1. I agree with George 2. Hold on there buddy You sure did have a funny way of showing that appreciation when you chucked the old bowl system under the bus for Czar Kramer's BCS system (actually the 'Bowl Alliance' and then the BCS) People bitched about the conference tie-ins under the old bowl system. What did you get with the new system? Well, you got more tie-ins than ever before and much less flexibility. Now, I know what BCS defenders will say. Well, those bowls weren't part of the BCS and you are 100% correct. I want you to remember that. It isn't the playoffs that created a separate entity of the bowls. It was the BCS that did that. When you see people talk about 'oh boo hoo, what will happen to the bowls now?' Just remember that's a load of bull. The only thing that is going away is the BCS. For the time being, you'll be taking 4 teams out of the "bowls" not 10, which are currently taken out and placed into BCS bowl games. Even if/when the playoffs expand to 8 teams, that's still fewer than the BCS was taking out. So enjoy your return to tradition, and a true champion proven on the field.
George, I didn't ask "IS making money the motivation?", I asked "SHOULD making money be the motivation?" 8)
Corey the "10" taken out are still playing the bowl system and where they are not part of a playoff scenario.... just playing a bowl game. The 4 will be out of the bowl system..... double that of the two BCS title participants that have been taken out. If you make it 8 then that's 8 teams out of the bowl system.
So that's 7 big time games with those 8 teams...taking the place of 4 bowl games. It may, indeed have the consequence of diminishing the other bowls...but I don't see it. If folks care about the Pizza Pizza! Bowl now, they still will after the new system...IMHO
Oh no you don't, sir. You don't get to do that. For however long this **** hole system has been in place as the Bowl Alliance or BCS, those who support it have carefully taken great lengths to ensure the separation between the bowl games and the BCS bowl games. Just because you called it a 'bowl game' doesn't mean they were the same. Hell, we can call the playoffs the 'playoff bowl game' and it would effectively negate your entire argument. You see what I did there? Isn't that ********?! How's that shoe feel on the other foot my man. What the playoff system does (at least in the 4 team format) is do what the BCS should have done long ago but wouldn't part with the cash grab. Whenever people pointed to the immediate lies, inaccuracies and broken promises of the Bowl Alliance, they created the BCS and said 'yea, but this will be better.' People people pointed out the lies, inaccuracies and broken promises of the BCS, they quickly pointed out that the BCS was something different. The regular bowl games were something apart of all the BCS was doing... ergo, blaming the bowl system for not living up to promises that the BCS made. So there you have it.. the BCS removed itself from liability of their own claims. The pointed to the shiny object that was their national title game and said that's all that matters. The rest of just bells and whistles. When people began to point out the obvious, subjective ******** that went into forming the title game, the BCS defenders said 'the system did was it was designed to do.. give us 1 vs 2' which is true... it gave you THEIR ******** 1 and 2. It defied logic, reason and evidence in many years. Then, when each year was done.. the media pundits (who you suddenly become chummy toward) start waving it in the public's face that 'Triumphantly, once again the BCS has managed to give you what you all asked for... a true 1 vs 2' In the meantime, there's a whole world of unbeaten and one loss teams who were passed over because they didn't pass whatever subjective eye/nose test that the power brokers of the BCS set up. This system didn't create a fair and level playing field to finally give us what we all wanted. This smashed that system into oblivion and destroyed the landscape of college football forever. Gone are nearly century old traditions and rivalries. Conference imploded, turned upside down or expanded beyond control by sloth. I can see why, given the level of success that your team and conference enjoyed during this time, you simply do not see what is right there plainly in front of your face. That's not to diminish the accomplishments of ALL those champions in this system, and they are champions. They always will be, no taking that away. I mean, you're the guy who believes there is a grand conspiracy of owners, GMs and coaches in the NFL to keep Tim Tebow from being a starting quarterback.. Yet you simply refuse to acknowledge that a system was designed by the SEC Conference Commissioner, and then put in place by a rather heavy handed power brokerage involving the newly created Big12 with assistance of the ACC that immensely benefited the SEC, Big 12 and ACC over all others. You don't see any connection there at all. The BCS created a Hunger Games type of environment in the world of college football in which survival became a very real struggle. Only those who set out the rules were the ones to truly prosper.
I think the BCS was a step up from the old bowl system. In the old system, their was no guarantee that no. 1 and no. 2 would ever meet. The winner of the Big 10 and the PAC 10 were going to play in the Rose Bowl. The winner of the SWC was going to the Cotton and the winner of the SEC was going to the Sugar. You had to get kind of lucky to get no. 1 and no. 2 to play. What the BCS really needed was 2 and only 2 undefeated major conference teams to work. If they didn't have 2 undefeated major conference teams then they were totally at the mercy of the polls and because all of a sudden there were numerous candidates for the NCG. At least now we get a chance to increase the field to 4 teams and let them fight it out. Now if we can get to 8 teams we should be good. 8)