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

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Forget for a second the participants (as obviously we both have emotion ties involved) and lets simply discuss the previous statement. If #2 played and beat #3, do they deserve to become the champs? You implied this was the case regardless of what #1 did in the last game (or perhaps even in the regular season).

You implied that was the case for a hypothetical situation, I simply extended the hypothetical to show the import you lay on the final game of the season, and this shows preBCS or otherwise the importance you feel of the bowl game verses the regular season (which is the crux of your arguement to preserve the importance of the regular season games).

[Drake Tungsten]

My point was this: since the #1 and #2 teams were both undefeated, there was no way to use the regular season to determine who was better, as I would like. They both had equally deserving regular seasons.

The next best option would be to have them play head-to-head in the title game to see who was better. Unfortunately, this couldn't happen in 1994.

So, we're left with the distasteful option of trying to determine which team is better by looking at their performances in the bowl games. The #1 team beats some podunk team, while the #2 team beats the #3 team in the nation. This obviously makes the #2 team look like the better team.

I'm not saying this was the right call. Personally, I would've split the title. But using the performances in the bowl games was the only way to decide the title that year. It certainly didn't mean that the regular season was irrelevant, just that the regular season was inconclusive that year. The BCS was created to make sure scenarios like this never happen again and it is doing a good job of it.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
The only way that the BCS screws a team is if there are three quality unbeatens.

No... the BCS can only work right if there are two unbeaten quality teams. If there is only one unbeaten team, then other 1 loss quality teams are screwed because some other team with the same record gets a chance, and they don't. And heaven help us if no quality teams goes unbeaten. And this doesn't even begin to address teams that don't play in the quality conferences but are still division 1-A who will never get a shot at the championship, even if they win all their games. Talk about a regular season being irrelevent.

Granted... having an 8 team playoff system will still leave some quality teams out. But a 2 team single game insures this to be the case most of the time.

I would rather see this then see some quality unbeaten team... a team that is done everything it has been asked to do in the regular season... be given no chance at all, because their regular season has been deemed irrelevent because their strength of schedule may have been .05 easier than somebody elses

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

The arguement will come back again that this hasn't happened that frequently so it is a nonsequitor.

If it did happen we'll just have to amend the rules to address one off situations etc. rather than having a systematic approach that allows the regular season to count for something (i.e making the cut of a VERY distinguished top 8) as well as a decisive means to settle the problem on the field in a small post season.

[Japher]

Who cares?

Football is an Extracurricular activity. While it brings in a lot of money for these schools it does not set out to improve what these SCHOOLS were intended to do....educate.

I think the BCS is crock, personally. And that everything that it touches is tainted.

Heismann? Where's Crouch? Not a whole lot these winners have gone on to do much of anything.

I think the level of competition is already to high at the collegate level, instilling playoffs will only increase that. Schools should teach, not compete.

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

This thread is still alive???

Ming - I disagree. If Miami and OSU win out, then this year, there is no need for a playoff. I don't buy into the idea that other 1- or 2-loss teams who are 'playing better right now' deserve a chance to be in a playoff against them.* Right now, every rating system has OSU and Miami at 1 and 2 or 2 and 1. IF - a big IF - those 2 teams win out, the BCS 'works' for another year.

That said, I support a small (4 to 8 teams) playoff because I know that most years, it won't be as cut and dried as this year. Plus, one or both of Miami and OSU could lose in the next 3 weeks and then... someone is going to get left out. But when the 1 and 2 teams are as obvious as they are now, a playoff is unnecessary.


* I know this seems to contradict my earlier statements. To me, the regular season SHOULD matter. Ideally, the regular reason should produce two teams that are inarguably the #1 and #2 teams in football. But that seldom happens. Because that seldom happens, a playoff is needed, because in most years there will be 3-5 teams who can legitimately argue they should play for the title. It just so happens that this isn't one of those years. Yet.

[Ming]

Well... part of the equation will be settled today. The last 5 times that OSU has gone into their last Big 10 game undefeated, Michigan has denied them their perfect record. It will be interesting to watch.

[Drake Tungsten]

Bad news for you BCS haters. Ohio State 14 - Michigan 9

All Miami has to do is beat Virginia Tech and the system works perfectly...

[DanS]

The difference between Ohio State and Michigan today was Clarett. Amazing vision of the entire field. Picking up 15 yards a pop like it's nothing.

This from a freshman...

[Drake Tungsten]

Pass interference? Is OSU trying to lose a sure thing?

edit: The ending was more thrilling than it should've been, but OSU still won. They should have fun getting annhilated by a real team in the Fiesta Bowl.

[Ming]

Thank God.. it's over. Go Big 10!

[Ming]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Bad news for you BCS haters. Ohio State 14 - Michigan 9

All Miami has to do is beat Virginia Tech and the system works perfectly...

Uhhh... they kind of have to beat Syracuse as well

But as you point out, it takes LUCK for the BCS system to work. Time to remove luck from the selection process

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Pass interference? Is OSU trying to lose a sure thing?

edit: The ending was more thrilling than it should've been, but OSU still won. They should have fun getting annhilated by a real team in the Fiesta Bowl.

I wonder if this years Fiesta will provide as much unintentional humour as last year's Rose

[Drake Tungsten]

But as you point out, it takes LUCK for the BCS system to work.

Not really. It takes luck for the BCS to work perfectly, ie: two undefeated teams playing in the title game. In years where there is only one undefeated, the BCS still works. It just has to choose which one-loss team gets an undeserved second chance at the title.

A playoff will always give undeserving teams a shot at the title, so I don't see how the guaranteed unfairness of a playoff is better than the theoretical unfairness of the BCS.

I wonder if this years Fiesta will provide as much unintentional humour as last year's Rose

I'm not sure. Nebraska of last year is better than Ohio State of this year, but there isn't a completely dominant team this year that matches Miami of last year. Ohio State will probably lose, but I don't think there is any team out there which can inflict a humiliating loss on them equal to last year's Rose Bowl. Maybe Oklahoma, but they probably blew their chance against A&M.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Not really. It takes luck for the BCS to work perfectly,

Again... oh boy, a system that needs luck to work...

It just has to choose which one-loss team gets an undeserved second chance at the title.

If a team with one loss wins, it just proves that they are the better team proving that it wasn't undeserved.

You seem to think that a undefeated team that has to win a playoff to prove they are the best is unfair. What could possibly be unfair about asking a team to prove they are the best by winning.

A playoff will always give undeserving teams a shot at the title, so I don't see how the guaranteed unfairness of a playoff is better than the theoretical unfairness of the BCS.

Again, their is NO unfairness in making a team win a playoff to prove they are the best. If these teams you are talking about are so undeserving, then they will lose and it won't matter. If they win, maybe because it is because they are deserving of a chance at the national championship.

Again... you keep saying that it would make the regular season irrelevent... but what could be more irrelevent than teams that play in 1 - A and go undefeated not getting a chance because of the conference they play in, or a team that losses no games or one game, and miss the championship soley based on a miniscule difference in stregth of schedule... That makes the regular FAR MORE irrelevent than having a playoff system and making the teams win to claim a championship