AJC > Sports > Blog > Archives > 2008 > April > 28 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USBig change coming to BCS, but just not now.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.-Good morning from sunny South Florida where over the next few days the movers and shakers of college football will meet to discuss the short-term future of the BCS.
If you had a chance to read any of my stuff about the BCS on Sunday you know that the current BCS contract with FOX ends in two years. If the commissioners who run the BCS want to make any changes to the format, which begins with the 2010 regular season, the decision to make those changes has to be made by Sept. 1. That’s when the negotiations on the new contract will begin.
There is some pressure to change. UGA President Michael Adams wants to scrap the current system for an eight-team playoff. A lot of fans have never embraced the current system and never will. They want a playoff and they want it now. Three congressmen, including Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia, have stated publicly that the BCS violates antitrust law.
But based on the research I have done and the numerous conversations I’ve had on this subject in the past two months I do not see any significant change coming out of these meetings, which are scheduled to end about lunchtime on Wednesday. This thing just has too many moving parts and there are too many different agendas at work.
SEC Commissioner Mike Slive will come to the meetings armed with a plan for a four-team playoff that would seed the teams 1-4. You’d have two semifinals and then a championship game. If there is going to be any change, I believe it’s the biggest one that can be made and actually put into place by 2010.
The commissioners are also going to talk about the current “double-hosting” model where one city hosts two games-its bowl plus the BCS championship game. Glendale, Ariz., and New Orleans both did a good job with it during the past two seasons. Miami and Pasadena will get their shot over the next two years. But I’m just not sure the idea is going to survive for another four-year cycle-not with Jerry Jones’s $1.1 billion stadium getting ready to come on line in Dallas. So that could change.
Everything is going to be on the table this week and I am told the discussions will be lively. There is the point of view that after 10 years of the two-team BCS championship fans are ready-and deserve-a new post-season product. There are equally passionate voices that believe that college football has never been more popular. The stadiums are full. TV ratings are good. Everybody’s making money. Why mess with a good thing?
Here is what I believe. I believe that the discussions that will take place over the next couple of days are to simply lay the groundwork for the REAL negotiations four years from now. By then the stadium in Dallas will be up and running full speed. The Citrus Bowl in Orlando will have completed its renovation. The Rose Bowl contract with ABC will also be up for renewal (it currently runs through the game of 2014). All of the moving parts that I mentioned before will finally be lined up.
The next four years will be used to build consensus for a big move, which is something that does not exist right now. Then the commissioners can put a four-team playoff on the table and open it up for bids to all of the TV networks and bowls who want to play. That’s the end game.
In short, I see big change coming to post-season football and the BCS. Just not now.
.JPG)
-1.JPG)
Services »
Comments
By ugadawgclc
April 28, 2008 8:41 AM | Link to this
FIRST thought i would try it once too!!!!!
scrap the bcs and go back to the old way. some teams got ripped but it made JAN1 fun!!!! not that crap we were forced to watch this year!!!!
By scribe
April 28, 2008 8:58 AM | Link to this
Please tell the commissioners of the Big 10 (er, 11), Pac 10 and Big East to come into the 21st century and support a playoff system. Email their conference offices
By Steeledawg
April 28, 2008 8:59 AM | Link to this
Tony, I agree with you. The big changes will happen in 2012, but one thing I wish could change now is to get Fox and their godawful telecasts as far away from college football as possible.
By Anonymous Reader
April 28, 2008 9:25 AM | Link to this
1) Someone will always complain about the system. Period. Whether it’s Number 3(coughU(sic)GAcough), or number 9 under one the proposed systems, or number 5 under another proposed system, someone will always complain and whine. 2)Why the he_1 are SEC presidents complaining about a system that has brought the championship to their conference the last 2 years? seriously? the system seems to be working just fine for your conference, why change it? 3)How exactly are these 4 teams going to be picked for the playoffs? Do you actually believe that there will be 4 teams that are absolutely, beyond any doubt the best picks for numbers 1-4 according to everyone?! WRONG! Guess what- they’ll probably be decided JUST how numbers 1 and 2 are right now - HUMAN OPINION POLLS! What an absolutely amazing change! You added another game to the season for 2 teams. how groundbreaking. Bah. 10 years after they adopt this kind of system, everyone will be whining again, because their team was OBVIOUSLY the best and got left out and it’s not fair and they really should scrap this whole system because it’s just all based on an opinion poll anyways.
By m
April 28, 2008 9:33 AM | Link to this
We need a 16 team playoff. We need the teams to earn their way into the field of 16. No opinions should count for ANYTHING…only on the field results. The BCS is a sorry, sorry system made up of opinions. Opinions should have no place in deciding the national champion. The only thing sorrier than the BCS is Chan Gailey…and luckily he is gone FOREVER….and so should the BCS be gone forever.
By Gen Neyland
April 28, 2008 9:42 AM | Link to this
In prior posts related to the BCS, I’ve argued that the BCS system is evolving. From a true beauty contest of the past many of you don’t remember, to at least one that uses some kind of formula to measure a season of success. It’s not gonna be based on simply W’s and L’s. We all clamoured for a system that crowned a true NC prior to the induction of the BCS. The BCS as we’ve known it has at times, seemed to move in reverse instead of forward. Like it or not, our favorites don’t always measure up to a system based on facts. So as the BCS and other Bowl pictures evolve, the likes of a Hawaii of 2008 going to an upper tier Bowl will disappear…and that will be good in my opinion. If a playoff is to be the next experiment with the BCS, fine and dandy. Maybe it’s the answer, maybe it’s just another slop pile to step through to get to where it needs to go. Seems reasonable to begin ASAP…
By gadawg89
April 28, 2008 9:56 AM | Link to this
The Rose Bowl Parade is a grand spectacle. But if you take the money then join the program. USC/Illinois was a joke. UGA/Hawaii was a joke. USC/UGA would have been something to see and I would have enjoyed attending the parade.
By NYJacket
April 28, 2008 10:03 AM | Link to this
Why not take the conference champions from all Div I AA schools and put them in a playoff the same as it was done for basketball years ago?
It is simple and it would generate a ton of money for everyone.
Take the human opinion out of the process.
If a team doesn’t win its conference, tough luck and best of luck next year.
And, yes, with this format every conference game is extremely important.
If necessary shorten the season to allow for the playoffs. The Div I AA conference teams don’t need to be beating up on Div II schools.
By Miles
April 28, 2008 10:14 AM | Link to this
Mr. Barnhart, your insight and opinions are teriffic! Although Charles Darwin may have difficulty explaining the the evolution of the BCS, Adam Smith could sum it up in one word, i.e., money. Mike Slive, it appears, is the free market’s not-so-invisible hand.
By bellefay
April 28, 2008 10:22 AM | Link to this
Delaney is a joke. “Ignore the man behind the curtain” comes to mind when thinking of that petty mind in terms of his manipulation of the BCS.
Start the playoff and let them have a big parade and watch Illinois vs. USC.
“I love speed and the SEC has great speed, especially on the defensive line, but there are appropriate balances when mixing academics and athletics. Each school, as well as each conference, simply must do what fits their mission regardless of what a recruiting service recommends. I wish we had six teams among the top 10 recruiting classes every year, but winning our way requires some discipline and restraint with the recruitment process. Not every athlete fits athletically, academically or socially at every university. Fortunately, we have been able to balance our athletic and academic mission so that we can compete successfully and keep faith with our academic standards.”
This child is the self described “splinter.” Tony, please be the tweezers and rid help the public rid college football of this cancer.
By Observer
April 28, 2008 10:36 AM | Link to this
Tony - thanks for a very inciteful and informative article. Unfortunately, we don’t get to see many of those in the Blogosphere of AJC Sports.
By ATLNative
April 28, 2008 10:43 AM | Link to this
Anonymous - The SEC has been robbed by the current system as much as it, as you alledge, has been helped by it. While UGA was rightfully not in the SEC Championship or the MNCG, I think they would have shocked the world if they got a chance to play for a title - or hell, it would have at least been a better game than the one against Hawaii. Don’t even get me started on AU in 2004 - talk about being robbed by the BCS. I’m not saying AU would have beat USC, but they deserved the chance just as much as OU did.
The overall point is - why have 6 BCS conferences when only 2 get to play for the title?
By P Dawg
April 28, 2008 10:44 AM | Link to this
It really won’t matter if they change the rules again or not, someone is always going to fell like they got the shaft. I just wish UGA would go undefeated and win the nc. Then nobody could argue or deny that they should have been there. Besides, I would hate to buy the t-shirt that has all the scores and have that ugly blemish on it where they lost to someone, or in LSU’s case… twice! Win em’ all dawgs and shut everybody up for good!
By Hootie Bookems
April 28, 2008 10:52 AM | Link to this
Tony,
Where is the NCAA in all of this? Why don’t they step in? They are the ones losing out on the $$. Look at the cash cow that March Madness is for the NCAA, why are they leaving the football $$ on the table?
By DWG
April 28, 2008 10:56 AM | Link to this
Amen to that SteelDawg. I was at the Sugar Bowl this year and the only thing worse than having to watch the BCS on FOX is sitting through TV timeouts in the dome.
Whatever they decide, one thing should be put in place: Until they find a perfect system, no undefeated team should be denied a share of the national title. I’d propose that if you have more than one undefeated team in the top 5 of the BCS, it’s declared a split nat. championship. Once you lose a game your fate is in the hands of the voters, but if you do everything asked of you during the regular season and post season, you should not be denied a share of the title.
By Albert
April 28, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this
Tony: As to the folks who espouse the “don’t mess with a good thing” logic…What those people fail to realize is that the “good thing” is college football itself—the stadiums, the campuses, the rivalries, and the actual football game. The “good thing” is not the “system” surrounding college football. Unless they take off the pads, turn the field into a diamond and make the guys start playing baseball, college football will ALWAYS be popular with the fans, have good ratings and full stadiums, and make a lot of money. Having a playoff will NOT jeopardize that one bit. I mean really, the thought that a single person would turn off their TV set, or not buy a ticket to the game, or not buy their favorite team’s jersey BECAUSE the BCS was scrapped in favor of a playoff is ABSURD. I happen to think that the opposite would happen with a playoff—revenues and popularity would increase. But, at the least, there is absolutely no way popularity and revenues would go down. Anybody who thinks otherwise is not thinking clearly.
By JJ
April 28, 2008 11:02 AM | Link to this
P Dawg, If I had the power I would let UGA win so everybody would shut up, especially you whining DAWGS! It might be a WIN/WIN for everybody.
By Atlanta Gator
April 28, 2008 11:21 AM | Link to this
Tony——As your column appears to be predictive of the actual outcome, not aspirational as to what it should be, I will say, yes, I agree with you. What you have predicted is what I believe is likely to happen (assuming that the Rose Bowl, Big 10 and Pac-10 don’t do everything they can to queer the deal).
First, implement a four-team playoff, eventually to be expanded to eight teams, with preference given to the BCS conference champions and the next two highest ranked teams. Details of the rankings to be worked out, but it ain’t that hard to do based on record and strength of schedule. The RPI works very well as a predictor of success in the NCAA basketball tournament. And, yes, there will always be someone who cries that they were unfairly left out, whether it’s number 3, 5, 9, 17 or 65. There is a difference, though: unlike the third ranked team, it is virtually impossible for numbers 5, 9 or 17 to be undefeated, assuming they are a major Division I-A team playing a BCS conference schedule.
If number 5, 9 or 17 whines about being left out, my reaction will be: “Tough break. I guess you should have won your own conference championship (or that 12th regular season game) and controlled your own fate, huh?”
By Paul From Milton
April 28, 2008 11:22 AM | Link to this
Well, at least this gives the Dawgs something else to whine about other than their schedule (as if they have the only tough schedule in the world) and the fact that Shockley should be starting for the Falcons.
By Steve Spurrier
April 28, 2008 11:33 AM | Link to this
I wish my team could be mentioned with the BCS. But my starting qb is a felon and the rest of my team stinks too. I wish I were still in Washington.
By Richard
April 28, 2008 11:39 AM | Link to this
If we scrap the BCS, how will Terrence Moore give us the high comedy collums when he prises the system. Theres no greater display of stupidity, lunacy, and comedy than to listen to someone praise the BCS.
By P Dawg
April 28, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this
Paul From Milton, as much as I would like to see DJ play for the Falcons I believe he’s probably done after the signing of Harrington, Redman, and the drafting of Ryan.
By Realist
April 28, 2008 11:43 AM | Link to this
I guess we just can’t have a legitimate NCAA football champion until Jerry Jones builds a new stadium. None of the hundreds of existing NFL and college facilities today are sufficient to crown a champion.
By Roswell Ed
April 28, 2008 12:00 PM | Link to this
I’d rather talk about the draft.
What happened to Bama?
By Dan
April 28, 2008 12:04 PM | Link to this
It’s absolutely worthless to have a BCS title game without a plus one format. That more than anything else is what watered down the BCS line up. I say keep it the original format until a plus one is implemented. If you went by the old format, you would have had LSU vs. OSU in the Sugar Bowl for the National championship, Va Tech vs. OU in the Orange, WV vs. Kansas in the Feista, and USC vs. UGA in the Rose. Those matchups would have been awesome. The Rose bowl committee sucks. They branched off from their Pac 10 vs. Big 10 format in 2005 when they selected Texas to play Michigan, and it was an AWESOME game. USC vs. UGA could have been that type of game. If they’re suppossed to be the “grandaddy of them all” then they need to live up to their name and produce better matchups.
By No Dawgs Here
April 28, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this
The BCS has shown to be nothing but a failed system. 16 teams should vie for the championship. Take the top team from the ACC, Big Ten, Big East, Big 12, SEC, PAC-10, WAC, Conference USA and whoever else wants to get in. Fill the rest of the slots with “at large” teams (like the NCAA basketball tourney). Yes, there may debates on the final 1 or 2 teams, but there will always be debates. Let those 16 teams play, this will ADD (ADD folks) 4 games to the season. Add means more money… The smaller bowls can have the teams that did not make the round of 16. So there are no schools left out. In fact it may allow more schools to play in bowls. Again, add more games… Add more money.. Where does the NCAA lose in this? Where do fans lose? The issue is some of the people in charge are having thier back pockets greased by the current BCS bowls and they don’t want to mess that up.
By AltamahaDawg
April 28, 2008 12:31 PM | Link to this
I think this year proved that the 2 team format creates a conflict of “criteria”. It seems to me that you would get a much more consistant set of rules applied by pollsters, if they werent under the pressure to “arrange” the NC game, and just let the polls fall where they may. I actually think the more teams in a playoff, the more accurate the polls would become.
By P Dawg
April 28, 2008 12:42 PM | Link to this
No Dawgs Here, that could be a little too much to ask of the kids playing the games. It’s pretty brutal, especially for the guys on the lines, to play that many games. I think the plus one is the most realistic scenario here. The people complaining are the ones that didn’t take care of business in the regular season. Yes, I’m saying it, UGA should have beaten SC and UT to play in the big one. LSU got VERY luck to have had such a crazy year last season with so many no. 1’s and 2’s losind so consistently. Don’t see that happening again for a long time. Hopefully, UGA will remember that and take this season one game at a time and go undefeated to a universally undisputed nc.
And JJ, I wish you had that power. LOL!
By Aj
April 28, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this
Roswell Ed, I watched the draft this weekend, and i can not believe that there was no one drafted from bama.
By KansasDawg
April 28, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this
Anything would be an improvement over the one we have now. GO DAWGS!!
By Dawg 'n IT
April 28, 2008 1:16 PM | Link to this
Anonymous Reader,
SEC Presidents are complaining because it seems that for an SEC to play for the MNC, they have to be the most dominant team on the planet, otherwise if you’re just a great team (see Auburn’s shaft job) then you won’t get a shot. Meanwhile, a pretty good team in a weak conference (see OSU) can always play for the MNC even when most are not excited about their team. Oklahoma, who plays in a respectable conference, used to get the OSU-like nod to the BcS Championship Game but having blown so many big bowl games since their last MNC, the powers that be finally decided to stop tossing them a bone.
Yes, someone will always complain about any system, however if you can settle things on the field there will be a lot fewer complaints. How many people complain about NCAA Basketball, the NFL, NBA, MLB, any other college sport or division of football, etc AFTER the championship game is played? Few and far between. Yes, in March Madness some teams complain about not making it in but we all know that those teams are not great so it doesn’t matter that they didn’t get in and the nation ignores those complainers after the playoff and championship gets started.
After this year’s BCS championship we are left wondering if USC or Oklahoma are better than OSU and if UGA is better than LSU. That said, LSU is a deserving MNC because they did look like a quality team all season. Heck, no one ended up undefeated so it’s hard to knock them for the Kentucky loss. And the fact that no one but Hawaii went undefeated during the regular season is the only reason LSU got in so the SEC was very lucky to even have a team in the game.
The SEC Presidents feel that more often than not, the best teams in the SEC could outplay the best of the rest in a playoff from season to season. Does that mean the SEC should always be in the championship game? No, it means that our regular season conference battles shouldn’t damage our chances at a MNC as bad as they do when the SEC has multiple great teams from season to season and most other conferences do not.
To anyone who is anti-playoff, why are you scared to see your favorite team prove on the field that they are the best? The glory of going undefeated is a fading concept in sports with more parity at every level. Sure, it’ll still happen from time to time, but being undefeated in the regular season is no longer carries the meaning of being the best with such a large pool of teams yet so few games against the field.
Just look toward the NBA this year for an example. Is Boston really the best team because they have the league’s best record largely against the weak Eastern Conference? Thank goodness the NBA has a meaningful playoff so that we ultimately find out.
Also, look at the NFL. Can anyone argue against the Giants being the champs considering they not only beat the Patriots on any given Sunday, but they also won 3 playoff games prior to the Super Bowl? They proved it on the field through 4 post season games. No whiners allowed, only winners. Settle it on the field.
By Dawg 'n IT
April 28, 2008 1:44 PM | Link to this
Here is where the BCS and D-I college football is broken. In the NFL a given team plays against enough of the field to get a good idea of how good or bad they are relative to the league and if they are deserving of the post-season. For example, the Falcons play 13 different teams each regular season which means they play against 42% of the other teams in the NFL (assuming 13 opponents from the other 31 teams).
Meanwhile, a team like UGA playing a 12 game regular season schedule would play against 10% of the field (assuming 12 opponents against the other 118 Division I-A teams in 2007). Keep in mind that teams like OSU might only play an 11 game regular season and any given team might play atleast 1 team from another division. Long story short, no team’s schedule provides enough games on paper to satisfy perception against the field only facing 10% of the league.
The assessment of a team in any sport that plays against 42% of the competition is much more legit than a team who only plays 10% of the competition. I say put an end to independents, force small conferences to merge and cut fat. The FBS should include 72 teams (6 conferences with 12 teams per conference). These schools should only be allowed to play other schools from this 72 team field as non-conference games. All 6 conferences will have a championship game to determine 6 automatic bids to an 8 team playoff. The 2 remaining at-large slots can be filled with the highest ranked non-championship teams. Yes, a team with a 12 game schedule would then only play against 16% of the field, but with every BCS eligible conference having a championship game and all non-conference games being against this 72 team field (not the current 119 plus any potential lower division school that is out for a payday) we’d sleep better at night with the outcome of the season.
By P Dawg
April 28, 2008 2:19 PM | Link to this
Dawg ‘n IT, I agree with you 100%. It stands to reason though that if OU isn’t getting the nod anymore because of their recent bowl record then OSU should most definitely get the same treatment. I think the world outside of Ohio would strongly agree. Their answer though will be “we’re playing USC this year”, but who else… Michigan. That’s about it. If only UGA had only two big games to get up for all season to walk into the nc game. For some reason it just wouldn’t work out for us. One day, the rest of America will wake up and realize what’s happening all too often and get the teams that play cupcakes 90% of the season out of the nc picture!
By Bamafan
April 28, 2008 2:31 PM | Link to this
Bama had 2 players with off-the field problems. Wallace Gillberry is a good defense lineman, but he is to small for a end in the NFL and to slow as a pass rusher. D.J Hall has talent to play in the NFL, but he has issues problems. That is why Bama did not have any players drafted, thanks to Mike Shula!! ROLL TIDE!!
By Sanjeev
April 28, 2008 2:54 PM | Link to this
FBS football - the only NCAA sport without a playoff system.
Why does the BCS run the national championship and not the NCAA?
If you think the Bowls are big the NIT was once the “Big Dance” be lo and behold the NCAA tournament is now king.
By P Dawg
April 28, 2008 3:08 PM | Link to this
Bamafan, give Saban a couple of years and he’ll be putting a lot of players in the NFL. I see MANY UGA vs Alabame SEC championship games in the future! You guys take care of LSU and we’ll take care of Auburn.
By Ed
April 28, 2008 3:41 PM | Link to this
Bring back the old system. It was fun. Last year we would have had the following bowl games under the old system: Rose: USC v. Ohio State Sugar: LSU v. West Virginia (a pretty good matchup) Orange: Oklahoma v. Georgia or Va. Tech (another good matchup), Fiesta or Cotton: a matchup involving a combo of Kansas, Georgia, Hawaii and possibly Arizona State, Texas or Illinois.
The current system has given us some terrible bowl matchups, especially when USC plays a non-champion from the Big 10, a conference in a down cycle. College football was a lot of fun before the BCS got involved. Just scrap it and go back to the way things were while the game is still recognizable.
By WestVaJoel
April 28, 2008 3:43 PM | Link to this
as much as most of us would like to see a playoff, it won’t every happen. Can’t happen without the Big 10 and Pac 10, and their TV deal with the Rose Bowl is too sweet. A playoff is a pipedream.
By WestVaJoel
April 28, 2008 3:43 PM | Link to this
as much as most of us would like to see a playoff, it won’t ever happen. Can’t happen without the Big 10 and Pac 10, and their TV deal with the Rose Bowl is too sweet. A playoff is a pipedream.
By Sam
April 28, 2008 4:00 PM | Link to this
First time poster …
I played in the Big Ten and in the Rose Bowl while in college, and can only say that that experience is the greatest bowl game experience a player can have, which is why the Big Ten and Pac10 guard it so strongly and why I believe every other school not in those conferences wants a shot to play there. My opinion only.
I have been to all of the other big Jan 1 games, Army-Navy, World Series, World Cup finals, and the Final Four as a fan, but nothing can compete with my experiences as a player or a fan in Pasadena on Jan 1 … and I suspect that guys who played in the SEC, Big 8, SWC would say the same thing about the Sugar, Orange and Cotton bowls under the pre-BCS, pre-conference tie-in format in which a conference championship and a Jan 1 date in New Orleans, Miami, Dallas or Pasadena were synonymous.
The thing is, the old system did just as good a job in determining a National Champion as the BCS does today, but without the venomous discussions that go on now. When it first began, the BCS/BCA was supposed to be an improvement too. despite the fact that we now have fewer good intersectional bowl or regular season matchups than we did before.
High-minded? Maybe. I mean, money DOES make the world go round (I work on Wall St. after all). But I will always be skeptical of the panacea purported by supporters of a playoff (which will never come off as easy as everyone seems to believe because too many parties have a vested interest in the division of dollars). Be careful what you wish for.
P.S. Tony, keep up the great work.
By Dick Rod
April 28, 2008 4:34 PM | Link to this
You young’uns are a hoot.
OU loses a couple of bowl games, has a subpar season, and magically has been “punished” by the voters for past failures. OSU loses a couple of bowl games, and deserves the same punishment. Hmmm, maybe the voters actually voted the way they think they teams should be ranked? Maybe we should switch to rolling records, and vote based on each team’s most recent 20 games. Maybe we should let the kids play out the season before whining about who’s going to which game. And ask ol’ LLLLLoyd (or Saban if it’s a local call) about only having two “real” games to prepare for.
NCAA basketball playoffs work because locations are chosen ahead of time, with regional sites, for three weekends, and they pull in multiple teams at each site. Call it money or what have you, if Georgia was in a playoff and had to go on the road for three (or four) weekends in a row with the potential to be in the MNC as the last of those three games (say, in the Fiesta Bowl), how many fans would make the trip each week with only a week’s notice ahead of time to make travel arrangements? How many for VaTech? Or Oregon? The logistics just don’t work. Four teams with regional (or bowl) sites might work, but you’re still leaving out two conference champs/at large teams. Stick with the bowls, and work out the mythical champ over a six pack.
By Cuz
April 28, 2008 4:59 PM | Link to this
Once again, the winners of the four bowls play each other seeded top team ranked plays bottom ranked. Then one more game. This keeps from beating up or risking injury to the kids who are waiting for that call from an NFL team.
By Dawg 'n IT
April 28, 2008 5:36 PM | Link to this
Dick Rod,
Why do all the other divisions of college football have successful playoffs? The more money schools have, the less they can afford to be in a playoff? And with all due respect, what does the fan travel aspect have to do with crowning a champion? Just have the playoffs on campus and the championship game at a neutral site like everything else in the free world. I’m sure the next thought would be how troublesome driving to a campus an extra 2 times would be after already going 6 or 7 times all season long. That’s a good problem to have in my opinion. Besides, USC is about the only team that has the “problem” of always winning their conference lately. The reality is that fans would not be in a hardship situation just because their school makes the playoffs. Yeah, there are 92,000 people who pack Sanford Stadium on Saturdays, but there are millions who follow UGA football. If the season ticket holders are too broke to attend a playoff game or two, I’m sure those fans who are not season ticket holders would be glad to save up the cash to go to one playoff game and sellout Sanford. That would be much cheaper than a donation and paying for a season of games. In a 8-team playoff you are looking at 6 games on campus (4 in the 1st round, 2 in the 2nd round). At most, the top 2 teams would host 2 extra games in a given season and it’s possible for 6 different schools to host games if the top 2 seeds fall. The logistics thing is nothing more than a scare tactic proposed by those who favor bowls. Yes, some people who attend all regular season games plus conference championship might not be able to make it to a playoff game or two, but there will be plenty of fans of that team who don’t get to buy regular season tickets at face value when sold out who can take their spot if tickets are available.
And before the people who are “concerned” about how many games a player must play, most Div I-A players are aspiring to be in the NFL where you play 4 preseason games, 16 regular season games and as many as 4 playoff games. At minimum you’re playing 20 barring injury as a younger player. So let me see, lower division players are fit enough and have enough time away from academics to play in a playoff yet Div I-A players who aspire to work a career where they play more than 12 regular season games can’t handle additional games? No wonder so many of the quality players in the NFL have come from smaller schools where they are used to competing for championships into December and rather than having to take a month off and depend exclusively on polls and hype before playing a token meaningless game during the holidays. If you want to argue that too many games are played, then argue against lower division playoffs, it’s still football. Not to mention that most schools would be out of session during these playoff games so academics really isn’t an issue.
Let’s make this simple. How many sports at any level have their champion doubted more than Div I-A football? How many of these sports do not have a playoff or tournament to decided the championship? I’m trying to remember the last time we’ve had a clear cut #1 team that no one questioned was the best. Maybe that wire-to-wire FSU team? And I think there wasn’t a great team in the bunch that season. The last 2 times we’ve seen single dominant teams in a season, they’ve failed to win the championship. Miami in 2002 when OSU won and USC in 2006 when Texas won. The most convincing team I can think of in my lifetime would probably be those mid-90s Nebraska teams because they took everyone they saw out behind the woodshed without mercy. I believe it was the 94 and 95 teams who no one could question as an undisputed champion given the poll and bowl system. Just too much parity today to not have a playoff.
By FLA DAWG
April 28, 2008 6:04 PM | Link to this
And who will seed the top four and the end of the season - the same biased guys that rank the teams now!
Has anyone considered a playoff by conference?
By S.E. Dawg
April 28, 2008 9:15 PM | Link to this
In the BCS rankings the computer probably gets it right. It’s the other two thirds biased votes from certain coaches and media members that makes this system a scrap pile. If every voter could be truthful and not have favorites then this system would probably work.
By Bravesfan79
April 28, 2008 10:05 PM | Link to this
Thats what im talking about! Im glad everyones now seeing what ive been saying for YEARS! College football is a meaningless sport without the playoffs. Why in the WORLD would the ACC comissioner (of all pple) supportive of a non playoff system?? What possible ACC team other than FSU or Miami could get enough national respect to be “voted” into the title game??
*I say everyone boycott going to games next year, i bet wed have a playoff system the next year because then the presidents couldnt say “attendence is higher than ever” *
By Bravesfan79
April 28, 2008 10:13 PM | Link to this
College football is like a body building competition, everyone gets on stage and flexes, BUT DOSENT FIGHT!!
College football will always BE A POSER compared to the REAL SPORTS (MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL, College Basketball)
I can just imagine what coaches at 97% of the schools tell their players at the start of the season… “ok….even tho we have NO chance at winning a national championship because were not ranked in the top 10 to start the year, MAYBE we can get into a whogivesashit.com bowl!!!
By Bravesfan79
April 28, 2008 10:20 PM | Link to this
SE Dog…what are you smoking man? The sentence “the computers probably get it right” is whats wrong with all yall college football fans.
I guess “voting” on the 2 teams in the final would of worked out for the NFL last year huh? I mean didnt Dallas prove to all the “voters” they were the top seed and get to the superbowl??
Wait, whats that? they ended up not even being good enough to get past the 2nd round?? NO WAY, i mean how could a COMPUTER ever be wrong!??
By War Eagle
April 28, 2008 10:37 PM | Link to this
Michael Adams campaigns for money, his job is secure with his FUND raising. He is jumping on the BAND WAGON after UGA , so called “got screwed” experience with BCS last year. UGA DID`NT GET SCREWED, they were not even SEC Champs… Auburn people got all aroused 2005,after being ignored(12-0, SEC champs), but live with as Auburn, NOTHING WILL BE DONE SOON, please stop COMPLAINING, as you told Auburn people in 2005, 2006, 2007… Get life, its OVER.
By JJ
April 28, 2008 10:57 PM | Link to this
If major college football is going to go to a playoff system then they also ought to go ahead and drop the FARCE that is amateur athletics of major CFB.
I don’t see how anyone can be proud of their school earning millions off of the backs of these young men while leaving many of them inadequately prepared to earn a decent living - all while these young men risk their health for our pride.
Sure they get a scholarship, but that those dollars pale in comparison to the major $$$ that they are raking into the athletic departments of these schools and the coffers of Nike, Under Armor, etc….
To top it off, many athletes are steered away from majors that could earn them hundreds of thousands of dollars more in additional income over their lifetime.
Sure all of you folks want playoffs - as long as it is on the back of your schools student athletes.
Time for these athletes to rise up and start demanding their cut of the millions that they are earning for these Universities and businesses. I really wouldn’t care if they rose up and shut down CFB for several weeks to make the point.
By Bravesfan79
April 28, 2008 11:16 PM | Link to this
War Eagle, this isnt a Uga blog so go do your b*** on one of Alabamas newspapers blogs. This blog isnt about college against college but about a overall fair system. Im a GA fan, a GT fan, and a AU fan (in that order for football) so what am i whining about huh??
I played basketball and soccer at a small college, so i dont have any loyalty to any, but ive always loved Gt and UGA and AL.
But make no mistake about it, the best college sport of all to me is GT Basketball! Its a team that has a chance to win a title every year, and has the top talent in the nation come thru! BTW….08 will be a decent year for GT hoops, but 09…will be GREAT! you heard it here first…
Anyways…… But with football i think the idea we both share is that sadly, it will take every team getting screwed over before changes are made. Personally i used to be a big AL fan growing up. But with their status on loving the BCS, i cannot wait for AL to go 11-1 and get screwed over!!
Its a shame it will take each school, 1 by 1 to get screwed over for common sense to prevail.
At this rate of stubborness it will be around 2050 well have a playoff system. (or until all the old stubborn farts die off) Only then will college football be among the GREAT sports.
Until then, there among WNBA status of….WHO CARES!
And you only care down there in Auburn because theres nothing to do on saturdays down there but get drunk, go fishing, and go to football games wasted. Trust me, i lived there, i know. Thank GOD im from a city with major sports!
Real fans like myself enjoy pro football better because it actually matters! And is more than just a excuse to get wasted and hang with friends on a saturday afternoon.
At least being a fan of the Braves or Falcons my chances of seeing my team win it all are 1-30 or something, but in college football….if your team isnt ranked in the top 10 to start the year, your chances of winning it all are 0-100,000.
haha…..college football fools…cough cough….i mean fans… jokes on yall…. your sport blows
By War Eagle
April 28, 2008 11:24 PM | Link to this
JJ, in all due respect, you are way out of line with comments about paid college athletes. How do you paid them? Does an All American make the same as a scrub, or a basketball standout averaging 20 points a game make more than a Moreno or Burns? How would you recruit,highest bidder? When I was on football scholarship at Auburn, we had tuition, books, room, board, all academic equipment(lab, special books etc), plus $9.50 month laundry money. We received this check last day of the month. If you want to do as above, but instead of laundry money, incentive money, it would cause chaos.
By oldskooljacket
April 28, 2008 11:37 PM | Link to this
The best way to fix the BCS is have the polls onwhich the BCS relies upon to wait until half way through the season to come up with the first rankings.
By oldskooljacket
April 28, 2008 11:37 PM | Link to this
The best way to fix the BCS is have the polls onwhich the BCS relies upon to wait until half way through the season to come up with the first rankings.
By jj
April 28, 2008 11:51 PM | Link to this
The only thing that would cause chaos it the fact that the cash cow that Ohio State, Michigan, UGA, UF, USC etc…. have been milking in the era of modern CFB would have to pay those that are actually make these earnings possible.
Would better players get paid better? Possibly.
Would some teams get left behind? Definitely, but there are many many teams that have already been left behind in the era of modern, big business, college football. They have already been outspent by the big boys building palaces for their faithful. Paying the players would just continue the trend of the super large schools outspending the little guys.
The only reason that players are not paid is simple: greed.
By WFC
April 29, 2008 6:16 AM | Link to this
Here’s what UGA fans want:
UGA is automatically in the championship game every year regardless of the regular season.
UGA’s opponent is chosen only by “registered” Dawg fans. You get two votes if you did not actually attend the university.
If UGA loses the NC game, there is a “do over” NC game the next week in Athens.
OK? Now STFU!
By MG1
April 29, 2008 9:00 AM | Link to this
From the old conference bowl tie-ins to the old bowl alliance to the BCS to playoffs….what does it matter? UGA will never win a national championship again because they always choke!! UGA is a joke and Adams is a wittle crybaby!!
LSU! Geaux Tigers!! The only two time BCS Champion!
By North Ave Pimp
April 29, 2008 9:44 AM | Link to this
Swofford is a pathetic BUM!! Im sure he does feel comfortable with the current system as far into the cookie jar his hand must be.