Chinese Bandit. So the ACC and Big East winners should have as much of a chance at the NC this year as Okal, SC, and LSU? That doesn't seem fair either to me. Things will work out. All year I have been saying to just wait for the final BCS poll, the only one that matters and take the entire seasons results into consideration. All these computer polls will be all over the place during the season, only to fall into line when the final results come in. People were freaking out about how unfair it would be for Ohio St to play for the title this year with one loss and constant poor performance on the field. Well, Michigan took care of it and Ohio St will not be a factor in the NC. Under a playoff a two loss Ohio st team and the 2 loss Michigan team would have as much of a chance at the NC as a 1 loss LSU and SC team, along with an undefeated Okla team. I say let the season play out and let the formula use the end of the season results before scrapping everything and allowing a 4 loss team the chance at NC over more deserving team, considering the playoffs could be swayed with a 4 loss team possibly beating an undefeated or 1 loss team. Somehow I don't feel the 4, 3, or 2 loss team really earns the right for a chance at the NC, along with the teams that went undefeated or only had 1 loss.
I agree with LSUfan. The BCS has problems but it isn't as terrible as everyone thinks. It doesn't matter what it says right now, the final one is all that matters and is the most accurate.
How does any playoff work my friend? How unfair is it that an NFL division winner with 12 or 13 wins is put into the same playoff as a wild card with 9 wins? For the life of me I can't remember anyone caring. I'm willing to guess that you have no problem with it either. But like many, you are likely so accustomed to things being finally decided by polls that you can't escape a double standard perception. Of course, in professional sports schedules are tightly controlled but the NCAA makes way for a playoff in every other sport that I know of. These arguments take place within the confines of the system we are currently stuck with. If we are FORCED to not have a playoff, then you have to discuss quality wins, margin of victory, strength of schedule and whatever else. Ohio State might not have been the best choice to go to the Sugar Bowl if they retained only one loss but there would be NO argumeent they didn't deserve to go to an 8 or 16 team playoff. And no, a playoff doesn't eliminate end of the year arguments about "who should go." NCAA basketball invites 64 and every year "bubble teams" don't make it and get upset. BUT.... you can extend that bubble out far enough that the national championship retains it's validity. No one wonders if Kentucky or whoever might not have won the Final Four if only Princeton had been invited to the tournament.
The only significant change the BCS brought was to end relationships between Conferences and Bowls. The Sugar was once the SEC game. Rose Bowl Pac 10/Big 10. Fiesta independent etc. To that extent it IS better than the old system where if the #1 team was from the Big 10 and the #2 from the SEC they wouldn't play each other under ANY circumstances, even if they were both 11-0 and every other team had 1 or more losses. The ranking system itself isn't much better at all and therefore, when the top 2 teams aren't PRECISELY clear, you get all the old arguments.
I guess we have different perceptions of what college football should be about. I don't see where a playoff enhances the college football season and makes it better. Sorry, I just don't see it. Of course it is personal preference. I personally don't think we should make college football like pro ball;. But, once again, that is just me and personal taste. It has nothing to do with how I feel about polls or any double standard perceptions you might think I have. I respect the system that rewards teams for going undefeated or through a season with 1 loss; more than a system that allows 4 loss teams to compete with undefeated teams for titles. When those teams play in a system where SOS vary so much from conference to conference. To each his own, I'm sure plenty of ACC, PAC 10, and Big East fans fully support you and your opinions. Remember, only once in the last 40+ years has there been a NC who had more than 1 loss. With a playoff, year in and year out you would have NC with more than 1 loss (in fact it wouldn't be that strange to have a 4 or even 5 loss NC if they won their conference). And that would happen under a playoff. By the way, playoff opponents don't care about "who will go" to the playoffs. We are all about not allowing bubble teams any chance at a title. We care about losing meaning during the regular season. And we don't want to see college football become a 1 month sport like college basketball or college baseball. Once again, it is personal feelings, but I haven't followed a full college basketball season since graduating, usually only watching during March madness. But I do watch college football from August to Jan, because of the importantance of the regular season and playoff atmosphere that surrounds games in Sept as much as Nov. The only way I, or many playoff opponents can accept the playoffs is if they start to include non BCS teams, then I can fully get behind the system. But to form a playoff around BCS conference winners with multiple losses in a 12 or 11 game season, giving those teams the same chance at a NC as an undefeated team is no more fair than the current BCS or older pol/bowl system. Why does a playoff have more validity than an undefeated team playing a one loss team for the NC? Is it b/c those two teams would have had to play undeserving teams to get there, or b/c only a playoff will prove that they are a better team with the regular season meaning nothing?
How about the following 8 team playoff system? Conference winners from the 5 BCS conferences (Big East would no longer be a BCS conference) if those conference winners have 3 or fewer losses The remaining 3 or more spots would be filled by the highest ranked teams with 3 or fewer losses. This would eliminate most/all 4+ loss teams from the playoffs, and allow non-BCS teams a chance to fill 3 or more playoff spots each year.
The only playoff I would be in favor of is a 4 team playoff. 1vs4, 2vs3. 4 teams have one more game. Keep the BCS and all of the bowls the way they are but the winners meet in the NC.
Actually only 2 teams would have one more game. To me, any 4, 8, or 16 team playoff would be much better than the current 2 team playoff.
