Last night was the national championship game for Collegiate football(us)
It is a game mired in tradition, and full of wonderful moments that out live the games themselves. Last night was an atrocity. It was obvious from just about the first play from scrimmage that only 1 team actually belonged.
After 60 mins a 42-14 blowout(which had bama scoring the first 35 points) many of us were left feeling nauseated. It was so bad that the producers obviously told the cameras to focus on the winning QBs GF(former miss Alabama) and this was just a stark reminder of how ugly the game on the field was.
The BCS since it's inception(following other terrible systems) in 98 has had some good games. However more times than not we can't say that it was definitely the best 2 teams playing each other. As a famous coach once said "The game is played on the field" I think we need to find some solutions to these problems.
The NCAA is taking steps including a 4 team playoff, but is this honestly enough? The best solution I can possible think of is limiting the number of teams that can actually play for the title game.
I think Division 1 is way to broad. We have powerhouse teams in tier 1 universities then we have what amounts to community colleges that the tier 1 teams stomp.
Cut division 1 down to 4 or 8 conferences then have them seeded in a full on single elimination bracket. Assuming 4 conferences it adds to games, assuming 8 you add 3.(counting the championship game)
The biggest issue with this system is the fact that these conferences act as individual entities and control their own revenue and finances. It will be really had to kill the Money culture behind the sport atm, but not impossible. As we have seen with conference realignment turmoil exist and turmoil is the single greatest cause of change.
What are your opioions on these matters? Have other ideas, or do you maybe like the system how it is?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."
I switched the channel at halftime. It was blatantly obvious that Notre Dame did not deserve to play in the national championship. They escaped with a win to Stanford when the refs botched the 4th down call and they had to go into multiple overtimes to put away a bad Pitt team that was up by double digits on the Irish in regulation. The only reason Notre Dame was playing was because they're Notre Dame.
As an Oregon fan, I can't stand the BCS at all, especially after it left out Oregon back in 2001 when Miami blew out Nebraska (the same Nebraska team that was blown out by Colorado in the Big 12 championship game). A four team playoff won't solve all the problems with the postseason in college football, but it will be a significant step up from what we currently have.
I don't think a 4-team playoff will settle anything, because it will just turn into a debate whether or not #5 or #6 should have had a chance. I honestly don't think we're going to have a "good" way of determining who the best team is until the BCS becomes some kind of 4- or 6-conference entity, and teams stop filling out their schedules with FCS matchups. I think we're partially headed that way with all the movement between conferences as it is, though that's clearly motivated by money, not desire for on-field competition.
~
I didn't have a chance to watch much postgame coverage, but I bet Mark May is giving Lou Holtz the biggest ****-eating grin ever after Lispin' Lou was proclaiming Notre Dame to be the best team ever all seaon.
And yes, Brent Musburger was getting all hot and bothered over a coed on-air again last night (reminiscent of the FSU/Jenn Sterger comment a few years back), though I think people are blowing it out of proportion -- someone clearly decided that putting the camera on her at 28-0 was a good idea, not to mention Herbstreit was right there with him.
Far too many teams in DIV1 college football. I'd like to see it trimmed down to 80 teams divided in to 4x 20 team conferences and have those conferences divided in to 2x 10 team divisions. 9 game interdivision round robin +3 additional games to preserve any rivalries that may be affected by realignment (I'd prefer it done regionally South, Northeast, West, Midwest). With an 8 team playoff, take the winner of each division or with a 4 team playoff, take the winner of each conference. I'd even support a 12 team playoff where by each conference winner received a 1st round bye and then the remaining 8 teams were selected "at large".
Also, colleges under this new system would ONLY be allowed to play teams among the other 79 in DIV 1. No more cupcakes 4 times a year.
I think if Ohio State actually was eligible this year, they could have given Bama a better game, but im predicting that is what we are going to see next year is Bama v Ohio St.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Decks Standard : Bant FlashUWG Modern : JundRBGW Legacy : JundRBG
I think if Ohio State actually was eligible this year, they could have given Bama a better game, but im predicting that is what we are going to see next year is Bama v Ohio St.
I have my eye on the Alabama/A&M game, as that's going to be a huge one next year. At least the game is early enough in the season that the loser still has a shot if they can run the table afterwards. But with the weaker SEC West opponents, Alabama should have a somewhat clear path to the SEC Championship/BCS Championship if they get by A&M.
The 4-team playoff is far better than what we have now. Arguing about who deserves to be in the final spot or two is better than arguing about who should be the top 2.
I don't want to see conferences get any larger, but it looks like it's probably going to happen anyways. It devalues conferences and kills conference identity when you only play just over half of the teams in your own conference.
Well you can say Oregon should have been playing. Well too bad, they lost. Good teams don't show up for game. It happens. Notre Dame ran the table with a schedule that should have been way harder than it was, but still included heavy hitters such as Stanford and a game AT Oklahoma. Michigan was not the easiest game either. Did Notre Dame get lucky with USC being shams and getting to play against USC's backup QB? Yes. But that happens. With the system in place, and the teams that were eligible, the correct two teams played for the BCS title.
A lot of the arguments on who gets in comes down to scheduling. Notre Dame by being undefeated had a distinct advantage in that they did not have to play a conference title game. But the fact that the SEC played one worked to Alabama's and Georgia's advantage. In truth, the only conference game that has worked to a conference's benefit in the BCS era in terms of the title game HAS been the SEC title game, because more often than not, you have 0 and 1 loss teams facing off against each other with one spot open in the BCS title game. Coupled with the reputation at this point, the SEC title game is a BCS title game eliminator. In a 4 team playoff, the SEC title game will work against the SEC because it will knock one of their teams out of the playoff.
I don't agree with the 64 team super league you seem to be hinting at. Lesser-tier schools such as Boise State have managed to elevate their game and national image to a whole new level through creative marketing. With increased coverage on ESPN, their unique field, they have a national awareness that rivals other major schools in Div 1 Football. Teams get better. It comes in cycles.
Well you can say Oregon should have been playing. Well too bad, they lost. Good teams don't show up for game. It happens. Notre Dame ran the table with a schedule that should have been way harder than it was, but still included heavy hitters such as Stanford and a game AT Oklahoma. Michigan was not the easiest game either. Did Notre Dame get lucky with USC being shams and getting to play against USC's backup QB? Yes. But that happens. With the system in place, and the teams that were eligible, the correct two teams played for the BCS title.
A lot of the arguments on who gets in comes down to scheduling. Notre Dame by being undefeated had a distinct advantage in that they did not have to play a conference title game. But the fact that the SEC played one worked to Alabama's and Georgia's advantage. In truth, the only conference game that has worked to a conference's benefit in the BCS era in terms of the title game HAS been the SEC title game, because more often than not, you have 0 and 1 loss teams facing off against each other with one spot open in the BCS title game. Coupled with the reputation at this point, the SEC title game is a BCS title game eliminator. In a 4 team playoff, the SEC title game will work against the SEC because it will knock one of their teams out of the playoff.
I don't agree with the 64 team super league you seem to be hinting at. Lesser-tier schools such as Boise State have managed to elevate their game and national image to a whole new level through creative marketing. With increased coverage on ESPN, their unique field, they have a national awareness that rivals other major schools in Div 1 Football. Teams get better. It comes in cycles.
Yes, Oregon lost . . . just like 'Bama lost. And, they lost to a lower ranked team (at the time).
I wasn't surprised at all that Notre Dame got crushed by Alabama, especially since they had several very close calls against pretty weak teams. Their best win was against a weaker than usual Oklahoma team and had no one in their schedule close to the level of the SEC powerhouses. There's a decent chance that Texas A&M was the best team in football at the end of the season not to mention Oregon, Georgia, and Florida. The playoff system can't come soon enough, but even that would have the problem of having Notre Dame waste one of four spots.
As an Irish fan this game shattered my soul. On paper they still matched up well in the stats it was the actual personnel that really makes the difference. And if you give Nick Saban 40 days I'm sure he could gameplay a cure for cancer.
Oregon sounds nice to say but they couldn't handle auburn 2 years ago or even LSU last year. Fast but not fast enough and certainly not big enough where it matters.
As far as too many d1 teams, unfortunately even cutting to 80 wouldn't change the disparity between a school like Alabama and one that would make the cut like Virginia would still be equally as huge.
The 4 team playoff will make things interesting but until the limit the chances of a same conference championship game, I'll still be annoyed.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It is a game mired in tradition, and full of wonderful moments that out live the games themselves. Last night was an atrocity. It was obvious from just about the first play from scrimmage that only 1 team actually belonged.
After 60 mins a 42-14 blowout(which had bama scoring the first 35 points) many of us were left feeling nauseated. It was so bad that the producers obviously told the cameras to focus on the winning QBs GF(former miss Alabama) and this was just a stark reminder of how ugly the game on the field was.
The BCS since it's inception(following other terrible systems) in 98 has had some good games. However more times than not we can't say that it was definitely the best 2 teams playing each other. As a famous coach once said "The game is played on the field" I think we need to find some solutions to these problems.
The NCAA is taking steps including a 4 team playoff, but is this honestly enough? The best solution I can possible think of is limiting the number of teams that can actually play for the title game.
I think Division 1 is way to broad. We have powerhouse teams in tier 1 universities then we have what amounts to community colleges that the tier 1 teams stomp.
Cut division 1 down to 4 or 8 conferences then have them seeded in a full on single elimination bracket. Assuming 4 conferences it adds to games, assuming 8 you add 3.(counting the championship game)
The biggest issue with this system is the fact that these conferences act as individual entities and control their own revenue and finances. It will be really had to kill the Money culture behind the sport atm, but not impossible. As we have seen with conference realignment turmoil exist and turmoil is the single greatest cause of change.
What are your opioions on these matters? Have other ideas, or do you maybe like the system how it is?
Thomas Jefferson
Jefferson's letter to John Adams, April 11 1823
As an Oregon fan, I can't stand the BCS at all, especially after it left out Oregon back in 2001 when Miami blew out Nebraska (the same Nebraska team that was blown out by Colorado in the Big 12 championship game). A four team playoff won't solve all the problems with the postseason in college football, but it will be a significant step up from what we currently have.
~
I didn't have a chance to watch much postgame coverage, but I bet Mark May is giving Lou Holtz the biggest ****-eating grin ever after Lispin' Lou was proclaiming Notre Dame to be the best team ever all seaon.
And yes, Brent Musburger was getting all hot and bothered over a coed on-air again last night (reminiscent of the FSU/Jenn Sterger comment a few years back), though I think people are blowing it out of proportion -- someone clearly decided that putting the camera on her at 28-0 was a good idea, not to mention Herbstreit was right there with him.
Also, colleges under this new system would ONLY be allowed to play teams among the other 79 in DIV 1. No more cupcakes 4 times a year.
Current Decks
Standard : Bant FlashUWG
Modern : Jund RBGW
Legacy : JundRBG
I have my eye on the Alabama/A&M game, as that's going to be a huge one next year. At least the game is early enough in the season that the loser still has a shot if they can run the table afterwards. But with the weaker SEC West opponents, Alabama should have a somewhat clear path to the SEC Championship/BCS Championship if they get by A&M.
I don't want to see conferences get any larger, but it looks like it's probably going to happen anyways. It devalues conferences and kills conference identity when you only play just over half of the teams in your own conference.
A lot of the arguments on who gets in comes down to scheduling. Notre Dame by being undefeated had a distinct advantage in that they did not have to play a conference title game. But the fact that the SEC played one worked to Alabama's and Georgia's advantage. In truth, the only conference game that has worked to a conference's benefit in the BCS era in terms of the title game HAS been the SEC title game, because more often than not, you have 0 and 1 loss teams facing off against each other with one spot open in the BCS title game. Coupled with the reputation at this point, the SEC title game is a BCS title game eliminator. In a 4 team playoff, the SEC title game will work against the SEC because it will knock one of their teams out of the playoff.
I don't agree with the 64 team super league you seem to be hinting at. Lesser-tier schools such as Boise State have managed to elevate their game and national image to a whole new level through creative marketing. With increased coverage on ESPN, their unique field, they have a national awareness that rivals other major schools in Div 1 Football. Teams get better. It comes in cycles.
Yes, Oregon lost . . . just like 'Bama lost. And, they lost to a lower ranked team (at the time).
Oregon sounds nice to say but they couldn't handle auburn 2 years ago or even LSU last year. Fast but not fast enough and certainly not big enough where it matters.
As far as too many d1 teams, unfortunately even cutting to 80 wouldn't change the disparity between a school like Alabama and one that would make the cut like Virginia would still be equally as huge.
The 4 team playoff will make things interesting but until the limit the chances of a same conference championship game, I'll still be annoyed.