College Football: Championship Weekend!

[Drake Tungsten]

Not only major conference teams; I think Utah deserves a shot this year. Most non-major conference teams who go undefeated aren't really worthy of a title shot IMO, though...

[pchang]

Like Boise State?

[Ming]

Undefeated teams by definition, have not been beat. Who knows which of the teams is really the best. The current system has sucked, does suck, and will continue to suck. It does NOT produce a national champion, and it screwed up all the history of the bowls. It has failed on ALL levels. It's time to trash the system, and let the NCAA govern their own sport for a change.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Hey! You guys made it close! With a 3rd string QB to boot >

I can't say I am displeased with Tennessee's year. They are so very young. Next year, barring injury, should be exceptional. Auburn just brought to much this year.

It's time to trash the system, and let the NCAA govern their own sport for a change.

Without a doubt. A playoff system is the only reasonable solution. From what I'm hearing, however, a "plus one" game may actually come to pass.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The nightmare scenario has finally occured.

Yep, but I'd say last year was at least a bad dream (three 1 loss teams). This year actually MAY be better. If USC wins over Oklahoma there will likely not be a split national championship (since USC is #1 in both polls), but Auburn will call themselves the champion, like Penn State does with 1998 (I think that's the year).

Undefeated teams by definition, have not been beat. Who knows which of the teams is really the best. The current system has sucked, does suck, and will continue to suck. It does NOT produce a national champion, and it screwed up all the history of the bowls. It has failed on ALL levels. It's time to trash the system, and let the NCAA govern their own sport for a change.

Couldn't have said it better. It failed on producing a 'true' national championship and it destroyed the history of the bowls. What is it good for?

A playoff system is the only reasonable solution.

[JohnT]

This year actually MAY be better. If USC wins over Oklahoma there will likely not be a split national championship (since USC is #1 in both polls),

IIRC, USC was number 1 in both polls last year as well but didn't get to play in the Championship game, and only got a split-decision when all was said and done.

[Imran Siddiqui]

IRC, USC was number 1 in both polls last year as well but didn't get to play in the Championship game, and only got a split-decision when all was said and done.

Exactly. Because the Coaches Poll is contractually obligated to vote for the BCS Championship Game winner as #1. The AP is not, so they continued to vote for their #1.

[JohnT]

"contractually obligated."

Yeah, sounds like a fine way to pick a champion!

[Imran Siddiqui]

Hehe... yep. The BCS did that so it wouldn't get embarassed if both polls voted for another team that didn't even play in the 'BCS Championship Game' as national champion (as would have happened last year with USC).

[Tuberski]

The non BCS conference coaches should have blown it up last year and voted for USC.

ACK!

[JohnT]

If the voting is not anonymous, then not voting for the BCS champion would make the individual coaches liable.

[Tuberski]

exactly.

ACK!

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by JohnT
If the voting is not anonymous, then not voting for the BCS champion would make the individual coaches liable.

I figure that would only matter if the coaches poll goes for someone else, but it would depend on how the contract is set up. I wonder what the penalty would really be.

[DanS]

I'm satisfied with the current system and think that it did its job just fine this year. Auburn, Utah, and Boise State are judged in part by their strength of schedules. It seems pretty clear to me that USC and Oklahoma are #1 and #2, respectively. If Auburn, Utah, and Boise State don't want left out next time, they'll schedule tougher opponents.

In any event, I always follow the AP, so as Ming points out, the BCS is only a means to help determine who is national champion.

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by DanS
I'm satisfied with the current system and think that it did its job just fine this year. Auburn, Utah, and Boise State are judged in part by their strength of schedules. It seems pretty clear to me that USC and Oklahoma are #1 and #2, respectively. If Auburn, Utah, and Boise State don't want left out next time, they'll schedule tougher opponents.

In any event, I always follow the AP, so as Ming points out, the BCS is only a means to help determine who is national champion.

Except in the cases of Boise State and Utah, the tougher opponents are loathe to schedule games with them.

Being mid-majors, the tougher teams don't see aything to gain by playing them and more to lose.

Scheduling should be turned over to an independent body and not done by the schools.

Then a lot of these problems will be resolved.

ACK!