Just think if the NFL had the BCS

[DFWJC]

The Falcons and Pats would have been crowned NFC and AFC champs and would be playing in the Super Bowl.

Every year at this time we get validation as to why the BCS is a total crock and NFL totally trumps college football. Last year, I guess they would have gotten it right..kind of like a broken clock being right twice a day. The top two seed rarely make it to the Super Bowl.

I'm a big college football fan, but no denying the better NFL product.

[Doomsday101]

Of course the NFL does it right so does NCAA Basketball and NCAA Baseball as well as the smaller football division in college who all have a playoff format. Computers I think are fairly accurate on who the best teams are out there but a computer can't tell you who will win on any given day.

I will say I like the BCS system better than it was before the BCS system was put in place in the past the 1 and 2 ranked team hardly ever faced off since the team had designated bowl games they would go to depending on the conference you were in. No doubt though a playoff system needs to be put in place.

[big dog cowboy]

Until there is a playoff system, the BCS remains a joke.

[DFWJC]

Until there is a playoff system, the BCS remains a joke.
It's borderline criminal to me.

Yet for some reason every year around bowl time the Dallas Morning News gives Tim Cowlishaw a platform to say how terrible a playoff would be in college football.

That in itself is criminal.

Talk about un-American. Let's have a champion based on opinion vs actual performance. :banghead:

This year was not bad, but even then, we will never know for sure if a team like TCU could win. Or whether Auburn would have won in '04 if given the chance, for example.

It does not have to be that way...ever.

[Rogah]

It's borderline criminal to me.IMHO, it's not borderline criminal - it is criminal. It runs afoul of antitrust laws.

[SaltwaterServr]

The Falcons and Pats would have been crowned NFC and AFC champs and would be playing in the Super Bowl.

Every year at this time we get validation as to why the BCS is a total crock and NFL totally trumps college football. Last year, I guess they would have gotten it right..kind of like a broken clock being right twice a day. The top two seed rarely make it to the Super Bowl.

I'm a big college football fan, but no denying the better NFL product.

:bow:

Folks might know my position on it. I refuse to watch any bowls until a playoff system is in place.

There is no honest reason why there cannot be a playoff system in place. None.

[187beatdown]

Boo hoo.

TCU wouldn't have beaten Oregon or Auburn.

[big dog cowboy]

Boo hoo.

TCU wouldn't have beaten Oregon or Auburn.
And Seattle would never beat New Orleans.

And NY Jets would never beat New England.

[DFWJC]

Boo hoo.

TCU wouldn't have beaten Oregon or Auburn.
Smarttarse:cool:
Nobody said they for sure would. This is discussing the system as a whole and over time.

[Cythim]

And Seattle would never beat New Orleans.

And NY Jets would never beat New England.

Your argument works against a playoff. The season tells you more about the better team than a playoff does. Atlanta and New England were the best teams over a 16 game season but Green Bay and New York were better than them in one game. The best way to determine who the best team is in a given group is to have a home/away round robin. A playoff only satisfies our entertainment needs.

[DFWJC]

Your argument works against a playoff. The season tells you more about the better team than a playoff does. Atlanta and New England were the best teams over a 16 game season but Green Bay and New York were better than them in one game. The best way to determine who the best team is in a given group is to have a home/away round robin. A playoff only satisfies our entertainment needs.
Not really.

Especially in college even more than in the Pros, there is often almost zero overlap in common opponents.
Also, in bascially all sports in the world except college football you have a playoff so the championship is actually earned on the field.

I recall teams getting into the BCS champ game without even winning their conference championship...good grief. So it would even fail baised on youor criteria.
The system falls apart anyway you slice it.

Do you think the Atlanta Falcons were the best (or second best) team in the NFL this season? Really?

[Cythim]

Not really.

Especially in college even more thanin the pro, there is often almost zero overlap in common opponents.

This is where college football falls apart. There are too many teams and not enough games to give an accurate look of who is the best. Picking the two best is impossible but picking four or eight is only marginally better. There will always be an argument of a deserving team being left out, and the more teams you invite the larger the pool will be of teams who were snubbed.

Also, in all sports in the world except college football you have a playoff so the championship is actually earned on the field.

I take it you do not follow soccer. They have tournaments but the season champion is crowned based on the results of the season.

I recall teams getting into the BCS champ game without even winning their conference championship...good grief. So it would even fail baised on youor criteria. The system falls apart anyway you slice it.

The problem is that there is no fair system. Arguing fairness is just an excuse because someone's team did not make it.

Do you think the Atlanta Falcons were the best (or second best) team in the NFL this season? Really?

You fail to recognize that this isn't based on opinion, what I think of the Atlanta Falcons is meaningless. They finished the regular season with the best record in the NFC and the NFL even recognized them as the best team in the NFC by awarding them the #1 seed. If opinions mattered Seattle would've been out and Tampa or New York would've been in.

Was Green Bay the best team in the NFC? They lost regular season games to Washington, Detroit and Miami.

[big dog cowboy]

A playoff only satisfies our entertainment needs.
I couldn't disagree more. It determines a true champion.

[Cythim]

I couldn't disagree more. It determines a true champion.

That is your opinion, no matter how statistically incorrect it may be.

[Doomsday101]

This is where college football falls apart. There are too many teams and not enough games to give an accurate look of who is the best. Picking the two best is impossible but picking four or eight is only marginally better. There will always be an argument of a deserving team being left out, and the more teams you invite the larger the pool will be of teams who were snubbed.



I take it you do not follow soccer. They have tournaments but the season champion is crowned based on the results of the season.



The problem is that there is no fair system. Arguing fairness is just an excuse because someone's team did not make it.



You fail to recognize that this isn't based on opinion, what I think of the Atlanta Falcons is meaningless. They finished the regular season with the best record in the NFC and the NFL even recognized them as the best team in the NFC by awarding them the #1 seed. If opinions mattered Seattle would've been out and Tampa or New York would've been in.

Was Green Bay the best team in the NFC? They lost regular season games to Washington, Detroit and Miami.

and GB had to go on the road through out the playoffs they got no bye week so are they the best yes they have shown that they are

[bracey]

That is your opinion, no matter how statistically incorrect it may be.

There's no statistically good way to do it. A 16 game sample size is way too small to use those results alone to determine a champion.

[bracey]

I take it you do not follow soccer. They have tournaments but the season champion is crowned based on the results of the season.

The big difference here is that soccer leagues have each team play every other team twice. That's obviously not possible in American Football.

[Doomsday101]

The big difference here is that soccer leagues have each team play every other team twice. That's obviously not possible in American Football.

They can also play every other day no way your going to get a football team playing 2 or 3 times in 1 week.

[DFWJC]

This is where college football falls apart. There are too many teams and not enough games to give an accurate look of who is the best. Picking the two best is impossible but picking four or eight is only marginally better. There will always be an argument of a deserving team being left out, and the more teams you invite the larger the pool will be of teams who were snubbed.



I take it you do not follow soccer. They have tournaments but the season champion is crowned based on the results of the season.



The problem is that there is no fair system. Arguing fairness is just an excuse because someone's team did not make it.



You fail to recognize that this isn't based on opinion, what I think of the Atlanta Falcons is meaningless. They finished the regular season with the best record in the NFC and the NFL even recognized them as the best team in the NFC by awarding them the #1 seed. If opinions mattered Seattle would've been out and Tampa or New York would've been in.

Was Green Bay the best team in the NFC? They lost regular season games to Washington, Detroit and Miami.

I think you may have missed every single one of your points.

0-5..imo.
I guess you for sure wouldn't have been in the playoff hunt.:D

Just kidding...we obviously disagree completely on this topic. That happens sometimes.

[Cythim]

and GB had to go on the road through out the playoffs they got no bye week so are they the best yes they have shown that they are

Atlanta proved to be the better team in the regular season by winning the head to head match up and finishing with a better record. Green Bay is the best team right now but that is not a representation of who the best team was in the 2010 regular season.

[Cythim]

There's no statistically good way to do it. A 16 game sample size is way too small to use those results alone to determine a champion.

I realize that, but others do not. They think adding more teams into a flawed system will somehow fix it. With the two team system we are consistently seeing an issue of having three or four teams who should be considered. If we invite four teams we will have a total of eight who make a strong case for consideration and if we invite eight there will be a total of sixteen teams who should have a chance to get in.

Changes need to go well beyond simply adding a playoff for any sense of fair play to be realized.

[SaltwaterServr]

I realize that, but others do not. They think adding more teams into a flawed system will somehow fix it. With the two team system we are consistently seeing an issue of having three or four teams who should be considered. If we invite four teams we will have a total of eight who make a strong case for consideration and if we invite eight there will be a total of sixteen teams who should have a chance to get in.

Changes need to go well beyond simply adding a playoff for any sense of fair play to be realized.


As opposed to keeping an almost arbitrary system in place? :confused:

[Cythim]

The big difference here is that soccer leagues have each team play every other team twice. That's obviously not possible in American Football.

I am not suggesting that it is, I am just providing an example of what needs to happen in order to be fair. There is nothing fair about a playoff, especially when you consider the fact that a team ranking in the bottom half of the league earned a playoff spot over teams with 10 wins.

They can also play every other day no way your going to get a football team playing 2 or 3 times in 1 week.

They play at most twice a week and use a lot of reserves when those situations arise. I'm not asking the NFL to change their system, just for fans to realize that the playoff system is not an end all formula to find out who is the best in the most fair fashion.

[Cythim]

As opposed to keeping an almost arbitrary system in place? :confused:

I'm not arguing for keeping the current system in place, I am arguing that simply arguing for a playoff will not fix the system.

[Doomsday101]

I am not suggesting that it is, I am just providing an example of what needs to happen in order to be fair. There is nothing fair about a playoff, especially when you consider the fact that a team ranking in the bottom half of the league earned a playoff spot over teams with 10 wins.



They play at most twice a week and use a lot of reserves when those situations arise. I'm not asking the NFL to change their system, just for fans to realize that the playoff system is not an end all formula to find out who is the best in the most fair fashion.

It is as fair as it will ever be for the NFL. The winner has every right to be crowned champions. The great thing about football it is 1 game elimination and the better team will come ready to play.

[DFWJC]

As opposed to keeping an almost arbitrary system in place? :confused:
I quit arguing. This person is WAY off base on very argument on this topic.
IMO, of course.

[Temo]

What exactly is fair about NE having a much better season, creaming the Jets in week 14, then losing a single game and being out of the playoffs?

The playoffs are inherently an unfair system. As soon as you make the playoffs, except for byes and home-field advantage, everything you did during the regular season is thrown out and no longer matters. Seattle and its 7-9 record could advance to the super bowl, despite sucking horribly for the majority of the year.

Look at the 2007 Giants. They did not have nearly the season that the Patriots or Colts or Cowboys did that year. Those three teams were far, far, better during the majority of the season than the Giants. But as soon as the playoffs started, everything got thrown out and the Giants got hot. What is fair about that?

Edit: That does not mean the BCS is a perfect system, or even the best system. I'm just saying that using the argument you used doesn't hold much water for me.

[Cythim]

I think you may have missed every single one of your points.

0-5..imo.
I guess you for sure wouldn't have been in the playoff hunt.:D

Just kidding...we obviously disagree completely on this topic. That happens sometimes.

I quit arguing. This person is WAY off base on very argument on this topic.
IMO, of course.

In your opinion, of course. I like how you have twice now attempted to discredit my argument by saying I am completely wrong yet refuse to offer any rebuttal to my points. Keep repeating it and your followers will begin to believe your propaganda.

[SkinsandTerps]

The playoffs are inherently an unfair system. As soon as you make the playoffs, except for byes and home-field advantage, everything you did during the regular season is thrown out and no longer matters. Seattle and its 7-9 record could advance to the super bowl, despite sucking horribly for the majority of the year.

The NFL regular season is teams playing for an opportunity to get to the playoffs. The BCS system computes who is good enough to play for the championship with them only having to beat one team after the regular season to in a championship. As crappy as the Seattle season was the system rewards division champions with a playoff berth, Personally, I am fine with that. They "should" have been destroyed by the defending Champions. They were not and earned their playoff spot with that one win.

In your opinion

The soccer reference was a terrible one. Making the tournament useless.

[Rogah]

I realize that, but others do not. They think adding more teams into a flawed system will somehow fix it. With the two team system we are consistently seeing an issue of having three or four teams who should be considered. If we invite four teams we will have a total of eight who make a strong case for consideration and if we invite eight there will be a total of sixteen teams who should have a chance to get in.

Changes need to go well beyond simply adding a playoff for any sense of fair play to be realized.I disagree. Right now we have a 2 team system so some legit contenders get left out. I believe there have been something like 5 undefeated teams who were not able to play for a national championship, one of whom came from the SEC. Think about it: A team went undefeated in the SEC and then was not given the chance to play for a championship.

If there were a 8 team playoff, then you would pretty much guarantee you could grab any 0 or 1 loss team from a major conference, plus any dark horse from a minor conference that went undefeated.

Any complaining from #9 (or lower) is going to fall on deaf ears. Using this year as an example, it would be tough for a 2-loss OU or LSU to claim they got hosed by not making the tournament.

[Rogah]

I am not suggesting that it is, I am just providing an example of what needs to happen in order to be fair. There is nothing fair about a playoff, especially when you consider the fact that a team ranking in the bottom half of the league earned a playoff spot over teams with 10 wins.



They play at most twice a week and use a lot of reserves when those situations arise. I'm not asking the NFL to change their system, just for fans to realize that the playoff system is not an end all formula to find out who is the best in the most fair fashion.Actually, it pretty much is the most fair fashion. Just because upsets happen doesn't mean the system is unfair. Every single team starts the season at 0-0. You can't go undefeated and miss the playoffs. Every game is equally important (well, that is, a game in September is as important as a game in December but yes some games like divisional games are more important).

The teams that make the playoffs are decided on the field. The teams that advance in the playoffs are decided on the field. It don't get any more fair than that. This is sports and upsets happen so sure, the best team doesn't always win. But the process by which a champion is crowned is as fair as can be imagined.

[DFWJC]

In your opinion, of course. I like how you have twice now attempted to discredit my argument by saying I am completely wrong yet refuse to offer any rebuttal to my points. Keep repeating it and your followers will begin to believe your propaganda.
I'm sorry. It's just that the rebuttles seem so elementary (and to me so incredibly self-evident). I'm sure you've heard them all before--some here even--it would be old hat.

The point of this thread was to point out the obvious--to me anyway. It was not to get in yet another old-tired debate on the validity of an 8,12, or 16 team tourney vs the current BCS format.

Nobody (or at least not me) said a playoff is perfect. Nothing is perfect. Playoffs do not guarantee that the best team even wins. But it does guarantee that a team MUST lose before they are not champion. You have to actaully win on th efiedl and not just in the polls. It's just, IMO, preposterously better than the BCS.

My "followers"? I don't have any followers, just those that I might share a similar view with on the topic....and they are vast in number.
I could talk to 1000 college football fans and might find 50-60 that think along your lines...if that.

But like I said, it really is your right to think that way and you aren't completely alone.

[Rogah]

Nobody (or at least not me) said a playoff is perfect. Nothing is perfect. Playoffs do not guarantee that the best team even wins. But it does guarantee that a team MUST lose before they are not champion. You have to actaully win on th efiedl and not just in the polls. It's just, IMO, preposterously better than the BCS.+1. Winning on the field trumps anything that involves an opinion poll over who the "best" team is. I think most people would say the Patriots were better than the Giants in 2008, the Rams were better than the Patriots in 2002 and the Russkies were better than the Americans in Lake Placid. But all anyone cares about is who won the darn game.

[casmith07]

:jackpot: