Except until postseason, they're not likely to play a top 10 team. Or possibly even top 20.
Which makes them more likely to be undefeated. Usually a non-BCS team with a loss has no chance to get in, regardless of who's on their schedule. An exception would be BYU this year, if they were to beat Oklahoma it could overshadow a later loss.
Boise St has a good chance too if they can get past Oregon, but Oregon's always much tougher in the beginning of the year. If you play them after Halloween, usually half their starting lineup is injured by then.
Well, outside of OSU's complete inability to beat an SEC team and Michigan's inability to beat a PAC 10 team (but we beat SEC teams!) they do reasonably well in bowl games usually. Except last year, and probably this year.
It's just hard to see perennially the sports media treat the Big 10 like they're the second or third best conference when there's no post-season history to refute such a claim. The Big Ten, for the most part, would have trouble keeping pace with the ACC, or possibly even the Mountain West with BYU, TCU, and Utah on their side.
I think mostly I'd like to see Notre Dame join up and have them play a true championship like the two best conferences, SEC and Big 12, do. And that goes for the Pac-10 as well.
The media rips the Big Ten routinely lately. After the '06 title game it got pretty bad. However, if you factor in the way the bowl tie ins work with the frequency of Big Ten teams getting at large bids (some undeserved because of the Rose Bowl history thing), you frequently get match ups like the Big Ten #3 vs. SEC #2 in the not Citrus Bowl. When adjusted for that, the Big Ten does not so bad.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I've actually been thinking about dropping $10 on UW winning the Pac-10 and BCSNC; someone posted on a fan sight last week that they'd found almost 10,000:1 on the Pac-10 title, and that's just too damn funny. Or painful. Or maybe both.
What do you think of college footbal? Does [your team] suck as bad as [pundit] says it does?
I'm a UW fan. It's not possible to suck as bad as pundits say we do. All we have to do is beat Idaho and we've taken a huge step up.
I've already stocked up on booze for when we lose to Idaho.
I used to cheer for UW because I feel bad for Tyrone Willingham. He got shafted by ND so hard. That is a place I hate for many legitimate reasons.
When they play ND is the one time I root for OSU... to win 2-0 with as many injuries as possible.
Same when Michigan plays them. Also: Bowl Games. Representing the Big IO.
There's actually eleven teams in the Big Ten. I say we kick out the conference newbie or change the name completely.
Actually you're right, I quietly don't root against Ohio State in bowl games. I can't say I root for them, but it'd be nice if you guys stopped embarrassing the conference. :P At least Michigan can beat SEC teams!
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
God I hope UCLA isn't awful this year. Last year started off so promising.
Quit trying to horn in on football. It's all we Trojans have left before having to deal with the smoking crater that was USC basketball.
I don't think you'll have to worry about UCLA football for awhile. I'd just like us to have a nice winning regular season record, and maybe win a bowl game against somebody who's supposed to cream us.
...
Maybe I'd be better off following Kentucky football...
Actually you're right, I quietly don't root against Ohio State in bowl games. I can't say I root for them, but it'd be nice if you guys stopped embarrassing the conference. :P At least Michigan can beat SEC teams!
Dude, dude, you do not want to go down this path.
I'd rather talk about how cool a bracket format for the NC would be.
Actually you're right, I quietly don't root against Ohio State in bowl games. I can't say I root for them, but it'd be nice if you guys stopped embarrassing the conference. :P At least Michigan can beat SEC teams!
Dude, dude, you do not want to go down this path.
I'd rather talk about how cool a bracket format for the NC would be.
Am I the only college football fan on the planet who doesn't really care for the idea of a gigantic cluster fuck playoff? The current system isn't perfect, but the faith put in a one-and-done format bracket to produce a definitive One True Champion is just silly unless only conference champions (and ALL conference champions) get a shot at it.
Actually you're right, I quietly don't root against Ohio State in bowl games. I can't say I root for them, but it'd be nice if you guys stopped embarrassing the conference. :P At least Michigan can beat SEC teams!
Dude, dude, you do not want to go down this path.
I'd rather talk about how cool a bracket format for the NC would be.
Am I the only college football fan on the planet who doesn't really care for the idea of a gigantic cluster fuck playoff? The current system isn't perfect, but the faith put in a one-and-done format bracket to produce a definitive One True Champion is just silly unless only conference champions (and ALL conference champions) get a shot at it.
Obviously, none of us want this but even Obama voiced his support for a playoff bracket. The current system is a gigantic cluster fuck.
Actually you're right, I quietly don't root against Ohio State in bowl games. I can't say I root for them, but it'd be nice if you guys stopped embarrassing the conference. :P At least Michigan can beat SEC teams!
Dude, dude, you do not want to go down this path.
I'd rather talk about how cool a bracket format for the NC would be.
Am I the only college football fan on the planet who doesn't really care for the idea of a gigantic cluster fuck playoff? The current system isn't perfect, but the faith put in a one-and-done format bracket to produce a definitive One True Champion is just silly unless only conference champions (and ALL conference champions) get a shot at it.
it's like the quote about democracy; it sucks, but all the other systems are worse.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
I'm telling you guys, all 6 conference champions and 2 at-large bids (based off of the BCS ratings). If you can't make it into one of these categories, you don't belong in the conversation.
Actually you're right, I quietly don't root against Ohio State in bowl games. I can't say I root for them, but it'd be nice if you guys stopped embarrassing the conference. :P At least Michigan can beat SEC teams!
Dude, dude, you do not want to go down this path.
I'd rather talk about how cool a bracket format for the NC would be.
Am I the only college football fan on the planet who doesn't really care for the idea of a gigantic cluster fuck playoff? The current system isn't perfect, but the faith put in a one-and-done format bracket to produce a definitive One True Champion is just silly unless only conference champions (and ALL conference champions) get a shot at it.
it's like the quote about democracy; it sucks, but all the other systems are worse.
I think my opinion of any bracket playoff system is going to be utterly dependant on how they limit and select the participants. Can you win the title without winning your conference? Fail - since we can't run a best of 5 or 7 playoff series, the sample size in the regular season has to carry substantial weight. Can you win your conference and NOT have a shot at winning the title? Fail - that's the biggest problem with the system we use now, and I can't believe people would be happy with retaining it.
Past that point, I have literally zero confidence that replaying the tournament 3 or 4 times would lead to a consistent result. So what would be the point? It's no more definitive than the way we do things now, it just leaves less room for bitching at the end of the season and as much as people hate the BCS, they love to hate the BCS and get to revel in the subjectivity of the 'title'. Hell, we just recognized a national title we supposedly won from some poll or the other in 1960.
Besides, what else would we do from January to August?
If you played the basketball tournament 3 or 4 times you'd almost never get the same champion. It's less subjective though, and that's the important thing.
It would require a) at large teams or b) making every conference either play everybody within PAC 10 style, or split into divisions. As you don't want a scenario where two undefeated teams from the same conference (the Big 10) don't play each other all year.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
My (possibly flawed for some reason) setup would be an eight team tournament, including the six major conference champs and two at large bids going to other teams in the top ten, with one of the at larges going by rule to a mid-major team if they finish within the top ten. Maybe you could have an exclusionary rule of a conference champ manages to fall outside the top 15 or something.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
If you played the basketball tournament 3 or 4 times you'd almost never get the same champion. It's less subjective though, and that's the important thing.
It would require a) at large teams or b) making every conference either play everybody within PAC 10 style, or split into divisions. As you don't want a scenario where two undefeated teams from the same conference (the Big 10) don't play each other all year.
This exactly. The playoffs are all about matchups and luck in any sport.
I still want a playoff and I'm a Gator, goddammit!
This exactly. The playoffs are all about matchups and luck in any sport.
I still want a playoff and I'm a Gator, goddammit!
This is the problem with an overly large playoff. Luck should not be a major factor in determing which team wins the championship.
In my opinion, any playoff field larger than 12 is pushing it in college football. At 10 spots in the current BCS lineup, we already get matchups like Wake Forest - Louisville and Virginia Tech - Cincinnati. Not one of those teams even deserved to be considered for a National Championship in those years, but in a 12 team playoff they'd have a shot.
I'm okay with this if it means teams like Utah and Boise State get a fair shot, but I'm not willing to sacrifice college football's amazing regular season just to prove "on the field" that Ohio State or Florida or USC or Texas is better than the 2nd place team in the WAC in a given year.
This exactly. The playoffs are all about matchups and luck in any sport.
I still want a playoff and I'm a Gator, goddammit!
This is the problem with an overly large playoff. Luck should not be a major factor in determing which team wins the championship.
In my opinion, any playoff field larger than 12 is pushing it in college football. At 10 spots in the current BCS lineup, we already get matchups like Wake Forest - Louisville and Virginia Tech - Cincinnati. Not one of those teams even deserved to be considered for a National Championship in those years, but in a 12 team playoff they'd have a shot.
I'm okay with this if it means teams like Utah and Boise State get a fair shot, but I'm not willing to sacrifice college football's amazing regular season just to prove "on the field" that Ohio State or Florida or USC or Texas is better than the 2nd place team in the WAC in a given year.
As opposed to now, when luck doesn't have anything to do with it. A huge part of going undefeated is luck based, especially with a bizarrely shaped ball and a sport which naturally features a ton of injuries.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Frankly I'm tired of the idea that there's something particularly "amazing" about the college football season. The entire first half of it is largely garbage, as the various contenders get their cupcakes and weaker conference opponents out of the way. The second half is often really good, but a playoff would only extend the really good part for another couple weeks.
I would be pretty comfortable with an 8 team playoff, or a 12 team playoff with some byes. I have a hard time seeing how you'd manage to invite 8 teams to a tournament and leave someone out who had a really credible shot at winning the thing. The regular season would maintain all it's drama, because a loss (or two, if you're a traditional powerhouse) is still probably going to keep you out of the playoff.
Eat it You Nasty Pig. on
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
But apparently inviting teams that aren't 'supposed' to win apparently ruins the entire thing, even if they go all the way, they still ruined it. By not being a marketing powerhouse.
FyreWulff on
0
Options
Hi I'm Vee!Formerly VH; She/Her; Is an E X P E R I E N C ERegistered Userregular
edited July 2009
Since 1979, four 3 seeds, one 4 seed, two 6 seeds, and one 8 seed have won NCAA Basketball championships. That means more than 25% of the championships in college basketball have been won by teams that aren't in the top 8.
Obviously basketball =/= football and whatnot, but I could see the benefit of extending the playoffs past 8 teams.
64 football teams would obviously be unreasonable, but fun as hell! :P
Don't they have a pseudo-playoff system in the other divisions of college football though?
It's not "pseudo." It's a playoff. Best four teams from each four regions play bracket-style. My only quibble is that it's not "Best 16 teams," but "Best Four Teams from Each region." If Div-1A were to go to that, I'd be fucking livid.
"No, uh, Fresno State, you get to go to the Fiesta Bowl, but sorry LSU, we already have Texas, Florida, Oklahoma, and Alabama going ahead of you."
I would be pretty comfortable with an 8 team playoff, or a 12 team playoff with some byes. I have a hard time seeing how you'd manage to invite 8 teams to a tournament and leave someone out who had a really credible shot at winning the thing. The regular season would maintain all it's drama, because a loss (or two, if you're a traditional powerhouse) is still probably going to keep you out of the playoff.
This is what I'm saying. Make it inclusive enough to give everyone a shot, but exlusive enough that the regular season still separates the pretenders from the field.
Teams like Utah and TCU can be rewarded for having a great season, while the big boys can schedule interesting non-conference games without fear of being eliminated by one loss.
The 8-12 team range seems to be the ideal for this goal.
Also, no autobids. If your conference can't put a team in the top 12 after 12 games, it doesn't have a team that deserves a chance to play for the championship.
Don't they have a pseudo-playoff system in the other divisions of college football though?
It's not "pseudo." It's a playoff. Best four teams from each four regions play bracket-style. My only quibble is that it's not "Best 16 teams," but "Best Four Teams from Each region." If Div-1A were to go to that, I'd be fucking livid.
"No, uh, Fresno State, you get to go to the Fiesta Bowl, but sorry LSU, we already have Texas, Florida, Oklahoma, and Alabama going ahead of you."
Don't like it? Too damn bad. Win your conference next year. Period. I don't care how 'tough' your conference is; if you aren't the best team in your conference you aren't the best team in the country. End or story, as far as I'm concerned.
My system would probably look like this:
8 team playoff. 6 autmatic bids, initially going to the conference champs of the BCS leagues. The last two slots go to the highest rated conference champions from non BCS leagues. Texas came in second in the Big 12 and wants a shot? Too damn bad, beat Oklahoma next season. ND wants to continue to be a league unto itself? Tough shit, the Big East is waiting right over there. If you aren't the best in your conference, you aren't the best in the country by default. Better luck next year.
Every 5 years, the auto bids are redistributed based on tournament performance - the 6conferences with the highest average annual finish get autobids, everyone else gets tossed into the 'best of the rest' pile, I don't care if that's the SEC or ACC or Pac-10.
Don't they have a pseudo-playoff system in the other divisions of college football though?
It's not "pseudo." It's a playoff. Best four teams from each four regions play bracket-style. My only quibble is that it's not "Best 16 teams," but "Best Four Teams from Each region." If Div-1A were to go to that, I'd be fucking livid.
"No, uh, Fresno State, you get to go to the Fiesta Bowl, but sorry LSU, we already have Texas, Florida, Oklahoma, and Alabama going ahead of you."
Don't like it? Too damn bad. Win your conference next year. Period. I don't care how 'tough' your conference is; if you aren't the best team in your conference you aren't the best team in the country. End or story, as far as I'm concerned.
Yeah its one thing if you don't have a chance for the championship because of arguments over whether or not you're 2nd or 3rd best, its quite a different conversation if your 4th or 5th best.
Are some of you really arguing for the BCS here? You know its just to keep the bowl system in place so that 6-6 teams can play 7-5 teams in the "post season" and make as much money as possible, right?
Don't they have a pseudo-playoff system in the other divisions of college football though?
It's not "pseudo." It's a playoff. Best four teams from each four regions play bracket-style. My only quibble is that it's not "Best 16 teams," but "Best Four Teams from Each region." If Div-1A were to go to that, I'd be fucking livid.
"No, uh, Fresno State, you get to go to the Fiesta Bowl, but sorry LSU, we already have Texas, Florida, Oklahoma, and Alabama going ahead of you."
Don't like it? Too damn bad. Win your conference next year. Period. I don't care how 'tough' your conference is; if you aren't the best team in your conference you aren't the best team in the country. End or story, as far as I'm concerned.
It's an issue of money at that point. Money will beat out your fair "tough luck" situation any day.
Oh, I know that'll never happen. It's part of the reason I don't support a playoff system - anything that can actually get implemented from a $ standpoint is little better to me than what we have now in terms of crowning a 'true' champion and has the added benefit of killing off the bowl system for everyone not a fan of a truly elite team.
As much as I'd love to watch USC/Texas/OSU/Oklahoma/ND/Florida/Alabama/LSU/some ACC team go at it for a mythical-but-revered NC every damn season, I'd also like to get to watch the Clemsons and GTs and Oregons and Wisconsins match up more or less evenly for a few months before hand.
Oh, I know that'll never happen. It's part of the reason I don't support a playoff system - anything that can actually get implemented from a $ standpoint is little better to me than what we have now in terms of crowning a 'true' champion and has the added benefit of killing off the bowl system for everyone not a fan of a truly elite team.
As much as I'd love to watch USC/Texas/OSU/Oklahoma/ND/Florida/Alabama/LSU/some ACC team go at it for a mythical-but-revered NC every damn season, I'd also like to get to watch the Clemsons and GTs and Oregons and Wisconsins match up more or less evenly for a few months before hand.
It won't kill off the bowl system. The only people interested in the Humanitarian Bowl now are the fans of the 2 teams.
A playoff system would spark more interest and more money into more bowls, not less. Under the BCS, only 1 bowl matters. Under a playoff system, multiple bowls would matter. Look at the NFL - it's not like only the Super Bowl sells out and all the other playoff games are half-empty.
Saturday Night Football (on ABC)- Brent Musburger, Kirk Herbstreit and Lisa Salters
ESPN College Football Primetime (Saturday)- Brad Nessler, Todd Blackledge and Erin Andrews
ESPN2 College Football Primetime (Saturday)- Mark Jones and Bob Davie
ESPNU SEC Saturday primetime- Eric Collins and Brock Huard
ESPN College Football Primetime (Thursday)- Chris Fowler, Craig James, Jesse Palmer and Erin Andrews
ABC Saturday Afternoon- Sean McDonough, Matt Millen and Holly Rowe
ABC Saturday Afternoon- Mike Patrick, Craig James and Heather Cox
ABC or ESPN Saturday Afternoon- Ron Franklin and Ed Cunningham
ESPN College Football (Saturday afternoons)- Dave Pasch, Bob Griese and Chris Spielman
ESPN2 College Football (Saturday afternoon)- Pam Ward and Ray Bentley
ESPNU Saturday noon- Clay Matvick and David Diaz-Infante
ESPNU Saturday afternoon- Todd Harris and Charles Arbuckle
ESPNU late Saturday- Carter Blackburn and TBD
ESPN and ESPN2 Fridays and select ABC Saturdays- Joe Tessitore and Rod Gilmore
ABC, ESPN and ESPN2 Saturdays and select Fridays- Terry Gannon and David Norrie
ESPN and ESPN2 midweek games- Rece Davis, Mark May, Lou Holtz and Rob Stone
ESPNU Thursday- Charlie Neal and Jay Walker
ESPN Radio games- Bill Rosinski, Dennis Franchione and Joe Schad
SEC Network (ESPN Regional Television syndicated games)- Dave Neal, Andre Ware and Cara Capuano
BIG EAST Network (ESPN Regional Television syndicated games)- Mike Gleason, John Congemi and Quint Kessinich
ESPN Regional Television MAC Syndication- Michael Reghi and Doug Chapman
There is one team I like there (Franklin and Cunningham). And it looks like Dave Pasch who is utterly clueless gets Big Ten games again, ugh. At least he's teamed with a pair of analysts I tend to like. McDonough and Millen might be good, but as a Lions fan, I have residual loathing for Millen still.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Don't like it? Too damn bad. Win your conference next year. Period. I don't care how 'tough' your conference is; if you aren't the best team in your conference you aren't the best team in the country. End or story, as far as I'm concerned.
I'm assuming then you'd require every team be part of a conference and all conferences to have a championship. It's hardly right to have Oklahoma have to play Missouri just for conference champs while Stanford could just have a decent season and get in.
Plus your idea is just bad. Conference champs should get a bid, but no one wants to see a number 25 get in while a number 2 sits home.
Posts
... and it will be the second straight season I lost the ticket lottery.
Fuck me.
Which makes them more likely to be undefeated. Usually a non-BCS team with a loss has no chance to get in, regardless of who's on their schedule. An exception would be BYU this year, if they were to beat Oklahoma it could overshadow a later loss.
Boise St has a good chance too if they can get past Oregon, but Oregon's always much tougher in the beginning of the year. If you play them after Halloween, usually half their starting lineup is injured by then.
He's a zombie, get it right.
The media rips the Big Ten routinely lately. After the '06 title game it got pretty bad. However, if you factor in the way the bowl tie ins work with the frequency of Big Ten teams getting at large bids (some undeserved because of the Rose Bowl history thing), you frequently get match ups like the Big Ten #3 vs. SEC #2 in the not Citrus Bowl. When adjusted for that, the Big Ten does not so bad.
I'm a UW fan. It's not possible to suck as bad as pundits say we do. All we have to do is beat Idaho and we've taken a huge step up.
I used to cheer for UW because I feel bad for Tyrone Willingham. He got shafted by ND so hard. That is a place I hate for many legitimate reasons.
Let 'em eat fucking pineapples!
When they play ND is the one time I root for OSU... to win 2-0 with as many injuries as possible.
Same when Michigan plays them. Also: Bowl Games. Representing the Big IO.
There's actually eleven teams in the Big Ten. I say we kick out the conference newbie or change the name completely.
Let 'em eat fucking pineapples!
Actually you're right, I quietly don't root against Ohio State in bowl games. I can't say I root for them, but it'd be nice if you guys stopped embarrassing the conference. :P At least Michigan can beat SEC teams!
Quit trying to horn in on football. It's all we Trojans have left before having to deal with the smoking crater that was USC basketball.
...
Maybe I'd be better off following Kentucky football...
Dude, dude, you do not want to go down this path.
I'd rather talk about how cool a bracket format for the NC would be.
Let 'em eat fucking pineapples!
Am I the only college football fan on the planet who doesn't really care for the idea of a gigantic cluster fuck playoff? The current system isn't perfect, but the faith put in a one-and-done format bracket to produce a definitive One True Champion is just silly unless only conference champions (and ALL conference champions) get a shot at it.
Obviously, none of us want this but even Obama voiced his support for a playoff bracket. The current system is a gigantic cluster fuck.
Let 'em eat fucking pineapples!
it's like the quote about democracy; it sucks, but all the other systems are worse.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
I think my opinion of any bracket playoff system is going to be utterly dependant on how they limit and select the participants. Can you win the title without winning your conference? Fail - since we can't run a best of 5 or 7 playoff series, the sample size in the regular season has to carry substantial weight. Can you win your conference and NOT have a shot at winning the title? Fail - that's the biggest problem with the system we use now, and I can't believe people would be happy with retaining it.
Past that point, I have literally zero confidence that replaying the tournament 3 or 4 times would lead to a consistent result. So what would be the point? It's no more definitive than the way we do things now, it just leaves less room for bitching at the end of the season and as much as people hate the BCS, they love to hate the BCS and get to revel in the subjectivity of the 'title'. Hell, we just recognized a national title we supposedly won from some poll or the other in 1960.
Besides, what else would we do from January to August?
It would require a) at large teams or b) making every conference either play everybody within PAC 10 style, or split into divisions. As you don't want a scenario where two undefeated teams from the same conference (the Big 10) don't play each other all year.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
This exactly. The playoffs are all about matchups and luck in any sport.
I still want a playoff and I'm a Gator, goddammit!
This is the problem with an overly large playoff. Luck should not be a major factor in determing which team wins the championship.
In my opinion, any playoff field larger than 12 is pushing it in college football. At 10 spots in the current BCS lineup, we already get matchups like Wake Forest - Louisville and Virginia Tech - Cincinnati. Not one of those teams even deserved to be considered for a National Championship in those years, but in a 12 team playoff they'd have a shot.
I'm okay with this if it means teams like Utah and Boise State get a fair shot, but I'm not willing to sacrifice college football's amazing regular season just to prove "on the field" that Ohio State or Florida or USC or Texas is better than the 2nd place team in the WAC in a given year.
As opposed to now, when luck doesn't have anything to do with it. A huge part of going undefeated is luck based, especially with a bizarrely shaped ball and a sport which naturally features a ton of injuries.
I would be pretty comfortable with an 8 team playoff, or a 12 team playoff with some byes. I have a hard time seeing how you'd manage to invite 8 teams to a tournament and leave someone out who had a really credible shot at winning the thing. The regular season would maintain all it's drama, because a loss (or two, if you're a traditional powerhouse) is still probably going to keep you out of the playoff.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Obviously basketball =/= football and whatnot, but I could see the benefit of extending the playoffs past 8 teams.
64 football teams would obviously be unreasonable, but fun as hell! :P
It's not "pseudo." It's a playoff. Best four teams from each four regions play bracket-style. My only quibble is that it's not "Best 16 teams," but "Best Four Teams from Each region." If Div-1A were to go to that, I'd be fucking livid.
"No, uh, Fresno State, you get to go to the Fiesta Bowl, but sorry LSU, we already have Texas, Florida, Oklahoma, and Alabama going ahead of you."
This is what I'm saying. Make it inclusive enough to give everyone a shot, but exlusive enough that the regular season still separates the pretenders from the field.
Teams like Utah and TCU can be rewarded for having a great season, while the big boys can schedule interesting non-conference games without fear of being eliminated by one loss.
The 8-12 team range seems to be the ideal for this goal.
Also, no autobids. If your conference can't put a team in the top 12 after 12 games, it doesn't have a team that deserves a chance to play for the championship.
Don't like it? Too damn bad. Win your conference next year. Period. I don't care how 'tough' your conference is; if you aren't the best team in your conference you aren't the best team in the country. End or story, as far as I'm concerned.
My system would probably look like this:
8 team playoff. 6 autmatic bids, initially going to the conference champs of the BCS leagues. The last two slots go to the highest rated conference champions from non BCS leagues. Texas came in second in the Big 12 and wants a shot? Too damn bad, beat Oklahoma next season. ND wants to continue to be a league unto itself? Tough shit, the Big East is waiting right over there. If you aren't the best in your conference, you aren't the best in the country by default. Better luck next year.
Every 5 years, the auto bids are redistributed based on tournament performance - the 6conferences with the highest average annual finish get autobids, everyone else gets tossed into the 'best of the rest' pile, I don't care if that's the SEC or ACC or Pac-10.
Yeah its one thing if you don't have a chance for the championship because of arguments over whether or not you're 2nd or 3rd best, its quite a different conversation if your 4th or 5th best.
Are some of you really arguing for the BCS here? You know its just to keep the bowl system in place so that 6-6 teams can play 7-5 teams in the "post season" and make as much money as possible, right?
It's an issue of money at that point. Money will beat out your fair "tough luck" situation any day.
Let 'em eat fucking pineapples!
As much as I'd love to watch USC/Texas/OSU/Oklahoma/ND/Florida/Alabama/LSU/some ACC team go at it for a mythical-but-revered NC every damn season, I'd also like to get to watch the Clemsons and GTs and Oregons and Wisconsins match up more or less evenly for a few months before hand.
It won't kill off the bowl system. The only people interested in the Humanitarian Bowl now are the fans of the 2 teams.
A playoff system would spark more interest and more money into more bowls, not less. Under the BCS, only 1 bowl matters. Under a playoff system, multiple bowls would matter. Look at the NFL - it's not like only the Super Bowl sells out and all the other playoff games are half-empty.
There is one team I like there (Franklin and Cunningham). And it looks like Dave Pasch who is utterly clueless gets Big Ten games again, ugh. At least he's teamed with a pair of analysts I tend to like. McDonough and Millen might be good, but as a Lions fan, I have residual loathing for Millen still.
I'm assuming then you'd require every team be part of a conference and all conferences to have a championship. It's hardly right to have Oklahoma have to play Missouri just for conference champs while Stanford could just have a decent season and get in.
Plus your idea is just bad. Conference champs should get a bid, but no one wants to see a number 25 get in while a number 2 sits home.
Pam Ward, who is depressingly awful. Doris Burke does analysis for both men's and women's basketball on ESPN, and she is actually quite good.