Sports
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Lets talk BCS vs other systems
I never understand the outrage. Back when it was simply based on polls, the outrage wasn't this high. Yet now with the BCS, people freak if there are more than two undefeateds.
I personally do no think the BCS is perfect, but no system will be. I am very against a play off. It would either a) require college kids to play many more games which isn't right or b) hack off regular season games to make room
What are other peoples' opinions?
Re: Lets talk BCS vs other systems
bc football requires a week off in between games. Other sports do not.
How do you suggest the schedule look? How many games? when would it start and end?
The FCS [I think that's what it's called now...Division 1-AA] has a playoff system, and they're finishing up their season. Why can't the FBS do the same thing? When I was in high school, our boys went to the state finals my senior year and played ball every weekend [but one] until the final game. FBS could do the same - most teams work in a week off anyway and then play every Saturday between September and November, so it's not like they get a big break.
If they go to a playoff system [which I'm sure won't happen], preseaon games will probably have to go away - or at least be cut down. I'd have to do some more of my own research to see how FCS does their system and if it would fit with the FBS, given the FBS has six BCS games and then a million other bowl games.
If the BCS was to go away, do any of you think that the BCS bowl games would disappear, too?
Because no conference is going to give up games. In order to be done right now, they'd have to cut games from the regular season.
I am not anti a play off, I just have yet to see a specific timeline laid out that makes sense.
Then FBS should cut their regular season out and just play. But I know that won't happen.
And, if a playoff system gets rid of the concept of bowl games...that won't happen, either. Those are too big of moneymakers for schools and NCAA for them to go away.
They could cut one cupcake game, and nobody would notice. I mean, I realize that future Gator teams not being able to run up the score on Troy, Charleston Southern and FIU in one season would probably make Tim Tebow cry again, but there would be no harm in cutting one of those games. Four OOC games are totally unnecessary.
Every other division of football can make a playoff work. We all know the real reason for not doing it in I-A - $$$. Of course, I'd love to see a playoff system that incorporates the bowls, but as long as it makes financial sense for the NCAA to resist a playoff, then it will.
well in order to be done this week, they would have to cut 4, or 3, games. If we want to expand it through december, then we would obviously have to cut less.
Has someone out there proposed an actual time line for a play off system? Thats all I want to see.
I don't see the harm in extending the season through December. I mean, the bowl system effectively already does that. There might not be any games, but you can bet the players are busting their asses in practice and watching film nonstop. And any time someone pulls out the academic reason, I want to barf. We can have football on Wednesday nights and basketball every night of the week, but god forbid we have a few more weeks of Saturday games.
I've heard both 8- and 16-team playoffs suggested. For an 8-teamplayoff, you could have round 1 this weekend (12/12), round 2 next weekend (12/19), and the championship in January the way it normally is. That's without cutting any games. Cut one OOC game for everyone, start it last week, and there you have it, you can do 16 teams! I have no doubt the NCAA braintrust could figure out how to make it work.
I also don't see the harm in extending it to the point it currently is extended. Just because no games are played for a few weeks doesn't mean they still aren't practicing and watching films.
My FSIL's brother plays for a Big Ten team and last year his team played in some crap bowl the day after Christmas. He didn't get to come home until after Christmas, despite the fact that his team's last game was at the end of November.
I think the real reason nothing will change is the money in the bowl system. I've seen articles about 8 and 16-team playoffs - and I think both would work.
Also, while I think out of conference play can have its benefits [if you see top teams playing each other], for the most part it is teams scheduling cupcake opponents, which IMO is worthless. Purdue [my alma mater] plays 3 or 4 of these games in the beginning of the season and it's just a waste. This year they did play Oregon, which was good, but playing Akron, Toledo, Southern Illinois, etc. could be cut from the schedule rather easily and no one would miss it.
I agree with all of this.
Another option is starting the season earlier, and playing cupcake games in August. For most Big10 teams, cupcake games run through the first 3-4 weeks of September, and the conference season starts the last week in September or in October.
I think the resistance to change is ridiculous. The current system does not crown a national champion IMO.
Unless Texas wins. Then it'll be legit.
Yes they can't go home if they have a bowl, but there is a HUGE difference between playing games and practicing, from a student athlete POV. I think sometimes we forget that they are students first, then athletes.
I tutor student athletes (specifically football players). Now, this year is a moot point for us because we aren't going to a bowl game, but I can tell you in years past they have a ton of more time during decemeber, even when going to a big bowl, than they do during the season when they have game.s This is usually their "catch up time" for all the class they had to miss for games and such.
I just think adding 3-4 additional games would be too much for student athletes. JMO.
This is an article from last year: http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-playoff120208&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
He runs through the arguments and why they're stupid and even proposes a schedule. My biggest thing is FCS, D-II, AND D-III all make a play-off work. Why can't FBS?
My Bio
Thank you for providing a schedule.
If we cut out conference champtionships and had games the first 2 weekend sof Dec, then the first two weekends of Jan, I can be on board with that.
But thats about it.
This doesn't seem to deter the NCAA from scheduling basketball games throughout the month of December. Or from scheduling football games on Wednesday nights. Cut even just one OOC game out of the regular season and do an 8-team playoff, and it would only be one extra week.
Just because they screw it up in other sports doesn't mean we should make fb even worse than it is.
The wed/tues night FB games really piss me off.
I think there should be a playoff. The bowl system has gotten ridiculous. I think it would be pretty easy to cut out some of the cupcake games if playing too many games is an issue.
The only reason for the current system is money.
An 8-team playoff makes the most sense. Realistically, there are no more than eight teams contending for the national championship. But there are certainly more than two.
This year would be:
1 Alabama vs. 8 Ohio State
2 Texas vs. 7 Oregon
3 Cincy vs. 6 Boise State
4 TCU vs. 5 Florida
I disagree that Georgia Tech, Iowa, Virginia Tech, or other teams ranked below 8 deserve a shot at the national title. They had their chance in the regular season and didn't show that they were worthy of making the playoffs.
I think the polling system is flawed so I would not want to base something only on that. Can you really say Ohio State is better than GT? GT has one more win the Ohio State, they both have two losses and the same record within their conferences.
So well said. Making Tim Tebow cry should be considered a pro not a con but who am I to judge. I don't understand why when the regular season ends almost a month before the last bowl game why we can't have a playoff system. For example, this year the regular season ends this Saturday. So the 19th and the 26th are the first two rounds of the playoffs (sixteen and eight). Then in January you have the final four on the 2nd and the championship game on the 9th.
Championship game is the ROSE BOWL
Final four games are ORANGE and FIESTA
Elite eight games are SUGAR and none BCS bowl games
Etc.
This argument is a slippery slope that logically leads to a playoff the size of the NCAA basketball tournament. I think that only eight teams need to be included in a football playoff. The method of ranking teams is up for discussion (though any ranking system will be flawed in one way or another).
I think thats too many games for college kids to play. Its also during finals at most schools. (yes, I know bball plays during finals week)
If we are going to do it, I'd rather cut the conference champtionship and one other game from the season. Do two games the last week of nov/first week of dec and then have a two week break. Do the last two the last week of december/first week of jan.
I do not think going to 65 teams is necessary. However they could take a page from basketball. You used to have to win your conference to make it to the NCAA tourney. The example above does not have an ACC school in the in playoff, so I do not see that working. I think the major conferences would need to be represented with a couple of at large bids.
This is ok too. It could be seen as screwing the little guy, though. This year the six auto-bids (champions of BCS conferences) would be Alabama, Texas, Cincinnati, Oregon, Ohio State, and Georgia Tech. TCU finished #4, so maybe they get one of two at-large bids. But who's going to get the other one: #5 Florida or #6 Boise State?
I come from a small-conference basketball school, so I'm sensitive to this sort of thing.
I would say Boise State, Florida lost their chance by not winning the SEC.
Yeah, but if we're using the NCAA basketball model, schools from power/BCS conferences have a much easier time getting an at-large bid because the prestige of their conference makes up for any shortfalls in performance.
Thus says the girl from the oft-shunned small school. LOL
that is how it is now.
It did not use to be this way. Conference tournaments used to mean a lot more. That was the only way to get into the NCAA tournament was to win the conference tournament (or however the conference determines its champion). There was only one team from a conference.