I'd like to pose a question about the BCS title

RevLimiter · Post by **RevLimiter** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 4:50 am

Now that LSU has won the MNC game, and they share a two-loss season with tOSU, doesn't that give one-loss (and Orange Bowl champ) KU JayhawkFan a legit gripe that THEY should be the MNCs?

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I heard the question posed on the radio today, so I just wanted to see what you fellas think.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 4:55 am

Until there is a playoff, it will be impossible to quantify. Did you enjoy the season? That's what it's all about, really. I have to admit, I didn't enjoy this season much. PSU players really embarrassed the program on and off the field, and the team folded against the good teams they played. I am looking forward to 2008...

Mook · Post by **Mook** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:13 am

RevLimiter wrote:Now that LSU has won the MNC game, and they share a two-loss season with tOSU, doesn't that give one-loss (and Orange Bowl champ) KU JayhawkFan a legit gripe that THEY should be the MNCs?

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I heard the question posed on the radio today, so I just wanted to see what you fellas think.

As a Kansas fan I'd like to say yes.....BUT, this is the crappy system all these schools agreed to, so that's what it is and none of the school have any right to bitch about it in my opinion. I think a number of teams could legitimitely make a claim for national title, Kansas included (and trust me when I say that I never thought I would utter those words!!!)

As for enjoying the year, obviously as a Kansas fan the year was very enjoyable. But as for being satsified with the BCS Bowl Selections and the "Championship" game, well lets just say that I was less than enthused.

Oh well, it gives us something to talk about.

Mook · Post by **Mook** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:14 am

In fact, I'll bet one loss Kansas is ranked behind LSU, Ohio State, USC and UGA in the final poll.........

Mook · Post by **Mook** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:14 am

And possibly WVU.

Adelpiero · Post by **Adelpiero** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:19 am

fuck no

and KU should be behind Mizzou

KU did not win their division, they have a right to nothing. fuckin tards. What next? claiming that since Mu has 2 conference losses, there is a tie for North title? Oh wait, you loser tards already tried that.

memo to KU tards, you have no dog in the fight. you couldnt beat your rival on neutral field, and you didnt win your division, so fuck off and go away. Enjoy 3 losses next season. rack KU having to face OU, UT, and Tech.

Mook · Post by **Mook** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:27 am

Adel - Should Oklahoma be ranked ahead of MU??
Pitt ahead of WVU??
Stanford ahead of USC??
Arkansas and Kentucky ahead of LSU??
Illinois ahead of Ohio State??
Wait, but then Texas Tech and Colorado would have to be ranked ahead of OU even though MU defeated them, but OU has to be ahead of MU since they beat MU TWICE!

That logic doesn't work adel and you know it......apparently we can't have a national champion this year because everybody lost......call off the season.

Of course the only game where head to head matters for Mizzou fan is the KU game.......

For the record Mizzou is one the teams that I think has a legit gripe for the national title and the team that did get screwed by BCS rules. However it wasn't Kansas that screwed them it was the ridiculous BCS rule limiting conferences to two teams. But once again these are the rules all the schools agreed to.....so too bad.

Fuck it, at least in basketball we don't have to worry about all this BS.

Adelpiero · Post by **Adelpiero** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:39 am

Mizzou Big12 North Champs 1-0 vs Chicken sqawks

Suck on it Beaker

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:39 am

Paul,

Until CF gets a playoff, there will always be controversy.

If you're asking which is the best team, this year ... lots of arguments could be made.

The bottom line is you have two commissioners -- of the Big 10 and the Pac 10, namely (and others) -- who would rather have this bullshit "system," than make even more money, because, quite frankly, when it comes down to it, they are Goddamned pussies. They're more interested in hanging on to power than they are in college football.

They mask it in "tradition," and "OH! But no! We can't have our players playing in games during their Finals!"

Tradition.

Let's talk about that for a minute.

The real irony is that the few folks in power who could actually change things are pretty much psychotic.

Either they are too old, or too rich or too stupid, or both, to understand the HUNGER that this country has for a real college football playoff.

This isn't rocket science.

It's done in the "minor" NCAA programs, amazingly. Btw, excuse the hell out of me for actually mentioning those pesky sub-teams' playoffs. After all, they have Finals, right?

Pathetic.

So, to answer your question, Paul, FUCK YES.

KU has a gripe.
USC has a gripe.
Georgia has a gripe.
WVa. has a gripe.

Every true college football fan has a gripe over this horseshit system we have.

What can we do?

Outside of writing to the NCAA and signing on-line petitions, and smacking our own in here ('sup Dins? Nice "championship," again.)

I'm not sure, other than to stop sending money to our respective universities, or at least declining it, and STATING WHY. And even if you're not an almunus, how about ending your own subscription to ___ "insider."

Fuck "accepting" this bullshit MNC, EVER.

Oh wait, I forgot: Let's go ahead and put New England and Dallas in the Super Bowl, immediately.

We could listen to endless stories about what a "great" season it was for both teams, on TV, radio and in here.

That would be awesome! For a month straight, instead of playing actutal games!

IN,

Sin,

Jim Delany and Tom Hansen.

That makes about as much sense as the "victor," tonight.

Mook · Post by **Mook** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:43 am

Adelpiero wrote:Mizzou Big12 North Champs 1-0 vs Chicken sqawks

Suck on it Beaker

So, I'll just assume that you do believe OU should be ranked ahead of MU....

King Crimson · Post by **King Crimson** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 6:29 am

i think you could make the argument that 1 loss 06 Wisconsin got serious media fellatio (pre-bowl game, despite not playing tOSU) and 07 KU just sort of gets disrespected (didn't play OU or Texas)....despite winning the Orange Bowl.

and to ask the question why that is?

but, in topic, KU doesn't deserve national title consideration anymore than Boise deserved the NC last year.

MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan · Tue Jan 08, 2008 7:23 am

RadioFan wrote:
Oh wait, I forgot: Let's go ahead and put New England and Dallas in the Super Bowl, immediately.

Actually, I think this NFL season makes as good a case as any why there shouldn't be a CFB playoff. I mean, if the Pats somehow get knocked out in their first playoff game, does that mean they weren't the best team in the NFL this season? I'm just playing devil's advocate here, b/c I want a playoff in CFB as much as the next guy, but if the Super Bowl is anything other than Dallas vs. New England, wouldn't you agree that the playoff format actually robbed us of seeing the two best teams play for the title?

Like I said, I want a playoff too, but making an analogy to the NFL, especially this year, when the best team in the league has already been decided in pretty much everyone's minds, is just not a good idea.

If you want to determine who the best team is at the end of the season, then a playoff is the way to go. Or maybe you just like the inherent excitement generated by a playoff, a la March Madness. I sure as hell do. But the notion that a playoff would consistently determine who the best team is in CFB throughout the course of the whole season is naive at best.

SoCalTrjn · Post by **SoCalTrjn** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 9:47 am

Tired of the "Thats what these schools agreed to" Bullshit.
Show me one document signed by Steven Sample or Mike Garrett that says that the winner of the BCS Title game will be recognized by the University of Southern California as the undisputed National Champion

Go ahead, Ill wait.

The conference presidents agreed to put their schools in to this system for a hefty price that is paid to the conferences, its a money driven system, not one designed to give an undisputed champion. Southerners will believe anything told to them, no wonder that area is called the bible belt, its full of stupid people.

The Money only goes to the conferences if they keep the bowl system, if there is an NCAA playoff, than the NCAA gets the money (like in March Madness) The "they will make a boat load of more money with a playoff" isnt true amd basketball proves it.

This system is one big shit sandwich and every year they want the fans to take another bite

Terry in Crapchester · Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:16 am

SoCalTrjn wrote:Tired of the "Thats what these schools agreed to" Bullshit.
Show me one document signed by Steven Sample or Mike Garrett that says that the winner of the BCS Title game will be recognized by the University of Southern California as the undisputed National Champion

Go ahead, Ill wait.

The conference presidents agreed to put their schools in to this system for a hefty price that is paid to the conferences, its a money driven system, not one designed to give an undisputed champion. Southerners will believe anything told to them, no wonder that area is called the bible belt, its full of stupid people.

The Money only goes to the conferences if they keep the bowl system, if there is an NCAA playoff, than the NCAA gets the money (like in March Madness) The "they will make a boat load of more money with a playoff" isnt true amd basketball proves it.

This system is one big shit sandwich and every year they want the fans to take another bite

Mike Garrett might not have signed it, but Tom Hansen most assuredly did. And whether you realize it or not, he, along with Jim Delany and the Rose Bowl Committee, is one of the biggest obstructionists to a true playoff system.

I've said this before and I realize that I'm probably in the minority on this board on this one, but the push toward superconferences has not been good for college football. If we still had the number of independents that we had in the 80's, we'd probably have a playoff by now.

And the Pac-10 and Big 10, in particular, are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 12:57 pm

RevLimiter wrote:Now that LSU has won the MNC game, and they share a two-loss season with tOSU, doesn't that give one-loss (and Orange Bowl champ) KU JayhawkFan a legit gripe that THEY should be the MNCs?

I think "one loss" Hawaii wold have a gripe about that.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 4:06 pm

Sudden Sam wrote:
IndyFrisco wrote:
RevLimiter wrote:Now that LSU has won the MNC game, and they share a two-loss season with tOSU, doesn't that give one-loss (and Orange Bowl champ) KU JayhawkFan a legit gripe that THEY should be the MNCs?
I think "one loss" Hawaii wold have a gripe about that.
I was going to mention that.

By Rev's logic, Hawaii and Kansas should share the title. Ridiculous.

Not sure that is by "Rev's logic" as he at least admitted this time it wasn't his take but someone else's. Props to him for finally citing a source rather than taking it as his own.

Adelpiero · Post by **Adelpiero** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 4:23 pm

he got that from KCtards radio. The beakers are claiming they deserve title consideration. what a joke.

but i still stand by my earlier staement, OSU and LSU could be beat by 3-5 of the team in top10. And this ain't a wishing in one hand thing, i feel MU,OU,WVU,USC,etc could beat both of teams that played last night in national title game. Many years you couldnt make the claim, but this year i think its a safe bet.

SEASON OVER · Post by **SEASON OVER** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 6:28 pm

Mook wrote:......apparently we can't have a national champion this year because everybody lost......call off the season.

Hahhahaaaahaaaaa...we got a bingo, back row....Hahahhhaaaa...hold your hand up little boy......Mook? is it?
Hahhahaaaahhaaa

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:10 am

MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan wrote:But the notion that a playoff would consistently determine who the best team is in CFB throughout the course of the whole season is naive at best.

Good point.

Thing is, though, that crazy, wacky notion seems to work in every other major sports competition around the world, except CF.

What we have now is a 2-6 week break between the regular season and a bunch of fucking glorified scrimmages, dressed up as bowl games. All of them mean exactly jack shit, save one. But I guess if you want to argue -- in tOSU's case at least -- that having 6 weeks off and then playing in the MNC game is representative of throughout the course of the whole season. Yeah, that makes sense.

That's about as laughable as the "tradition" of the "Insight.com Bowl," or the "Blockbuster Bowl," for that matter. Anybody remember that abortion, with the Blockbuster movie tickets, painted in both end zones?

From what I've read and heard, it's a freaking miracle that the Big 10 and the Pac 10 even agreed to the BCS format.

Let's face it, when it comes down to it, the real problem here is two power-hungry assholes who are more concerned with a Goddamed parade -- and their own personal petty fiefdoms -- than college football.

Jim Delany and Tom Hansen make me fucking ill with their pseudo platitudes about "tradition" and "But ... but ... but ... the student-athletes, they need time for finals..." in public, and their power-plays in private. FUCK them.

It's time for a playoff, and everybody knows it.

RACK the Ga. athletic director, btw, for bringing this up, the day after LSU won the championship. Granted, it was bad timing from LSU's standpoint, but any and all public pressure on these assholes is a good thing.

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:18 am

A champion is determined by single-elimination playoffs in every major sport, BtH.

Usually, you have to get to a tournament, to even play for a championship, via a round-robin, so yeah I get what you're saying.

Obviously, the best models for CF -- given the regular season is the virtual "round robin," are the NFL or the NCAA tourney.

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:20 am

I'll amend my previous statement. Obviously, the NBA or NHL don't have single elimination. They have more playoff games, not less.

Crazy!!

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:24 am

[OT] 'sup Butty? I haven't read your thread yet in the main forum, but I'll get to it. Welcome back! [/OT]

Carry on ...

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:27 am

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:53 pm

What I find humorous is all the jackasses who think the regular season will lose its lustre like in NCAA BB. There are so few games compared to other sports it is impossible. Even college basketball they play 30+ games. Is the regular season in the NFL meaningless and unexciting? Hell no.

Adelpiero · Post by **Adelpiero** » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:36 pm

they need to go to a +1 immediately. Shove it up Pac10 and Big10 ass.

if they dont want to play, they can fight it out in Rose every year. Let the tards have their day in Pasadena.

Canadian · Post by **Canadian** » Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:28 pm

I would say USC should of been #1. They would 'smoke' LSU..

smackaholic · Post by **smackaholic** » Sat Jan 12, 2008 1:47 am

RadioFan wrote:I'll amend my previous statement. Obviously, the NBA or NHL don't have single elimination. They have more playoff games, not less.

Crazy!!

don't forget us

sin,

that other sport that doesn't have single elimination (baseball)

RF, what the fukk were you smoking when you said all major sports are single elimination. The NFL is the only one that does.

Dinsdale · Post by **Dinsdale** » Sat Jan 12, 2008 2:21 am

PSSST!

A "single-elimination tournament" means a team only needs to be eliminated once -- as opposed to a double-elimination tourney where there's a losers' bracket, the winner of which goes to the final, but must win one match (regardless how many games the "match" might consist of) as opposed to two for the finalist from the losers' bracket.

All major sports are indeed single-elimination tournaments. NFL, NBA, MLB, and NHL anyway.

smackaholic · Post by **smackaholic** » Sat Jan 12, 2008 3:50 pm

You could argue it that way, but, imo, single elimination pretty much means lose a game, go the fukk home.

Until you can expect fukkers to play football on consecutive games, we are stuck with the one and done format, unless you want the playoffs to last 6 months.

So, since we pretty much agree that CF should have a playoff, how many rounds should it go? Is plus one, good enough? Then you get to listen to #5 bitch and wine.

I think 3 rounds is good. if you are number 9, you can just go fukk yourself.

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 2:35 am

smackaholic wrote:You could argue it that way, but, imo, single elimination pretty much means lose a game, go the fukk home.

Uh, no.

What part of "more playoffs" are you missing here?

Maybe you missed my earlier post:

Obviously, the best models for CF -- given the regular season is the virtual "round robin," are the NFL or the NCAA tourney.

But, OK, if you want to make that argument ... fine, technically, there is no "single-elimination" in the NBA, MLB or NHL. They just have playoff series, which are single elimination, obviously.

If MLB were college football, it would just go ahead and put the Yankees in the WS, every fucking year, right after the regular season, without any playoff games whatsoever -- at least during the last decade or so. Hope that helps clear things up as to how ridiculous CF's "system" is.

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:21 am

Believe the Heupel wrote:Wait.

You mean they'd determine the AL Champion by taking the two teams with the best records over the course of the regular season and having them play to determine the championship?

No, obviously not. Though, I did laugh, hard.

Believe the Heupel wrote:Wow, that sounds eerily familiar.

In what way?

Oh ... you must mean the way LSU, as a "best team," waited 5 weeks, before playing a game. Yeah, now there's a REAL championship. Just like every other championship team has to wait, for weeks on end. RACK that. There's nothing better. It's the epitomy of championship: Waiting. Excellent. Let's face it, it just doesn't get any better than that.

Awesome. What a great system college football is. No Really, AWESOME.

Btw, as I said before and I'll say it again, let's go ahead and crown NE as SB Champions.

No need for them to play any more games except for the SB.

In fact, it's pretty ridculous that they even have to show up for these so-called "playoffs." It's all a bunch of bullshit, anyway, right BtH?

By God, nothing sucks more than the NFL playoffs, with ~ gasp ~ college players taking part.

The absolute Horrah.

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:46 am

Believe the Heupel wrote:
RadioFan wrote:In what way?
In the way that that's pretty much exactly what they did for about a century.

And?

You have got to be kidding me.

Ok, I submit. I'm wrong. All of those NFL films, all of those World Cups, all of those NBA, NHL and MLB Finals, are all a bunch of horseshit. No real "champions" there. This whole "playoff" deal is really just a gimmick.

Besides, what beats the 2007 Bowl Season?

It's really, really good to know, that we, as college football fans, have so many MEANINGFUL games to watch, during bowl season. It just doesn't get any better than bowl games.

M Club · Post by **M Club** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:23 am

soccer champions are generally decided by who has the best record. cup football is a different story.

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:31 am

M Club wrote:soccer champions are generally decided by who has the best record.

Wrong.

Soccer, on most any level, kicks college footballs' ass, when it comes to playoffs.

Which, btw, makes college football and those who oppose a playoff, especially pathetic.

M Club · Post by **M Club** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:51 am

RadioFan wrote:
M Club wrote:soccer champions are generally decided by who has the best record.
Wrong.

Soccer, on most any level, kicks college footballs' ass, when it comes to playoffs.

Which, btw, makes college football and those who oppose a playoff, especially pathetic.

uh, link. domestic leagues are generally decided by who has the most points. like i said, cup football is different.

MiketheangrydrunkenCUfan · Sun Jan 13, 2008 9:38 am

RadioFan wrote:
Believe the Heupel wrote: Besides, what beats the 2007 Bowl Season?

It's really, really good to know, that we, as college football fans, have so many MEANINGFUL games to watch, during bowl season. It just doesn't get any better than bowl games.

17 of those 32 games were decided by 7 points or less.

As far as your implication that the lower-tier bowl games are meaningless, I guess that depends on your perspective.

MuchoBulls · Post by **MuchoBulls** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:09 pm

RevLimiter wrote:Now that LSU has won the MNC game, and they share a two-loss season with tOSU, doesn't that give one-loss (and Orange Bowl champ) KU JayhawkFan a legit gripe that THEY should be the MNCs?

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I heard the question posed on the radio today, so I just wanted to see what you fellas think.

I don't feel as if they do have a legitimate gripe because they didn't win their conference, let alone even play for their conference Championship.

Terry in Crapchester · Mon Jan 14, 2008 1:10 pm

Believe the Heupel wrote:You mean that the baseball postseason is much better now that there's teams with barely winning records making it in instead of the top two teams over the course of the season?

College football has that as well. Go 6-6 in a BCS conference, and odds are that you'll be bowling somewhere. Go 7-5 and it's pretty much a guarantee.

The bowl system simultaneously rewards mediocrity and punishes close-but-not-quite-there success. It's the worst of all possible worlds in that regard.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Mon Jan 14, 2008 3:16 pm

Comparing the legitimacy of the old school MLB regular season to CFB's is just absurd. Over the course of an 11 million game season like baseball has, you get a pretty good feel for who the two best teams are. Everybody plays everybody in their league at least once. In CFB, you've got a measly 12 regular season games to determine who the two best teams are. 70% of these games will be against in-conference foes and there's a pretty damn good chance the other 30% will be against three out of conference slappys. Once in a blue moon you'll see a regular season matchup with two top 10 teams. That just isn't enough.

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Tue Jan 15, 2008 3:19 am

Believe the Heupel wrote:You mean that the baseball postseason is much better now that there's teams with barely winning records making it in instead of the top two teams over the course of the season?

[timeout] Hell, you know me in here, I love a good argument. [/timeout]

What mgo said.

What part of "I'd like to see more playoffs, instead of less" are you having trouble with here?

Hell, in CF's case ANY playoff would be preferrable to what we have now. See, that's the thing about old-time baseball.

They had PLAYOFFS, from the start. Even baseball in the 19th century isn't as retarded as certain asshats in college football, in the 21st century.