in the eye and tell him that he had a phenomenal season and that I was sorry that his team didn't take care of business in the playoffs. Better luck next year.

That's a lot different conversation than telling your son that played on an undefeated an untied team that they simply didn't look as good as the other teams and didn't deserve a chance to prove it. . You San Diego Charger son at least had a chance to prove they were the best. Your Boise State or Auburn Tiger son didn't get that chance.

In the NFL...all 32 teams have an equal shot at winning the Superbowl when the season starts.

In college football, only 66 of 119 teams have a chance to win the title. The 65 BCS conference teams and Notre Dame. Anyone else is out of luck. They can win their conference, go undefeated, it doesn't matter. The bowl system creates a class system for college football. There are the "haves" (BCS conferences and ND) and the "have nots" (everyone else).

Bowl System advocates simply don't care about fairness.

That is BS...

the truth is the scene you set has NOTHING to do with the BCS or bowl's it has to do with CFB!!! There are too many teams... a playoff would not change anything about the number of teams able to win the title, unless you went CBB route and that's a pretty gay bob route if you ask me

and I would tell my Bosie son he went undefeated in cfb... great job...

 

[KingAdrock99]

Here's a point for the playoffs in the NFL: The regular season games mean a lot because it makes a difference between playing at your house in the postseason and playing in someone else's. In CFB, you play in a neutral site regardless. Playing a postseason game at ND stadium in January would be tha bomb!

 

[KingAdrock99]

That is BS...

the truth is the scene you set has NOTHING to do with the BCS or bowl's it has to do with CFB!!! There are too many teams... a playoff would not change anything about the number of teams able to win the title, unless you went CBB route and that's a pretty gay bob route if you ask me

and I would tell my Bosie son he went undefeated in cfb... great job...

That's why I say make an elite league for the better CFB teams and have them play each other, with the worst teams getting relagated to lower league and are replaced by the best teams in the lower league. Premiership soccer style. You could have playoffs at the end of the year, bowl games or just crown the one with the most points, the winner. I think soccer systems, with multiple leagues are the best example of what to do when you have too many teams. Would you honestly miss Indiana or Oregon State if they weren't in the first league?

 

[ACamp1900]

Here's a point for the playoffs in the NFL: The regular season games mean a lot because it makes a difference between playing at your house in the postseason and playing in someone else's. In CFB, you play in a neutral site regardless. Playing a postseason game at ND stadium in January would be tha bomb!

LOL... possibly, there are indeed points to both sides... it should be clear that neither side is cut and dry at this point, it all depends what you think is the greater evil. I side that it's a greter evil to to take away, or at least have the chance to, what teams have EARNED all year, a title shot... Than it is to have teams like Boise who played a 90th ranked schedule not have a shot while getting the memory of a lifetime against OU and 10+ million for the school...

It's all perspective I suppose

 

[ACamp1900]

That's why I say make an elite league for the better CFB teams and have them play each other, with the worst teams getting relagated to lower league and are replaced by the best teams in the lower league. Premiership soccer style. You could have playoffs at the end of the year, bowl games or just crown the one with the most points, the winner. I think soccer systems, with multiple leagues are the best example of what to do when you have too many teams. Would you honestly miss Indiana or Oregon State if they weren't in the first league?

While I doubt this will get much support here, due to lack of soccer fans with knowledge of the system in question and the mere fact it's a soccer system... I must say following the elite leagues somewhat, but enough to know what you are taking about it is another option and a possible good one... but not realisitc, I think it's fair to say an American style playoff is the only real alternative...

but I do like yours better...

 

[solo]

That is BS...

the truth is the scene you set has NOTHING to do with the BCS or bowl's it has to do with CFB!!! There are too many teams... a playoff would not change anything about the number of teams able to win the title, unless you went CBB route and that's a pretty gay bob route if you ask me

and I would tell my Bosie son he went undefeated in cfb... great job...

What are you talking about?

We have 11 conference sin college football. Admit the 11 conference champs plus 5 at larget teams to the post season playoff. That way, EVERY TEAM stands a chance to win the title. All they must do is win their conference.

With the BCS system, you only stand a chance of finishing the season ranked #1 or #2 if you are ND or a BCS conference team. There are 65 BCS conference teams plus one ND. So with the bowl system, 66 teams have a chance to win the title. It doesn't matter if TCU or Boise State or Hawaii go undefeated. BYU will never win another title (they wouldn't have won their only title in 1984 had the BCS been around then). If you aren't Notre Dame or you aren't in a BCS tconference, then you are simply out of luck. And if you think that this is right or fair, I would question your value system. Every team should at least have an opportunity to win the title before the season starts.

 

[ACamp1900]

What are you talking about?

We have 11 conference sin college football. Admit the 11 conference champs plus 5 at larget teams to the post season playoff. That way, EVERY TEAM stands a chance to win the title. All they must do is win their conference.

With the BCS system, you only stand a chance of finishing the season ranked #1 or #2 if you are ND or a BCS conference team. There are 65 BCS conference teams plus one ND. So with the bowl system, 66 teams have a chance to win the title. It doesn't matter if TCU or Boise State or Hawaii go undefeated. BYU will never win another title (they wouldn't have won their only title in 1984 had the BCS been around then). If you aren't Notre Dame or you aren't in a BCS tconference, then you are simply out of luck. And if you think that this is right or fair, I would question your value system. Every team should at least have an opportunity to win the title before the season starts.

Just like the Kansas City Royals....

1984 BYU should not have won the title that year anyway... BCS would have fixed that... If your system was put into play let's say you have UTEP, winner of conference playing USC in the first round... most likely a joke... IF the fluke happens... it only furthers my previous points...

If a team in a lesser conference wants their shot schedule some big boys and beat em... if Bosie played and beat USC and Mich this year instead of Oregons St and whoever else for their out of conference, they would have theirs... the bottom dweller's of CFB have as much shot as the percentage of bottom dwellers in any other sport in reality imo

 

[Irishkid23]

I was really wanting to see that AFC title game in San Diego with the Colts coming in.....LT, Manning, Rivers, Harrison - Indy run D vs Tomlinson......man this sucks.

now here we go with Indy vs New England version 700 where Manning craps down his leg, New England wins in unspectacular fashion and ho-hum another New England "Tom Brady is this eras Montana" love fest. brrrrrrraaaaaaghhht

I would argue that the Bears are every bit as good as their record, Im a 49er fan first, Bears fan second. So Im not coming from a homer perspective. They played New england straight up in Foxborrow and lost a close one - the 3rd game of a 3 game east Coast road trip. the NFC was just weak this year.

Getting back on point, the BCS is a pretty good system in my eyes - not perfect but as we see more and more, the playoff system isnt perfect either (st louis cardinals)

NFL records show that 90+% of teams lose their 3rd game on the road. The Bears played tough, but lost. They will beat NO and be in the Super Bowl against NE. Tom Brady is the "Poster Child" of the NFL. He sells tickets.

 

[solo]

I will revisit my stance on the bowl system when Bowl system advocates can provide reasonable answers to the following:

1. What solution does the BCS offer for when 3 teams go undefeated?
2. If the bowl system is the best way to determione a champ, why does no other sport use it including the lower divisions of college football? Why does every other sport use a playoff to fairly determine their champ but college football uses the bowl system?
3. Can we truly and conclusively determine who the 2 best teams are or os there often signficiant doubt about the #2 team?
4. Does a non-BCS conference team other than ND (which compromises 44 % of NCAA Div 1a teams) truly stand a chance to win the title? We have had situations recently (Utah and Boise St) where a non BCS conference produced a title worthy team.

A playoff adequately and fairly addresses all the points above whereas the bowl system does not. And the underlying theme that we haven't discussed is that the only reason the bowl system exists is to make money. It is a revenue generating machine masquerading as a post season for Div 1a football. This is most clearly evident by looking at the history of bowl games. Back in the 30', 40's, and 50's the college football champion was named even before the bowl games were played. Their origin was simply to generate revenue and that is still the case today. We have simply dressed it up a bit. Aside from this final point though, if any bowl system advocate can truly and fairly addreess ALL 4 points above, I would certainly re-evaluate my stance.

 

[Vince Young]

I tend to avoid these playoffs vs. bowls arguments, since they rarely provide any arguments that haven't been heard already ad naseum for years, and this thread is no exception, unfortunately. However, I think your 2nd question is based on some faulty premises:

2. If the bowl system is the best way to determione a champ, why does no other sport use it including the lower divisions of college football? Why does every other sport use a playoff to fairly determine their champ but college football uses the bowl system?

First of all, European soccer doesn't use a playoff. Each team plays each other twice, home-and-away. At the end of the season, best record wins. Of course, that's with a "perfect" regular season schedule, so a playoff isn't necessary, strictly speaking. But they don't use a playoff. So you can't say "every other sport" uses a playoff.

Then there's the assumption that if bowls were better than playoffs, all the other sports would would use a bowl system. That's assuming that the same system is best for every sport. Imagine if the NASCAR champion was determined by a series of 2-car head-to-head races in a playoff formula. Would that make much sense to you? (Heck, there's another example of a sport that doesn't use a playoff. But then that opens up the "Is NASCAR really a sport?" question, and I'm sure as hell not going there, so never mind.) The point is, the "best" system for one sport is not necessarily the "best" system for all other sports as well.

That's also assuming that everyone will use the "best" system. I think a quick look around the world will show you that people very VERY often do not do what is "best."

Also, the wording of your question implies that since the majority of other sports use a playoff, the minority has some explaining to do. But in the real world, the majority is often in the wrong. There was once a time in this world's history where slavery was perfectly acceptable in the majority of the world's nations. A majority can very EASILY be just as wrong as a minority.

Anyway, I'm done being pedantic now. Just thought you might want to tweak or re-word question 2, or perhaps just eliminate it altogether. It's your weakest attack. The other 3 are far stronger.