2008 College Football Thread

[ricoFlame]

this international bowl is crazy, Uconn is literally giving buffalo touchdowns on special teams. weird.

[Displaced Flames fan]

http://www.ksn.com/sports/37034384.html

Keep your ears open for this kid. He's got a chance to be special.

He has a verbal to Miami where his older brother plays LB, but in recent weeks he's been open to a couple of other programs stealing him away.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Because seeding in a 16 team playoff doesn't mean anything?

You've said that twice now and it makes no sense.

I never said it doesn't mean anything.

It just doesn't mean as much as people think it does. It's not March Madness where it's #1 vs. #64.

Say Florida loses the SEC Championship. In a 16-team tournament that means a date with #13 Oklahoma State instead of #15 Georgia. It doesn't really mean a whole lot.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by ricoFlame

It's not easy, and it won't be done, because change doesn't come easy in the NCAA. when did anyone say it was easy? it is something that needs to be done, but we will never see. god forbid people discuss change. i'm sure orange bowl officials and traditionalists loved the hokies/bearcats matchup.

Well you're apparently advocating that winning your conference should be irrelevant. That's not just major change for the NCAA, that's major change for every sporting league on the planet. Should the NHL just go with the 16 best teams then?

Ole Miss beat Texas Tech yesterday. They wouldn't be invited to the 16 team playoff. I guess you better make it 32 teams then so no half-decent teams get left out.

A 16-team playoff will never happen. It completely changes the sport. A 4 or potentially 8 team playoff is worth discussing, if it's done properly.

[transplant99]

It just doesn't mean as much as people think it does. It's not March Madness where it's #1 vs. #64.

No it would be one vs sixteen...or one vs eight.

Sounds a lot like the NFL...or the NHL...or the NBA....or MLB...or both other divisions of NCAA football...or any other sport in the world sans some soccer leagues.

And why do keep insisting that bowl games will be eliminated??? Why would they.

As an example...next year the Rose Bowl is the NC game and it could very well be that niether a Pac-10 NOR Big 10 team is in it, yet you rail on and on about "tradition"

yeah a Miami/Texas matchup would sure carry on THAT tradition huh?

jeez i dont get why people are so afraid of change.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by JayP

Well you're apparently advocating that winning your conference should be irrelevant. That's not just major change for the NCAA, that's major change for every sporting league on the planet. Should the NHL just go with the 16 best teams then?

Ole Miss beat Texas Tech yesterday. They wouldn't be invited to the 16 team playoff. I guess you better make it 32 teams then so no half-decent teams get left out.

A 16-team playoff will never happen. It completely changes the sport. A 4 or potentially 8 team playoff is worth discussing, if it's done properly.

8 team playoff would work and here is how. 6 BCS conf champs and 2 at large. However, the conference champs needs to be reworked so the best 2 teams play in the conference championship game (not north vs. south or east vs. west) which would also require adding a conf championship to a couple of conferences. The 2 at large would come from undefeated non BCS conf teams if there are none than they come from whoever is best out of the rest.

Or you could do 12 teams with 4 getting byes.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Sounds a lot like the NFL...or the NHL...or the NBA....or MLB...or both other divisions of NCAA football...or any other sport in the world sans some soccer leagues.

So why don't they put 64 teams in like NCAA basketball?

Apples and oranges. College football has had the bowl system for a 100 years. Every other league has had a playoff system in place since it's birth.

It's funny how you bring up the MLB when lord knows they could use more teams in the playoffs and it was a huge uproar simply to bring the wild card in. It's not as easy as snapping your fingers, forgetting everything, and putting in a playoff system next year.

And why do keep insisting that bowl games will be eliminated??? Why would they.

Well, then you tell me which bowl is the semi-finals and which bowl is the finals. I'm sure all the Sugar Bowl committee won't have any problems being the quarter-final game while the the Rose Bowl is the finals and is the only real game to have a legimate travel crowd (and the tourism that comes with it).

As an example...next year the Rose Bowl is the NC game and it could very well be that niether a Pac-10 NOR Big 10 team is in it, yet you rail on and on about "tradition"

Uh...do you not realize that the Rose Bowl and National Championship will be completely different games next year? Much like the Orange Bowl and NC Game this year...

jeez i dont get why people are so afraid of change.

I don't understand why people can't understand that you can't throw away 100 years of tradition overnight.

Contrary to what you all think, I don't think the BCS is perfect and don't think a playoff system is out of the question. However, when the lot of you simply say "Div 1-AA does it, why can't Div 1-A do that?" and completely downplay the many, many differences and challenges it's pretty easy to argue for one side.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by JayP

Well, then you tell me which bowl is the semi-finals and which bowl is the finals. I'm sure all the Sugar Bowl committee won't have any problems being the quarter-final game while the the Rose Bowl is the finals and is the only real game to have a legimate travel crowd (and the tourism that comes with it).



.

This makes no sense to me. Can you explain what you are saying?

[transplant99]

So why don't they put 64 teams in like NCAA basketball?

Because they dont need to.

Well, then you tell me which bowl is the semi-finals and which bowl is the finals. I'm sure all the Sugar Bowl committee won't have any problems being the quarter-final game while the the Rose Bowl is the finals and is the only real game to have a legimate travel crowd (and the tourism that comes with it).

Rotate them...sort of like they do NOW.

I don't understand why people can't understand that you can't throw away 100 years of tradition overnight.

WHAT tradition is being thrown away....it would be ADDING to the games. And it has hardly been overnight...a PO system has been clamored for since before the BCS system was even implemented fer chrissakes.

the ONLY reason that a PO system has not been implemented already is because it is non-football people making the decisions.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by JayP

Well, then you tell me which bowl is the semi-finals and which bowl is the finals. I'm sure all the Sugar Bowl committee won't have any problems being the quarter-final game while the the Rose Bowl is the finals and is the only real game to have a legimate travel crowd (and the tourism that comes with it).

I guarantee you that the Orange Bowl would have gotten more money this year if it was a playoff game rather than a meaningless one.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

This makes no sense to me. Can you explain what you are saying?

It's commonly suggested that a playoff system wouldn't need to get rid of the bowls. Instead, the playoff games would be at the current bowl locations and called the bowl games instead of the NCAA Semi-Finals (or whatever they'd call them).

So the Sugar Bowl and Orange Bowl could be semi-final games and the Rose Bowl could be the finals.

This makes no sense, however, as each major bowl would surely want to be the finals.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by JayP

It's commonly suggested that a playoff system wouldn't need to get rid of the bowls. Instead, the playoff games would be at the current bowl locations and called the bowl games instead of the NCAA Semi-Finals (or whatever they'd call them).

So the Sugar Bowl and Orange Bowl could be semi-final games and the Rose Bowl could be the finals.

This makes no sense, however, as each major bowl would surely want to be the finals.

It would rotate, just like it does now for the BCS.

That's not really the part of your post I was referring to though. You mentioned something about not travelling and tourism as a result? Can you elaborate on that?'

[JayP]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Rotate them...sort of like they do NOW.

They changed the BCS bowl system a few years ago...

It used to be that one of the four major bowls was also the national championship game (the last time was the famous USC/Texas Rose Bowl). Now the four major bowl games are played, followed by the National Championship which rotates between the locations only.

They already changed the system so each bowl is seperate from the National Championship and I don't see the bowl committees wanting to go back to that situation.

Either way, it's not the same. Hosting the finals of the playoff is a hell of a lot different than hosting the National Championship was a few years ago (when the NC Game was the ___ Bowl). There would be very little travel for the quarter and semi finals as most fans cannot afford to follow their team around the country for potentially 3 games). Fans would simply hope for a finals appearance and whatever bowl that happened to be would reap the benefits. It's not as easy as rotating the bowl games around annually.

WHAT tradition is being thrown away....it would be ADDING to the games. And it has hardly been overnight...a PO system has been clamored for since before the BCS system was even implemented fer chrissakes.

the ONLY reason that a PO system has not been implemented already is because it is non-football people making the decisions.

You honestly don't think making the Rose Bowl a semi or quarter final game has a huge impact on the event that it is? Major bowl games are more than just a 3 hour football game. There's a ton more going on before the game.

Here's a good article on exactly what I'm talking about:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...bag/index.html

[JayP]

Originally Posted by Sowa

I guarantee you that the Orange Bowl would have gotten more money this year if it was a playoff game rather than a meaningless one.

If it was the finals, yes.

If it was the semis or quarters, no.

There's going to be no travel for any playoff game, but the finals. Add an upset or two in there and you could easily see some playoff games not sell-out. If you want proof of that look at the ACC Championship game.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

It would rotate, just like it does now for the BCS.

That's not really the part of your post I was referring to though. You mentioned something about not travelling and tourism as a result? Can you elaborate on that?'

Let's say there's a 8-team playoff.

So your team has to win three games to go to the finals. Do you have the money for three seperate trips around the country to follow your team to the finals? Most likely not. So whereas now people can save up to attend that one bowl game, in a playoff system people will save up and pray their team makes the finals.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by JayP

They changed the BCS bowl system a few years ago...

It used to be that one of the four major bowls was also the national championship game (the last time was the famous USC/Texas Rose Bowl). Now the four major bowl games are played, followed by the National Championship which rotates between the locations only.

They already changed the system so each bowl is seperate from the National Championship and I don't see the bowl committees wanting to go back to that situation.

Either way, it's not the same. Hosting the finals of the playoff is a hell of a lot different than hosting the National Championship was a few years ago (when the NC Game was the ___ Bowl). There would be very little travel for the quarter and semi finals as most fans cannot afford to follow their team around the country for potentially 3 games). Fans would simply hope for a finals appearance and whatever bowl that happened to be would reap the benefits. It's not as easy as rotating the bowl games around annually.



You honestly don't think making the Rose Bowl a semi or quarter final game has a huge impact on the event that it is? Major bowl games are more than just a 3 hour football game. There's a ton more going on before the game.

Here's a good article on exactly what I'm talking about:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...bag/index.html

I think that's a huge assumption on your part. The FCS teams travel extremely well to multiple locations on consecutive weekends. Generally speaking, these folks are fewer in number and less well off too.

[JayP]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

I think that's a huge assumption on your part. The FCS teams travel extremely well to multiple locations on consecutive weekends. Generally speaking, these folks are fewer in number and less well off too.

Like I've said, apples and oranges.

According to Wikipedia, the championship game gets an annual average attendance of under 20 000 people. It was attending by 5200 less people this season than last so I'm going to assume it's not selling out annually.

A quick look at some FCS stadiums for playoff teams show the average is probably around 17 000 people. That's a little different than the Rose Bowl (92 000), Sugar Bowl (73 000), Orange Bowl (77 000), Fiesta Bowl (73 000) in terms of filling the stadium up with travellers.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by JayP

Like I've said, apples and oranges.

According to Wikipedia, the championship game gets an annual average attendance of under 20 000 people. It was attending by 5200 less people this season than last so I'm going to assume it's not selling out annually.

A quick look at some FCS stadiums for playoff teams show the average is probably around 17 000 people. That's a little different than the Rose Bowl (92 000), Sugar Bowl (73 000), Orange Bowl (77 000), Fiesta Bowl (73 000) in terms of filling the stadium up with travellers.

Exactly.

How do you explain that a team that draws 17000 a game (25000 for Montana) travels so well in consecutive playoff weeks to Virginia and Tennessee?

You stick those big schools with rich ass boosters in those games and they travel very well, IMO. Just like they do now.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I've heard this numerous times from those who dont favor a playoff system. And I have one question...why?

Why can the games not be played thru december like the other NCAA levels do? I just dont get it. In fact...why can some of the the bowl games themselves not be used as the playoff system? As an example, USC had 26 days between games...and that was with two off weeks during the season. Surely they could wrap up the PO's in the same time frame that bowl season constitutes now.

26 days for final exams I would think. They are students afterall. We all remember final exams in December. Some of the youngsters on here just went through it

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Exactly.

How do you explain that a team that draws 17000 a game (25000 for Montana) travels so well in consecutive playoff weeks to Virginia and Tennessee?

You stick those big schools with rich ass boosters in those games and they travel very well, IMO. Just like they do now.

Ok. I'm on board now cause this was my one worry.

[transplant99]

26 days for final exams I would think. They are students afterall. We all remember final exams in December. Some of the youngsters on here just went through it

yet every school that qualifies for bowl sub series or whatever the ell they call it now...manages somehow?

Seriously...this reason doesn't fly. How did those App St kids manage the last 4 years??