*KILL THE BCS*

So you're talking about playoffs into December, maybe January for multiple teams - teams playing 14, 15, 16 games.

At that point, the NCAA might as well give up the "student" ruse and call itself the NFL minor leagues.

That's what's so frustrating; the greed of a few is ruining the sport as a whole. They don't need playoff for 16 teams; even a 3 game, 4 team play off would do infinitely more than the current system. And, more than likely, the best team in the league wouldn't get shut out.

>>So you're talking about playoffs into December, maybe January for multiple teams - teams playing 14, 15, 16 games.<<

If you have a huge playoff system. Really, a smaller one is just as good (though a larger system would benefit the smaller bowls that typically break even or lose money).

>>At that point, the NCAA might as well give up the "student" ruse and call itself the NFL minor leagues. <<

Football is a profession...

-
Alan

-
Alan

A 3-game, 4-team playoff would be as bad or worse than the BCS, which is essentially the same thing, only with six teams. Teams five and six and so on would bitch.

A legitimate playoff has to have at least a bracket of 16.

If you have a huge playoff system. Really, a smaller one is just as good (though a larger system would benefit the smaller bowls that typically break even or lose money).
But a huge playoff system is the only alternative to the BCS or the "old way" where the polls decided by themself.

Football is a profession...
105 D1-A teams give or take, 80 scholarships per team. How many are ever going to see an NFL contract?

But hey, I'm fine with the idea of a football minor league - I'm just tired of it masquerading as college-anything, and taking money and emphasis away from programs that could use it.

Perhaps what amazes me most about the BCS is the defense of it. The best arguments are completely disgusting.
But I've seen no one defending the BCS. I say scrap it. But the idea of a playoff system is a joke, too. Just go back to the pre-BCS way.

I mean, c'mon, we shouldn't have a playoff system because there's less guaranteed money for colleges?
You convince the 80+ teams that aren't getting into the playoffs to give up three games.

What does that do for the players? More that 12 games makes it nearly professional? Then why does every other team sport on earth (including college basketball, hockey, baseball, and Div II and III football) have tournaments? It just boggles my mind.

Basketball, hockey and baseball all get played more than once a week. DII/III football aren't as emphasized, important or rough as DI football, where many more kids (and yet still very few) actually have a chance to play pro ball.

None of this does anything for the players. The players don't factor in to colleges or playoff or bowl considerations.

No, it couldn't possibly be "just as bad or worse" because in even such an abbreviated playoff the #1 team is always going to be included. This is literally as insane and pathetic as it can possibly get.

>>But hey, I'm fine with the idea of a football minor league - I'm just tired of it masquerading as college-anything, and taking money and emphasis away from programs that could use it.<<

And the current system doesn't make college football look like the minor leagues of the NFL? I mean, really now. Does anyone look at Division IA college sports as a whole and say, "yes, academia is being served well here"? No. If you want to feel that programs more deserving of money should be getting it, then my suggestion is that you ask for the disbandment of major college sports in America. Having any sort of playoff system is suddenly not going to make it any less of a legitimate academic activity.

>>You convince the 80+ teams that aren't getting into the playoffs to give up three games.<<

First of all, the 80+ teams aren't really getting anything from it...just the ones in the big conferences that get bowl bids. Secondly, this more a reason why playoffs won't happen as opposed to an excuse as to why they shouldn't happen.

>>None of this does anything for the players. The players don't factor in to colleges or playoff or bowl considerations. <<

At the very least they should be allowed to play for a legitimate national championship, so that they can feel like they've accomplished something in college (apart from getting a degree in phys ed or communications) and perhaps their lives as a whole.

>>the original sin here is the notion that we need a "national champion" anyway. <<

Yea...let's just give everyone trophies for being good sports...

-Alan

And the current system doesn't make college football look like the minor leagues of the NFL?
Of course it does. Expand it to where some teams are playing 16 games, and you have to give up the charade.

First of all, the 80+ teams aren't really getting anything from it...just the ones in the big conferences that get bowl bids.
No, every team in the country is losing out on games to create a viable playoff system, unless you propose that they play 11-12 games then go into a 4+ game playoff.

Secondly, this more a reason why playoffs won't happen as opposed to an excuse as to why they shouldn't happen.
Which are one and the same.

At the very least they should be allowed to play for a legitimate national championship, so that they can feel like they've accomplished something in college (apart from getting a degree in phys ed or communications) and perhaps their lives as a whole.
Wow, that whole paragraph, and not a single bit of content.

I think it is a joke if anyone believes that major college football or basketball is anything but a professional league, except the players get treated much worse.

I've known two people that played Division I college football get completely screwed by the system by getting injured, losing their scholarship and then getting stuck with medical bills down the line. It is a freaking crock.

Look; the top team right now is USC. They are not in what is claimed to be the "national championship game". By extending even to a minimal playoff series, USC would be playing for a chance at a unified national championship. And, in fact, no team ever ranked #1 by both polls or even in just one would be left off again. The BCS decides its top team based on a bunch of numbers; it can't watch a game. For this alone, it shouldn't be the way to decide the best team in football.

>>Of course it does. Expand it to where some teams are playing 16 games, and you have to give up the charade.<<

How? The Nokia Sugar Bowl and Tostitos Fiesta Bowl are keeping collegiate football academically based "how"? Has the NCAA Men's and Women's basketball tournaments devalued their academic programs? How about the olympics; has it devalued the gov't programs of all countries worldwide that help subsidize its amateur athletes?

(And I'm not even demanding we have a 16 team playoff...please stop putting words in my mouth)

>>No, every team in the country is losing out on games to create a viable playoff system, unless you propose that they play 11-12 games then go into a 4+ game playoff.<<

A) I'm not demanding a 4+ game playoff. Again, please do not speak for me.

B) Yes, the playoff, however long it would occur (2 games, 3, 44, whatever) would be after the end of the regular season. After all, the BCS teams are taking the next month off, during which I'm sure they'll still be practicing full contact and whatnot.

>>Which are one and the same.<<

No, they aren't. For instance, saying "CEOs should be allowed to steal as much as possible!" is not a proper defense of Enron. Its completely amoral. Just because its for one persons or groups "good" does not mean its for the good of the whole. In this case, the good of a few schools in the big conferences is making things suck for the whole, that being the fans that support their schools through taxes, game tickets, and merchandise.

>>Wow, that whole paragraph, and not a single bit of content. <<

I was making light of how much of a joke the "academic" side of college sports was. Most people accept it by now.

-
Alan

Which is why we're just going to stop it here, until you actually bother to realize that opposing a playoff system doesn't equal support for the BCS, especially when I've said I don't like the BCS.

Learn to read.

There is only one reason that there is not a playoff system in Division 1A: money. It has nothing to do with scheduling, making kids practice through winter break, or the pressures of being a student athelete. It has everything to do with television revenue.

Damn you, Tony Kornheiser, for hooking me in.

March Madness x football = BIG FREAKIN' BUCKS

16 team tourney =
8 first round games
4 second round games
2 final four games
National Title

You could pay off the national debt with this kind of shit.

Could you imagine some big team like Michigan playing Florida in the first round, USC in the second round, playing Ohio State for a second time in year during the Final Four and playing a championship against Miami? That STATE would implode from such a month and this kind of scenario would be true for almost major college football team.

Or imagine if someone like BYU or Bowling Green upsetting a major school like Miami in the first or second round of such a tourney.

If it happened, it could become as big as the freakin' Superbowl, at least in the states, as it would have that national interest (both gambling and TV revenue) as the hoop tournament.

The problem is that the college presidents think they will ultimately lose control of the money tills. It's too much risk for them to stomach, allegedly. But their hand will ultimately get played for them if they don't wake the fuck up.

My aforementioned uncle is prone to claiming that the BCS was the NCAA's way of conning all the money holders to a playoff. Kind of like how the new Medicare scam is another slow, slipperly step towards socialized medicine.

http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sports/columns/barnhart/index.html

"Our presidents have made it pretty clear. That option is not on the table," said Tranghese. "We are going to do everything we can to make post-season football as good as it can be. But we are not discussing a playoff."

Q. When the fuck is some curious ESPN reporter going to do an expose on the bowl system a la the Olympic bid process?

A. Approximately the 5th of Never.

WITJFF?!!?

Clearly a similar reorganization of the Electoral College is in order.