2009 NCAA football thread!!

[transplant99]

Yep....but again the system is just fine as it is. Not.

Really my biggest beef is that so much hinges on pre-season rankings. Its absolutely ludicrous to help predetermine a NC game with who is decided to be good before a single flippin snap is taken by anyone.


Boise started 17th this year IIRC...and that was just too much ground to make up. Had they started in the top 10, certainly a spot they deserve in hindsight, they likely would of had a very good case for playing in the NC game...but even then one of Bama and Texas would then be left out. the whole thing is so freaking goofy, and those who support the current system really need to think about such a scenario. Auburn goes 13-0, doesnt get a sniff of the NC. BSU goes 14-0...same deal.

It really is too bad. And again its the only major sport, pro or amateur, that is unable to figure out a PO system. Wierd, when even the same group in charge has a football playoff system they run elsewhere!!

I will be watching tonight however, as i love the game...even though these particular two teams really dont catch my fancy so much.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Tranny, they will likely start in the top 10 next season...they are losing only 1 starter to graduation. Should they somehow end up as an afterthought yet again I'll cry conspiracy.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Really?



Maybe i am mis-interpreting. I dont believe so however.

I suspect then that you care not if the Flames finish 8th or 3rd, as home ice shouldnt matter but moreso some "favorable match up" is more important?

You clearly are. I asked a question - I didn't make a statement.

By favorable match-up I include home-field advantage as a part of that. Just look at the Cardinals last season (and this is coming from a Card fan).

In the first round, we got home-field advantage against a Falcon team that was 2 games better in the regular season (11-5 vs. 9-7). In a game that the Cards ended up winning by one score, that home field advantage was huge. Then, with the help of some upsets, we eventually get to play the Eagles at home in spite of the fact that they had a better regular season record as well. The Cards won that game by less than a TD. Put either or both of those games on the road (as they should have been based on records) and the Cards are not a Super Bowl team. That's the issue with playoffs - seeding and luck play just as much a factor in deciding the two best teams as do the teams themselves.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Joe Paterno wants a playoff

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=4768822

Mack Brown wants a playoff

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/colle...eary-of-it-all

Pete Carroll wants a playoff

http://www.collegenews.com/index.php...playoffs_0751/

Steve Spurrier is in favor of a playoff format.



http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/tag/steve-spurrier/

Bob Stoops in favor of a playoff.



http://www.newsok.com/article/332292...m_click=search

And on and on it goes.

If the guys at the top of where football games/champions are decidedly for a playoff, then doesnt it stand to reason it really should be something that happens?

I realize these guys arent the ones to make the decisions, but they certainly are a lot more qualified than Chancellor X from school anonamous is.

The only guy i looked up that is against it is Nick Saban. Im sure there are others but these guys are the ones who are there year after year.

Im sure if we checked with Peterson on Boise or Patterson in TCU or Mendenhall at BYU, they would also all favor a playoff system.

I just do not understand why any fans of the game would be opposed, i get why the moneymen are against it, but most everyone actually associated with the game on the field wants one as it, again, is the only major sport in North America that doesnt have one...and that is just plain goofy no matter what.

Of course the coaches want a playoff.

It gives them the chance to play for a title in a year where they finish a mediocre 9-3 or even 8-4. Furthermore, when a playoff system is in place the focus of expectations hinges on whether you made the playoffs, not winning a title. Sure, coaches at major programs still need to win titles to keep their jobs, but a well-timed playoff run in a down year will give them another chance.

Here's an article from a retired AD:
http://www.aikenstandard.com/localsp...h-henry-column

I don't agree with all of it, but lots of what he says is very interesting and hasn't been brought up by anyone before that I've seen (anywhere).

For one thing, NCAA players are 80% OPPOSED to a playoff. One other nice point is that the 1-AA playoffs you love so much and have said many times that should be ported over to 1-A actually loses money. I thought it was the perfect system - guess not.

Most fans opposed to a playoff are of the opinion that it will devalue the regular season too much to be worth it. There would be absolutely no reason to play anyone out of conference and a loss simply doesn't mean as much as it does now.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by ricoFlame

I fully agree, and i love how on the pre AND post game show for the Fiesta Bowl, they discussed how Boise shouldn't get a share of the NC because of their strength of schedule, and then discussed how none of the big programs will schedule them out of fear of a tough game/loss...hmmmmmmmm, interesting. As far as I'm concerned, with this system, BSU deserves at least a share of the "national championship"

Boise St. has nothing to complain about. They've been going around to big programs and demanding $1.2M or $1.3M dollars to play a road game. How many programs are going to cough up that kind of jack (when a cupcake costs them around $0.5M) especially considering what a threat Boise St. is?

If Boise St. really wanted those games they'd play them for the going rate for mid-majors.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Tranny, they will likely start in the top 10 next season...they are losing only 1 starter to graduation. Should they somehow end up as an afterthought yet again I'll cry conspiracy.

After two BCS bowl wins and only 1 loss in 4 years Boise St. is starting to build that long-term resume that the teams they get passed up for have.

I could easily see them getting their shot in the next couple seasons.

[nik-]

Well that started about as bad as possible.

[JayP]

I think we can all agree that fake was a terrible decision.

4th and 23 too. Wow.

[nik-]

Bad decision and that thing hung up there for what seemed like an eternity.

[JayP]

McCoy hurt.

Hopefully he's able to return or this game is a snoozer.

[nik-]

for the love of god

[rubecube]

Alabama needs to wake the hell up.

[JayP]

Bama is incredibly lucky.

This game could easily be 14-0 with McCoy in there.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by JayP

Bama is incredibly lucky.

This game could easily be 14-0 with McCoy in there.

You know what sucks? Bama could play lights out the rest of the way, but they won't get any credit because McCoy got hurt.

And as I write this it looks like Texas might be going to their 3rd stringer.

[nik-]

Late comment. That Ingram touchdown seemed pretty effortless even though Texas stacked the line.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by rubecube

You know what sucks? Bama could play lights out the rest of the way, but they won't get any credit because McCoy got hurt.

And as I write this it looks like Texas might be going to their 3rd stringer.

And rightfully so. Texas without McCoy isn't exactly a championship team. That doesn't take anything away from Bama - they're a great team, but beating Texas without McCoy doesn't tell us anything about them we didn't know last week.

What really sucks is that what looked to be a very good championship game is now a rout due to a freak injury.

[JayP]

Malcolm Williams can't drop that with a freshman in at QB.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by JayP

And rightfully so. Texas without McCoy isn't exactly a championship team. That doesn't take anything away from Bama - they're a great team, but beating Texas without McCoy doesn't tell us anything about them we didn't know last week.

What really sucks is that what looked to be a very good championship game is now a rout due to a freak injury.

I still think Bama would have won, but it does take away from the shine of the game. McCoy being out doesn't excuse Texas' defense if Bama puts up a ton of points.

[rubecube]

On the plus side, I have $50 on Bama to cover the spread.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by JayP

And rightfully so. Texas without McCoy isn't exactly a championship team. That doesn't take anything away from Bama - they're a great team, but beating Texas without McCoy doesn't tell us anything about them we didn't know last week.

What really sucks is that what looked to be a very good championship game is now a rout due to a freak injury.

I don't think Texas with McCoy automatically wins the game. Texas' defense can't stop anybody.