Congress to end BCS?

[fieldgeneral 10]

Funny you mention Oklahoma and TT, it had more viewers than ANY football game this year in the NFL last I checked according to the Nielsen ratings.

 

As for your underdog statements, in a 8 game playoff, only 6 underdog games could occur in the playoffs. (4v5 is not one IMO).

 

In my system, every game still matters, and the underdog can win at any time and create havoc. Iowa, Colorado, Appy St., Ol Miss, Pitt, Arkansas, all did it and the list goes on. Ill take a season where every game matters compared to when a loss isnt that bad, and you can sit players. With a playoff, why even have a conference championship? thats another question you have to ask yourself, and another close game. We wouldnt have seen Bama UF if it wasnt for that.

 

I figure you might come back and say, look at March Madness! Its the greatest tournament in the world! And your right it is. BUT, college football has the greatest regular season in the world. The only "problem" is the fact that somefan bases feel like they get snubbed every year so they immediately hate the BCS.

 

Under my system, the 4 best teams settle it out on the field, while allowing every game to still matter. You can not beat that.

 

There will be controversy in some fashion , you're right. However, they aren't always the UF Fl game, they too often turn out like TT and OU, while it was widely watched, it left a lot of people unsatisfied. All conference champs have to make it in and then take the next best however many to fill the field. Some fan bases have a right, look at Utah and Boise. They have a valid argument. If put in a field of 16 or whatever, they can prove or go home. Look at the JMU / Montana game. If it were in a system such as the BCS, JMU plays for the championship and Montana goes and plays in the douche bag bowl. Montana proved to be the better team, maybe not the whole season but at this point in time. Hell that is part of sports...on any given night, any given field.... The four "best" teams aren't always 1-4 ranked. #5 could have one loss as well as 4, just not the "votes." All games still matter, get the highest seed and you play the lowest rank team and have home field adv. Give them a chance to settle it on the field. We'll never agree on this, but I watched JMU almost come back in a great game. I saw the underdog win. We can watch it again tomorrow with the Spiders of Richmond. It's just more entertaining in my opinion.

[Guest BEAVERTAIL]

The question you have to ask yourself, do you want to ruin college football and their amazing regular season, to have what might be 2-3 upsets.

 

I dont want that. College football is the most watched sport for a reason, and people tend to forget that.

 

Every game matters.

[fieldgeneral 10]

The question you have to ask yourself, do you want to ruin college football and their amazing regular season, to have what might be 2-3 upsets.

 

I dont want that. College football is the most watched sport for a reason, and people tend to forget that.

 

Every game matters.

 

.....and that is your opinion. I don't think that it ruins any game or regular season. You have to almost win out your conference games in order to be the conference rep. The OOC wouldn't mean as much this is true, but they would be downsized anyway if we only played 10ish before playoffs. It wouldn't ruin anything in my eyes. Once again, we won't agree on this, just two different opinions.

[fieldgeneral 10]

Playoff for college’s top division would make sense, money

 

Commentary

 

By BRIAN WOODSON

Bluefield Daily Telegraph

 

From the late stages of August to the opening week of December, college football provides the most exciting three-plus months in all of sports.

 

From the anti-climatic BCS selection show to the final whistle of the so-called national championship game, the excitement of the college football season turns into a month (or longer) of ho-hum matchups, all culminating with the only game that really seems to matter.

 

It is time for a change, and fortunately our president-elect agrees. So does most anyone who isn’t affiliated with our college football bowl system.

 

There was a time when bowl games meant something. They were a reward for a great season, and only the best teams earned that distinction.

 

We now have 34 bowl games, which includes 68 teams. There are 119 Division I teams. That means just 51 schools didn’t earn a bowl bid. Too bad. There should be other teams on the sidelines joining the likes of Michigan, Auburn, Tennessee, Texas A&M and Virginia, schools that didn’t qualify for the postseason.

 

Thank goodness there aren’t two more games. The only eligible schools not to get bowl bids were Louisiana-Lafayette, San Jose State, Bowling Green and Arkansas State. At least Lafayette would have brought with it the Rajun’ Cajuns, one of the great nicknames in all of sports.

 

How watered down is the bowl system? The ACC was the worst of the BCS conferences this season, and it placed 10 teams in the postseason, including one six-loss team and four five-loss squads. Only Virginia and Duke were left out.

 

Bowl games used to be a reward for a special season. Now it’s a reward for six wins and a .500 record. Nine schools with 6-6 records are bowling, including Florida Atlantic, Northern Illinois, Colorado State and even Notre Dame.

 

Do these teams really deserve to continue playing? Is really there excitement for an Independence Bowl that will feature Louisiana Tech and Northern Illinois, a matchup made possible when the SEC didn’t have enough teams qualify for the postseason.

 

There’s also 17 teams still playing that compiled 7-5 records, while Hawaii finished with a 7-6 mark. Thirteen teams with eight wins are also bowling, but at least they only have four defeats, except for Buffalo, which has five.

 

Sure, all these games count to the teams that will play in them and their fans, many of whom will flock to wherever their favorite school lands. Of course, at this time next year, good luck finding anyone who remembers who won this month’s Cotton Bowl.

 

That’s not the issue with the BCS. Let the schools with the mediocre records have their bowl games, but give the other games a chance to mean something.

 

Who is to say that Florida and Oklahoma are the best teams in the land right now? There are slew of one-win teams that might beg to differ, including Texas, Alabama, Southern California, Texas Tech and Penn State. What about Cinderella? It works in basketball. Utah and Boise are undefeated, Ball State played one bad game. Give them a chance.

 

What about some of the two-loss teams? LSU won the BCS title last season with two defeats. Brigham Young, Texas Christian, Cincinnati and Ohio State only have two losses right now. Of course, in the Buckeyes’ case, that’s a good thing for all of us.

 

Every year it’s the same thing. There are a collection of teams near the top, and we let computers decide who the best two teams are. It’s happened again.

 

Apparently, Oklahoma is better than Texas even though the Longhorns beat the Sooners on the field in rather convincing fashion. Call that an oversight by the Big 12 to let the BCS rankings decide a divisional tie-breaker.

 

In most every other sport under the sun, there are playoffs. There is one in college football at every level, but the top. We’ve all heard the excuses, missed class time, difficulty of travel for fans and the length of the season.

 

Apparently, that hasn’t been a problem for Richmond and James Madison, a pair of Virginia schools that advanced to the Division I-AA (or whatever it is called now) semifinals.

 

It all comes down to — as with everything else — money. The schools don’t want to lose the money that’s thrown at them by these games.

 

Well, a playoff could make them even more money. The system is in place. An eight-team playoff would include the six conference winners and two at-large teams, exactly like it’s done now. Seed the teams 1-through-8 and let’s play ball.

 

True, someone will get left out, but that’s part of our ESPN-ruled world. Just ask Graham Harrell, who wasn’t invited to the Heisman Trophy ceremonies, like it’s his fault the Texas Tech defense allowed 65 points to Oklahoma. Or, ask any bubble team that doesn’t get invited to the NCAA Tournament in March.

 

Make the four major bowls the opening round of an eight-team playoff. The semifinals and a ‘real’ national title game would follow over the next two weeks. Done.

 

True, it would push the season further into January, put college football in competition with the NFL playoffs, and might make the big bowls swoon because their games might not have the same influence they once had. How is that different from what we have now?

 

How about cutting back on the regular season, and do we really need a month between games for Florida and Oklahoma? Two weeks between games for the Super Bowl is bad enough. We get four weeks (or longer) in college football.

 

Changes can and should be made. Will it happen? Well, Barack Obama has said he would ‘throw his weight’ around on the issue.

 

Combine Obama’s influence with ESPN’s money — they will control the BCS starting in 2011 — and it just might happen. After all, what television wants, they usually get.

 

Brian Woodson is sports editor of the Bluefield Daily Telegraph. Contact him at bwoodson @ bdtonline.com.

[Guest BEAVERTAIL]

Well said, Sir. You took the words right out of my mouth.

 

Someone else thinks my idea is cool...

[fieldgeneral 10]

Someone else thinks my idea is cool...

 

At least mine makes his living writing about sports. Or I could say that at least the President elect agrees with me. No offense to Money, but I'm sure he's as amature as I.

[hokie07 11]

At least mine makes his living writing about sports. Or I could say that at least the President elect agrees with me. No offense to Money, but I'm sure he's as amature as I.

 

I might make a bet that you could possibly know more about football than both Barack Obama and Brian Woodson. Just because they have "higher credentials" doesn't mean their arguments are necessarily right or wrong.

[fieldgeneral 10]

I might make a bet that you could possibly know more about football than both Barack Obama and Brian Woodson. Just because they have "higher credentials" doesn't mean their arguments are necessarily right or wrong.

 

 

http://www.swvasports.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13952

 

I'm sure that you don't know either of them personally so it's possible they know a little bit of somethings. Anyway, you don't want it, and several others do. I realize that it's a split topic, but It's just our opinion.

[hokie07 11]

http://www.swvasports.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13952

 

I'm sure that you don't know either of them personally so it's possible they know a little bit of somethings. Anyway, you don't want it, and several others do. I realize that it's a split topic, but It's just our opinion.

 

I never said I did or didn't want a playoff. If your poll isn't anonymous then take a look at it and you will find my name on neither side of the battle. All I'm saying is that just because the president-elect and a local newspaper writer want it doesn't mean it is the best thing OR the worst thing. Look at Skip Bayless on ESPN; he talks about sports for a living and he is an idiot. If you took his word to the grave then you would think Lebron James is one of the worst basketball players to ever play the game. Plus, I think Obama has a few things that should top his priority list before he thinks about intervening with the BCS.

 

But to make you happy, I'll give you my opinion so you don't have to assume anything else. I think a college football playoff would be great for the sport, but I think it should be done for the right reasons (i.e. excitement, an extra home game or two, etc.). Right now it doesn't go any deeper than a bunch of people whining and pleading their case because they aren't getting a "fair" shot. If it is because of the latter reason then I want no part in it at all.

Edited December 15, 2008 by hokie07

[parsons 178]

[

Edited December 15, 2008 by parsons

[fieldgeneral 10]

I never said I did or didn't want a playoff. If your poll isn't anonymous then take a look at it and you will find my name on neither side of the battle. All I'm saying is that just because the president-elect and a local newspaper writer want it doesn't mean it is the best thing OR the worst thing. Look at Skip Bayless on ESPN; he talks about sports for a living and he is an idiot. If you took his word to the grave then you would think Lebron James is one of the worst basketball players to ever play the game. Plus, I think Obama has a few things that should top his priority list before he thinks about intervening with the BCS.

 

But to make you happy, I'll give you my opinion so you don't have to assume anything else. I think a college football playoff would be great for the sport, but I think it should be done for the right reasons (i.e. excitement, an extra home game or two, etc.). Right now it doesn't go any deeper than a bunch of people whining and pleading their case because they aren't getting a "fair" shot. If it is because of the latter reason then I want no part in it at all.

 

We agree on all then. I think Bayless should be gagged and put in a cave somewhere. On the other hand using sports writers stories is a staple around here for showcasing your point or proving it or whatever. Sure Obama has other things to tend to, but just because we've had to sit around 8 years with an idiot in office doesn't mean Obama can't multi task. I too am tired of the whiners, but Boise and Utah have reason to complain, they are undefeated, while I agree their schedules aren't great and several 2-4 loss teams could beat them, who are we or anyone to say they shouldn't get the chance to prove it. There will be all sorts of reason to or not to, if it's done right, then it will be the best thing to happen since cracker jacks.

[Guest BEAVERTAIL]

Playoff for college’s top division would make sense, money

 

Commentary

 

By BRIAN WOODSON

Bluefield Daily Telegraph

 

From the late stages of August to the opening week of December, college football provides the most exciting three-plus months in all of sports.

 

From the anti-climatic BCS selection show to the final whistle of the so-called national championship game, the excitement of the college football season turns into a month (or longer) of ho-hum matchups, all culminating with the only game that really seems to matter.

 

It is time for a change, and fortunately our president-elect agrees. So does most anyone who isn’t affiliated with our college football bowl system.

 

Not me. And like Hokie07 said, I guarantee Obama doesnt spend his saturdays watching football.

 

There was a time when bowl games meant something. They were a reward for a great season, and only the best teams earned that distinction.

 

He is right, there are too many bowl games. But there is also a reason to why lower bowl games dont seem as important, WVU isnt in them any more. A few years back WVU would struggle to make a bowl, so there was a place for them in this area. Now, we dont have that with WVU excelling.

 

How watered down is the bowl system? The ACC was the worst of the BCS conferences this season, and it placed 10 teams in the postseason, including one six-loss team and four five-loss squads. Only Virginia and Duke were left out.

 

Ahh, here Mr. Woodson uses the ACC as a whipping boy to try and get WVU fans to follow his idea. The ACC places more top teams in the BCS than the BE, they have a better combined record, and UNC has as many wins against the BE as the entire BE has against the ACC.

 

Who is to say that Florida and Oklahoma are the best teams in the land right now? There are slew of one-win teams that might beg to differ, including Texas, Alabama, Southern California, Texas Tech and Penn State. What about Cinderella? It works in basketball. Utah and Boise are undefeated, Ball State played one bad game. Give them a chance.

 

First off, Ball St played one good team all season. Secondly, you cant compare apples and oranges. Basketball and football are two different beasts. Cinderella? You propose a 8 team playoff, with the 6 conference champions and 2 at large teams. Where would the Cinderellas come from? This year Texas and Bama would have been the at large's, no Cinderella there.

 

What about some of the two-loss teams? LSU won the BCS title last season with two defeats. Brigham Young, Texas Christian, Cincinnati and Ohio State only have two losses right now. Of course, in the Buckeyes’ case, that’s a good thing for all of us.

 

Anybody think any of those teams are worthy to be a National Champion? I didnt think so. Add in teams with 3 & 4 losses, and you have a bunch of teams that dont deserve it. It also takes away from the every game matters rule.

 

Every year it’s the same thing. There are a collection of teams near the top, and we let computers decide who the best two teams are. It’s happened again.

 

Actually its not every year. If you did your research, the majority of time in the BCS we have 2 undefeateds, only recently the tide has changed. And if you knew anything about college football, you would know that before the BCS, at one point 1v2 played 8 times out of 56. The BCS has created 1v2 every year... Sounds like a good system to me.

 

In most every other sport under the sun, there are playoffs. There is one in college football at every level, but the top. We’ve all heard the excuses, missed class time, difficulty of travel for fans and the length of the season.

 

And in every other sport in the sun the regular season is almost meaningless when compared to the college football regular season. No one has the excitement as they do. If you are a fan of a certain team, you watch them and them only. Its been proven. The SEC signed a lucrative contract with CBS for a reason, people love it.

 

As for those reasons, think about this. Your "Cinderella" this year is Ball St, even though they wont make it in with this system, lets say they do. They travel to Florida and upset them, then they travel to play USC. Now that small school has to make travel arrangements for 100+ people, get a plane, get hotel rooms, in just a few days. They would lose money. If any of you have tried to buy a plane ticket a few days in advance you would know what i am talking about.

 

I like the fact that he didnt even comment on the fact, nor dispute the regular season. Few people realize the greatness of it, and think, duh of course a playoff would work and be better for college football when actually college football is made great because of the regular season.

 

By him not mentioning that fact, it pretty much proves that he did not consider it, as well as many other people who argue for college football.

 

Apparently, that hasn’t been a problem for Richmond and James Madison, a pair of Virginia schools that advanced to the Division I-AA (or whatever it is called now) semifinals.

 

You would think that these playoffs dont have flaws, but they do. Carson Newman last year lost one game, were ranked in the top 5 all season, and DID NOT make the playoffs. Hmmm... seems like every game matters in that division as well which makes it work well. I proposed a playoff offering up a system where every game still matters, but it wasnt good enough. Obviously its good enough for DII.

 

Well, a playoff could make them even more money. The system is in place. An eight-team playoff would include the six conference winners and two at-large teams, exactly like it’s done now. Seed the teams 1-through-8 and let’s play ball.

 

And how would they do that? He fails to mention that at all.

 

Make the four major bowls the opening round of an eight-team playoff. The semifinals and a ‘real’ national title game would follow over the next two weeks. Done.

 

True, it would push the season further into January, put college football in competition with the NFL playoffs, and might make the big bowls swoon because their games might not have the same influence they once had. How is that different from what we have now?

 

What do you guys think about during the holidays? Bowl games. End them Jan. 8th. Semifinals of the 4 team playoff on New Years day. Gives them a week between, and ends earlier than they did before. Isnt my system great?

 

How about cutting back on the regular season, and do we really need a month between games for Florida and Oklahoma? Two weeks between games for the Super Bowl is bad enough. We get four weeks (or longer) in college football.

 

My system solves this. Saying the season ends around the 10th, you get 3 weeks. You have to lose one because of exams, usually the 2nd or 3rd week of Dec, plus with the 3 weeks you can give the kids a few days off to go home for Xmas. I dont see anything wrong with that.

 

Changes can and should be made. Will it happen? Well, Barack Obama has said he would ‘throw his weight’ around on the issue.

 

Combine Obama’s influence with ESPN’s money — they will control the BCS starting in 2011 — and it just might happen. After all, what television wants, they usually get.

 

Barack Obama needs to be working on the corrupt CEO's and labor Unions in Detroit and his boy the Govenor of Illnois. Not the BCS. Rediculous argument.

Edited December 15, 2008 by BEAVERTAIL

[fieldgeneral 10]

Not me. And like Hokie07 said, I guarantee Obama doesnt spend his saturdays watching football.

 

 

 

He is right, there are too many bowl games. But there is also a reason to why lower bowl games dont seem as important, WVU isnt in them any more. A few years back WVU would struggle to make a bowl, so there was a place for them in this area. Now, we dont have that with WVU excelling.

 

 

 

Ahh, here Mr. Woodson uses the ACC as a whipping boy to try and get WVU fans to follow his idea. The ACC places more top teams in the BCS than the BE, they have a better combined record, and UNC has as many wins against the BE as the entire BE has against the ACC.

 

 

 

First off, Ball St played one good team all season. Secondly, you cant compare apples and oranges. Basketball and football are two different beasts. Cinderella? You propose a 8 team playoff, with the 6 conference champions and 2 at large teams. Where would the Cinderellas come from? This year Texas and Bama would have been the at large's, no Cinderella there.

 

 

 

Anybody think any of those teams are worthy to be a National Champion? I didnt think so. Add in teams with 3 & 4 losses, and you have a bunch of teams that dont deserve it. It also takes away from the every game matters rule.

 

 

 

Actually its not every year. If you did your research, the majority of time in the BCS we have 2 undefeateds, only recently the tide has changed. And if you knew anything about college football, you would know that before the BCS, at one point 1v2 played 8 times out of 56. The BCS has created 1v2 every year... Sounds like a good system to me.

 

 

 

And in every other sport in the sun the regular season is almost meaningless when compared to the college football regular season. No one has the excitement as they do. If you are a fan of a certain team, you watch them and them only. Its been proven. The SEC signed a lucrative contract with CBS for a reason, people love it.

 

As for those reasons, think about this. Your "Cinderella" this year is Ball St, even though they wont make it in with this system, lets say they do. They travel to Florida and upset them, then they travel to play USC. Now that small school has to make travel arrangements for 100+ people, get a plane, get hotel rooms, in just a few days. They would lose money. If any of you have tried to buy a plane ticket a few days in advance you would know what i am talking about.

 

I like the fact that he didnt even comment on the fact, nor dispute the regular season. Few people realize the greatness of it, and think, duh of course a playoff would work and be better for college football when actually college football is made great because of the regular season.

 

By him not mentioning that fact, it pretty much proves that he did not consider it, as well as many other people who argue for college football.

 

 

 

You would think that these playoffs dont have flaws, but they do. Carson Newman last year lost one game, were ranked in the top 5 all season, and DID NOT make the playoffs. Hmmm... seems like every game matters in that division as well which makes it work well. I proposed a playoff offering up a system where every game still matters, but it wasnt good enough. Obviously its good enough for DII.

 

 

 

And how would they do that? He fails to mention that at all.

 

 

 

What do you guys think about during the holidays? Bowl games. End them Jan. 8th. Semifinals of the 4 team playoff on New Years day. Gives them a week between, and ends earlier than they did before. Isnt my system great?

 

 

 

My system solves this. Saying the season ends around the 10th, you get 3 weeks. You have to lose one because of exams, usually the 2nd or 3rd week of Dec, plus with the 3 weeks you can give the kids a few days off to go home for Xmas. I dont see anything wrong with that.

 

 

 

Barack Obama needs to be working on the corrupt CEO's and labor Unions in Detroit and his boy the Govenor of Illnois. Not the BCS. Rediculous argument.

 

 

Well while I am not going to disect every comment you made or Mr. Woodson's, I will say several people have ideas and issues on this topic, while I'm not going to make this an ACC vs. BE thing, I could ask how many BCS games has the ACC won recently especially since becoming a "super" conference? Anyway, I think saying the doofus is Barack's boy is a little ridiculous. You McCain people are easy to find. jk

[Guest BEAVERTAIL]

Well while I am not going to disect every comment you made or Mr. Woodson's, I will say several people have ideas and issues on this topic, while I'm not going to make this an ACC vs. BE thing, I could ask how many BCS games has the ACC won recently especially since becoming a "super" conference? Anyway, I think saying the doofus is Barack's boy is a little ridiculous. You McCain people are easy to find. jk

 

I love it. Anytime you are presented with any information you repond with stats that are not relevant.

 

If you can tell me how the ACC's record in the BCS, in the past, reflects how they are the worst team THIS year ill admit I was wrong. But you cant do that, cause it has nothing to do with it.

 

Not only does that stat reflect less than 10% of all bowl games the ACC was in, once again it was years past, not this years.

 

As for Obama, i merely called him his boy because they are both from Chicago, but yo ucan see they def were friends at one time, this is undeniable...

 

From CBSNEWS... http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/12/10/politics/politico/main4661816.shtml?source=mostpop_story

 

Obama endorsed Blagojevich in his two gubernatorial runs and was among his key advisors during his first bid, in 2002.

 

During the governor’s reelection campaign in 2006 - with press reports swirling about a grand jury investigation into Blagojevich’s alleged jobs-for-contributions scheme - Obama praised the governor as a leader “who has delivered consistently on behalf of the people of Illinois.â€

[Deleted Account 5,203]

To be fair, the BCS represents about 12.5% of the bowl games the ACC is in, given that the ACC averages 8 bowl-eligible teams. I'm not kidding. But regardless, if we had people like BTail working at the BDT, I might actually not line the bottom of the birdcage with it.