2006 College Football

macallan25 · #1 12-04-2006, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by valkyrie

Why should Florida get rewarded for losing to Auburn?

I'm not saying that Michigan is better than Ohio State. Michigan is better than Florida.

No team should get rewarded for losing.....however, teams that play in the toughest conference in the nation with a conference championship after the fact.........should absolutely be rewarded if they escape it with 1 loss to a top 10 team. Nevermind the fact that they beat 3 other top 10 teams and escaped Georgia (down year but still solid at 8-4) and South Carolina, who has that certain coach known as Steve Spurrier.

How do you justify Michigan being better than Florida? I'm actually interested to hear your analysis.

shinerbock · #2 12-04-2006, 03:37 PM

I think UF deserved to get in. However, say they beat OSU by 3, I won't really consider them the best team in college football. When an undefeated team from a respectable conference plays a one loss team, out of a couple one loss teams, I don't see how thats a legit game for the title. I have no doubt that UF, if they play really well, can win. That being said, I don't think UF has shown any indication that they're a top 3 team, much less number one.

macallan25 · #3 12-04-2006, 04:15 PM

I see your point.....and I think a playoff is the only way to decide. There will be controversy every year. I think last season was the exception....everything seemed to work out right.....but I can't see something like that happening again, especially now that they added a 5th BCS.

shinerbock · #4 12-04-2006, 04:59 PM

Yeah, a playoff is precisely what I'm saying we need. Its just that sometimes I think the BCS fails more than the polls and bowls system we used to have. Yeah, it worked last year, but this year I think we'd be better off just letting OSU play whoever, not for the title game, but just to stay atop the polls. Everyone else can battle it out for 2nd. I just don't UF will be THE legitimate champ if they beat OSU. A top team with several quality wins, sure. However, if that happens and Michigan goes out and dominates USC, we're back where we started.

macallan25 · #5 12-04-2006, 05:43 PM

true story.

starang21 · #6 12-04-2006, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Yeah, a playoff is precisely what I'm saying we need. Its just that sometimes I think the BCS fails more than the polls and bowls system we used to have. Yeah, it worked last year, but this year I think we'd be better off just letting OSU play whoever, not for the title game, but just to stay atop the polls. Everyone else can battle it out for 2nd. I just don't UF will be THE legitimate champ if they beat OSU. A top team with several quality wins, sure. However, if that happens and Michigan goes out and dominates USC, we're back where we started.

are you suggesting we get rid of all or most of the bowl games then?

macallan25 · #7 12-04-2006, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by starang21

are you suggesting we get rid of all or most of the bowl games then?

Why couldn't you make the bowl games the playoff games?

example:

Playoff Round 1:
Game 1: Cotton Bowl
Game 2: Holiday Bowl
Game 3: Gator Bowl

......as the playoffs get furhter along...you play in more prestigious bowl. Semifinals, Quarterfinals etc. could be played in the current BCS Bowls (Rose, Sugar, Orange, etc. )

starang21 · #8 12-04-2006, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25

Why couldn't you make the bowl games the playoff games?

example:

Playoff Round 1:
Game 1: Cotton Bowl
Game 2: Holiday Bowl
Game 3: Gater Bowl

......as the playoffs get furhter along...you play in more prestigious bowl. Semifinals, Quarterfinals etc. could be played in the current BCS Bowls (Rose, Sugar, Orange, etc. )

i thought about that too, but it's a logistical nightmare.

then the people who really lose out in this are the fans. go to the gator bowl and then have to turn around and go to the rose bowl that next week?

shinerbock · #9 12-04-2006, 05:53 PM

No, not at all. I'm saying that under the old system, where the pairings weren't necc 1 vs. 2, the situation would be different. OSU would probably play USC in the Rose, and thus its a championship game for OSU, but not for USC. USC winning doesn't mean their the national champs, just like I don't think UF or Michigan winning would really crown them the champs. I mean, say UF wins, some people might think its legitimate (no slight to UF, its just a bad system), but I wouldn't assume they're the best team in college football. At least under the pre-BCS polls and bowls system, we could get a split title. Note, I'm not in favor of splits, but I'd prefer a split title over shutting out a completely deserving team, and sending them home with nothing. I think if UF beats OSU (but not overly impressively) and Michigan takes it to USC, the AP should put Michigan at #1. Of course, this is all a result of my bias over AU getting hosed in 2004. I would never assume we were better or more deserving than USC, but to send a 13-0 SEC team home with nothing was ridiculous, and I don't want to see it happen to any other major conference team.

starang21 · #10 12-04-2006, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shinerbock

No, not at all. I'm saying that under the old system, where the pairings weren't necc 1 vs. 2, the situation would be different. OSU would probably play USC in the Rose, and thus its a championship game for OSU, but not for USC. USC winning doesn't mean their the national champs, just like I don't think UF or Michigan winning would really crown them the champs. I mean, say UF wins, some people might think its legitimate (no slight to UF, its just a bad system), but I wouldn't assume they're the best team in college football. At least under the pre-BCS polls and bowls system, we could get a split title. Note, I'm not in favor of splits, but I'd prefer a split title over shutting out a completely deserving team, and sending them home with nothing. I think if UF beats OSU (but not overly impressively) and Michigan takes it to USC, the AP should put Michigan at #1. Of course, this is all a result of my bias over AU getting hosed in 2004. I would never assume we were better or more deserving than USC, but to send a 13-0 SEC team home with nothing was ridiculous, and I don't want to see it happen to any other major conference team.

but then how would you do it? let's say you have the sugar bowl and the citrus bowl as semi-finals. then the rose bowl as the final. everything on a neutral field. while the bowls themselves will pay for travel expenses for the teams....what about the fans? say you're from florida and you want to watch your team in AZ to win the semifinal. are you gonna leave that next week to travel to california to watch them again?