AJC > Sports > Blog > Archives > 2008 > January > 09 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USLet the “season of discussion” begin
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Major League Baseball has its Hot Stove League. Now college football will have, in the words of SEC Commissioner Mike Slive, its “season of discussion.”
There was already going to be a lot of talk about what to do about the post-season in Division I-A football before UGA President Michael Adams floated his idea of an eight-team playoff on Tuesday. Now those discussions will involve a lot more people and will include many more ideas.
In short, there will be no off-season for college football in 2008. This topic is going to dominate everything. Starting with the NCAA Convention this week, every meeting that takes place involving college athletics this year, and there will be a lot of them, will touch on the topic of post-season football.
And that’s a good thing.
The idea of a multi-team playoff in college football has been talked to death. But the topic has never been seriously DISCUSSED among the people who would have the responsibility for formulating and implementing the plan.
It’s one thing to call a sports talk show and to bellow that college football simply MUST have a playoff or life as we know it will end. It’s another thing when you have to actually DO it and will held responsible for the consequences, both intended and unintended.
And understand this. In every effort like this there are unintended consequences.
Here’s one. In early 1994 the NCAA put together a Blue Ribbon panel to simply talk about a college football playoff. The panel even included a couple of student-athletes. One of those was Derrick Brooks, Florida State’s All-America linebacker.
At one point in the discussion Brooks spoke up and said, in so many words: “If the NCAA generates extra millions of dollars with this playoff, how much of a share would the players be expected to receive?”
“It was like somebody had sucked all the air out of the room,” said someone who was actually in the room.
See my point? Any kind of radical shift like this creates all types of circumstances that cannot be foreseen. That is not a reason not to do it. But you better go into the process with your eyes wide open.
What Dr. Adams has done is force all the parties involved to have this discussion and to put everything on the table. There has been anecdotal evidence that some presidents want some kind of a playoff. Others want no part of this issue. Now all of them are going to have to show their cards and we’ll find out exactly how much support is there.
If the support is there and the presidents want to take control and implement a playoff plan then I say go for it. If not, let’s see if we can come up with something better than what we have now.
A four-team playoff could work under the current BCS structure. And at the end of the day, that could be the compromise. We’ll see.
Until then, let the discussion begin.
Services »
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By L. Hutz
January 9, 2008 9:53 AM | Link to this
Interesting comments from Mr. Adams. He really is a pioneer amongst presidents. By the way, what was his response to the UF president, Bernie Machan, when the idea of a playoff was proposed at the SEC meetings last summer?
By 08 Sugarbowl Beatdown
January 9, 2008 9:56 AM | Link to this
There’s nothing wrong with proposing ideas on improving college football. Analysts like Mark May, who picked Hawaii by the way, going on national tv and bashing Adams’ idea and the Dawgs should be ashamed.
By DWG
January 9, 2008 9:58 AM | Link to this
Glad we’re talking about it. Still ticked at Mr. Adams for his poor timing. Of course if a plan gets passed it will probably be called the “Adams Playoff system” so this ego maniac can get his name on something besides his office door. Reminds me of the office scenario where the emplolyees have a great idea - then the boss says it and takes all of the credit. Congrats to LSU. Go Dawgs!
By reality check
January 9, 2008 9:59 AM | Link to this
A four team playoff could be an improvement for sure, depending on how it is structured. The big question is how would the four teams be chosen? BCS ranking? In that case it is still a popularity contest. This year the teams finally ranked 2 and 3 wouldn’t have made it in. Two teams that were soundly beaten in their bowl games would have made it in. I believe if we went back through the BCS history we would find the BCS process to be poor predictor of success.
The problem is 4 teams probably aren’t enough. There were at least 8 teams this year with valid claimns they had the talent to win it all.
If we start with a plus one 4 team format we will quickly evolve to include more teams, but it would be a step in the right direction.
Didn’t the NCAA basketball tournament start out with only 8 teams, or was it 16? Whatever the number it was a lot less than the 64 that are in it now.
Think TV and the colleges are making any money from NCAA basketball? Once this thing gets started the College Presidents are going to chase the money in a way that would turn practitioners of the world’s oldest profession pea green with envy
By Tech Fan since 1950
January 9, 2008 10:10 AM | Link to this
Tony:
Don’t make this playoff idea so complicated, with the idea that athletes may want to be compensated. NCAA playoffs at other divisions have been going on for years without any compensation. What’s the big deal? Just let the historic “big bowls” be the venues and kick the ball off. It just isn’t as complicated as you are making it. Yes, there are and have been excuses as to why they can’t (won’t) have a playoff, but if the other divisions can do it, so can they. The other divisions have student-athletes too. Student-athletes would appreciate that finally there would be some integrity in the championship system and not just a rigged effort.
By somesuchdawg
January 9, 2008 10:17 AM | Link to this
HORSEMEN say whatever is decided aint worth a crap no way. 2-10.
By SECisFootball
January 9, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this
While I think a playoff is much needed, Dr. Adams timing of his decision to pursue this sounds like sour grapes. I am sure he would not be in the media now had UGA been selected to play in BCS National Championship game. He probably would have thought the system was great. I don’t like how the current system functions but this year they did get it right. LSU was not only the SEC Western Division champs they won the conference. Ohio State had one loss to another team that was in a BCS bowl game.
As for a playoff systems, no matter what they end up comign up with, if anything, it will never be enough. If you have a 4 team play off, there will be teams who feel they were slighted. If you have an 8 team playoff, same thing will happen there. A team will think they deserve a shot because they might be a hot team. That is the sad truth about it. A plus one, which I think is what you will see, is a step in the right direction. However, I think it will be a LONG time before we see any kind of playoff. There is way too much money in the bowl games and not all college presidents would go for the idea of giving up that money.
By joe
January 9, 2008 10:24 AM | Link to this
What is the over/under on how many posts are published until some UGA fan says they would have won a playoff had this been set up already instead of the BS bcs??
By mcdawg
January 9, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this
so who are the four teams? LSU, USC, UGA & ?????? WVU over Kansas??? is that fair-doesn’t seem that anything is going to be solved by a playoff- fandom is not rational-trying to impose order on it could kill alot of the fun-i usually could not care less about the Super Bowl by the time it comes around
By tiger7_88
January 9, 2008 10:30 AM | Link to this
joe, of COURSE, the puppies would have won a playoff if one had happened this year. Didn’t you see the completely fair and impartial AJC online playoff this year? The pups rolled all the way to the AJC online playoff champ-een-ship!
ROTFL!
By Ramblin Wrecker
January 9, 2008 10:33 AM | Link to this
The more I hear about a playoff or plus-1 scenario and the more I see of the BCS, the more I wonder if we wouldn’t just all be better off with the old Bowl system. Follow me here. With all the revenue involved in having a competitive matchup, wouldn’t we get the best bowl games possible if it were all opened back up to allow the individual bowl games to court the teams they want? Open competition could create the best bowl games imagineable. If you were the Orange bowl wouldn’t you try to court the #1 & #2 teams in the country to push your ratings (and revenues) upward? The BCS was supposed to remove the debate about who was #1 in the end. All it really did was push the debate downward to argue about how each team got into the championship game and whether they belonged or not. A playoff will only push that debate further down to say who belongs in the top 8. If you think that discussion won’t be just as heated, you are sorely mistaken. We’re not talking about the 64th or 65th team getting into March Madness (because none of the teams who were 64, 65 or the teams left out were going to win anyway). But if you don’t think that 8th, 9th or even 10-12 couldn’t somehow get to the championship game in a playoff scenario, you better think again. There were 9 different teams ranked #2 this season alone. That will keep the debate raging.
I’m tired of all the nonsense. I want to watch GREAT football games, not some corporately created matchup that happens because of some guidelines agreed to 5 years ago.
By FluffAlbright
January 9, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this
Adams is late in his assessment (wonder what changed his mind?) but he is correct. College football’s champion must be decided on the field and not by so-called experts who have consistently proven that they know nothing! The current system is pathetic and only detracts from the efforts of the players on this year’s (or any year’s) anointed team who claim to be “National Champions”. There is no phonier championship in all of sports. Fix it!!
By Ramblin Wrecker
January 9, 2008 10:46 AM | Link to this
And another thing….
What strikes me as so disingenuous about UGA President Adams is that UGA already lost their playoff this season. It’s called the SEC round robin tournament bracket. I mean when you boil it down, isn’t that what each conference is…a round robin tournament (even if every team doesn’t play everybody it is close to a round robin)? So in essence he doesn’t even believe in the integrity of his own proposal because he believes UGA got screwed by the BCS, despite not winning their “playoff”. I mean why else would he be beating this drum.
In my opinion, unless you want to devalue the regular season, the conference champions have to MEAN something. So why would you allow a playoff that includes at-large teams? And by definition, Adams’ 8 team playoff does that, because those 2 additional teams beyond the 6 BCS conference champions is not going to be the winners of the WAC, MWAC, Conf USA, Mid-American, etc. every year. So more often than not in that scenario those two extra teams will be at-large teams. And if one of them wins the playoff, then the regular season means squat.
By yellowblood
January 9, 2008 10:55 AM | Link to this
I’m against a playoff. I like the old Bowl System better. I think Tech would be further frustrated by our inability to make the playoffs and our Tickle Piles would be adversely effected.
By YUP
January 9, 2008 11:05 AM | Link to this
I think that any system is better than the current one where ESPN picks the national champion.
By KR
January 9, 2008 11:09 AM | Link to this
While I think Dr. Adams’ goal is worthy of discussion, I question his tactics and his timing. Would it have killed him to go about this privately at the NCAA meeting rather than publicly through the media? Couldn’t he let LSU bask in their achievement for 24 hours before grabbing the spotlight for himself and his school? I don’t recall him being such a strong supporter of a playoff in years past when his school was nowhere near the possibility of being named National Champions.
I believe a playoff can work, but some other changes will have to be made. In my opinion, either you limit the playoffs to conference champions and select at-large invitees or you do away with naming conference champions. What point is there in winning your conference (through a game or otherwise) if you still don’t get into the playoffs? Plus, playing and losing a conference championship game can only hurt a team’s chances of getting to the playoffs. So why do it?
Is it really about naming a National Champion or is it about protecting good bowl game match-ups? Would there be complaints if Georgia and Southern Cal had played in either the Rose or Sugar Bowl?
After a decade of existence, the only thing the BCS has proved is that you can do everything right and still find yourself on the outside looking in. Maybe it is time to try another way.
WAR EAGLE!
By Pat
January 9, 2008 11:10 AM | Link to this
That hot-seat will get a lot warmer for 6 SEC coaches with a playoff. Try going 2 straight years without making the top 8 and see how the fans like it. I’m talking about UGA, UT, FLA, AUB, BAMA and LSU.
By Bob
January 9, 2008 11:15 AM | Link to this
This sounds great to the couch potato fan. What fan base could afford to go to NOLA one week, Phoenix the following week and then Miami? It is easy to do with 3000 or so basketball fans but with 25K football fans? I am afraid the quarterfinals would either look like the half empty Gator Bowl did, or Corporate America will buy up all the tickets. CFB is nothing without the fans, bands, students, alumni etc.
I am not against changing the crap we have. I think a plus one has merit. I worry that an 8 team playoff would expand to 16. Regardless of what anyone says, the Regular Season means everything to College Football. Had my Dawgs beaten S. Carolina OR UT we might have been in the game. If WVU had beaten Pitt or S.Fla the same. If USC had beaten Oregon OR Stanford the same.
Everyone talks about March Madness. I agree it is great, but the Regular Season…are you kidding me? Look at the ratings. The other day Wisconsin “upset” Texas in Austin. Who cares? It means nadda because both teams go to the dance.
The current system needs fixing but we had better make sure we know what we are doing before reacting to all the emotional BS. It is easy to do a playoff with a 32 team professional league…it is a bit more complicated with a 119 team league.
By Gradgrad96
January 9, 2008 11:16 AM | Link to this
Look through the BCS guidelines. Nowhere does it state that either participant has to be a conference champion. Remember a few years ago when Oklahoma got killed by Kansas State in the Big12 Championship. OU still went to BCS championship game. So all the whining about that topic should stop.
That said, my personal opinion is that if you don’t win your conference championship game, you don’t play in a BCS championship game. And for a conference to qualify for BCS Champ. game it has to have 12 teams with a deciding conference championship game (ala SEC, BIG12 and ACC). Big10, Big East and PAC10 champs are all illusionary. Who knows what might have happened had Ohio State had to play Illinois again in a conf champ game. Same for USC. All the conferences should be on equal footing from an infrastructure point. This is part of the reason BIG10 doesn’t deserver to polish shoes for SEC schools. Read the Pat Forde article on ESPN.com - it’s quite funny.
By Tom
January 9, 2008 11:27 AM | Link to this
Tony- Please remind me why we are having this dicussion. Is it because UGA didn’t get in the final? Or that the Sugar Bowl was a bust(some people thought it was the best match up of the bowl season..not). Do you think UGA would get in the playoffs if we had 8 teams…not if the NCAA has anything to do with it. They would take a 10-2 Notre Dame and an undefeated non-BCS team long before 2 SEC conference teams.
By TeacherMan
January 9, 2008 11:36 AM | Link to this
Adams said nothing in 2004 when Auburn was left out, and his support for a playoff was absent last year when Florida was angling for a spot. He’s a hypocritical, self-serving joke for thinking NOW is the time to act.
By Maryland Dawg
January 9, 2008 11:47 AM | Link to this
I can’t take it anymore. Did someone cutblock Mark May in the Sugar Bowl when we played them, did someone say something to his parents. This guy obviously has a beef with UGA. Me personally I am fed up with this donkey. This guy has never said anything positive about us. I am thinking about starting an anti Mark May website. Who’s in?
By reality check
January 9, 2008 11:50 AM | Link to this
We are having this discussion Tom because the current BCS system is producing bad matchups and worthy teams are not getting a fair shot at winning it on the field as opposed to the totally subjective popularity contests this thing has become.
The BCS has been a miserable failure in my view. Feel free to disagree and defend the BCS.
Notre Dame didn’t have a 10-2 team this year. I don’t know the answer as to who would have been in a 8 team playoff and neither do you. That process hasn’t even been discussed yet. My bet is Georgia, Southern Cal, WVU, Oklahoma, Virginia Tech and either Missouri or Kansas would likely have been in an 8 team playoff this year and all the speculation about who would have beaten whom goes away.
By Ramblin Wrecker
January 9, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this
All this posturing for a playoff means only one thing:
“Create a playoff so I don’t have to win all my regular season games.”
To me that’s a p*ssy’s way out. Be a man, schedule tough opponents and win your games and let the chips fall where they may. No team can say they DESERVED the national title this year. Kansas and Hawaii only lost one game a piece, but can they honestly look themselves in the mirror and say they tested themselves at all with the weak schedules they had? C’mon. LSU lost 2 games and had to come from behind in three others to get to where they were. Not exactly a dominant team in my opinion. Ohio State had a weak schedule as well. Missouri couldn’t beat OK. OK couldn’t beat Colorado or Texas Tech (or win a BCS bowl game). VaTech couldn’t beat Kansas. UGA couldn’t be good for a whole season. I think UGA was the best team playing the last few weeks, but they don’t give out Natl Champ’s for “most improved”. So to me, all the griping is ridiculous. All these teams should look themselves in the mirror and say “We’re responsible for why we didn’t get to New Orleans, not the BCS.”
By FLA DAWG
January 9, 2008 12:02 PM | Link to this
Only the beauracy of getting this done is hard Tony. High school football and professional football both have playoffs. This is not a hard decision at all - it only makes sense. What has been going on for years has made little sense.
By BullDawg Rick
January 9, 2008 12:09 PM | Link to this
There’s flaws in the polls and in getting the “best 4 teams” there will always be debate…
Here’s a question: How can a team that is 4th in the coaches poll (UGA) beat a team ranked 10th (Hawaii), by 31 points.. Yet a team ranked 7th (USC) beat a team ranked 13th (Illini) by 32 points, gets ranked above the #4 team???
Since the BcS has been in place, the major bowl matchups have been pathatic. There is maybe 1 good game outta the 4…
A playoff system will probably not happen in my lifetime…
By Football an
January 9, 2008 12:18 PM | Link to this
I like the old bowl system better, when a bowl game was a reward to a team for having a good year. There were fewer bowls and better quality. The only tie in back then was the Rose Bowl which will never change, and the Sugar Bowl took the best of the Southern teams as it’s home team.
People need to let this stuff go. The NCAA is the only body that can really award a NC, and the BCS, AP, USA Today are just a bunch of media outsiders stirring up stuff to sell papers. Their awards mean nothing.
I wrote yesterday that it reminds me of a bunch of kids having fun playing baseball until the parents decide to get it “organized” and form little league and hold required practices, and make the kids play until 10:00 at night with school the next day, yell during games at their kid’s mistakes, and start fights in the stands and with the coaches. Then it is no fun any more.
People need to leave it alone, or the fans will go away when Bowl season rolls around. The regular season is more fun anyway.
I would cut it back to 11 games from 12 like it used to be. Everyone should have to play everyone else in their conference and to hell with playing all over the USA.
Mike Adams probably has the best of intentions, but he really screws up every time he tries to call the shots with the athletic dept. Remember his good friend from Pepperdine that he forced on us, Jim Herrick? Mike, just run the university and leave the athletics department to Damon Evans. Thank you.
By Big Ed
January 9, 2008 12:21 PM | Link to this
Here’s my prediction. If there’s a 4 team playoff UGA will be ranked number 5. If ther’s an 8 team playoff UGA will be ranked number 9. The whining will still go on. It’s ironic since the DAWGS will be a preseason top 5 team in 08 that the pressure is comming ftom Adams.
By xmann
January 9, 2008 12:30 PM | Link to this
Why does everyone make this so hard? Just take the six conf. champs, and either select two other conferences to make your 8 team playoffs or if you want to keep it BCS then just make it a 6 team playoff with the conf. champs and decide it on the field. As for the person whinning about not being able to go to the different sites, do like everyone else in America, make a decision which game you want to attend. Who’s to say your team would win there conference anyway. Stop holding on to these outdated ideas of the bowl system being a fair way to decide.
By epb
January 9, 2008 12:31 PM | Link to this
ON THE NATITIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP PLAYOFF -
1) GO TO 8 TEAMS -
2)LET THE TOP 8 IN THE POLLS GO ON TO THE 8 TEAM PLAYOFF - NOT THE 7 CONFRENCE WINNERS +1 . WE WANT THE TOP 8 TEAMS!!!!! PERIOD.
3)THE COACHES POLL AND THE AP DETERMINE THE 8 TEAMS - NOT AN NCAA COMMITTES AS SUGGESTED BY M.A. CAN YOU IMAGINE THE POLITICS GOING ON WITH THAT COMMITEE!!!!
4) KEEP THE BOWLS IN PLACE AND THE TOP 7 HOST THE GAMES. (ROSE CAN OPT OUT IF THEY LIKE)
5) CUT THE SEASON TO 11 GAMES AND PLAY THE FIRST ROUND IN DECEMBER PRIOR TO CHRISTMAS.
CAN’T WAIT!!!!
By GatorMan
January 9, 2008 12:34 PM | Link to this
Last year the hottest team at the end of the year in the SEC was LSU, winning their last 7 games and ending up #3 in the final polls. Like Georgia, LSU put on a dominant performance in the Sugar Bowl, beating Notre Dame 41-14. But LSU did not win their division(Arkansas did even though LSU beat them) and like Georgia this year did not make it to the SEC Championship game. Florida who did win the SEC and National championship, lost later in the season than LSU and barely got by with close wins over Vandy, South Carolina, Georgia, and FSU. Many felt LSU was the “hottest” team in the country at the end of the year and would have had a great chance to beat Florida, Ohio State, USC, or any other team they would have played. Thankfully, LSU’s president had the class and integrity to realize that LSU, like all the other teams in the SEC had an equal opportunity to when the National Championship, but failed on the field, just like Georgia did this year against South Carolina and Tennessee. As a Gator fan I would have been insulted and offended last year if the LSU president would have pulled a stunt like Adams did yesterday. Why wasn’t Adams making his case last summer, BEFORE the season started? Obviously the system seemed fine to him then and certainly would have seemed fine now had Georgia taken care of business on the field and ended up in the NC game. In the 10 years of the current system the SEC CHAMPION has one the National Championship 4 times (Tennessee, Florida, and LSU twice). Seems to me that Adams and his Dawgs should concentrate more on winning(the SEC), and less times whinning.
Go Gators in 08!
By robby
January 9, 2008 12:45 PM | Link to this
adams is the PERFECT guy to bring this up at this time…
1…hes SEC 2…superficial blowhards will be more fired up…his team has listeners to its ‘i was left out argument’ … adams wants the system fixed for HIS team…obviously the only fix for his team is a time machine and an open wide-out route against south cackle-lacky 3…hes not just whining…he has a plan … which i kinda like … ONLY FOUR TEAMS GO AN EXTRA WEEK … two go beyond that…traditinal big bowls stay very relevent…exciting new semifinal and finals locations??
and its not news not everyone agrees with adams … i dont think ull get consensus from ne1 on this … at this point …
and this is COLLEGE FOOTBALL…presidents SHOULD HAVE THE FINAL AND ONLY SAY…im sure theyll consult their athletics people…lol…and media friends…but only they sit in the seat that can make this choice…dont like it…start an nfl feeder league…seriously… =D
By robby
January 9, 2008 12:53 PM | Link to this
CLEARLY GEORGIA WILL BE IN THE SAME AS THIS YEAR NEXT YEAR…AND IN THREE YEARS…AND IN FIVE YEARS…
so thank goodness michael adams has the strength and sense to take action …
whew…
By reality check
January 9, 2008 12:56 PM | Link to this
Let me see if I understand you Ramblin Wrecker. You say no team can claim they deserved the title this year. LSU had 2 losses like many other teams, but they were voted into the game for the championship and I was happy under the circumstances they won big. Is a voting process what you mean by “chips falling where they may”?
And a playoff that lets teams settle things on the field rather than by a vote of old men wearing suits or geeks sitting at a computer is the “p*ssy’s way out” ?
By your blog handle I think we can conclude you are a Tech fan. That helps in understanding your perspective. Thanks.
By Skydawg
January 9, 2008 1:00 PM | Link to this
Seems typical for a former FSU player (current at the time)to expect monetary compensation for a playoff. Listen the powers that be make money now and will make money later, no matter what the system. But here’s an idea Mr Brooks. How bout you earned probably close to a $40,000 education because you happened to be a good football player. There are a bunch of average Joes with much better GPAs that would have loved to have that scholarship money so pipe down. The bottom line is, I find it utterly ridiculous that all these excuses can be made for Div 1A when all the other divisions of college football have a playoff system. The only intended or unintended consequences would be what corporation or conference would be making more or less money, that’s it Tony. So screw the general public who just want to see a legitimate champion played out on the gridiron. Instead of some nerdy a$$ beat righter who probably never laced up a pair unless it were rented ice skates deciding who has a right to play in the BCS. Its total political BS and we fans are sick and tired of it. Only way to get the attention of the powers that be, is to hit them in the pockets and start boycotting these ridiculous BCS matchups we’ve been force fed since 1998.
By LSU1985
January 9, 2008 1:03 PM | Link to this
The SEC already has its own playoff and “wild card” teams like UGA this year and LSU last year have no place in a playoff. UGA’s proposal diminishes the SEC Championship Game and the regular season. Finally, at a minimum, at least win your division before stating that you deserve a shot to play in the NCG.
By WadeDawg
January 9, 2008 1:14 PM | Link to this
Maryland Dawg - Please start an Anti-Mark May website. The key would be to find out all the old dirt on his hatred for the Dawgs…you would have to look no further than Pitt being left out of the National Championship in ‘80…..reems and reems of comments could be put together….then when we prove him wrong, have those follow-ups as well. I hate Mark May. What a joke.
By reality check
January 9, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this
I have to agree the timing of Adams’ announcement was very unfortunate. I don’t blame Slive and others for being offended. He is arrogant and a very complicated person to like.
I don’t want anyone to think of me as a supporter of Mike Adams because I am not. I have found him to be charismatic and engaging in person. Im hindsight I have to credit him with creating a situation that resulted in our hiring Mark Richt, but I despised the way he repeatedly undermined Dooley and then fired him over the objections of Georgia’s fan base.
I think his 8 team playoff proposal has considerable merit compared with the system we have.
By Bob
January 9, 2008 1:23 PM | Link to this
Gatorman,
While I agree with your comments on Adams, don’t play holier than thou with President Machen. Last year PRIOR to the SEC Title game he started this playoff crap before the selection process. Why? Because ESPN was lobbying furiously for Michigan to get a rematch with OSU. Yeah, Herbstreit and Corso and company who this year decided that a non conference winner should be discounted right off the bat, felt last year that a Michigan team that lost to their Conference Champ should get in. My oh my, how things change for ESPN when we are not talking about a Big Ten team.
Anyway, Machen was lobbying furiously for a playoff and for the Gators to get in. The Gators did deserve to be in, but only because USC lost and finally the voters in the BCS realized that a Michigan rematch was a joke. Machen never, never spoke up before it appeared that the Gators might be eliminated.
Frankly, Machen and Adams should have spoken up when Auburn truly got the shaft in 04, but neither did. I am not slamming their proposals, although I have lots of questions. But don’t give us this crap that Machen did it right. Like nation states, University Presidents do things in their own interests.
By Vince
January 9, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this
Can you imagine our backfield next year - and the next several? Its AMAZING and has to be the best.
About 5 top flight tailbacks plus a great walk-on in Daniels.
Three top-flight fullbacks.
By GW
January 9, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this
Who agrees that Adams has cost UGA in next season’s polling?
By Boo-Hoo
January 9, 2008 1:31 PM | Link to this
I thought you Georgia Yahoos were finally through whining. What do you not understand…YOU WERE ONLY 2ND IN THE SEC EAST!! How in the world do you think you deserved to play in the BCS Championship. YOU NEED TO BE A CHAMPION to play in the game. Face it, you are not champions on the football field…however, you are champions of whining. See you in Baton Rouge on October 25 and then you can put up or shut up!!
By Bob
January 9, 2008 1:47 PM | Link to this
Hey Boo-Hoo,
Congrats on a well deserved National Championship. I have no issue with you guys being there. But I do have one question for you. Do you want to give back your 2003 National Championship when you played the Big XII Runner-up that had just LOST to Kansas State by 4 touchdowns? You had no problem playing a team that failed to meet your “Need to be a Champion to play in the game” qualifier.
And yeah we will see you in Baton Rouge. How many do you want us to put up…45 like in 04 or 34 like in 05?
By Skydawg
January 9, 2008 2:04 PM | Link to this
Hey Boo-Hoo, you moron. Most of us Dawg fans aren’t b***. What we are p** off about is that NOWHERE in the BCS systme does it state you have to be conference champion. NOWHERE! And that has actually been voted on numerous times and voted down. What p** us off is any other year, if the #1 and #2 teams lost, the #3 and #4 teams would move up to #1 and #2. But, nooooooo, not this year. Seems it was OK last year for Herbie to think Michigan deserved a rematch with OSU even though they didn’t win the Big 10. But this year he feels no way a non-conference champion should be awarded the same right. You show me in the BCS system rules where it states you have to be a conference champion to play in the BCSCG. So next time come to the table a little more well informed. Bottom line is ESPN used their pull to tout giving OSU another shot even with their ridiculous schedule and to jump another team that hadn’t lost in 7 weeks versus a team that had lost twice in the span, just because they won the SEC. Sorry if you don’t believe it, but yes we got screwed. If the BCS rankings, writers and coaches thought we were a better team in the rankings prior to championship week, then what changed a week later. Nothing but politics and Herbie trying to push LSU after getting lambasted by Miles in his press conference before the game. And yes, we will see you in Baton Rouge, with a very p** off, determined and better football team than LSU. You see, Les Miles is running out off eligibility of Saban’s leftovers and reality will soon settle in on Death Valley.
By DWG
January 9, 2008 2:15 PM | Link to this
Gatorman,
I agree with a lot of what you have to say but remember, LSU lost on the field to your gators and thus had no claim to be in the game over UF. I gaurantee you that if the dawgs had lost to LSU on the field this year, NO ONE would be saying we needed to be in the NC game.
By dawgcall
January 9, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this
I am a Dawg and this is the problem I see most Georgia fans had with how the national championship participants were decided.
The ESPN analysts basically started a crusade that said if you don’t win your conference, division, etc., you shouldn’t play for a national championship. This is not in the rules anywhere. For example, we respect that TN played LSU for the SEC championship because the rules of the SEC states that the team with the best conference record from each division play for the SEC championship. Even though TN lost more games than GA in the regular season, we had the same conference record and they won the tiebreaker because they beat us head to head. TN deserve to play for the title for that reason. Since it’s not in the rules to win your conference, they should not have made a big deal about us not winning the conference. Before #1 and #2 lost, Kirk Herbstreit and other ESPN announcers were saying in this crazy season, Georgia could in up playing for a national championship if the top 2 teams lose, but it seem like that change quickly after it actually happen that way. Also, Oklahoma and Nebraska had played for the national championship in the past without winning their conference, so what was the big reason why GA could not play for the title if a precedent had already been set. Can someone say politics.
We were rank #4 going into the final week of the season. #1 and #2 lost, so we felt like if Ohio State move to 1 why would we not move to 2. If GA had the same rules as the Pac-10, Big 10, and Big East, we would have been considered co-SEC champions, but ESPN and other media like to spin it that GA not only didn’t win their conference, but didn’t win their division. Can someone say politics. Mark May seems like he has some kind of grudge against UGA. May said GA was wrong for the celebration against FL, always pick the other team to beat GA including Hawaii (who after they lost to GA he said they didn’t play anybody), and he said Dr. Michael Adams was whining. If Notre Dame would have been the 4th rank team, most people would agree that they would have played for the NC because you know Lou Holtz would have been acting like ND was the best thing going since slice bread and ESPN/NBC would have been saying ND should play for the national championship. But ND can’t win a conference because they are independent which is more than likely why they want put in a rule saying you have to win your conference because ND can’t win their conference since they are not in a conference.
Every team in the BCS title race besides Hawaii had lost at least once since the last time GA lost including LSU who had lost twice since the last time GA lost. And based on what Kirk Herbstreit said the year before for Michigan, you should put the 2 best teams, the hottest teams, or however you want to say it in the national championship game.
Why was no one on ESPN stating these facts. I do believe GA should have played for the national championship, but the biggest point is that it shouldn’t be decided by a network. It appeared that the whole network canceled GA and Kansas out of the discussion and everyone basically was saying that LSU should play for the national championship. I believe ESPN and the powers to be should have discuss every teams arguments on why they should have had a chance to play for the national championship or took the unified front and said that we are going to let the voters decide without stating who they think should play for the national championship and who shouldn’t get considered. If USC, Kansas, GA, LSU, Ohio State, Oklahoma, West Virginia, etc., would have been discuss on an even basis, I believe you would have heard a lot less complaints from GA fans.
With all that being said, I agree with Dr. Michael Adams that it’s time for an 8 team playoff, so the champion will be decided on the field and not by politics. I agree that maybe Dr. Michael Adams would not have said anything about a playoff if he felt his institution had not been slighted for the national championship, but we can all agree, it’s the right thing to have a playoff. This is what all college fans want.
By dawgcall
January 9, 2008 2:21 PM | Link to this
Anbother brief point I forgot to mae about why GA feel ESPN influence voters against them. In college football, has a #1 and #2 team lose and the #4 team drops to #5 in the rankings. I rest my case.
By KR
January 9, 2008 2:47 PM | Link to this
dawgcall posted: In college football, has a #1 and #2 team lose and the #4 team drops to #5 in the rankings.
Probably. I just can’t think of a case at the moment.
However, I can tell you that in 1983, the #1 team lost their bowl game to the #4 team and the #3 team beat the #2 team in theirs.
In the end, the #4 team going into the bowls that season was declared the National Champion.
By Price Blissit
January 9, 2008 2:47 PM | Link to this
I wish the eight playoff team could work but it won’t because no matter how bad their team is, the Pac-10 and the Big East want their guarenteed BCS Bowl game for the conference champion
By epb
January 9, 2008 2:49 PM | Link to this
Guys,
I can see where some can say you don’t win your confrence, you dont play in the N.C. Game although it is not written….
Question…. If we were in a plus 1 this year and 1 and 2 were squaring off - would the media/BCS/ESPN let LSU and UGA play it out OR would the “they did not win the confrence” rule apply????
I think year in and year out, under current ranking system you can expect 2-3+ SEC teams among the top 8. If we do go to an 8 playoff I think the top 8 play, regardless of confrence. THE 7 BCS confrences are NOT equal by any stretch of the imagination and mearly winning your confrence should NOT get you in the 8 team playoff.
By GatorMan
January 9, 2008 3:30 PM | Link to this
One problem that Georgia fans keep forgeting is that they didn’t finish 2nd in their conference like Michigan did last year or back in the days of Nebraska/Oklahoma or even Oklahoma in 2003. Georgia finished 3rd in the SEC.
Also, lets say there was no SEC tournement and for arguments sake lets use the Big Ten’s tiebreaker system for determining who should represent the conference in the BCS, forgeting for a moment that TN was not part of the equation. The Big Ten formula is a good example because members don’t play every other team in the conference.
Head to Head - obviously not applicable.
If there is still a tie for the championship, or if the tied teams did not play each other, the team that played more games against Football Championship Subdivision (FCS) teams shall be eliminated.
Georgia played Western Carolina, a member of the FCS. LSU did not play any members of the FCS. Georgia eliminated.
Even if you went to a 3 team tiebreaker, Georgia would be eliminated first because of their game against Western Carolina, then TN would be eliminated because of overall record.
By Mikey
January 9, 2008 3:47 PM | Link to this
We need to be careful what we wish for- we just might get it…
By Mark May
January 9, 2008 3:52 PM | Link to this
Yes I did pick Hawaii. I thought the Warriors had the Dawgs right where they wanted them. Until the first play from scrimmage…
If GA was playing a directional school from Wyoming I would pick them as well.
By Bob
January 9, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this
Gatorman, Not forgetting anything. Michigan lost to Ohio State. They did not win their conference. They have no divisions in their 11 team conference so that issue is irrelevant. Actually they TIED for second in their conference with Wisconsin.
Nebraska did not get into their Conference Championship game because they LOST to the Big XII North Champion 62-24. So you could say they finished 3d in their conference too.
I have never proposed that UGA should get in based on anything. Tennessee rightfully represented the East and I have zero issue with that or LSU. But don’t tap dance around the Michigan issue. They did not win a division because they don’t have divisions. They did lose to their conference champion. Big Ten rules for selecting Rose Bowl reps are not relevant to the SEC.
Again, I have no gripes about where Georgia wound up. I do have issues with the double standard and regardless of the amount of tap dancing you want to do, they are the same.
By C
January 9, 2008 4:21 PM | Link to this
For God’s sakes people! ‘Whining’ is spelled with 1 ‘n’, not 2!
Also, saying you have to be a conference winner to get to the playoff bracket does not insure that you will get the top 8 teams - it just means that teams like OSU who schedule sisters of the poor and play a WEAK conference are guaranteed a spot every year where they can get demolished by some team with two losses that made it out of the nasty SEC. The ‘at large’ teams must be able to come from any conference with no restrictions if you give the other 6 conference winners a ‘free’ ride. I would propose that you could have a conference winner in 1 division that is actually ranked lower than two or even three teams in another division come decision time…
By gdawginkalamazoo
January 9, 2008 4:21 PM | Link to this
F it all. Just kick a$$ next year. That will end the debate. If we do, I would certainly hope to play HERstreit’s Ohio State Suckeyes. Make them 0 and 10 against the best conference in the land.
Skydawg, Bob, and dawgcall. Dead on. Why Nebraska and Oklahoma got to go as non conference winners, but not the dawgs? Last years call against Michigan? Maybe if they had two divisions and OSU and UM were in different divisions what would have happened if Michigan beat OSU the second time in the conference title game. Neither goes to the NC? Or we get to see them play each other three times? Boring enough the first time round.
GW, I don’t know. Maybe, maybe not. Maybe they pick us #1 because our schedule is so brutal they won’t think we can hold it all season long. Just as an in your face, here is your #1 ranking you thought you should have played for last year type of thing they can throw back to Adams.
Great to see Hebron is back on campus. Hope he stays out of trouble and takes advantage of this second chance. Talking about stacked at LB now with Ellerbe coming back. And if Samuel moves to LB. Damn, it will be one of the best LB corps in the nation, and the youngest.
By braveswin
January 9, 2008 4:27 PM | Link to this
I didn’t have a problem with the old bowl system.I have a problem with the BCS not being able to establish a game between the two best teams in any given yr.(see AU undefeated and left out)So if the BCS is incapable of giving a true championship(and it appears they are) then lets just go back to the traditional bowls.I think I enjoyed it better that way anyway.All this bellyaching is giving me a headache.GO DAWGS.Congrats LSU
By gdawginkalamazoo
January 9, 2008 4:31 PM | Link to this
Damn Bob, why doesn’t Adams and Evans hire you to discuss these issues with the “media”. Well said. I couldn’t agree more.
By Big Dawg
January 9, 2008 4:34 PM | Link to this
KR
However, I can tell you that in 1983, the #1 team lost their bowl game to the #4 team and the #3 team beat the #2 team in theirs.
In the end, the #4 team going into the bowls that season was declared the National Champion.
KR; If my memory serves me right- Auburn got screwed that year, but you are mistaken because Michigan wasn’t rated # 2 that year it was Texas. IMHO Auburn was passed over because they took a mediocre Michigan team lightly in the Sugar Bowl and then played a very uninspired game and barely won when they should have beaten the Wolverines by three or four TDs. Miami on the other hand beat a Great team - Unbeaten and # 1 ranked Nebraska and it was a very exciting game, plus you left out the fact the Dawgs beat the other undefeated Great Team- # 2 Texas who had beaten Auburn at Auburn quite convincingly earlier in the year.
By Braves Fan 79
January 9, 2008 4:37 PM | Link to this
A plus one system while better than what we have now… is NOT THE ANSWER! UGA and USC would of BOTH been out of the 4 team system… so what would that of proved when the 2 hottest/best teams arent in it?? A 8 team playoff is the way to go…no doubt!
By Braves Fan 79
January 9, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this
You LSU fans are lucky kentuckys sorry butts couldnt score from the 1 yard line against TENN, or else yall would of been exposed in the SEC championship game!
By Red & Black
January 9, 2008 4:51 PM | Link to this
Playoffs wouldn’t be good for uga it would show everyone all our wasted talent and future prison inmates.Also we seem unable to beat Spurrier again. Dawggoneit
By Bob
January 9, 2008 4:55 PM | Link to this
Kalamazoo,
Thanks but no thanks. I would rather not work for the esteemed President of our Alma Mater.
By Braves Fan 79
January 9, 2008 5:01 PM | Link to this
Ramblin Wrecker: man this isnt a GT, or UGA thing, im a GT fan myself… this debate is a sports fan debate. And how any one that calls themselves a FAN can agree with this BSC CRAP…or even ANY non playoff system is beyond me!
College Football ….as is RIGHT NOW…SUCKS! And isnt even a real sport… common pple the WNBA is more of a real sport than college football!
And to be honest…if GT won all their games last year they STILL wouldnt of been in the championship game! How would that make u feel knowing that tech won the ACC…yet still is playing for no more than 3rd or 4th place…
By maxsportz.com
January 9, 2008 5:07 PM | Link to this
Where was Adams in year’s past? Don’t come up with ideas when your team gets jammed. Only way a playoff ever happens is with a BCS protest. Before every BCS game the teams refuse to come out of the locker room. Things would change within a week.
text to be linked
By George L. "Dazy" Perry
January 9, 2008 5:07 PM | Link to this
A college playoff system is the only fair way to determine who is really number one in the country. The BCS is bovine scatology.
By braveswin
January 9, 2008 5:13 PM | Link to this
Let’s clear up all this “debate”LSU is no better than KY.OSU is worse than ILL.GA lost to S Car.USC is no better than Stanford.W VA is more pitiful than Pitt.OKL choked again as usual.Mizz lost to Okl.Kansas is terrible.Tenn only played one decent game all yr.So it is obvious that LSU is the National Champion of college football.(or should at least share the dadgum thing with Notre Dame or Fla St..Any of this make sense?
By Tdog
January 9, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this
We need 8 teams if we only have 4 there will be to much wiggle room for ESPN to use their influence to block some teams and permote other teams. Can someone give me a legitimate reason USC jumped UGA in the coaches pole, GA played in a tougher confrance, played more teams with a winning record, looked just as good or better,USC lost to Stanford while a 40+ point favorate
By Priceless
January 9, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this
I think GT could win the National Championship next year,,,,,if they played in 1-AA (Championship Playoff Division or whatever). I also believe that PJohnson will be the biggest flop as a coach since that Atlanta Falcon HCoach. I only hope he has the common sense to leave the same way. There’s a reason Oklahoma and Texas doesn’t use the triple option any more. It’s call fast defensive players, and smarter Defensive Coordinators.
By Skeeter
January 9, 2008 5:50 PM | Link to this
follow a real man’s sport like hockey you little wussies
By Saban101
January 9, 2008 6:28 PM | Link to this
A team that can’t beat a 6-6 USC team at home and gets trounced by Tenn should be grateful they even got invited to a BCS bowl, and against a creme puff who didn’t belong at all.
By jags32
January 9, 2008 8:36 PM | Link to this
Priceless
Navy faced plenty of BCS schools under CPJ, and they had a LOT of success, and even had the #1 rush offense in the country. Also, when GSU went between the hedges in ‘04, they scored the most points on our defense than any other team did that year. (28)
You can recruit much better athletes at a major school like GT, I really can’t see why a lot of people are so doubtful of the offense.
By Tdog
January 9, 2008 9:48 PM | Link to this
Saban101 DOES YOUR TEAM BELONG?
By Tom Trojan
January 9, 2008 9:54 PM | Link to this
To aleviate all your angst, win your conference! The mighty SEC has divided into TWO (2) divisions, so you have a ‘East/West’ deal going for you! You ain’t never going to be satisfied no matter how good you think you are! USC wins their conference! They get to play in The Rose Bowl! Case closed! You can play in any other bowl you qualify for, but USC has already qualified for theirs! A ‘National Championship’ is a myth without 10 teams playing each other and that ain’t going to happen, ever! UGA had a wonderful seasonm! Be happy!
By War Eagle
January 9, 2008 10:31 PM | Link to this
Gator Man, very good post, Adams is a “come-on” seeking limelight on behalf of UGA football success 2007 and future.. CMR has to support his request, but in reality, NCAA will object to Adams proposal because bowl games are tradition, $$$ and fun environment for players and fans. The BCS has been on the money last several years for the best team in the country: LSU, Florida, Texas, USC and USC.I think a four team playoff would be good, the problem, who would select four teams?
By Bob
January 9, 2008 10:34 PM | Link to this
Tom Trojan,
Nobody in the country is complaining more today that the Men of Troy. Any team that loses to Stanford shouldn’t qualify for a NCGame. Open up your Rose Bowl for somebody other than the Big Ten and maybe you will get a game for a change. Like uh, Texas. Funny, every “outsider” invited to the Rose Bowl to their dismay has won…Oklahoma and Texas twice. No wonder you guys like playing Illinois.
By Billy
January 10, 2008 12:54 AM | Link to this
i do not think some of you people get it…..THE BCS WAS BASED ON A THEORY!!!!it is NOT a science!!!!Dr. Adams,,,like any other smart person,,,needs some evidence to analyze before making a comment on rather or not a THEORY is flawed or not…..have you ever heard the expression===>”let me sleep on it”………just so happens that this THEORY needed several years to analyze…..the way i look at it,,,the THEORY might be right for 20 years and then there is the year that it is totally blown out of the water…..it is NOT fair to the people (teams in this case)that the THEORY did not work that flawed year====>just does not justify the motive in that the powers at be (BCS) want to find the true champion year end and year out……I applaud Dr Adams in getting this discussion on the table…..it is the ONLY way to get a consistant or nearly consistant choice for NCAA college football champion……PERIOD!!!YES,, a flawed BCS could happen next year with diff teams===>you just can’t predict….that’s what makes it a THEORY!!!!so sick of reading some of these posts which make absolutely no sense…..one of barnharts “talking points” is quoting that fsu’s brooks……if i would have heard that at the time,,, i would have politely advised this gentleman to be appreciative of what he has recieved and is receiving at his college institution…ie) room and board,,,,chance (if he so chooses) at a top notch FREE education and the FREE training and instruction of some of the best football coaches to make you a better player so one day your sorry butt might have a chance to play in the nfl…..just amazes me how this question would stop conversation at a meeting discussing playoffs….Dr Adams has admitted he has seen enough flaw in the bsc THEORY to make the call for a playoff….to the people who oppose it=====>your not in it for the true reason of the sport and that is to crown an undisputed national champion year in and year out……you people know your agenda and situation that college football has now become…..hey,,,,it ain’t like it was 50 years ago so get over it
By Tdog
January 10, 2008 8:33 AM | Link to this
Their is a reason you don’t see 40+ point spreads in the SEC, like you see every year in the Pac-10, Big- 10, We have a football conferance. Usc fan’s need to bow their knee to the football king’s the SEC.
By KR
January 10, 2008 8:41 AM | Link to this
Big Dawg you’re reading too much into my post. I purposely left off the teams to keep away from various people’s biases.
The point was, lower ranked teams jump higher ranked teams all of the time, and have been doing so as long as I have been following college football. (around 40 years, btw…)
It’s never been as simple as #1 & #2 fell, so #3 & #4 should move up.
By Billy
January 10, 2008 9:10 AM | Link to this
and another thing====>what do you people think it means when one disagrees with current bcs saying it’s a beauty contest? ANSWER===>the teams that are voted in by whomever are looked at as being good on paper and tradition===>that’s why these teams get the higher placement vote…..you can’t tell me that me that a team that is good on paper at the beginning of the season and starts out like they deserve it THEN goes into a status quo or even playing worse than they are on paper for the rest of the year with losing and barely winning is better than a team that is not as talented on paper and loses a couple of games early and fixing the problems and becomes motivated to handily win your last seven games with heart and talent AND having the same record in same conference ….LSU showed me absolutely nothing this year but they were good on paper……osu was worse as they were exposed by playing NOBODY during the regular season====>didn’t know how to fight which is part of a great team…..if this were to be the case,,,why not just crown the champ at the beginning of the year w/o playing a season……i think an 8 team playoff would be a pretty good model with it taking into consideration the regular season and would more of determination of crowning a true champion…….yes,,,you can argue that a # 25 team could beat a # 3 or whatever top 8 team on a given day====>this true but is not a argument…..the top 8 would have earned it thru the year…..as of now,,,this is just a model and can be tweaked but is a start…..there are many factors that factor into the equation when deciding who has a great team as opposed to a good team=====>it can’t be just who is good on paper and tradition which is a BEAUTY CONTEST…..a four team playoff would not work===>this season proves it……it could happen again
By Eric1
January 10, 2008 9:51 AM | Link to this
If you lose to Kentucky and unranked Arkansas you do not deserve to be National Champions, no matter who else you may have beat. The system sucks!
By Billy
January 10, 2008 10:51 AM | Link to this
one last comment then i’m off the stump====>i will take a team like vandy any day of the week that plays and fights with heart that has less talent any day of the week====>you listening spurrier?maybe you can quit talking badly about your players and take some of the blame yourself….yes,,,the coaches are part of the TEAM…..AND to the prima donna teams that are constantly,,,year in and year out,,,the top teams in polls on paper,,,,start acting like you belong and not lose to stanford,,appy state,,boise state and arkansas while you have been graced by the talking heads of the media…..show some character and do what you are suppossed to do…AND there will be no question====>don’t get complacent b/c hopefully there is a change in the wind…..