Jon Solomom of the Birmingham News had a good line today: "Imagine if the BCS ran the NFL's post season we would be getting ready for Patriots vs Falcons" :?
....and we managed to have rabid, sell-out crowds and great games in both stadiums where the high for the day probably didn't reach 15 degrees....on a weeks notice.
And we saw a 3rd string pro Qb take the reins because of injury to the other Qbs and then watched as that 3rd stringer didn't miss a beat and in fact he excelled and almost brought his team back. That would be a rarity at the college level.
Yeah that does come to mind but I think it is an exception at the college championship level to find a suitable replacement on a moment's or even a week's notice. There are only so many reps in practice in the college game whereas the pros make it their livlihood and commit countless hours to getting it right in all layers of the lineup.
Hmmmmm......Tommy Rees of ND took over for our starter Dayne Crist when he went down with an injury and really should have won the game if our coach had elected to go ahead and kick a 30 yd FG with our kicker who had never missed. But instead like the Bear QB he threw the pick that lost it instead. After that he won his next four starts. True Freshman.
It would be an interesting comparison to see how many hours of film, how many hours of instruction and how many hours of practice Haney received in this past year vs. Auburn's 3rd string Qb.
MCG, Haney (thanks) is a professional athlete, I'll bet he spent more time than a college athlete practicing football. I'll bet the ratio of reps in practice is similar though. And it really doesn't matter, that is football. They have a playoff (just like every other division of football and sport in the NCAA) and the FBS doesn't. It didn't ruin their regular season and it has provided great football every weekend of the post season.
I guess the general point I am trying to make Kp is that pro teams have way more resources and time to prepare their bench than do college teams to ensure at least a competitive game once the starters go out. In a grueling 3 or 4 game playoff at the end of the regular season and conference championships what you would get in some years is a watered down champion....not necessarily the best team that season. Bama earned their win over Texas last year but did anyone really think the Horns had a real chance after McCoy went out? I'm just saying that a playoff may not be the end all.....completely satisfying method of determining a champion that many people think it would be. And I also say the regular season and conference championships currently have a significant bearing all season long on who is #1 at the end and they would both be severely diminished in importance in a playoff scenario except for their impact on what would be a sure to be maddening and frustrating seedings process..
I don't hear anybody saying that.....what I do hear people saying is that a playoff would be a superior alternative to the 2 team process currently "used" by the FBS and ONLY the FBS where a popular vote is a more important consideration in the process than on the field results.....
Computer rankings ( usually based on performance vs. schedule toughness ) and W-L record also factor greatly into the final 2 selection process.
My understanding of the BCS point system is that it is weighted 2/3rds popular vote, 1/3rd computer. I don't see where you get points for W-L record.....
Teams used to lose BCS ratings points for losses.....don't they still? If not it does factor in obviously in the computer rankings.
Nope.....Harris Poll, USA Today Poll and an average of 6 computer polls all equally weighted making the final determination 2/3rds popular vote, 1/3rd computer poll which includes some systems which provide benefit for prior years results. It is a system that places a great emphasis on how somebody "thinks" you did and none on how "in fact" you did.....bizarre at best. In spite of the imperfections of any of the other playoff systems, it would be a move in the right direction to place a greater emphasis on what "in fact" happens on the field over what somebody "thinks" might happen..... The NCAA runs 88 championship playoff tournaments and then there is the BCS......nuff said.
Obviously W-L vs. SOS strongly influence how someone "thinks" a team has performed. I see a 4 team "plus one" format with the 2 winners emerging from the current BCS bowls as the most doable and least damaging to the traditions of present day college football. I would like to see all of those qualifying bowls take place no later than Jan. 3rd and then we could wait that 10-11 days that we currently do before the NC game. Not much disruption and 4 teams are in....which is better than 2. Actually all 125 teams are in from Sept. on.....it's just that all 125 teams must do what they can....including success vs a tough schedule..... to impress enough voters and computers to make that final 4.
Suppose we assumed that as in the NFL the No. 2 team in the east (Pitt) OSU would have played the no.6 team in the west (Green Bay) Ark. you think that it would have been a better championship game? We had that game so OSU should have been the National Champion?