Seriously, why would it be so great to give a bunch of 2 and 3 loss teams a chance to get lucky and steal a title? I don't know anyone outside of St. Louis who really enjoyed last year's World Series, and I just don't see why college sports need to be treated like the pros. Last year worked out pretty well, and Florida/OSU seems about right this time.
2006-12-11 14:13:59 · 8 answers · asked by Edward K 5 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
If UM/OSU wouldn't have been the last game for both teams, I think they might have gotten a rematch. I agree that Tressel was playing it safe by not voting; it would've been a no-win situation for him to vote, IMO. His vote probably wouldn't swing who OSU faced one way or the other, but it would've been good bulletin board material for whatever team the BCS decided if it didn't match his vote.
2006-12-11 14:26:12 · update #1
To me, the absence of a playoff makes the regular season the de facto playoff. I like that. It makes every game meaningful, because a team can't afford to slip up even one time. If there is a playoff, the intensity of the regular season would inevitably be lessened to some degree.
2006-12-11 14:35:09 · update #2
In a 4-team playoff, the 5th and 6th teams would gripe (Louisville, Wisconsin, Boise State, etc., etc.).
Same thing with 8 team playoffs.
I have never seen a season where 16 teams were good enough to compete for the nat'l title, so that shouldn't even be a consideration.
The regular season in college football is like no other in sports. If we had a little better way of teams scheduling tougher out of conference opponents, it would be a little easier to determine who plays at the end of the year.
And this year, every major poll, human and computer thought that Florida and OSU were the two best teams, where is the controversy, other than from Lloyd Carr, Michigan fans, and people who have never watched a football game outside of the Big Ten?
2006-12-11 19:25:54 · answer #1 · answered by willyc 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The problem is that without having a playoff, too many what ifs remain. Every single year there is at least one team taht has a legitimate reason to play for the title, yet they are watching on TV. I dont think it should go beyond a top 8 scenario, and think I think that overall record should count for a lot more than anything else. But think about it- Florida is a 1 loss team. There are 3 others, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Louisville- How do we really know Florida is the best of them unless they play each other. And how about Boise State, the other undefeated team in college football this year. How do we know that they aren't as good as Ohio State? We can speculate all we want, but we don't know for sure. They played no common opponents with OSU, so how can we justly compare them? College Football is the best sport in America, yet every year it hangs the loyal fans of talented and deserving teams out to dry. After a succesful season, a team doesn't deserve to be left wondering what if.
2006-12-12 12:33:33 · answer #2 · answered by jayoaks50 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
First, a playoff is a pretty fair system if it is done correctly. Obviously, the traditionalists would not be as receptive to the idea because they enjoy their bowl games at the end of the year and all the debate it causes when you have two unbeaten teams or four one-loss teams. The NCAA basketball tournament is great to watch, even if you don't catch a single regular season game. And just because a team is seeded lower doesn't mean they don't deserve a title. The George Mason reference is preposterous. They played well and deserved to be in the Final Four.
Back to relevence to this question, if a playoff format were implemented, it would still require teams to play well during the season to get in. There would be plenty of two-loss teams sitting at home during the playoffs. If everyone is so mad about one-loss teams getting left out, then why is there no uproar about unbeaten Boise St. not getting in? Level of competition. And Florida played much tougher opponents in their conference than Michigan.
As far a Tressel not voting, I agree with you. While the one vote would not have affected the ultimate outcome, it still would have been a media frenzy because of what it would have caused had he voted either as number two. If he put Michigan two and Florida three, the entire SEC would have been upset. If he put Florida two and Michigan three, Lloyd Carr would have had a cow.
BCS Committee: Please get together and put a playoff system together!
2006-12-11 23:05:12 · answer #3 · answered by heluvajobu 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
actually, ohio stae v michigan is the obvious choice. i can't disagree with you about the world series, i didn't watch a pitch. college football needs a playoff not for a 2 or 3 loss team to "steal" a title (do we say a lower seed stole the ncaa tourney?) but rather for those instances where there are 3 or more deserving teams at the end of the year. some conferences play a playoff for their conference title, and is it fair to penalize them for that extra game? you can keep your bowls, your bcs rankings, just set up a final 4 at least using the existing bowl format on a rotating basis. without this there's just too much politics involved, by the way did you notive ohiostate coach jim tressel did NOT vote in the final coaches poll? very interesting, you know why? the voting is made public and he didn't want to play michigan again or explain why he didn't vote them # 2.
2006-12-11 22:22:26 · answer #4 · answered by likkerlicense 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because american sports rely on the drama and closure of a playoff system, all other major sports have them, and it seems like the fairest way to do things, in a playoff system no one feels slighted because it all plays out on the field. College basketball does a playoff and its one of the most exciting tournaments in sports, and almost all of the time, the best team wins, sure u have ur george masons advance, but they rarely win. Same goes with the nfl. the best team wins 80-90 percent of the time because u prove who's the best where it counts, on the field not in the polls.
2006-12-11 22:23:07 · answer #5 · answered by Kyle F 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A playoff would only hurt College football.
C'mon!
Would that early Michigan-Notre Dame game mean anything in the playoffs?
I think it was Shaq that said the reg. season doesnt mean anything, it's all about the playoffs.
Granted, playoffs work for the NFL but NCAA football is not the NFL, it is better.
The great thing about college football is that it is the goal to go undefeated. One loss potentially ruins a season.
Controversy means more press, and that's always good.
2006-12-12 00:38:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know. I like the old bowl system. It made everything more interesting.
2006-12-11 22:24:02 · answer #7 · answered by chipman67 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not adamant about it at all
2006-12-12 02:10:26 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋