Re: Thank you BCS!
 

[ QUOTE ]
The BCS has replaced a bunch of meaningful bowl games with one championship game.

Before the BCS, undefeated and one-loss teams still had a shot at a national championship on New Years Day. People had a rooting interest in the other bowls, hoping a loss by a higher ranked team would enable their team to move up in the polls.

The arguement that the BCS removes the discussion about who is number one by matching #1 and #2, has been replaced with the discussion about who is number two heading into the bowls. Almost every season there has been a team with a legitimate gripe about being passed over for the championship game. This year there were two teams: Michigan and Florida. Maybe Boise State (zero losses), Wisconsin, and Louisville (one loss teams).

I'd like to see the bowls bring back the old conference tie-ins and then add a four game playoff at the end of the season.

Edit: Got rid of USC.

[/ QUOTE ]

4 game playoff? You mean 4 rounds or 4 games? 'Cause I don't see how 4 games can be done as it has to be 3,7, or 15 games and 4 round seems extremely excessive. I wouldn't mind seeing a 3 round playoff with the top 8.

Re: Thank you BCS!
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

My biggest gripe is how the BCS has rendered every other bowl game meaningless in the national championship picture.


[/ QUOTE ]

Not quite true. Remember after the 2003 season, where there were two different national champs.

[/ QUOTE ]

you mean the real national champions and the whiners who tried to claim a national championship?

Re: Thank you BCS!
 

[ QUOTE ]


4 game playoff? You mean 4 rounds or 4 games? 'Cause I don't see how 4 games can be done as it has to be 3,7, or 15 games and 4 round seems extremely excessive. I wouldn't mind seeing a 3 round playoff with the top 8.

[/ QUOTE ]

Four team playoff.

Re: Thank you BCS!
 

Bottom line is we need a playoff.

Re: Thank you BCS!
 

My system would look something like this:

Rose Bowl: Ohio State vs. USC
Orange Bowl: Oklahoma vs. Louisville
Sugar Bowl: Florida vs. Boise State
Fiesta Bowl: Michigan vs. Wake Forest
Cotton Bowl: Wisconsin vs. LSU

Take the four highest ranked teams after these games and seed them for a playoff.

(Cotton used to be the Southwest Conference champion's destination. Just picked them to make room for at-large teams.)

Re: Thank you BCS!
 

What I think is hilarious about this quote is the first part, crediting the BCS for "giving" us the Boise/Oklahoma game. As if games like that only happen because of this magical system.

Re: Thank you BCS!
 

[ QUOTE ]
My system would look something like this:

Rose Bowl: Ohio State vs. USC
Orange Bowl: Oklahoma vs. Louisville
Sugar Bowl: Florida vs. Boise State
Fiesta Bowl: Michigan vs. Wake Forest
Cotton Bowl: Wisconsin vs. LSU

Take the four highest ranked teams after these games and seed them for a playoff.

(Cotton used to be the Southwest Conference champion's destination. Just picked them to make room for at-large teams.)

[/ QUOTE ]

So Ohio State's reward for beating Michigan is they get to avoid playing Wake Forest? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: Thank you BCS!
 

The only playoff system I would enjoy is the +1 game. Have 1 play 4 and 2 play 3. Then the winners play each other. That's all NCAAF needs to do and hopefully its all they do when they finally switch it. Seeing a playoff any larger I feel is just doing to much.

Re: Thank you BCS!
 

[ QUOTE ]


So Ohio State's reward for beating Michigan is they get to avoid playing Wake Forest? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm keeping the old conference tie-ins. Since the Rose Bowl is so concerned about tradition, that's what the matchup would be.

Old bowl tie-ins:

Rose: Big 10 and Pac 10
Orange: Big 8 (then Big XII)
Sugar: SEC
Cotton: SWC
Fiesta: Whomever they wanted

Re: Thank you BCS!
 

[ QUOTE ]
What I think is hilarious about this quote is the first part, crediting the BCS for "giving" us the Boise/Oklahoma game. As if games like that only happen because of this magical system.

[/ QUOTE ]

The quote is one of many comparing the BCS with the old system where bowl games were contracted out to be the same conference matchups. These quotes are correct in that matchups such as BSU/OU would never have happened and even most 1 vs 2 matchups wouldn't have happened.

The problem is that they aren't making the correct comparision. Comparing the BCS to a pretty terrible system doesn't mean much. The people that like the BCS should compare it to other good systems that people have proposed - mostly some sort of playoff setup that uses bowl games somehow.