SportsAndLady;571478 wrote: 3) The playoff concept is anything but a general concept. It's so complex I don't even know where to begin. The logistical issues alone would set a playoff back 2 or 3 years. It's not a general concept at all..to say it is is laughable lol <---see, I laughed.

Haha I don't really think setting up a playoff system would be all that complex. The problem is the fact that the powers that be are lining their pockets with the current system, so there is no financial incentive for them to change it right now, so they throw out cliche lines like "nobody can even agree on a playoff system!". That isn't really a defense of the current system (from a fans perspective), because I mean its college football, people are going to tune in to watch no matter what. That doesn't mean the current system is a better way to decide a champion than a playoff.

I just don't really understand how fans can defend this system. BCS officials and college presidents, yes I can understand that. What's it going to take for some of the people on this board to sing a different tune? An undefeated Ohio State on the outside looking in of the title game? Of course that would never happen, because their name is Ohio State, kind of like Texas getting the nod over Boise State and TCU last year. Of course isn't that the point of the current system, to allow for collusion and screw over unestablished teams and exclude them from having a shot at joining the elite club and just kind of hope they go away?

sherm03;570634 wrote:Six team playoff? LOL. Good luck getting the conferences to agree to that. This year...that would mean that nobody from the Big 12, Big East, ACC, or the Big 10 would make the playoffs. I would love to see the tone of this board if Ohio State was the #8 team in a 6 team playoff scenario. I doubt everyone would still be as high on the idea as they are now.

And? Haha none of those conferences have anybody close to deserving of playing in the Championship game. The Big East and ACC are both incredibly mediocre

Again...you are takling a very, very specific situation that applies to ONE team....and this is not something that is going to happen year after year. If a team wraps it up early, so what.

enigmaax;571433 wrote:COMPLETELY different dynamics there. Although, the professional systems aren't perfect either - is there any reason an 8-8 division champion should be in the playoffs over an 11-5 team in a better division?

Still, there's a relative equality at the professional level for many reasons, not the least of which is the smaller pool of teams and well, they're professionals. There is a wide discrepancy between talent levels even within the Football Bowl Subdivision. There is absolutely no way any playoff would ever or should ever involve an automatic bid for a 6-6 or 7-5 Sun Belt champion over any team from a major conference that has the same number of wins, let alone 9 or 10 wins. The record of that conference and the average scores over history offer a little insight into the discrepancy in talent. Not everything in life is equal and handling those inequities accordingly is not "unfair".

You ask why an 8-8 team should go to the playoffs over an 11-5 team. Our country is a large reason and for whatever reason in different sports at different levels, teams organize themselves into conferences and leagues for whatever reason and enter into agreements to form champions of those leagues. For instance, in Ohio High School Division 1 football, there are over 100 teams easily. But, because of travel distance factors, these teams organize themselves into respective leagues. Although there is a computer based system, it is generally the case that champions of these leagues go onto to compete in the Ohio high school playoffs which first determines champions of 4 regions. A team with a strong record in one region might get knocked out because of the competition in its region and may have made the playoffs in another region. But, we organize ourselves into groups of teams and schools that are similar and share geographical proximity. Nothing as perfect but I think plenty of reasonable people think this seems to make at least some sense, including the authors at Sports Illustrated who recently proposed a similar idea (not saying that means my position is right by any means).

Your reasoning about equity in talent levels applies even more to Basketball. Yet, college basketball employees some kind of playoff format. If anything the inequity you speak of might be mitigated. Suppose you are a talented football player in Ohio dreaming of a Buckeye offer but it does not come. In the current world, these athletes tend to go to other big ten programs that offer them as it is a more prestigious conference. Perhaps, a kid from Toledo Whitmer might choose to play for his local state university if he knows there's at least a fighters chance he can win a national championship? Winners of certain conferences have automatic bids to the BCS and you say because there is an unequal talent level. Yet, that system encourages unequal talent levels.

Glad to see we've finally cleared up this topic.

I just want to know why so many people think it incumbent on the rest of us to give entitlement to those that aren't good enough, aren't big enough, aren't fast enough to play where their services aren't going to cut it. At some point you have to let go of the teet and realize that perhaps your calling isn't the NFL, or a major college football program for that matter. Once you're out of high school seems like the time to look at reality.

Life isn't fair and not everyone gets a ribbon.

SportsAndLady;571478 wrote:1) It's not a strawman argument. I can't counter your argument logically when your argument does not make any logical sense. You can't look at the 119 team field and compare it to a 32 team field, and that isn't even getting into the basics. You're gonna put a 7-5 MAC team in a playoff and leave out a 11-1 SEC team, and you'll see lawsuits flying all over the place. The amount of monetary compensation you are keeping from that 11-1 SEC team and offering it to a 7-5 MAC team is borderline theft.

Well, you say it doesn't make logical sense, as in suggesting perhaps that my argument commits some kind of logic fallacy or suggests the truth of some contradiction such as claiming that up is down and that certainly isn't the case. I know it makes things easier to simply dismiss them as illogical but it seems to me it just makes the debate more callous. Plenty of reasonable minds share my view.

If you don't like comparing 32 teams with professionals, how's about comparing the over-100 teams composed of amateurs with homework and exams in Division 1 Ohio High school football who end their season with a playoff to determine the champion of their sovereign state on the field. For starters, the BCS system is already awarding a less talented Big East team with the reward of going onto the meaningless BCS exhibition game. An 11-1 team will miss out for this thing which you seem to think a grave injustice. The injustice remains, if it is one. At least in the system I propose, every publicly supported (and private as well) university has the opportunity to earn a chance to compete for a championship by winning their respective conference in which they share qualities with their respective schools. This is not the case in the BCS as exemplified by Boise St. and TCU. Who will know if they were good enough to compete with an 11-1 team that goes to MNC? There are also 5 at large teams that have the chance to get in should they not win their respective conference. As with Ohio High School football, good and deserving teams may not always win their conference but they still have an opportunity to compete for the championship of their state.

SportsAndLady;571478 wrote:2) If you really want me to list the differences between the NFL and the NCAA, I will. But I would rather not, as it would be quite lengthy. "The semi voluntary association with over 100 teams uses the same general concept of determining a champion as that 32 team professional league in every single sport except 1, the one sport that most closely mirrors that of the professional league you're citing." I'm not sure what that even means. Seems like you left out a word or two, I don't know.

I'm talking about the general concept of teams organizing themselves into smaller associations; normally, conferences, leagues, etc. and the champions of those leagues going on to face each other in a post-season. This is the general underlying principle that is used to determine the champion in the National Football League. This is also the general underlying principle that the NCAA uses to determine its champion in every sport that it sponsors except the sport of American-style football.

SportsAndLady;571478 wrote:3) The playoff concept is anything but a general concept. It's so complex I don't even know where to begin. The logistical issues alone would set a playoff back 2 or 3 years. It's not a general concept at all..to say it is is laughable lol <---see, I laughed.

Perhaps you're suggesting that the logistics of transferring from a meaningless exhibition system of bowls left over from time when conference championships were what mattered to a playoff style system wherein champions are determined through competition would be complex and that is true. But, the idea of a "playoff" with a bracket-style organization based on any number of criteria, as the idea is commonly understood in the lexicon itself, is not a complex idea at all and has been used as far back as feudal knights.

The bowl system is the relic of the days when mass cross country travel was not dramatically widespread as it is today in the world of jet-setting and the internet. The Big Ten Championship is what mattered and the Rose Bowl was a reward for the Big Ten Champion to get out of the cold midwest. Though an important tradition, it belongs in the museums along with the printing press.

A playoff is a system wherein a champion is determined by pitting the winners of various groupings against other winners of groupings since not all teams play each other. As playoffs have become more popular (as in Major League Baseball as an example; keyword example), we've allowed second and third place teams in those groupings to compete in these playoffs.

Playoffs determine champions. Champion comes from the latin word campio and it means to be the victor in a challenge, competition or contest. In Feudal times, I can assure you that champion knights were not determined by a bunch of supposedly knowledgeable knight-writers arbitrarily deciding who is good on a poll. In fact, the "BCS national champion" doesn't even meet the very definition of the word "champion."

I'll finish with a quote from the film Patton: "When you were kids you all admired the champion marble shooter, the fastest runner, big league ball player, the toughest boxer. Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in hell for a man who lost and laughed. That's why Americans have never lost and will never lose a war, because the very thought of losing is hateful to Americans"

^That right there is why people don't like the BCS.

ytownfootball;573469 wrote:Glad to see we've finally cleared up this topic.

I just want to know why so many people think it incumbent on the rest of us to give entitlement to those that aren't good enough, aren't big enough, aren't fast enough to play where their services aren't going to cut it. At some point you have to let go of the teet and realize that perhaps your calling isn't the NFL, or a major college football program for that matter. Once you're out of high school seems like the time to look at reality.

Life isn't fair and not everyone gets a ribbon.

I don't see how this applies. Kenny Hayes is an elite football talent who goes to Toledo Whitmer and has chosen to attend the Ohio State University. Toledo University is also a public university supported by Ohio taxpayers who's president and other administrators are charged with the task of competing with tOSU and other universities for talent. tOSU and other Big Ten members have a significant bargaining chip when they can say to Kenny Hayes that he has a legitimate shot at attaining a national championship at Ohio State and leaving his imprint on the history books and being forever remembered as a national champion. Coach Beckman at UT cannot make Kenny Hayes that same argument and not be laughed at in the face. Who's to say that if the winner of the MAC had at least a chance to compete for a national championship that UT and others couldn't recruit more of this local Ohio talent. This already happens in basketball. Ohio State loses recruits to Dayton and Xavier that they would never lose in Football.

I don't see how this has anything to do with people not being good enough? Because it has always been the case that most west coast football talent attends pac 10 schools does not mean it must stay that way. Currently, many universities are blocked from effectively marketing themselves to top talent because they are blockaded from a chance at a national championship by a cartel that would be utterly egregious in any other circumstance within a free-enterprise system.

If anything, we might stretch your position to a further extreme. Due to migration patterns and the decline of the rust belt, more and more of the football talent has located to the nation's southeast. Not everybody gets a ribbon so why even bother allowing those schools up north to compete for a championship?

BoatShoes;573510 wrote:This already happens in basketball. Ohio State loses recruits to Dayton and Xavier that they would never lose in Football.

LOL! Dayton is a FCS school in football...and Xavier hasn't played football since 1973. So you are 100% right...Ohio State will not lose football recruits to those schools.

Boat Shoes - Geographic organization at the high school level exists and makes sense because the financial implications at most schools dictate such. That's it. Again, college football is a completely different dynamic. I know you're trying to draw parallels but you shouldn't because it doesn't matter. College football is a unique sport with a unique setup and a unique success. Trying to make it like everything else isn't necessary as it does just fine.

But since you brought it up, my high school went 9-1 a few years ago and didn't make the playoffs. Some 5-5 teams in our region DID get in. You know why? Because we finally started playing schools more similar, size wise and in other ways. And we dominated all those teams because they sucked and didn't win other games either. And there is no reason for us to have made the playoffs because we didn't earn it and we would've been blown out by any number of big time (or even decent) programs in our region. I'm not going to try and sell us as something we aren't and the same thing goes for the Boises and TCUs. Those schools aren't "blocked" from competing for a national title. They don't do enough to earn that shot through the level of competition that they CHOOSE to play.

As for the rest of your fantasy world, I agree with this:

ytownfootball;573469 wrote:Glad to see we've finally cleared up this topic.

I just want to know why so many people think it incumbent on the rest of us to give entitlement to those that aren't good enough, aren't big enough, aren't fast enough to play where their services aren't going to cut it. At some point you have to let go of the teet and realize that perhaps your calling isn't the NFL, or a major college football program for that matter. Once you're out of high school seems like the time to look at reality.

Life isn't fair and not everyone gets a ribbon.

The system of which you speak is a fairly recent development. And the basis for who gets automatic berths is based on many, many years of seeing these discrepancies in talent. Thing is, nobody gets an automatic berth into the title game. It is a highly selective process, yes. But nobody is excluded purely on the basis of what conference they play in. It may be because that conference doesn't offer the competition the system is looking for (or that someone else has established/conquered). Life isn't all that different. You may have done very well in school, but someone with more experience might get a job over you. Just the way it goes.

sherm03;573522 wrote:LOL! Dayton is a FCS school in football...and Xavier hasn't played football since 1973. So you are 100% right...Ohio State will not lose football recruits to those schools.

I mean, obviously I was speaking analogously right? Substitute any "lower level" conference team like say Western Kentucky or Boise State.

enigmaax;573533 wrote:Boat Shoes - Geographic organization at the high school level exists and makes sense because the financial implications at most schools dictate such. That's it. Again, college football is a completely different dynamic. I know you're trying to draw parallels but you shouldn't because it doesn't matter. College football is a unique sport with a unique setup and a unique success. Trying to make it like everything else isn't necessary as it does just fine.

But since you brought it up, my high school went 9-1 a few years ago and didn't make the playoffs. Some 5-5 teams in our region DID get in. You know why? Because we finally started playing schools more similar, size wise and in other ways. And we dominated all those teams because they sucked and didn't win other games either. And there is no reason for us to have made the playoffs because we didn't earn it and we would've been blown out by any number of big time (or even decent) programs in our region. I'm not going to try and sell us as something we aren't and the same thing goes for the Boises and TCUs. Those schools aren't "blocked" from competing for a national title. They don't do enough to earn that shot through the level of competition that they CHOOSE to play.

As for the rest of your fantasy world, I agree with this:



The system of which you speak is a fairly recent development. And the basis for who gets automatic berths is based on many, many years of seeing these discrepancies in talent. Thing is, nobody gets an automatic berth into the title game. It is a highly selective process, yes. But nobody is excluded purely on the basis of what conference they play in. It may be because that conference doesn't offer the competition the system is looking for (or that someone else has established/conquered). Life isn't all that different. You may have done very well in school, but someone with more experience might get a job over you. Just the way it goes.

If Auburn or Oregon loses and Boise and TCU don't get in, they are getting excluded because of the conference they play in. And, teams like Boise can only schedule 3 big name teams a year and years ahead of time. They have to be formally invited into a conference. And, they would never join a conference like the SEC or ACC because conferences are still organized by geography because it still is financially burdensome to travel all the way across the country multiple times a season for a college. It makes sense to organize by geography.

It's one thing to be left out because you lack experience or talent...but when there's been nothing to actually measure it like a test or competition and all you rely on is something arbitrary like the rankings of sportswriters, well that's something different.

BoatShoes;573549 wrote:If Auburn or Oregon loses and Boise and TCU don't get in, they are getting excluded because of the conference they play in. And, teams like Boise can only schedule 3 big name teams a year and years ahead of time. They have to be formally invited into a conference. And, they would never join a conference like the SEC or ACC because conferences are still organized by geography because it still is financially burdensome to travel all the way across the country multiple times a season for a college. It makes sense to organize by geography.

It's one thing to be left out because you lack experience or talent...but when there's been nothing to actually measure it like a test or competition and all you rely on is something arbitrary like the rankings of sportswriters, well that's something different.

Wait a minute. Boise CAN only schedule three big names a year because Boise CHOOSES to be in the WAC (soon to be watered down Mountain West). I've been saying for a few years, if those teams want legitimacy and can't get in a major conference....go independent. BYU jis doing it. Boise isn't.

Oh but NOW you want to talk dollars. And ask for handouts. It does cost a lot to run a big time athletics program. If you can't do that/don't have the money, you aren't a big time athletics program. There's more to all of this than just football. Why should Texas or Ohio State or Alabama, who can sustain numerous sports and opportunities for its student athletes largely off of its football income, have to make the football playing field equal? Why is that their responsibility?

BoatShoes;573549 wrote:If Auburn or Oregon loses and Boise and TCU don't get in, they are getting excluded because of the conference they play in. And, teams like Boise can only schedule 3 big name teams a year and years ahead of time. They have to be formally invited into a conference. And, they would never join a conference like the SEC or ACC because conferences are still organized by geography because it still is financially burdensome to travel all the way across the country multiple times a season for a college. It makes sense to organize by geography.

It's one thing to be left out because you lack experience or talent...but when there's been nothing to actually measure it like a test or competition and all you rely on is something arbitrary like the rankings of sportswriters, well that's something different.

In the early 80's Miami and FSU were in situations where they wanted to take their programs to the next level. They were willing to play anyone anywhere. Boise recently turned down a deal to play Nebraska. I don't understand the sense of entitlement that they have where they think everyone should play them in their place.

enigmaax;573614 wrote:Wait a minute. Boise CAN only schedule three big names a year because Boise CHOOSES to be in the WAC (soon to be watered down Mountain West). I've been saying for a few years, if those teams want legitimacy and can't get in a major conference....go independent. BYU jis doing it. Boise isn't.

Oh but NOW you want to talk dollars. And ask for handouts. It does cost a lot to run a big time athletics program. If you can't do that/don't have the money, you aren't a big time athletics program. There's more to all of this than just football. Why should Texas or Ohio State or Alabama, who can sustain numerous sports and opportunities for its student athletes largely off of its football income, have to make the football playing field equal? Why is that their responsibility?

Perfect! Where does everyone get this idea that everything has to be neat and fair, and everyone...no matter their skill level or schedule...deserves the same shot at the championship. Don't get me wrong, I think a few things need tweaked with the BCS (the #1 thing being the preseason rankings). But for the most part it serves its purpose. If you want to be the best...you have to beat the best. And teams like Boise and TCU do not beat the best during the regular season.

BoatShoes;573510 wrote:I don't see how this applies. Kenny Hayes is an elite football talent who goes to Toledo Whitmer and has chosen to attend the Ohio State University. Toledo University is also a public university supported by Ohio taxpayers who's president and other administrators are charged with the task of competing with tOSU and other universities for talent. tOSU and other Big Ten members have a significant bargaining chip when they can say to Kenny Hayes that he has a legitimate shot at attaining a national championship at Ohio State and leaving his imprint on the history books and being forever remembered as a national champion. Coach Beckman at UT cannot make Kenny Hayes that same argument and not be laughed at in the face. Who's to say that if the winner of the MAC had at least a chance to compete for a national championship that UT and others couldn't recruit more of this local Ohio talent. This already happens in basketball. Ohio State loses recruits to Dayton and Xavier that they would never lose in Football.

I don't see how this has anything to do with people not being good enough? Because it has always been the case that most west coast football talent attends pac 10 schools does not mean it must stay that way. Currently, many universities are blocked from effectively marketing themselves to top talent because they are blockaded from a chance at a national championship by a cartel that would be utterly egregious in any other circumstance within a free-enterprise system.

If anything, we might stretch your position to a further extreme. Due to migration patterns and the decline of the rust belt, more and more of the football talent has located to the nation's southeast. Not everybody gets a ribbon so why even bother allowing those schools up north to compete for a championship?

Universities were not begun to compete for football talent, their purpose as with all business ventures was to make money. To suggest that any university's first priority is to secure the best football talent is to bastardize the initial and subsequent reasoning behind their inception. Whether they're publicly funded or not does not change their capacity or ability to draw intellectual, football, basketball or the arts talent. Some specialize better than others at drawing that talent by being BETTER than others at providing the best opportunities once course (or coaching) studies are completed. I'm sure Yale is less concerned about football talent than others, it's not their specialty.

Of course there are a lot less scholarships and a much smaller pool of those who will receive playing time when considering basketball, so it's hardly a valid comparison. To think that Toledo could essentially run the table in a play-off format, while possible, is just unrealistic. Frankly, their lack of focus on their football program, lack of funding, whatever, has made them a less desirable destination for top recruits, but I fail to see how it's up to the rest of college football to hand them the keys to the Porsche, when they haven't proven the ability to handle a Chevette.


And yet do they not only compete, but they win...so the recruits still come.

sherm03;573626 wrote:Perfect! Where does everyone get this idea that everything has to be neat and fair, and everyone...no matter their skill level or schedule...deserves the same shot at the championship. Don't get me wrong, I think a few things need tweaked with the BCS (the #1 thing being the preseason rankings). But for the most part it serves its purpose. If you want to be the best...you have to beat the best. And teams like Boise and TCU do not beat the best during the regular season.

Pre season is by far the worst of the issues. It however won't be going away, too much to talk about, sell papers, periodicals etc.