The BCS is a bunch of poo anyways. Scrap it and go to a playoff...like division 1AA....and settle it on the field....like division 1AA. I also follow McNeese St. football...a 1AA school...and the playoffs are so much fun! A playoff system could include some of the current bowl sites...and rotate the championship game between current sites, or have cities bid for the right to hold the game on a year-to-year basis like the NFL does with the Super Bowl. All of this would have to correspond with a trimming back of the schedule to 10 or 11 games instead of 12 or 13 when including conference title games and bowl games. It works in 1AA and they don't have near the money or resources that 1A schools have. Here's what I propose: a 16 team tournament using BCS rankings to determine the seedings. The 16th seed would play the 1st seed, 15 vs 2 and so on down the line until you end up with 9 vs 8. Either the higher seed would host the first round, or the sites for some of the lesser bowls would be rotated on a yearly basis so Memphis, Houston, San Diego, Seattle, Houston, Dallas, etc., would get a playoff game every other year. In the second round (quarterfinals), you'd have the normal sites of BCS bowls hosting (Pasedena, Tempe, New Orleans, and Miami). In the national semifinals and championship game, either they could be played at the same site, or be auctioned off like the super bowl. It would generate Just as much, if not more fan interest and revenue for the schools than is currently. This tournament would start on the 2nd week of December and end on the first week of Janurary.:lsug: forever
too many games won't happen....a 16-team takes away the excitement that the BCS generates week in and week out a 4-team play-off YES...16 teams no way keep the BCS...adjust it accordingly...play the bowl games...teams in the final BCS top 4 play in a 2-game 2-week playoff there's your answer folks no tradition is lost; excitement is still there every week and a true national champion will emerge http://members.aol.com/lsur0x/bcs.doc
Too many games? That's why I said the regular season schedule would have to be trimmed down to 10 or 11 games. The 16 team format WORKS in 1AA, why would it not work in 1A? You are only adding 4 games maximum to just 2 schools for a grand total of a 14 or 15 game schedule for just 2 schools. I think it could work...I've SEEN it work...and we'd have a TRUE championship, not this media-derived lukewarm thing we now have called the BCS...which should remove the "C" because it is just BS.
Do you mean that you wouldn't be excited to see if the Tigers could win each week in a 16 team playoff that would be fair to everybody? If there was a playoff right now LSU dosen't have a playoff berth clinched right now so there is still the week to week excitement of hoping they keep winning to make the playoffs and earn the best possible seeding. Lets say the season ends with everybody ranked where they are now. Oklahoma and USC play for the bogus NC in the Sugar Bowl while LSU and Ohio State play each other in the Rose, Fiesta or Orange Bowl. Nobody outside of LSU and Ohio State fans give a damn except for the people who bet on the game. Other likely matchups like Michigan-Pittsburgh, Miami-Texas, Georgia-Virginia Tech, Florida-Nebraska, Florida State-Tennessee mean nothing to anybody except for those teams fans. If all the abovemention teams played each other in a playoff where the winner advances to the next round everybody would be interested.
Not a fair survey. I'm for the BCS. But, some of these computer rankings have to be revised or trash. TO have such NOBODY'S (who have beaten NOBODY) like TCU and Bowling Green ahead of LSU at this point just shows how SERIOUSLY RIDICULOUS these computer programs are. Much more emphasis should be put on the two major polls. They shouldn't be the end-all-be-all, but they should count A LOT mroe than they do. In any case, I would still think that if LSU, USC and OU win out, LSU has only itself to blame for not getting into the NC game. We did it to ourselves (with Marshall and Arizona helping a little) but scheduling such patsies. Maybe this will finally be the wake-up call (as well as the letter writing campaign) to FORCE the A.D.'s office to schedule one DEFINITELY TOUGH game every year. So what if we lose a little money. We'll be paying enough through the Tiger Vision Plan to make up for any loss in revenue every other year. And, OBTW, Skip - build in a $3 million buyout once we make a visit to a top team. Let the team know that we'll be happy to host first and build in the same buyout. BUT, don't let any team pull a Virginia Tech EVER AGAIN.
Is it LSU's fault that Marshall backed out of a game? Is it LSU's fault that Arizona's football program dropped from a top 10 team at the time the game was scheduled to the sorry state they are in today? If you favor keeping the BCS the you must be in favor or LSU getting screwed by factors beyond their control. A PLAYOFF IS THE ONLY FAIR WAY TO SETTLE IT ON THE FIELD! Do you really believe that USC is a better team than LSU? Out of conferences games aside what it tougher? Winning in the SEC or winning in the PAC 10? Until next weeks USC-Arizona game LSU and USC as of now have only one common opponent - Auburn. USC caught an overhyped Auburn team in the first game of the season and dominated them with their defense while their offense put enough points on the board to give them a convincing win. LSU played an Auburn team that was starting to realize their potential and had gotten on a roll. LSU dominated Auburn on both sides of the ball and after the first quarter there was no question who the winner would be. USC's only loss is to unrated Cal. LSU's only loss is to 17th rated Florida. Don't get me wrong. USC is a very good football team but have they earned the right to be rated higher than LSU and be given a free pass to the NCG? Hell No! The only thing that USC has earned is the right to be one of the higher seeded teams in a playoff if there was a playoff.
how about this... just have the conference champions of each BCS conference enter a playoff? im sure thats been thought of before..but it just crossed my mind. i just thought of this 30 seconds ago so it will be flawed a bit...but for traditional reasons...the winner of the pac-10 and big 10 could play in the rose, SEC could still have the sugar...etc i think this would lead to better conferences and also everybody with a conference championship game.
Not sure about that one. What about a team that finishes with one loss and misses out on the conference championship game? Ask Tennessee if that would be fair. lol I still say the top 16 should play it out.
my opinion is this... if you dont even win your conference....then you do not deserve to be playing for the national title (like nebraska a few years ago). we were a better team than ut when we played them again. that would make the conference championship games HUGE
