| |
|
|
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Sep 18, 2006
|
You're not describing a NC, you are describing a post season tournament. Face it, those are 2 vastly different propositions. A tourney crowns the last team standing, and that can be a very different outcome from a NC crowned after a season of college football.
Since when has there EVER been a year where there are more than a handful of teams that truly have a claim to the NC. This year was probably came as close as there has been in the last 25 years where all the BIG 6 conference champs could have been in the mix after the regular season, and that was because no team truly stood head and shoulders above the rest.
To open it up to include a bunch of undeserving conference champs is a joke. Just to recap how the 5 non-BIG 6 conferences did n the post season, CUSA champ UCF lost to MS ST, the 7th or 8th best SEC team. MAC champ, C. MICH lost to PUR, the 7th best team in the BIG 10, BYU blocked a FG on the last play of the game to defeat UCLA, the 5th best PAC team, FLA ATL beat MEM, the CUSA's 4th best team, and we all know what happened to HAW playing the SEC's 2nd or 3rd best team, UGA. What a joke. HAW's performance is going to make it harder for all the non-BIG 6teams on the edge to get the benefit of the doubt in making the cut to land in a BCS Bowl. UTAH and BOISE they were NOT.
Having a tourney with those conference champs makes a mockery of any legitimate attempt to crown a NC and is a complete waste of time. College football is not a tourney sport and after a regular season there are fewer, not more teams worthy of a NC. One of the undisputed truths of life, the non-BIG 6 conference champs don't have a snowballs chance of winning your tourney much less than a NC. There is a reason a #16 has never beaten a #1 in the BB tourney. Good luck selling this nonsense to the college football world.
|
|
|
|
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Sep 18, 2006
|
This year was probably came as close
Should be "This year probably came as close." Sorry
|
|
|
|
|
Reputation:98
Level:Superstar
Since:Nov 21, 2006
|
|
Having a tourney with those conference champs makes a mockery of any legitimate attempt to crown a NC and is a complete waste of time. College football is not a tourney sport and after a regular season there are fewer, not more teams worthy of a NC. One of the undisputed truths of life, the non-BIG 6 conference champs don't have a snowballs chance of winning your tourney much less than a NC. There is a reason a #16 has never beaten a #1 in the BB tourney. Good luck selling this nonsense to the college football world.
AMEN, AMEN, and once more AMEN.
|
|
|
|
|
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Jan 17, 2008
|
|
To open it up to include a bunch of undeserving conference champs is a joke.
At last! The real core of your argument! You don't believe any team that's not in a BCS conference is "worthy" of playing in a national championship. Other than the one possible bone a year the BCS throws them. Why is that? Let me make your argument for you. The BCS conferences have more tradition, more bowl wins, more mythical national championships etc etc etc. Because of this prior history, BCS teams deserve to play for a national championship, while non-BCS teams do not.
Fair enough. Some teams are deserving and some are not. So who gets to decide. The BCS conferences! Wow, how convenient for them! So no matter who you are, if you're in the right conference you can play for an NC, if not too bad. MIght be fair if the better non-BCS schools like a Boise State or a BYU had a chance to get into a BCS conference and you could relegate the Vanderbilts, Minnesotas, Dukes, and the rest to a non-BCS conference. But we know that will never happen.
So the BCS schools feel the non-BCS schools are unworthy. So why don't you play them and find out? Why don't you strap it on like Georgia did and kick the crap out of them in a real national championship? The answer is plain old cowardice. These BCS schools are afraid to lose. So rather than have a real NC, you continue to play these mythical national championships based on polls, and computers and more polls and now 1 game too! Wow. And even though these are still mythical, you will crow and blow your horns that you're the "National Champ" even though you have prohibited half the schools from even competing.
The BCS conferences think they are Division 1 football. College football is a sport played by 120 teams in this country. Some day, we'll find out exactly who the national champion is, on the field. In the meantime, keep playing your limited access tournament and calling it a national championship. You're not fooling anyone.
Fortunately, there are other places to define the word champion, than the bogus BCS. Try the Random House Dictionary for example:
<table minmax_bound="true" class="luna-Ent">
<tbody minmax_bound="true">
<tr minmax_bound="true">
<td class="dn" valign="top" minmax_bound="true"> 1.</td>
<td valign="top" minmax_bound="true"> a person who has defeated all opponents in a competition or series of competitions, so as to hold first place</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
When D1 college football gets something, anything like that, then we'll have a national champion. Until then, keep up the excuses. They get more pitiful every year.
|
|
|
|
|
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Jan 17, 2008
|
|
Here's the definition of the word "champion" which you so obviously don't understand
champion- a person who has defeated all opponents in a competition or series of competitions.
All-not just who you want to play.
|
|
|
|
|
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Sep 18, 2006
|
|
Here's the definition of the word "champion" which you so obviously don't understand
champion- a person who has defeated all opponents in a competition or series of competitions.
All-not just who you want to play.
Noticed you chose not even begin to defend the records of the 5 non-conference champs. By the above definition NONE, except HAW qualify do they? At the end of the regular season last year, HAW was the only one that had come through the season undefeated. UCF had 3 losses, BYU had 2 losses, C. MICH had 5 losses and FLA ATL had 5 losses.
Please explain how any outside of HAW has any kind of claim to be included in a playoff. I wanted the Braves to make the playoffs last year but they weren't good enough. The other 4 conference champs were not good enough.
Last time I checked in EVERY other case where a CHAMPION is crowned, only a portion of the overall league makes the competition to determine that champ. In every case there are a limited number of slots available and the ones that don't make the cut sit on the sidelines.
If the teams are good enough by the criteria, i.e. HAW (even though they were a joke that played an inferior schedule) let them be included. Winning a conference should not be a ticket to the playoff. Not even close.
|
|
|
|
|
Reputation:99
Level:Superstar
Since:Sep 18, 2006
|
'To open it up to include a bunch of undeserving conference champs is a joke."
At last! The real core of your argument! You don't believe any team that's not in a BCS conference is "worthy" of playing in a national championship. Other than the one possible bone a year the BCS throws them.
There you go again. Did I say that? Not even close.
The operative word is UNDESRVING. For the record, I am in a favor of ONLY a 4 team playoff and that is it. At the end of the regular season it is pretty clear what teams have risen to the top. If a 4 team playoff were implemented, at least 2 and possibly 3 or 4 BIG 6 Bowls could be sitting on the sidelines in the undeserving category.
The BCS conferences have more tradition, more bowl wins, more mythical national championships etc etc etc. Because of this prior history, BCS teams deserve to play for a national championship, while non-BCS teams do not.
BINGO. All true, but the BIGGER question is how that came to be? If every team starts the season 0-0, something caused certain teams to rise above the others. Way back when the IVY league ruled the day. As time went on other schools got in the game. Nobody knew anything about a small school named Notre Dame before they came on the football landscape. I remember the days when SEC stadiums held less than 40K. What happened ? Some schools excelled and grew, others did not. There is a reason the bowls tied-into certain conferences. The fan base, the following and the chance to put butts in seats. Every school had a chance to become a BIG BOY. FLA ST and MIA are perfect examples of teams that grew into major powers from humble beginnings. FLA ST used to be a girl's school. USF has been on the scene just a few years. BOISE started their football program just a few years ago.
Some teams are deserving and some are not. So who gets to decide. The BCS conferences! Wow, how convenient for them! So no matter who you are, if you're in the right conference you can play for an NC, if not too bad. MIght be fair if the better non-BCS schools like a Boise State or a BYU had a chance to get into a BCS conference and you could relegate the Vanderbilts, Minnesotas, Dukes, and the rest to a non-BCS conference. But we know that will never happen.
The bottom line, the BEST teams should play for the BCS NC, and so far not a single non-BIG 6 team has qualified. If you think putting the teams you mention in a BIG 6 conference is going to change things, you clearly are disregarding the recent past. In the past 10 years BOISE is 0-4 against the SEC, 0-1 against the ACC, 2-7 against the PAC, and 2-0 against the BIG 12. Overall BOISE is 103-24 in the last 10 years, but is only 4-12 against the BIG 6 conferences. 99-12 against non BIG 6 teams. BYU is 11-16 against the Big 6 the last 10 years. Does not bode well if that were to happen.
The answer is plain old cowardice. These BCS schools are afraid to lose. So rather than have a real NC, you continue to play these mythical national championships based on polls, and computers and more polls and now 1 game too! Wow. And even though these are still mythical, you will crow and blow your horns that you're the "National Champ" even though you have prohibited half the schools from even competing.
Regardless of the playoff format, teams still have to qualify. Unless you open it up to include all the conference champions the teams you cry about aren't good enough too make it. Say we had an 8 team playoff in 06. Boise made the semi-finals with a win over OU. Next up USC and if lightening were to strike twice, next up would be FLA in the BCS NC. We all saw it happen once, but 3 times is asking a lot. Anything can happen but the only way to get all the conference champs a shot is to give each a automatic berth and any playoff that does that is a joke and illegitimate as MANY more worthy teams would cry foul, and rightly so.
When D1 college football gets something, anything like that, then we'll have a national champion.
We don't have to include a bunch of unworthy second rate conference champs to determine a NC. As previously stated a regular season of football narrows the number of contenders down to a very few.
Have your tourney, but including a bunch of conference champs for the sake of inclusion does not make it anymore legitimate than a playoff that only includes the best of the best and excludes pretenders. We don't need a round of a bunch of 1's beating a bunch of #16's just to be PC. What a waste of time.
|
|
|
