2010 NCAA football thread....

[PIMking]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Understandable stance then. I love college basketball, certainly more than college football. I despise the NBA and love the NFL over everything. College basketball is the most pure spectator team sport in North America, IMHO.

I just cant get into the NFL anymore. I use to play 3 separate FF leagues and had sunday ticket you name it. I'm tired of guys like Reavis b*tching about money. Pro sports other than NHL has really taken a huge fall to me.

Now that I'm back in CFB territory nothing matters. It's all about Saturday.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by PIMking

MSU as in Mich State? Or Mississippi State?

College basketball sucks for that reason. Too many games and you can loose a lot and still make it into the dance. Hell you could loose every game besides conference tourny and make the big dance....

The one with multiple Final Fours and National Championships

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

FCS playoffs aren't regionalized to minimize travel. That was my point.

Why do the games have to be at neutral sites?

I know the answer.

Cause bowls are at neutral sites? If you don't have neutral site playoff games than you eliminate the Rose Bowl, Fiesta Bowl etc...

Present to me your playoff format
Would you still use the BCS to seed the teams? etc...
What would be your criteria?

[Montana Moe]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

FCS playoffs aren't regionalized to minimize travel. That was my point.

Why do the games have to be at neutral sites?

I know the answer.

Pairings
[Reference: Championship Structure (page 11) in this handbook and Bylaw 31.3 in the
NCAA Manual.]
All pairings will be made by the Division I football championship committee. The
following principles are applied when pairing teams:
1. The teams awarded the top four seeds are placed in the appropriate positions in the
bracket (Nos. 1 and 4 in the upper half, and Nos. 2 and 3 in the lower half), and will
be paired with teams that are in closest geographic proximity;
2. The remaining teams will be paired according to geographic proximity and placed in
the bracket according to geographic proximity of the four pairings previously placed
in the bracket.
3. Teams from the same conference will not be paired for first-round games;
4. Once the first-round pairings have been determined, there will be no adjustments to
the bracket.

http://web1.ncaa.org/web_files/champ...A_Football.pdf

Of course, that doesn't explain how the University of Montana hosts Texas State, Wofford (SC), McNeese St. (LA), Northwestern St. (LA) x3, Western Illinois, Eastern Illinois, etc. in the past 10 years.

But according to the rulebook, it is a consideration.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by PIMking

Again Liberal Political mindset " Small (or poor) people (bsu) are getting the shaft, So lets give the shaft to everyone else to make it equal."

BTW that cheating ass Bush is having Heisman taken away.

LOL!

How is allowing all to compete equally...giving anyone else "the shaft"?

And yes you nailed me...im pretty liberal minded.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by transplant99

LOL!

How is allowing all to compete equally...giving anyone else "the shaft"?

And yes you nailed me...im pretty liberal minded.

Because they aren't competing equally. BSU has to win 2 competitive games all year to get into the NC game, an SEC or Big Ten team is looking at 4+ difficult games and a grind of a conference season with next to no gimme games. BSU supporters seem to be pretty keen to overlook the fact that their team has months to gameplan for every legit opponent they face, while the rest of the top teams have to battle nearly every week to get a win. Anyone who has ever played or been around the game at an elite level can tell you how much of a difference that makes. Banged up players on a team like OSU can't take time off when Penn State is on saturday followed by Iowa and UM, it's a little different when BSU has that murders row of New Mexico State, Toledo and San Jose State.

And this is coming from someone who has a friend that played at BSU and ahs always been a fan of the program.

[transplant99]

BSU has to win 2 competitive games all year to get into the NC game, an SEC or Big Ten team is looking at 4+ difficult games and a grind of a conference season with next to no gimme games

SEC yes...Big 10?? Not a chance. And again...just because BSU plays in a weak conference, does not equate them to being a weak team.

BSU supporters seem to be pretty keen to overlook the fact that their team has months to gameplan for every legit opponent they face, while the rest of the top teams have to battle nearly every week to get a win.

Are you suggesting that teams that BSU beat in bowl games or even Va Tech the other night didnt have the same amount of time to "gameplan" as BSU did?

Anyone who has ever played or been around the game at an elite level can tell you how much of a difference that makes.

Again...I have no idea what you are arguing here. When BSU beat OK, was OK not allowed to gameplan for the same amount of time roughly? Did Boise complete their schedule a month before the Sooners or something? What about Monday night? Did Va. Tech not have 9 months to gameplan for BSU? Strange strange argument.

Banged up players on a team like OSU can't take time off when Penn State is on saturday followed by Iowa and UM, it's a little different when BSU has that murders row of New Mexico State, Toledo and San Jose State.

So you are saying that the Big 10 is a tougher conference than those that TCU or BSU or Utah play in. OK...no doubt about that. However...not sure what that has to do when applying BSU's success against other BCS teams when those games are played 5-6-7 weeks after the end of the season.

And this is coming from a guy that is in no way a huge fan of BSU specifically, but moreso a huge fan of ridding the college landscape of the most ridiculous "playoff" system in existance.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by transplant99

SEC yes...Big 10?? Not a chance. And again...just because BSU plays in a weak conference, does not equate them to being a weak team.



Are you suggesting that teams that BSU beat in bowl games or even Va Tech the other night didnt have the same amount of time to "gameplan" as BSU did?




Again...I have no idea what you are arguing here. When BSU beat OK, was OK not allowed to gameplan for the same amount of time roughly? Did Boise complete their schedule a month before the Sooners or something? What about Monday night? Did Va. Tech not have 9 months to gameplan for BSU? Strange strange argument.



So you are saying that the Big 10 is a tougher conference than those that TCU or BSU or Utah play in. OK...no doubt about that. However...not sure what that has to do when applying BSU's success against other BCS teams when those games are played 5-6-7 weeks after the end of the season.

And this is coming from a guy that is in no way a huge fan of BSU specifically, but moreso a huge fan of ridding the college landscape of the most ridiculous "playoff" system in existance.

Ugh, not sure iof this is worth it as you seem to have completely missed the point. It's not about what BSU did against VT, or against OU, it's about how easy it is for them to run the table. They have 2 challeneges all season, the rest of the elite teams face challenges nearly every week.

BTW, did you seriously argue in your first point that the Big Ten isn't a grind? Are you on acid?

[transplant99]

Ugh, not sure iof this is worth it as you seem to have completely missed the point. It's not about what BSU did against VT, or against OU, it's about how easy it is for them to run the table. They have 2 challeneges all season, the rest of the elite teams face challenges nearly every week.

Which has what to do with "gameplanning" for their opponents like you suggested?

Originally Posted by valo403

BSU supporters seem to be pretty keen to overlook the fact that their team has months to gameplan for every legit opponent they face

Do their opponents not have all this time to gameplan as well? I seriously have no idea what you are talking about.

BTW, did you seriously argue in your first point that the Big Ten isn't a grind?

No more so than any other BCS conference sans the Big East.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Which has what to do with "gameplanning" for their opponents like you suggested?



Do their opponents not have all this time to gameplan as well? I seriously have no idea what you are talking about.



No more so than any other BCS conference sans the Big East.

Every conversation with you goes like this, it's hilarious really.

My entire point is that BSU can cruise the season with only one or two threats, and yes regardless of the time off the other team has this gives them massive advantages. No wear and tear, no need to to open up the playbook (not an issue for openers), and plenty of time to focus down the road as opposed to facing challenges week in and week out. Gameplanning may have been to narrow of a word, but the gist of my point was obvious. Just like using the SEC and Big Ten as examples of power conferences was obvious.

[GirlySports]

Don't forget injuries. Playing an easy schedule lessens the chance of major injuries.
Oklahoma goes through a tough schedule, gets all bruised up, has a month off and gets to play UTAH? At that point they don't really care anymore as another poster already mentioned.

[transplant99]

Gameplanning may have been to narrow of a word, but the gist of my point was obvious.

No it really wasn't.

What you meant to say is that other conferences are tougher opposition. Well no kidding.

That still doesn't mean that BSU is a weaker team, therefore should not have a chance to play for the NC. Which in a very veiled way is what your argument is.

I couldn't care less what teams have had harder seasons when they have over a month off to face each other in bowl games...that has no bearing on anything actually. So I don't understand what the point is when making an argument that an easier schedule means something when considering planning to play team X. It's really quite simple and obvious.

Again all this is easily settled by a playoff system that would require every team to play the same amount of games in the same amount of time as everyone else in order to get to a NC game. And that is done even after a month long break for all these "power" conferences to get their teams healed up. I know this can happen because every other sport in the western world can do it, the NCAA itself has schools that can do it, and the NCAA has every other sport under its wings doing it.

And yes it is hilarious conversing with you.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by transplant99

No it really wasn't.

What you meant to say is that other conferences are tougher opposition. Well no kidding.

That still doesn't mean that BSU is a weaker team, therefore should not have a chance to play for the NC. Which in a very veiled way is what your argument is.

I couldn't care less what teams have had harder seasons when they have over a month off to face each other in bowl games...that has no bearing on anything actually. So I don't understand what the point is when making an argument that an easier schedule means something when considering planning to play team X. It's really quite simple and obvious.

Again all this is easily settled by a playoff system that would require every team to play the same amount of games in the same amount of time as everyone else in order to get to a NC game. And that is done even after a month long break for all these "power" conferences to get their teams healed up. I know this can happen because every other sport in the western world can do it, the NCAA itself has schools that can do it, and the NCAA has every other sport under its wings doing it.

And yes it is hilarious conversing with you.

But in other leagues the path to playoffs is the same for everyone as the regular season is balanced. Like the Flames and Maple Leafs have equal chance of making the playoffs, or the Cowboys and Steelers have an equal chance. There is no Boise State playing a weak schedule in the NHL.

Thus, BSU's path to a playoff and an 'equal chance' to win a title really isn't equal at all.

When Boise State made the Fiesta Bowl and famously beat Oklahoma this was their schedule to get there.

Sacremento St. (H)
Oregon St. (H)
Wyoming (A)
Hawaii (H)
Utah (A)
Louisiana Tech (H)
New Mexico State (A)
Idaho (A)
Fresno St. (H)
San Diego St. (A)
Utah St. (H)
Nevada (A)

If THIS schedule was good enough to get a Fiesta Bowl spot is certainly would be enough to get playoff spot in a 16 team tournament. Why would BSU need to put an Oregon or a VA Tech on the schedule? They could be a good enough team to run a cupcake schedule every year. Doesn't have to be BSU, it could be whoever runs the table in any easy conference would make the playoffs? If all the little conferences had one team that went undefeated (let's say, BSU, TCU Marshall and Troy ALL went undefeated, would you put them all in the tournament?) That's not fair as teams in the BIG conferences would have to kill themselves to make the playoffs. Would a BSU or TCU or Troy be seeded in a playoff and host an eighth-finals game? Like a 6 versus 11 game? That's even worse.

[valo403]

Excellent quote from the Iowa lineman who got hit by a truck while riding his scooter:

“It’s not like getting hit by a truck really changes me.”

[transplant99]

But in other leagues the path to playoffs is the same for everyone as the regular season is balanced. Like the Flames and Maple Leafs have equal chance of making the playoffs, or the Cowboys and Steelers have an equal chance. There is no Boise State playing a weak schedule in the NHL.

Yes and no. For instance the Red Wings feasted on weaker teams in their division for years. The NHL doesnt have a balanced schedule at all. Neither does the NFL. Just look at the NFC West for proof of that...weak division that will still get a team in the PO's no matter what.

If THIS schedule was good enough to get a Fiesta Bowl spot is certainly would be enough to get playoff spot in a 16 team tournament.

Of course it would. So what though? Those arent the clubs they would be facing in a playoff system. They would still have to face the best of the best in any sort of 8 or 16 team playoff.

Just as an example from last year and using the final AP poll as seedings.. Boise would of had to play Ohio St in its first game. They win that one and they would of had to face the winner of Florida/TCU. etc etc...It can work quite easily.

If all the little conferences had one team that went undefeated (let's say, BSU, TCU Marshall and Troy ALL went undefeated, would you put them all in the tournament?) That's not fair as teams in the BIG conferences would have to kill themselves to make the playoffs

No. Pretty obvious, that much like basketball, SOS would have to come into it...which would almost demand teams schedule stronger OOC games...including power conference teams like florida that have devoured Presbyterian, Troy and Western Carolina (as an example) over the last couple years. Play a sched like that and have a loss or 2 in conference and you arent likely to be ranked high enough to make a playoff system. And if the Boise/Utah/TCU's dont schedule OOC games with decent teams then they too would be left out. I am not saying just because a weak conference team goes undefeated ( which wouldnt happen all that often in such a scenario) that should automatically qualify for the post season. What I am advocating though is that lets not have some unknown computerized system determine unequivocally who the top 2 teams in the country are and thats the only two teams that can even play for a NC. Its a tragically flawed sysem without question and was never more in evidence when an undefeated SEC team didnt even get to play for a NC. Its a joke.

I do not understand anyone other than school chancellors/presidents being opposed to seeing more important games played at the end of the season. Almost every coach i have heard asked on the subject favors a PO system. I have little doubt the athletes themselves would LOVE a chance to play for the whole shebang. At seasons start there are what...10 teams that really have a chance any particular year and a lot of that is based on what people think those clubs may play like? Its assinine.

Change can be a very good thing, tradition aside, and should be embraced when it is for the greater good. This is, by far, for the greater good than a system that has been in place, with the BCS curveball, for over a century.

[GirlySports]

That's all fine, you don't want a crazy computer system determining the top 2 teams but then the same crazy computer system would determine the top 8 or 16 teams anyways. Unless you have a different way. There are just too many weak divisions and weak schedules. If FBS was maybe 60 strong teams in 8 conferences, now we've got a great argument for a playoff.

And I also bring up the other issues.

- Unbalanced conferences and schedule.. yeah The Red Wings fed on weak opposition and the NFC West blah blah but that's cyclical. The WAC will always be weak for another 100 years.
- playing 16 games
- going into late January
- travel
- television contracts
- neutral venues

There are alot of things that have to be organized and planned out logistically before just putting 16 teams onto a piece of paper. You need to present a plan.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

That's all fine, you don't want a crazy computer system determining the top 2 teams but then the same crazy computer system would determine the top 8 or 16 teams anyways. Unless you have a diferent way.

Do you think that is more room for error in determining the top teams when they are selecting 2 or selecting 8?

I mean I dont ever recall the 9th ranked team at seasons end clamoring that they were robbed of a chance to play for the NC...but I can certainly recall teams as low as 5 and 6 all having very strong arguments and most assuredly teams ranked 3 and 4 having absolutely valid arguments. None moreso than Auburn/Boise and Utah in 04. (And just as a side note the team i cheer for benefitted from that at the time because they started the year ranked higher therefore got to play for the NC)

Obviously there is no perfect system, but again no one can tell me the current one is the best one available...because it isnt and has been proven as much.

[Clever_Iggy]

I'm in the camp that a playoff system would, in time, have just as many problems and complaints as the existing system. Ultimately, however, so long as the Bowl traditions aren't disturbed, I can live with it.

I do believe that the playoff argument will never get off the ground. There are too many other forces that want to keep things the way it is. No matter how many times stupid ESPN anchors bring up the playoff system, it's not going to change - the system makes too much money as it is, the Universities can cloak themselves in tradition, academics (opposing a longer season), existing contracts, etc... and ultimately, fans are still clamoring to watch.

[transplant99]

Unbalanced conferences and schedule.. yeah The Red Wings fed on weak opposition and the NFC West blah blah but that's cyclical. The WAC will always be weak for another 100 years.

except you have no idea about that. Boise made the rise...are you suggesting no other clubs can? What has happened in college football that no one seems to talk about was an equalizing of scholarships among the big schools and the smaller schools over the last few years. As a result we have seen much less difference between the haves and have nots during that time and we will continue to as recruiting gets somewhat equalized as well. Some things take time.

playing 16 games

Or 14....many teams play 13 now....whats the problem? More money for schools BTW as well.

going into late January

And?

travel

Travel for teams is quite simple...they do it all year long. Fans is another issue for sure, but again the FBS manages quite well as does Bball during March.

television contracts

You think television will be a problem? really? They will be falling all over each other to get a piece of this pie....it will be a massive revenue stream for all invloved. Not sure how TV is a problem at all.

neutral venues

Again...not sure what you mean. Bowl games are played at neutral venues every year. They are packed if the matchups are good ones. Va Tech/Boise was a neutral stadium and had over 90,000.

There are alot of things that have to be organized and planned out logistically before just putting 16 teams onto a piece of paper. You need to present a plan.

I am no expert in any of this stuff so I am not sure why it fall on my shoulders!....but the NCAA, TV networks, and individual institutions all do have guys that are much much smarter than I that i am pretty ceratin could overcome most any obstacles. I will reiterate once again that I understand there are problems with any scenario, but again the one we have now is nowhere near good enough and can be improved upon. there may be some growing pains and some learning along the way (much like BCS has tried to do but failed miserablt at) but thats OK isnt it? Better than being stagnant and saying "oh well we did it this way for 120 years so i guess we will just stay with it".

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Do you think that is more room for error in determining the top teams when they are selecting 2 or selecting 8?

I mean I dont ever recall the 9th ranked team at seasons end clamoring that they were robbed of a chance to play for the NC...but I can certainly recall teams as low as 5 and 6 all having very strong arguments and most assuredly teams ranked 3 and 4 having absolutely valid arguments. None moreso than Auburn/Boise and Utah in 04. (And just as a side note the team i cheer for benefitted from that at the time because they started the year ranked higher therefore got to play for the NC)

Obviously there is no perfect system, but again no one can tell me the current one is the best one available...because it isnt and has been proven as much.

Why would a 9th place team complain in a 2-team playoff system. But if it were an 8 team-playoff system and they were 9th, you better believe they will complain! The teams just on the outside of anything will always complain.