Interesting article from CBS: http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/14235169/defense-optional-for-top-two-as-we-hit-stretch-run "Thirty-two days from today -- Dec. 5 -- the BCS will spit out its 13th championship pairing. It is, as you know, an exclusive club. Only 12 teams have ever played in the BCS title game. Only 10 have won it. Four of those are from the SEC (Tennessee, Florida, LSU, Alabama), which has won half of all the BCS titles (six), including the past four in a row"
Hey....just facts presented by CBSSportsline. It does however play into the poll voters perception about who should be invited back to the title game. It's the same exact kind of perception about how many conference at-large teams get invited to the NCAAs in basketball. The NCAA "selection committee" arbitrarily decides who gets in and who gets left out and some of that is based on how a particular conference fares once invited in. Going 0-4 for instance in one year or similar failure in successive years in the NCAA Tourney does not bode well for future invitations for that conference as opposed to one that performs well in the tournament. It stirs controversy....but we all get over it and move on and enjoy the tourney. Why would you think the same sort of past BCS performance criteria is not relevant to the BCS Title game in football?
.....if there were 65 teams invited to have an opportunity to play their way into the title game I would agree with you. There is not......it is a joke and it is logically indefensible. Get off the table..... Even using your own flawed example would fail you....the conference rankings this year would favor the Big 12 and they would therefore likely have more teams in the tourney. The SEC is just not strong this year....get over yourself.
Well......it's what we have now and if you don't embrace it a little you won't find it fun to watch. I thought the 2002 BCS title game was exciting....didn't you? Heck Miami was supposed to be a world beater and the Buckeyes said otherwise. As I said.....the BCS system could work just fine with a plus one format. But I think the season would be diluted with a playoff unless they reduced the regular season down to 9 or 10 games and then had a 32 team playoff......adding 5 extra games to the champion. Then...some non-playoff teams would only have the revenue from maybe 5 home games. I can't see that working any more than I could see the champion playing 18 games total. This isn't the NFL....especially depth wise.
A champion is chosen on the competitive field of play in every sport on every level except one.......BCS football. There is no rational argument as to why that remains the lone exception. Tell me again why the earth is flat.....
I've given you some rational arguments against and also a playoff type alternative. How do you think it should be carried out?
They need to have a 16 team playoff with no guaranteed slots for Conference champions, not that with 16 teams one should be needed...but just incase there is an upset and a 7-5 team wins the conference championship that team should not be in the playoff. You can allow that in the basketball tournament because there are 64 freakin' teams.
....there are any number of models currently utilized by the NCAA in football and other sports to choose a champion on the field of play that would be vastly superior to using a panel of judges to choose only two as if they were the only teams deserving of even a hint of an opportunity.
So Terry that's 17 games for a conference champion. And if a conference champion as you describe.....say an 8-4 Florida....wins the conference championship then does that really take away from Conference Championships when a team like Florida as I describe would not be invited to the NCAA playoffs? Hate to be such a devil's advocate here but people just say...."let's have a playoff".....and I say let's protect the game that we love first before we make wholesale changes that are not well thought out.
:lol: :lol: :lol: Dude, I think everybody here understands full well that your defense of the current mess has nothing to do with preserving the "game we love" and everything to do with maintaining an unreasonable, unwarranted and unearned benefit that may accrue to the SEC at the expense of schools in other conferences whose claims to the title game have at least as much if not more merit.....further, then there is the issue of your Gators this season.....but there is no reason to go there. What is understood, need not be discussed.... If it were a team from the SEC who was at risk of not having an opportunity to play for the title in spite of a better record and a season more worthy, you would rant ad nauseaum at the outrage and the changes necessary to preserve and defend "the game we love". Let's get real here......
Where in the hell do you even find merit in that statement? At the martini bar already? :lol: Crap....the SEC is 4-0 in the last 4 BCS Title games and you think other conferences would have more merit from past seasons? With regard to 2010 Florida.....thanks for even thinking it necessary to bring the Gators into the conversation. Heck....I could understand it if we were talking about the "merits" of a team going to the Outback or Peach Bowl. 8)
Forgive me, I thought we were talking about this season...... So we talk last season....ok....last season Auburn was barely the equal of Northwestern because of a game injury to the kicker. So they're out.....Penn State was superior to LSU so they're out. So Carolina got sh!t hammered by UConn suggesting that Bama's out and Ohio State and Boise handily dispatched Oregon - out - and UF and Texas were part of the discussion......or should we go back to when Utah and Bama last met......do you want to talk about history or this season.....which is it? Because either way, the argument falls on its face.....if you want to take them both into consideration, I guess Boise and TCU face off in the semi's and play the winner of the Bama-Ohio State game or something to that effect......or the winner of Boise/Bama face off against Ohio State/TCU but then that leaves out three one loss teams from the highest rated conference in college football - the Huskers, Mizzou, and Okla but then BDR's Cats say k.m.a. we deserve to be in this circle jerk as well......give me a break with that last year crap.....it ain't last year. Tebow ain't taking snaps for your Gators and last year don't count for nuttin'....
Again...I fail to see how the Gators factor in to this year's discussion but thanks. But they do factor in to the recent history of the BCS Championship.....having vanquished all-Universe teams from the Big 10 and the Big 12. LSU pounded it's opponent and Bama wins easily. If you are debating who is best suited for the BCS title game wouldn't you consider those results?
Just heard Reece Davis state on the ESPN wrap-up show: "college football has the most significant regular season in all of sports".... This after they all agreed Bama will definitely be in the BCS title game if they win out. Pay attention.......you might learn something...... :wink: 8)
I'm going to sit back and let you continue to argue with yourself here.....you've broken your own world record by contradicting yourself within 3 sentences...... I agree with your first statement. The Gators are not a factor in this years discussion. Why? They've won more titles than anybody - shouldn't they get an automatic seeding? Of course not, because what has happened in the past is irrelevant and their body of work this year is not worthy.....and the body of work in the present year should be the sole basis of selecting a champion as it is in every other organized sport on the planet. Even if you do argue that there should be some consideration given, nobody has a better argument in that regard than Boise who has recent victories over 3 teams on the list of contenders - Oklahoma, Oregon and TCU - and zero losses.....zero. And then how do you ignore Utah based upon their recent contest with Bama, who you are including based primarily upon past performance? Even you can see how absurd that line of thinking is....to include some games on a selective basis and ignore others that contradict your position only emphasizes the folly of your view.... Dude, at the end of the day, you're just an SEC homer arguing his book no matter how irrational the position, contradicting yourself at every turn.....your position has been beat to death. Carry on.....
Not just "some games"........try BCS Championship games. Let me repeat my earlier post: "Just heard Reece Davis state on the ESPN wrap-up show: "college football has the most significant regular season in all of sports".... This after they all agreed Bama will definitely be in the BCS title game if they win out. " I rest my case.
That shouldn't be hard as your case never existed..... I will give you credit for being consistent.... 1) you argue entitlement, 2) you seek benefits that you have not earned, 3) at the expense of those that have, 4) you are unwilling to compete to earn those benefits It is precisely your political and personal mantra, you just change the subject......it's crystal clear. Carry on....