I agree with toosmartforyou. I imagine that rare will be the year when #5
doesn't put up a big stink about being left out. Especially if it's a
second SEC team. I mean, what controversy could possibly come from the
"selection committee" in this multi-million dollar busines$?....Having
said that, I think it is still an upgrade from the single game format.More
This will accelerate the slope of irrelevancy as football, like boxing,
baseball, and basketball before them, slides toward irrelevancy. First the game
goes off of free TV, then the game ticket prices become only available for
corporate sponsors, then the sport makes blunder after blunder trying to chase
more and more money. Rugby anyone?
College football playoff. Wow, that took some thought didn't it? Dumb. I
think they named it this because they know it's not right yet, so they are
saving the cool name for when they get it figured out. We'll know the name
in like 2030 or something like that.
@spokane uteKeep in mind that utah was never deemed worthy of a #1
vote regardless of their record or who they beat. Did you enjoy that parade for
spokenute"It's getting better, certainly better than
pre-BCS when a team could beat a 6-5 team in a bowl and get voted as NC."The bcs was and will always be a joke. If a four-team playoff had
existed in 1984, BYU wouldn't have been forced to play a 6-5 team in the
championship game. The Cougars would have been given the opportunity to continue
their 24-game winning streak by beating Nebraska and Washington to win the
National Championship.btw, BYU has won as many bcs championships as
the entire "conference of champions", COMBINED.
"Spokane UteSpokane, WAThe BCS system is much more
palatable when you are on the inside looking out. It's getting better,
certainly better than pre-BCS when a team could beat a 6-5 team in a bowl and
get voted as NC."Keep in mind Utah is basically just another
Northwestern...only without the academics.
The BCS system is much more palatable when you are on the inside looking out.
It's getting better, certainly better than pre-BCS when a team could beat a
6-5 team in a bowl and get voted as NC. An 8 team playoff would be ideal; baby
There's no reason why the playoffs and bowls can't co-exist.A 16-team playoff would be best, but an 8-team playoff would be sufficient to
include all legitimate national championship contenders as long the selection
committee is left to choose the best 8 teams, regardless of conference
affiliation.If that means 3 SEC teams and no PAC 12 teams, so be
it.If you want to include automatic berths for conference champions
a la the Big Dance, then it should be a 16-team playoff, with EVERY conference
champion included, plus the best of the rest.
I prefer the bowls, always have.
@Stang Oh EightYou are so funny. You think I'm angry about an
aggie immatating me. Well I'm not and I didn't mention SUU. Because
our level already has a playoff system and it's great. I'm happy the
soon to be former BCS is doing the playoff system. That's all I was
saying. I was also expressing my opinion about a team that won't make the
playoffs. Don't worry though Stang Oh Eight the aggies won't be
"KVN/Hoff want 0-4 against UTAHOgden, UTOnly teams
from power conferences should be eligible for this playoff." A
selection commmittee is being formed in order to ensure this is the case.BYU could run the table beating the four top five teams ranked behind
them and they wouldn't get in because it would be taking a large chunk of
change away from one of five conferences. Some would say it's religious
bigotry and while that argument holds some water regarding conference
affiliation, the reality is the system is not about crowning a champion. It is
only about ensuring revenue distribution remains status quo and as long sa BYU
isn't in one of those conferences they're in for an uncertain future.
Only teams from power conferences should be eligible for this playoff. With the exception of Notre Dame of course.Long live the BCS
My solution for a true National Championship Playoff is to expand the playoff to
16 teams with each conference sending their champion, then have a committee
select the at large berths. This would eliminate most of the minor Bowls which,
in my opinion, would be a good thing.Then seed the teams similarly
to the way the NCAA Basketball playoff is seeded. Initially, four regions (West,
South, Mid-West, East) with 4 teams each; 1 plays 4, 2 plays 3. That would
create a HUGE interest from cities all over the country wanting to host the
initial round of games.I would then like to see the Rose, Orange,
Sugar and Fiesta Bowls incorporated into the playoffs as the quarter-finals
sites. That would help keep these historic bowls as an important part of the
National Playoffs. The semis would then pit each of these Champions against one
another, with one finally breaking through to win it all in a National
Championship game.The above playoff system would require the
elimination of conference tournaments, but that would be a good thing; since it
would make the regular season much more meaningful,
"(Why do the Ute fans still support the BCS?)" - toosmartforyouNot all of us do, I still think it's a load of baloney and I'm a
long time Ute fan (33 years). Kyle Whittingham said something similar even after
the Utes got in to a BCS league.
"(Why do the Ute fans still support the BCS?)"Cause
we're in and you're not.Cause We've been there and you
Well, SoonerUte, there may have been 48 teams go to BCS bowls but how many
different teams have ever played for the national championship? Last time I
checked it was less than 10. And don't forget that one year your beloved
Utes were worthy on the field but not in some poll or in some pre-programmed
computer. How you can sing the praises of the BCS when they've really left
you out in the cold as far as playing for all the marbles is beyond me. Do you
think it was because Utah didn't have a "good enough team" to
actually win it, as in Barry Switzer saying Alabama wouldn't even recruit
the U of U players that year, or do you think perhaps they were afraid the Utes
really would win the game? I suspect the latter, particularly after Utah
pummeled the Tide. I actually cheered for the Utes that game!! The BCS was and
is a joke. (Why do the Ute fans still support the BCS?)
The FCS or D-II of yesterday started off with a four-team playoff and now is up
to 20 teams. It is great to see a system that lets the players on the field
determine it and not the boardroom or the marketing department.I
agree with toosmartforyou, the foot is in the door. FINALLY!
No news and no change. So What!
Good to hear the BCS is doing the samething the FCS is doing. That's the
best way to find the best team in the nation. It's a shame USU won't
make the playoffs though LOLOLOLOLOL.
Different name, still exclusive.Not that exclusive, really,
considering 48 different teams have gotten in to BCS bowl games.
So much for Chris B's beloved BCS membership. Oh well, if was fun for two
I agree, Cool Cat, but at least the camel has his nose in the tent now. Just
wait until #5 thought they should have been #4 or #3 and you'll see the fur
start to fly. Everyone knew the BCS wasn't the answer. And
just about every year it looked pretty dumb in regards to at least one team in
the country so this is an improvement over that. Just be patient until a select
few oxes have again been gored and you'll see it expand. I
agree that the 16-team deal is likely the best situation, as far as making it a
true national championship and not forcing teams to play forever at the end of
the year, but it will take some time to get past four teams. Eight teams seems
more likely to me at least in the present climate. If they did go
to 16 teams it might help settle the continuous changing of conferences that
some schools are doing fairly often and settle things for some years. Then
rivalries could be re-built and have some possibility of remaining in tact.
I agree with both comments. No team outside the current BSC schools conferences
have a chance, except Notre Dame!!! The independent with real National value!!
Everyone knows that this is a farce; the top 4 is better than nothing, but how
hard would it be to do a 16-spot playoff?? Really? This is about keeping money
and fame with the "big boys," as it always has been. With the rankings
being as subjective as they are, the name is disingenuous. It's still a
load of malarkey in my opinion.
They can't use the name "NCAA Division I Championship", because
that name is already taken by the Football Championship Subdivision and
sponsored by the NCAA itself, rather than a sub-group of a subdivision.