Current Format vs BCS Format?

[ACamp1900]

Every other sport has 82+ games. The NFL is the only thing close and people watch every single week no matter what.

We aren't talking about expanding to 16 team playoffs with a best out of 3 series for each matchup.

We are talking about keeping 4-6 teams in the hunt for a shot at an undisputed natty.

Yes we are, there is no in between, there is only completely jumping the fvking shark like every other sport, or nothing at all... Nothing has shown me the powers that be can keep their greed in check enough to stop expanding the thing.

 

[Monk]

Because you're only considering end-of-season excitement. Yes, a playoff is "more exciting," strictly speaking, than a bunch of random bowl games. But when you have four, six, or eight teams that get into "the dance" at the end, September becomes worse. October matters less. November isn't as exciting. The thrill of "who's in" is toned way down when you can afford a loss (or two) and still have a shot at the national championship.

Those months become less exciting for who? The fans of the teams that still have a shot are extremely excited. A lot of casual fans that don't follow there team like we follow ND would still follow there team if they thought they still had a shot at the championship. For what it's worth, I do not want to water down the regular system with more than an 8 team playoff and think an 8 team would also probably hurt the regular season. I like the 6 team idea with the byes. It give one and two a big advantage for there regular season, but doesn't cut out the likes of TCU last year.

 

[ACamp1900]

But excitement isn't the only thing that matters. There's also "is this the most legitimate way to recognize the best team in the country?" Take the NCAA basketball tournament as the extreme example. After a long season of 20+ games, it's plenty exciting if a 14-seed knocks off a 3-seed in the first round. But is that a true picture of which was the better team that season? Of course not. It's a picture of which was the better team for 40 minutes. I want my champion to be the best team over a season, not one of the top 64 teams of the season that got hot late and got some good bounces in a tournament.

.

 

[wizards8507]

Every other sport has 82+ games. The NFL is the only thing close and people watch every single week no matter what.

We aren't talking about expanding to 16 team playoffs with a best out of 3 series for each matchup.

We are talking about keeping 4-6 teams in the hunt for a shot at an undisputed natty.

I know this wasn't your point, but series are a huge reason why playoffs work in other sports. When you play seven games and all of your pitchers have to pitch and your 8th man is going to have to produce off the bench and you might need your backup goalie to go in there for a period, playoffs work. It's hard for an objectively "worse" team to win a seven-game series in Major League Baseball, the NBA, or the NHL, but it's very easy for a "worse" team to prevail in a single game.

To your other point, the FBS has 120+ teams. If you team sucks and is eliminated early, it does nothing to hurt the sport because there are so many other teams to pay attention to.

 

[kmoose]

I don't think I would support(as if that matters) any format that just automatically includes Conference Champions. In 2005, Florida State won the ACC at 8-4, before losing their BCS bowl(Orange) game to Penn State. I think you have to place a minimum number of wins, or some other qualifier on it. In other words; if you win your conference, AND have a minimum of 9(random number) wins, then you get the bid. If you do not have 9 wins, then your conference is not guaranteed a spot.

 

[Monk]

I refuse to give up what I believe is the best system for fear that it might change later to a worse system. If it comes to them expanding to a ridiculous number of teams in the playoffs, then fortunately we have this site to discuss it on.

 

[ACamp1900]

For the record, 8 teams is stupid enough... I'd like to see one season where the 8 ranked team at the end of the reg season had a legit claim to the title... In terms of legitimacy, that system is disqualified right there IMO.

 

[Monk]

I don't think I would support(as if that matters) any format that just automatically includes Conference Champions. In 2005, Florida State won the ACC at 8-4, before losing their BCS bowl(Orange) game to Penn State. I think you have to place a minimum number of wins, or some other qualifier on it. In other words; if you win your conference, AND have a minimum of 9(random number) wins, then you get the bid. If you do not have 9 wins, then your conference is not guaranteed a spot.

I agree. I do not like anything that automatically qualifies a team.

 

[Monk]

For the record, 8 teams is stupid enough... I'd like to see one season where the 8 ranked team at the end of the reg season had a legit claim to the title... In terms of legitimacy, that system is disqualified right there IMO.

I can't disagree with that.

Unless ND is in eighth place at the end of the year.

 

[gkIrish]

Here's a question, why must everything follow the same model? Playoffs are present in every other sport and has dummed down every other sport IMO... Diversity is good guys.

The playoff model works because you settle everything on the field/rink/court. There is no controversy. You can't claim you deserve the championship if you lose. Period.

 

[gkIrish]

But excitement isn't the only thing that matters. There's also "is this the most legitimate way to recognize the best team in the country?" Take the NCAA basketball tournament as the extreme example. After a long season of 20+ games, it's plenty exciting if a 14-seed knocks off a 3-seed in the first round. But is that a true picture of which was the better team that season? Of course not. It's a picture of which was the better team for 40 minutes. I want my champion to be the best team over a season, not one of the top 64 teams of the season that got hot late and got some good bounces in a tournament.

The flaw with your position is that not every team plays every other team during the course of the season. In fact, most of the top 10 teams don't even have more than 1-2 common opponents. So how can you crown a champion based on regular season play that can't be compared accurately?

 

[ACamp1900]

The playoff model works because you settle everything on the field/rink/court. There is no controversy. You can't claim you deserve the championship if you lose. Period.

TCU thinks this is funny... I would say you could just as easily expand the reg season to improve this aspect and remove all postseason play entirely............ larger sample size and all.

 

[wizards8507]

So how can you crown a champion based on regular season play that can't be compared accurately?

You can't, which was my original point way back. You have no chance of accurately crowning a champion in a field of 120 with such a small sample size. "Eye test" is as good as anything. At least that way, the flaws are apparent and acknowledged. The playoff feigns precision but it's not real.

 

[wizards8507]

TCU thinks this is funny... I would say you could just as easily expand the reg season to improve this aspect and remove all postseason play entirely............ larger sample size and all.

#OneTrueChampion

 

[gkIrish]

TCU thinks this is funny... I would say there is no perfect system, at all...

I agree that there's no perfect system. But in a world where 3 major teams can go undefeated (and have before) but only 2 get to play for the championship, 4 is better. 6 is even better. 8 I can live with. Anything more than that and I agree that there are too many undeserving teams.

 

[gkIrish]

You can't, which was my original point way back. You have no chance of accurately crowning a champion in a field of 120 with such a small sample size. "Eye test" is as good as anything. At least that way, the flaws are apparent and acknowledged. The playoff feigns precision but it's not real.

I guess I'm not sure what you want then. Not having a champion is just stupid.

 

[ACamp1900]

I agree that there's no perfect system. But in a world where 3 major teams can go undefeated (and have before) but only 2 get to play for the championship, 4 is better. 6 is even better. 8 I can live with. Anything more than that and I agree that there are too many undeserving teams.

I would say my system of a plus one addresses this much better than yours and does so without locking in a playoff that in most years isn't needed and without killing the bowls..

 

[ACamp1900]

I guess I'm not sure what you want then. Not having a champion is just stupid.

I prefer to have a champion, but for an amateur sport??? Is it really that serious?

 

[Monk]

I prefer to have a champion, but for an amateur sport??? Is it really that serious?

Yes. Yes it is. In all sports at every level it is. That's why you play the game.

 

[ACamp1900]

Yes. Yes it is. In all sports at every level it is. That's why you play the game.

 

[ACamp1900]

It's a bold new world... Today I learned that, the only reason for doing anything, is so that at some point someone can be crowned champion of it... this totally changes my family's diner time forever...

 

[gkIrish]

I prefer to have a champion, but for an amateur sport??? Is it really that serious?

I would stop watching college football if there was no champion. I shit you not.

And I think 90% of Americans would do the same thing.

 

[ACamp1900]

I would stop watching college football if there was no champion. I shit you not.

That's reason enough for me... get these playoff thumpers dafaq out of here!

 

[Monk]

Ok maybe not at all levels. What I meant was from High school on up.

 

[ACamp1900]

playoff don't decide true champions, they're almost completely exclusive from the larger sample size, especially once you expand.... just sayin.

 

[wizards8507]

I guess I'm not sure what you want then. Not having a champion is just stupid.

The AP will still publish a poll. They can give out a stupid trophy to whomever they deem worthy.

 

[Monk]

That's reason enough for me... get these playoff thumpers dafaq out of here!

What is the reason you watch ND football games?

 

[ACamp1900]

What is the reason you watch ND football games?

I'm a masochist....

 

[wizards8507]

What is the reason you watch ND football games?

What are you getting at, exactly? Your implication would mean that nobody watched a Notre Dame football game prior to 1998.

 

[gkIrish]

What are you getting at, exactly? Your implication would mean that nobody watched a Notre Dame football game prior to 1998.

Prior to 1998 we had the polls. If we had it your way those wouldn't even exist, right?