2006 College Football

macallan25 · #1 11-19-2006, 06:34 PM

Michigan had their shot against OSU....they lost......they souldn't be rewarded for losing and making it a pretty close game. It was clear that OSU was the better team without a doubt.

jon1856 · #2 11-19-2006, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25

Michigan had their shot against OSU....they lost......they souldn't be rewarded for losing and making it a pretty close game. It was clear that OSU was the better team without a doubt.

\
Brother, part of me agrees with you and part of me does't.
On any given day, on any given field, anything can, does, and will happen.

DeltAlum · #3 11-19-2006, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25

Michigan had their shot against OSU....they lost......they souldn't be rewarded for losing and making it a pretty close game. It was clear that OSU was the better team without a doubt.

I couldn't agree more.

But what if no other team in the country could beat Michigan?

Before the big BCS hype, they used to call it, "the mythical national championship."

Assuming Ohio State really is the best team in the country, if there is a team that can beat Michigan, they should play the Buckeyes.

Unfortunately, we can't be absolutely sure if that team exists or not -- so the title is still "mythical" to me.

macallan25 · #4 11-19-2006, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeltAlum

I couldn't agree more.

But what if no other team in the country could beat Michigan?

Before the big BCS hype, they used to call it, "the mythical national championship."

Assuming Ohio State really is the best team in the country, if there is a team that can beat Michigan, they should play the Buckeyes.

Unfortunately, we can't be absolutely sure if that team exists or not -- so the title is still "mythical" to me.

I agree......good call. Playoff system anyone?

ufdale · #5 11-19-2006, 08:50 PM

I would love to see college football playoffs. They have them for basketball, then why not football? Which would be better- playoffs by conferences or by rankings?

jon1856 · #6 11-19-2006, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ufdale

I would love to see college football playoffs. They have them for basketball, then why not football? Which would be better- playoffs by conferences or by rankings?

Just re-thought something: March Madness is one thing but just how many football games can be played in one week by the same teams? Not sure just what the time frame would be but IMHO would be a great deal longer than 3 or 4 weeks.

shinerbock · #7 11-19-2006, 09:32 PM

I think we need to move to an 8 team playoff. I would require that each conference have a championship game, and the 6 BCS conferences put their champ into the playoff with automatic bids. Then I'd set up a more extensive coaching panel to vote for 2 at large bids. No coaches from the automatic qualifiers would be allowed to vote, nor would any of the votes of those competing for the 2 at large bids be counted. This could be a problem because 2 at large bids aren't really enough, but I really don't want to go much higher. I think theres something to be said for only conference champions getting in, but because of a lack of parity, its not fair that the Big East would get as much as the SEC. Also, we'd have to make ND join a conference if they want to get in. Now, naturally I think it would be wise to have a larger playoff, but its simply not good for the sport. Not only do you have the longer season concern, but I really don't want to see NCAA football become NCAA bball, the point of a playoff should be to determine who the best team that year is, not who can go on a run at the right time. I like cinderellas in the tourney, but lets leave it to basketball.

jon1856 · #8 11-19-2006, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I think we need to move to an 8 team playoff. I would require that each conference have a championship game, and the 6 BCS conferences put their champ into the playoff with automatic bids. Then I'd set up a more extensive coaching panel to vote for 2 at large bids. No coaches from the automatic qualifiers would be allowed to vote, nor would any of the votes of those competing for the 2 at large bids be counted. This could be a problem because 2 at large bids aren't really enough, but I really don't want to go much higher. I think theres something to be said for only conference champions getting in, but because of a lack of parity, its not fair that the Big East would get as much as the SEC. Also, we'd have to make ND join a conference if they want to get in. Now, naturally I think it would be wise to have a larger playoff, but its simply not good for the sport. Not only do you have the longer season concern, but I really don't want to see NCAA football become NCAA bball, the point of a playoff should be to determine who the best team that year is, not who can go on a run at the right time. I like cinderellas in the tourney, but lets leave it to basketball.

On second reading, I do like your thoughts.
Think one would hear from some of the teams in the top 10-15-20 that did not make it this way but over all not bad.