Should BCS Be Replaced By Playoffs? -- Guynemer's Proposal

[Ming]

Watch Bowling Green be the only unbeaten... wouldn't that be a riot

[Drake Tungsten]

So much for all the worrying about having a ton of unbeatens at the end of the year. Only Oklahoma, Miami, and Ohio State are left and one of them is bound to lose sometime. It always works out somehow.

[Ming]

But what if all three take a loss... it is possible because they all have at least one tough game... it could get even more interesting...

[Drake Tungsten]

But what if all three take a loss... it is possible because they all have at least one tough game... it could get even more interesting...

You're absolutely right and I love every second of it. It wouldn't be college football without some sort of controversy...

[DanS]

Here we are three weeks later. Two undefeated teams and still plenty of season left to go.

[Ming]

Both teams could take a loss and really make this interesting. I just hate the BCS

[Guynemer]

Ohio State continues to flirt with disaster week after week (the Minnesota game being an exception). If they don't snap out of it, they're in for a very long game a couple weeks from now against Michigan.

Miami still has to get past Pittsburgh and Virginia Tech. The Panthers are red-hot and fear no one, and VT will be looking at the game as a chance to salvage their season. With a suspect run defense, Miami is very, very vulnerable in both games. EDIT: Forgot, Miami also has to get past Syracuse in the Carrier Dome. A few weeks ago, this wasn't worth mentioning. But suddenly, the Orangemen are looking like the 'Cuse of old, shredding VT for well over 500 yards...

So I was wrong; there won't be three or more undefeated teams. But the way these teams have looked recently, I'd be shocked if both of them remain undefeated. And even if they do, the BCS is still a sham.

[Peacemaker]

Originally posted by Guynemer
Ohio State continues to flirt with disaster week after week (the Minnesota game being an exception). If they don't snap out of it, they're in for a very long game a couple weeks from now against Michigan.

Ohio State has the best defense in the NCAA and couple that with the best feild goal kicker and a great punter their offense just has to keep from losing. The Buckeyes will get past Indiana and then crush the hell out of that team up north.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Here we are three weeks later. Two undefeated teams and still plenty of season left to go.

What if Ohio State loses to Michigan (which is a definite possibility) and Miami loses to Virginia Tech (well, not as likely).

So who do you pick for the Top 2? Miami, Ohio State, Texas, Washington State, Oklahoma, Iowa, Georgia? What a mess!

[DanS]

No more or less a mess than any other situation. We go by a cross between the popularity polls and the computer rankings.

It would be the worst if there is a wide difference between the popularity polls and the computer rankings. This is because it would make a very close choice among all of the candidates. But even there, it wouldn't be a mess.

[Ming]

And that's why we need a play off system that features more than just two teams. There could be a significant difference between the polls and the BCS rankings. If OSU and Miami go down in flames and lose a game, there are FAR more than just two teams who can honestly say they deserve a shot at the big game. It would be the same situation as if we had a bunch of undefeated teams

[DanS]

OK, now you're changing your position--originally being that teams without losses didn't have their full measure taken. By your (original) system, a lot has been accomplished already.

There are only six 1-loss teams in the top 20 of the ESPN/USA Today poll. Presumably, this will shrink somewhat over the next 3 weeks. After that, we should have a great group of Bowl teams based primarily on the quality of teams that each has beaten.

This is working fabulously, so far.

[Ming]

Originally posted by DanS
OK, now you're changing your position--originally being that teams without losses didn't have their full measure taken.

No... not changing anything. I still say that teams that have no losses haven't had their full measure taken.

Plus, both my suggestions (granted similar or identical to those submitted by others) would give ANY undefeated team (unless there were more than 8 of them with my first suggestion or two undefeated teams in the same conference in my second suggestion) a chance to go for it.

And I don't agree that things are shaping up well at all.
If only OSU and Miami finish the season undefeated, then there will be no argument... (yeah yeah yeah, I'm sure somebody will whine that a team with one loss is better) the two teams that deserve a crack at it got it. But as many of us pointed out, this may not happen.

If one or two one loss team gets picked for the championship game, then again we have some silly ranking system being used instead of letting the teams play it out on the field. The difference in the polls and the BCS rankings truely indicate that there is room for disagreement.

[DanS]

"If one or two one loss team gets picked for the championship game, then again we have some silly ranking system being used instead of letting the teams play it out on the field."

Not silly at all. While there can be disagreement between the two, both pillars are based on how well a team does on the field, with a small stress on how well they've done lately.

[Ming]

It isn't based on how they played on the field... it's based soley on an "estimate" of strength of schedule. Unless all teams play all teams, strength of schedule is a guess at best. Basing it on how the team does on the field means just that... letting the contenders actually PLAY each other to prove who it the best... not some computer geeks program that rates the strength of schedule.