That post you referenced was several weeks old. 'Bama should be no lower than 4th or 5th. Solid team. :crystal::geaux::crystal::geaux::crystal:
How is this for 2 cents? Quoting islstl... If you can't get into the top 4 of the BCS at season's end, then you shouldn't complain. A nonBCS team could go undefeated, beat the few BCS teams it could fit on its schedule, and not make the top 4. It is mathematically possible for each BCS conference to have an undefeated team. Four would not accomodate them all. But for someone like Texas to be snubbed this season, as it appears will happen, that just isn't fair. Conferences should be free to choose the team that represents them in a playoff. The Big 12 chooses to hold a conference championship game. Texas did not make the championship game. I don't have a problem with Texas being left out. Quoting LSUFanZone... If your conference doesn't have a conference championship then you don't get BCS bowl berths. Let the major conference champions play each other in the playoffs... I don't see why conferences HAVE to hold a championship. If the Big 10 doesn't want a championship, so be it. I say allow the Big 10 to choose a champion as they see fit. They won't get the BCS boost that conferences with championship games get. I also don't think simply winning a conference championship should guarantee inclusion in a playoff. I think keeping the playoff as small as possible is good for college football, and by not simply allowing conference champions in, the issue of exclusivity is somewhat answered. I see the need for making a maximum rating for inclusion. I still believe conference champions should get precedence, but a champion that is poorly rated doesn't belong, in my view. I do realize that may be a problem when trying to get the BCS conferences to sign on to a playoff, and that may be a point to compromise, but I believe it should be fought for. Quoting clair... I always dreamed that we could push college football's start back a little bit and then have an 8-team playoff that would coincide with the Superbowl. I don't like the sound of that. Tradition, college football's baby, should not be tossed out with the bathwater. People railing against a playoff for academic reasons wouldn't like this much, either. Quoting Bengal Buddy... There is no way there would be a conference championship if there is a playoff system. That would put the season into the next semester and college presidents will not allow that. If there is going to be a playoff system, the conference championships will have to go. I don't think so. I can see the two coexisting just fine. Quoting islstl... I say you use the 4 BCS bowls for the semi's. Then use 2 neutral sites that rotate on an annual basis for the semi-finals. Then use one of the BCS bowls for the NC, as we do with the plus 1 now. That would require two fan bases to travel to three rounds of neutral site games. I'd prefer to see a quarter-final of home games hosted by the higher rated team, a semi-final using two of the three BCS bowls, a final using one of the BCS bowls, and the fourth BCS bowl hosting a non-playoff secondary bowl game, with the BCS bowls rotating similar to the way they rotate now. Quoting Hawker45... I... believe all the BCS conferences should have 12 teams/two divisions, even if it causes realignment of current leagues. Only their champion should get into the playoff, no second teams from the same conference. I agree with most of what you said, but I don't see the need for realigning conferences or forcing every conference to hold a championship game. I agree that one team per conference should make a playoff, but I don't necessarily believe it should be the conference champion. A conference champion could have backed into the conference championship game and lucked into the win, all the while having a highly rated team that just didn't make the conference championship game. While winning a conference championship is a regional accomplishment, it doesn't necessarily hold national implications. If a conference's champion is rated significantly lower than another team in its conference, I can see a strong case for the higher rated team being invited to the playoff. Quoting LSUFanZone... Keep the regualr season the way it, conference championships and bowl games. Then after the bowl games are played take the top 8 teams from the final BCS poll. Talk about extending the college football season. I think simply having a playoff after the conference championship games are complete is a more direct and reasonable choice. Quoting LaSalleAve... If the winner of said conference is not ranked in the top 10, that conference winner will be replaced with an At Large. Sounds good, but I'd add... will be replaced with an at large whose conference is not already represented in the playoff unless no other conference is represented. I'd also consider either giving nonBCS teams a lower threshold or simply lowering the threshold from 10 to something like 15 to give nonBCS teams a better chance at making the playoff. And I don't really like that you'd use the BCS bowls as the quarterfinals. You could possibly have #1 vs #2 and #9 vs #10 in the semi-final round and then have a championship game of #8 vs #10. A playoff should be better arranged than that. Quoting LSU Engineer... Why can't we just do the 16 team playoff like the NCAA does at every other level. A large playoff would reduce the importance of the regular season. There is also a bigger gap in 1a football from #1 to #120 (I believe we're at 120 with W Kentucky, right?). A large playoff would also take away from the importance of the bowls. Quoting Bandit88... If you have a playoff, then the fight is over whether there needs to be uniformity in terms of conference champ games. And if that happens, then what if all the conference champs are 12-1? How come the #4 guy gets a shot, but #5 doesn't? More whining. There will always be whining and second guessing. But it is always better to have teams that really don't belong in a national championship playoff arguing rather than teams that definitely do belong. I don't see a reason to demand uniformity in conference championship games. I do see the need for more than a four team playoff, and at the same time 8 teams is almost always too much. I think a six team playoff would be more ideal, with the most ideal playoff being a flexible 2-8 team playoff. That would be a hard sell, but I think it is a very defendable option.
I like this statement. Those who are griping about Texas not making the championship have no beef against the BCS. The Big 12 maybe made a mistake in choosing their representative. Under the precedent recently that the best two teams must/should be conference champions, the BCS got it EXACTLY right this year.
I don't understand why the college presidents wouldn't allow a longer football season. All that TV and gameday revenue is out there. Do they really care about how this affects the students. If they did there'd be more than feigned concern about graduation rates. Players that were recruited to play ball and had career ending injuries or just weren't good enough to keep their athletic scholarships would still be allowed to stay in school on some type of academic waiver.
I'm sure, to some degree, they care about how it affects students. But I imagine there are other factors that are more controlling.
I think they do too. I havent been to campus in years. I hear there's a good academic center for athletes. But overall these athletes are being used by the universities to produce big bucks (in football) because there's no alternative option like the minor leagues (in baseball) or early draft entry (in basketball) for athletes who may not be that interested in academics. I just think someone like DeAngelo Benton should have more options if he's not that interested in academics...and if he really is, LSU should really step up to the plate for players who lose their elegibility or get hurt, etc.
I don't know. They are kind of contradicting themselves if they think that way. Football teams leave on Friday for away games, and are back on Sunday. Baseball teams are gone by Thursday, and are back Sunday... sometimes. If they have an away game on the following Tuesday, then they do not even come back at all. Sometimes those trips last through the entire week. I remember hearing about a baseball team (I think it was posted here, I don't feel like searching for it) that was on the road for two weeks or so. Basketball teams are similar. For the teams that go deep into the tournament, they miss about 80% of classes for over a month. And do you think that the days that they are on campus that they care about school? All parties involved make a LOT of money with the current system. Much more than from March Madness. They are too afraid they will screw things up and lose money.
