In the words of Jim Mora...,

[Racing Truth]

Playoff?! Playoff?! (http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news;_ylt=AiVDRiZGopmtkz4T2sJj9MwcvrYF?slug=dw-playoff112707&prov=yhoo&type=lgns)

Yeah, I know its been discussed in the humongous CFB thread, but it really deserves its own. If nothing else, I want to engage our own version of John Saunders (f00boy;) ) in a civil discussion.

Now, I disagree with Wetzel's specifics here. 16 teams is too much. Furthermore, do I really want to see UCF-OSU playing? Eh, not really.

But he's right in disputing the ridiculous "Oh, the regular season IS the playoffs!!!!!11!" nonsense. Really? Tell me, when did Missouri and Ohio St. play? When did either one play Hawaii? Oh, they didn't? Hmmm.

The problem with the current model is the subjectivity involved. In a yr. like this, that doesn't work. First, congrats to Mizzou and WVU. They've had great yrs., and, under the current system, they'll deserve their shot (if they both win). This is NOT a slam on those two programs.

Still, how do we REALLY know they're the two best 2 teams this year? Simply b/c they only lost once and, more importantly, lost at the right time? By that criteria, the Steelers never would have had a sniff at Super Bowl XL. Now, I hate Pittspuke, but I'll never say they didn't earn/deserve that title. They absolutely showed how good they were when it mattered (playoffs) and where it mattered (the field). The NCAA would say, "Eh, that's nice, but we don't care. We have computers!" Nice system.

Is Mizzou better than LSU, OSU, UGA, VaTech, etc.? They may very well be, but we simply cannot know that, and we'll never find that out. Such a system, I submit, is fatally flawed.

"But the rivalries won't mean anything then!" Really? Don't you think these rivalries have a life of their own at this point? Many of these games have existed for close to 100 yrs. The introduction of a playoff will change all this? I doubt it.

"What about the bowls?!" Who cares?! Most bowls suck anyway, and there are WAAYYYY too many of them.

Is a playoff perfect? Of course not. I won't pretend otherwise. But it does provide two important things: Closure and Clarity. A clear, indisputed resolution is what we need.

[Sean O'Gorman]

I'm sorry, I stopped reading at the part where he said the MAC should get an automatic seed. :p

[Racing Truth]

I'm sorry, I stopped reading at the part where he said the MAC should get an automatic seed. :p

I know, I just used the article as a vehicle for discussion

[Ankf00]

Yeah, I know its been discussed in the humongous CFB thread, but it really deserves its own. If nothing else, I want to engage our own version of John Saunders (f00boy;) ) in a civil discussion. Saunders is almost as big a choad as Cowherd. "I think Virginia Tech is the #2 team in the country. Marcus Vick deserves the Heisman." :p


Now, I disagree with Wetzel's specifics here. 16 teams is too much. Furthermore, do I really want to see UCF-OSU playing? Eh, not really. The advantage of 16 teams is it legitimizes all conferences, the disadvantage is the shitacular matchups, and lets face it, D1-A isn't structured like the other divisions, there's a huge gap between BCS and non-BCS, and it's not like pro sports where division/conf strength can fluctuate heavily. Stewart Mandel's classification of D1-A into 4 tiers at the start of the season was spot on, some teams (like UGa) historically are at a certain level, they can hope to rise to the top level every now and then, but entrenching themselves permanently at that level such as Miami did in the 80's is very, VERY unlikely.

Also, in years like '04 and '05, should USC, OU, and UT have to prove themselves in 2 extra rounds vs. 2 & 3 loss teams. Should 3 loss teams even be in the conversation for a national title? I don't believe so. But 16 is the smallest “fair” playoff you could have. And that's the dillema, imo. Creating fairness while not profoundly changing the sport


But he's right in disputing the ridiculous "Oh, the regular season IS the playoffs!!!!!11!" nonsense. Really? Tell me, when did Missouri and Ohio St. play? When did either one play Hawaii? Oh, they didn't? Hmmm. Wetzel's wrong with the "we'll finally have a cindarella" point. If there was no BCS, Hawaii would be going to a good bowl vs. a good 2-3 loss opponent such as UGa or OU. Should they win that they might get a share of the title, ala BYU '84. Should tOSU get beat like last year by another southern spread in the bowl game, then Hawaii would undoubetdly by consensus champs.

Last year w/ a month left to play we had USC vs. ND/Cal/Ore/UCLA, UTK/LSU/Arky round-robin w/ UF having played Auburn and having to play LSU. tOSU/Michgan, and Big East round-robin with WVU/Lville/RU. Those teams by and large were the top 15 at the end of Oct and it all played out. But it won't always be like that, in '04 there were 3 major undefeateds which has never happened post-WWII. And this year we have a complete close order group fornication.


The problem with the current model is the subjectivity involved. In a yr. like this, that doesn't work. First, congrats to Mizzou and WVU. They've had great yrs., and, under the current system, they'll deserve their shot (if they both win). This is NOT a slam on those two programs.

Still, how do we REALLY know they're the two best 2 teams this year? Simply b/c they only lost once and, more importantly, lost at the right time? By that criteria, the Steelers never would have had a sniff at Super Bowl XL. Now, I hate Pittspuke, but I'll never say they didn't earn/deserve that title. They absolutely showed how good they were when it mattered (playoffs) and where it mattered (the field). The NCAA would say, "Eh, that's nice, but we don't care. We have computers!" Nice system. Steelers, Florida Marlins, that's all well and good. UGa and USC are playing some of the best football right now, but shouldn't UGa's getting pasted by UTK and USC getting punked at home by the last place team in conference matter? The fact that those losses do matter makes CFB different, why does it have to be the same as basketball where everyone and their mother makes playoffs? It's like handing out little league trophies to everybody. We got pasted at home by KSU, even though it was only 1-loss, that ensured we were going to be the last place 1-loss team, the OU loss killed serious hopes for conference and elminated any possibility of MNC (although w/ this crazy season, even after the OU loss we could’ve still won conference w/ a win vs. aggy, and we were likely BCS-bound). Even if UT beat aggy w/ a 16 team playoff in place w/ 5 at larges (would probably be top 10 at end of season in such case), in my opinion it’s atrocious that we would still have a shot at a title.


Is Mizzou better than LSU, OSU, UGA, VaTech, etc.? They may very well be, but we simply cannot know that, and we'll never find that out. Such a system, I submit, is fatally flawed. true, it’s not perfect. But if VT and UGa wanted to be part of the conversation they shouldn’t have allowed themselves to be rolled by LSU and UTK. (Same reason Tebow doesn’t deserve the Heisman, LSU and UGa rivalry losses, and Auburn revenge game loss at home, but that’s another conversation for another thread).

Furthermore, in years like ’01 when Big XII had 4 top 10 teams to finish the season, or ’04 when the South had Aggy, Tech, OU, and UT in major bowl games, a playoff still wouldn’t be fair. In the end nothing’s going to be completely fair. The problem with the current system is best epitomized with last year’s Michigan/tOSU “National Championship” when both turned out to be paper tigers. Or NU ’01 getting demolished by Miami in Pasadena. But NU ’01 and Michigan ’06 would probably have made an 8 team playoff, and in hindsight neither was really worthy.


"But the rivalries won't mean anything then!" Really? Don't you think these rivalries have a life of their own at this point? Many of these games have existed for close to 100 yrs. The introduction of a playoff will change all this? I doubt it. The OU game has decided 12 national championships and 5 or 6 Heisman winners in the past 50 years. The game has been do or die with top 5 rankings for the past 50 years. Once it’s no longer do or die, it loses some luster. The stakes have as much to do with its prominence as the game’s atmosphere (cotton bowl, state fair) and history (titles, heisman awards). The stakes are the same reason OU/NU was such a great rivalry, Devaney, Switzer, Osborne. UF/LSU has been a serious national match-up the past 10 years as well. Take Miami/FSU and UF/FSU, sure the game means something to the alumni base, but the nation at large doesn't GAF since Miami and FSU are in the shitter these days.


"What about the bowls?!" Who cares?! Most bowls suck anyway, and there are WAAYYYY too many of them. Most do suck, but most first round march madness games suck too. Which brings me to another of Wetzel’s points regarding casual viewers tuning into upsets. They tune into the upsets b/c there’s 16 games a day for the first 2 days, and 8 for the next 2, there’s a **** ton of games for CBS to pick from. Casual fans don’t watch #1/2 blowing out #2/15 for the whole 40 minutes, they only watch the final 5/10 minutes once the game is close and CBS switches to that game. In the meantime they’re watching the more competitive 5 vs 12, 6 vs 11 games.

CFB games are 3-4 hours, not 1.5 like CBB, no one’s going to watch WMU vs. 2007 tOSU other than Buckeyes and big 10 folks. It’s just a chance for tOSU players to get injured once their season is over and after they’ve earned the right not to play any more patsies.

But just like w/ march madness, there’s fun bowl games every year. The Holiday’s good most years, Cap One has had its exciting finishes too. I have fun going to the Cotton, Alamo, and Houston Bowls, or traveling to see UT in San Diego or Pasadena/Glendale, etc.


Is a playoff perfect? Of course not. I won't pretend otherwise. But it does provide two important things: Closure and Clarity. A clear, indisputed resolution is what we need. The past 10 years I’ve only not had closure w/ the ’04 mess. My preference on the face of it is no playoff but a 4 team one would be nice. But just look at the clock rule fiasco last year to see how changing the sport for "the viewers" just ****ed it up for the year until they could change the rules back. But in years like ’05 I have no problem with USC and UT not having to play tOSU, PSU, Oregon, WVU, or 2-loss Auburn. I’m glad they didn’t, both teams had a month to get healthy and went at it with full rosters.

The biggest mistake imo is to NASCAR’ize CFB to be like the rest of the pro sports without a real reason. “It’ll be march madness” is not a reason. The BCS for its faults has resulted in more national exposure for what were previously regional games. No one in Boston cares much for UCLA/USC bball. No one in LA will be up for UT/OU basketball. No one in Seattle will watch UF/LSU. But that will and does happen for football, the numbers bear out that much.

With whatever decision is taken, it needs to be analyzed against a 10+ year period, drastic changes shouldn’t be made b/c of one year in 50 anomolies. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. No need to be like Nebraska firing Solich when the sport's pulling in record viewers and attendance every year. Changes? Sure. Reinventing the entire sport's structure? Hell no.

And thus endeth my spiel. I'll turn the lights off on my way out so I don't wake anyone up. :)


p.s. King of the Hill season premier this year, "Texas vs. Nebrasky." Hank and the guys take Bobby to the B12 CCG in Houston b/c Bobby starts liking football. NU wins on a trick play at the end ('83 Cotton Bowl punt muff at end of 4th, natl title down the drain spoof). Bobby: "Dad, is it wrong that I feel like my life is over after this?" "No, that's normal." <--- epitome, and I will hunt down and dismember the TV exec who ruins that feeling.

[Andrew Longman]

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, the Vladimir Putin of college sports and the key figure preventing a playoff

So that's who I should be blaming.

I actually don't find much wrong with anything he said.

16 teams too many? No. Four rounds works just fine in the other divisions (hockey too) and as someone whose followed DII playoffs since 1975 I can say they are a blast for the schools involved. Besides, any less and too many will say they belong too.

All 11 conference champs? Absolutely. If they aren't good enough to compete then move back to DIAA. Thirty some years ago schools like Central Michigan were DII. Otherwise, they should compete and have reason to compete.

Bowls become less important? If some fat cat chamber of commerce type in a ugly orange sport jacket is worried about losing his grip over the sport and his bowl, I don't care. If drunken alumni don't want to lose their annual junkets to far away places, then they can just make sure their teams stay out of the top 16.

Central FL v tOSU? With only eight first round pairing only a couple would likely be blowouts and there would certainly be some upsets or near upsets.

If I have a complaint about this is that it will make the NCAA even less of an agent promoting fair competition for student athletes and more of a greedy business grabbing as much money as possible while exploiting unpaid students. I'm convinced a playoffs would easily eclipse March madness.

[Insomniac]

Doesn't the is X better than Y argument still hold true for a playoff? I mean, I can still say NE was better than the Steelers in 2005 because they didn't get to play them. Only Denver was better than NE for that matter.

The playoff allows more teams a chance to be the champion. But it's all a mess. How do you decide who gets in? Is it fair that some conferences have a championship game and others don't? Is it fair that some conferences are stronger/weaker than others? In the NFL, they have a clear outline about how teams are selected for the playoffs. They would still be using polls. Would it be fair if the second best team in a conference isn't in the playoffs while 7 other teams that they may be better than are?

There are always going to be flaws unless DI-A forces a complete reorganization of all conferences to have the same number of teams and a championship game. Then the champions all play in the playoff.

My suggestion is schools should decide if they want to be in a play-off system or bowl system. If you want to be the champion, you have to participate in the play-off system. If you do, then you only play 10 games. Then there is a clear definition (objective) for what teams qualify from that pool. The playoffs are for 16 teams and start 2 weeks after the conference champion weekend. That gives a max of 14 games to be the champion. You get college football in a couple more weekends later in the year and they're done by the same time if they were playing for the BCS National Championship.

[Ankf00]

Mid-Majors/Independents could have a play-in tourney for a couple of spots, thus eliminating their need for 5 exclusive spots.


There are always going to be flaws unless DI-A forces a complete reorganization of all conferences to have the same number of teams and a championship game. Then the champions all play in the playoff. and that's the crux of it, having a fair system that doesn't re-do the entire sport. Throwing out 100+ years just b/c D1-A's different and unconventional in regard to american post season systems isn't a good reason, imo. Plus good luck breaking apart the SEC, Big 10 and Pac 10.

[Racing Truth]

First, good discussions and points made. :thumbup: Now, then...


1. Saunders is almost as big a choad as Cowherd. "I think Virginia Tech is the #2 team in the country. Marcus Vick deserves the Heisman."

2The advantage of 16 teams is it legitimizes all conferences, the disadvantage is the shitacular matchups, and lets face it, D1-A isn't structured like the other divisions, there's a huge gap between BCS and non-BCS, and it's not like pro sports where division/conf strength can fluctuate heavily. Stewart Mandel's classification of D1-A into 4 tiers at the start of the season was spot on, some teams (like UGa) historically are at a certain level, they can hope to rise to the top level every now and then, but entrenching themselves permanently at that level such as Miami did in the 80's is very, VERY unlikely.

Also, in years like '04 and '05, should USC, OU, and UT have to prove themselves in 2 extra rounds vs. 2 & 3 loss teams. Should 3 loss teams even be in the conversation for a national title? I don't believe so. But 16 is the smallest “fair” playoff you could have. And that's the dillema, imo. Creating fairness while not profoundly changing the sport

3. Wetzel's wrong with the "we'll finally have a cindarella" point. If there was no BCS, Hawaii would be going to a good bowl vs. a good 2-3 loss opponent such as UGa or OU. Should they win that they might get a share of the title, ala BYU '84. Should tOSU get beat like last year by another southern spread in the bowl game, then Hawaii would undoubetdly by consensus champs.

Last year w/ a month left to play we had USC vs. ND/Cal/Ore/UCLA, UTK/LSU/Arky round-robin w/ UF having played Auburn and having to play LSU. tOSU/Michgan, and Big East round-robin with WVU/Lville/RU. Those teams by and large were the top 15 at the end of Oct and it all played out. But it won't always be like that, in '04 there were 3 major undefeateds which has never happened post-WWII. And this year we have a complete close order group fornication.

4. Steelers, Florida Marlins, that's all well and good. UGa and USC are playing some of the best football right now, but shouldn't UGa's getting pasted by UTK and USC getting punked at home by the last place team in conference matter? The fact that those losses do matter makes CFB different, why does it have to be the same as basketball where everyone and their mother makes playoffs? It's like handing out little league trophies to everybody. We got pasted at home by KSU, even though it was only 1-loss, that ensured we were going to be the last place 1-loss team, the OU loss killed serious hopes for conference and elminated any possibility of MNC (although w/ this crazy season, even after the OU loss we could’ve still won conference w/ a win vs. aggy, and we were likely BCS-bound). Even if UT beat aggy w/ a 16 team playoff in place w/ 5 at larges (would probably be top 10 at end of season in such case), in my opinion it’s atrocious that we would still have a shot at a title.

5. true, it’s not perfect. But if VT and UGa wanted to be part of the conversation they shouldn’t have allowed themselves to be rolled by LSU and UTK. (Same reason Tebow doesn’t deserve the Heisman, LSU and UGa rivalry losses, and Auburn revenge game loss at home, but that’s another conversation for another thread).

Furthermore, in years like ’01 when Big XII had 4 top 10 teams to finish the season, or ’04 when the South had Aggy, Tech, OU, and UT in major bowl games, a playoff still wouldn’t be fair. In the end nothing’s going to be completely fair. The problem with the current system is best epitomized with last year’s Michigan/tOSU “National Championship” when both turned out to be paper tigers. Or NU ’01 getting demolished by Miami in Pasadena. But NU ’01 and Michigan ’06 would probably have made an 8 team playoff, and in hindsight neither was really worthy.

6. The OU game has decided 12 national championships and 5 or 6 Heisman winners in the past 50 years. The game has been do or die with top 5 rankings for the past 50 years. Once it’s no longer do or die, it loses some luster. The stakes have as much to do with its prominence as the game’s atmosphere (cotton bowl, state fair) and history (titles, heisman awards). The stakes are the same reason OU/NU was such a great rivalry, Devaney, Switzer, Osborne. UF/LSU has been a serious national match-up the past 10 years as well. Take Miami/FSU and UF/FSU, sure the game means something to the alumni base, but the nation at large doesn't GAF since Miami and FSU are in the shitter these days.

7. Most do suck, but most first round march madness games suck too. Which brings me to another of Wetzel’s points regarding casual viewers tuning into upsets. They tune into the upsets b/c there’s 16 games a day for the first 2 days, and 8 for the next 2, there’s a **** ton of games for CBS to pick from. Casual fans don’t watch #1/2 blowing out #2/15 for the whole 40 minutes, they only watch the final 5/10 minutes once the game is close and CBS switches to that game. In the meantime they’re watching the more competitive 5 vs 12, 6 vs 11 games.

CFB games are 3-4 hours, not 1.5 like CBB, no one’s going to watch WMU vs. 2007 tOSU other than Buckeyes and big 10 folks. It’s just a chance for tOSU players to get injured once their season is over and after they’ve earned the right not to play any more patsies.

But just like w/ march madness, there’s fun bowl games every year. The Holiday’s good most years, Cap One has had its exciting finishes too. I have fun going to the Cotton, Alamo, and Houston Bowls, or traveling to see UT in San Diego or Pasadena/Glendale, etc.

8. The past 10 years I’ve only not had closure w/ the ’04 mess. My preference on the face of it is no playoff but a 4 team one would be nice. But just look at the clock rule fiasco last year to see how changing the sport for "the viewers" just ****ed it up for the year until they could change the rules back. But in years like ’05 I have no problem with USC and UT not having to play tOSU, PSU, Oregon, WVU, or 2-loss Auburn. I’m glad they didn’t, both teams had a month to get healthy and went at it with full rosters.

The biggest mistake imo is to NASCAR’ize CFB to be like the rest of the pro sports without a real reason. “It’ll be march madness” is not a reason. The BCS for its faults has resulted in more national exposure for what were previously regional games. No one in Boston cares much for UCLA/USC bball. No one in LA will be up for UT/OU basketball. No one in Seattle will watch UF/LSU. But that will and does happen for football, the numbers bear out that much.

With whatever decision is taken, it needs to be analyzed against a 10+ year period, drastic changes shouldn’t be made b/c of one year in 50 anomolies. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. No need to be like Nebraska firing Solich when the sport's pulling in record viewers and attendance every year. Changes? Sure. Reinventing the entire sport's structure? Hell no.

And thus endeth my spiel. I'll turn the lights off on my way out so I don't wake anyone up. :)


p.s. King of the Hill season premier this year, "Texas vs. Nebrasky." Hank and the guys take Bobby to the B12 CCG in Houston b/c Bobby starts liking football. NU wins on a trick play at the end ('83 Cotton Bowl punt muff at end of 4th, natl title down the drain spoof). Bobby: "Dad, is it wrong that I feel like my life is over after this?" "No, that's normal." <--- epitome, and I will hunt down and dismember the TV exec who ruins that feeling.

1. Heh. Hey, has he ever mentioned he's Canadian? So subtle about it.

2. Agreed about it being too much. As I said, the UCF-OSU matchup would be a boat race (not even close). You have a point about it being fair, though, because I think the parity we're seeing now will become more pronounced. However, we're not there YET, so I don't feel too bad about stiffing the Sun Belt.

3. You mention this later, but I think now's the time to go back to a problem I have w/ Wetzel: He wants a March Madness thing for CFB, which is so NOT the point of the debate.
Back to my main point, as you mention, maybe you do get lucky enough so that reg. season truly is a playoff. Then again, more likely, maybe you don't.
On Hawaii, I'm confused. Do you argue that, in a pre-BCS world, they could a) play in a major bowl game (what level do you think they'd reach? Holiday, or bigger) and b) were they to win, have a shot at one or both titles? I realize the whole '84 BYU thing, but I further think that today's voters would make sure to avoid a repeat (fair or not).

4. OK, it makes it different, but does it make it better? Teams have bad days during a season. While very noteworthy, this idea that we ought to demand perfection or only one "quality loss" (speaking of subjective) strikes me as kind of silly. Doesn't that encourage cupcake (relatively) scheduling?

Yes, in many sports, too many teams make the playoffs, and I don't want a 16-team deal myself. Still, we have, IIRC, 119 D-IA (sorry, FBS:yuck: ) teams. 8 teams (even 16, one could argue) is NOT inviting unworthy teams to a playoff (unlike 16 teams in a 30-team league).

I know, I'm going back to pro sports, but to answer the question you pose, I would say, no not really, outside of seating. I suppose if an at-large team were selected, that should be considered. Again, Stillers lost 5 reg. season gms. in '05, some of them were "bad losses." Anyone want to dispute what they went on to accomplish?

Furthermore, while it might seem obvious, you're subjectively deciding "quality" of losses. Injuries play a role, as does how the lower-quality opponent was playing at the time. UGA discovering Moreno made them an inherently different team.

5. Yeah, they would have made a playoff, and deservedly so. The fact that they would have been exposed in said playoff is precisely the point: Showing what these teams are really made of. More than likely, they never would have made it to the title game at the end of a playoff.

On the Heisman, can I assume you're a Daniel supporter? Fine by me, if so.

As to VT & UGA, again subjectively determining "unacceptible" losses and, again, ignores the reality that teams IN ALL SPORTS grow during a season. No other sport holds early growing pains against good teams.

6. We're just going to fundamentally disagree here. I'm ALWAYS going to hate those 'tards up north (UM), and I'm pretty sure you'll always hate Okie and Aggy.;) Will it take some "national luster" away? I suppose, but the question then becomes whether you gain more in return. I say yes; you would likely disagree.

7. Agree and disagree. One, the NCAA 1st round lasts two days. In those two days, interspersed with the cr@p games, can be some classics. Bowl season can see multiple days w/o good games or compelling matchups. Not to mention, 6-6 teams shouldn't be bowling.

On those good bowl games, 1) an 8-team playoff doesn't mess with most of them and 2) in the end, they may be great games, but they are really EXHIBITIONS anyhow. Glorified exhibitions, yes, but exhibitions all the same. A playoff gives you more meaningful, tension-filled games.

As to people not watching, for example, an OSU-WVU playoff game, maybe, maybe not. I think the curiosity factor in seeing what these teams are really like would be compelling for many.

8. I don't want March Madness either, and I can accept a "plus-one" scenario. Still, I think an 8-team playoff is a measured step with potential for incredible drama and teams earning it on the field.

Well, so endeth my thesis.

[Ankf00]

4. BCS encourages cupcake schedules, but that hasn't stopped USC, tOSU, UTK, Miami, OU from scheduling inter-sectional games. UT schedules pretty weak usually but we have Arky, and UCLA for the next 4 years. In this regard 4-8 team playoff is better since you can drop 1 and still go through. As for the perfection thing, that's defined 100+ years of CFB, the goal isn't to be good enough and get hot late, the goal is to beat everyone. Teams know that going into the season. European soccer has no playoffs, it has a round-robin only and it works great. Pro US sports wish they had 1/10th that atmosphere during the season.

5. holding early losses against a team, no other sport does it. CFB's different, why's different a problem? And UGa and VT didn't just lose, they got pasted, same as UT did at home vs KSU. In other sports, those games don't matter, teams say *shrug* there's next week. But it mattering is why tOSU vs. UT was such a huge deal 2 years in a row, electric atmosphere you won't find for regular season games in any other sport. Those 2 games had playoff atmosphere precisely b/c of the stakes. In contrast #1 duke vs. #2 texas had barely more atmosphere than any national bball game

Heisman: as much as I loathe Arky, McFadden deserves it, even if Daniel beats OU. I'd rather Daniel win, but unlike Tebow, McFadden has a tougher time changing a game all on his own being a rb. McFadden beat LSU in Death Valley too.

6. didn't The Game last year have an extra dose of energy b/c of the stakes involved? all or nothing vs. *shrug* we're going to be in the playoffs anyway, the bobby hill quote says everything.

7. name 5 classics off the top of your head from the 1st weekend of march madness? 5 Holiday Bowls come to mind more quickly for me, and there's only 1 of those per year, not 32. They may be glorified exhibitions but they haven't lacked any suspense. but we're in agreement on march madness aspect.

8. wheather it's 4/8/16 there's going to be ppl bitching about inclusion/exclusion. 8 teams is fairest while being exclusive. 16 is fairest overall and legitimizes d1-a as a whole, but w/ Wetzel's 16 team bracket, there could potentially be a third Mizzou/OU game, or second KU/Mizzou. UF/LSU, BC/VT. The Big 12 and ACC CCGs could be replayed just 2-3 weeks later. Screw that. CCG rematches are bad enough to start with. Then round 3?


U of Houston and Rice got up for bowl games last year, UH's first conf title in a decade, Rice's first bowl in decades. I had friends go crazy when UH won C-USA and road trip to Memphis for their exhibition, why change that?

[Andrew Longman]

Will this thread set a record for wordiest posts?

Jeebus dudes. I'm passionate about the topic but you're killing me. :tony:

[Sean O'Gorman]

Don't worry, I'm sure that Spicoli will drop a six word gem that'll cancel him out. :laugh:

[Ankf00]

Will this thread set a record for wordiest posts?

Jeebus dudes. I'm passionate about the topic but you're killing me. :tony:

I know how words tend to confuse you jocks :gomer:

[dando]

I've heard the arguments both ways ad nauseum ....save the bowls, don't mess with the best regular season in sports, BC$ sucks, The OSU doesn't belong in the championship, etc. My take is that a playoff is the best way to level the playing field in regards to schedule irregularities/conference weakness. It also gives teams with early losses a second chance that the polls may not allow. Also, official polls should be restricted until after the 4th or 5th game.

Since the NC2A allowed a 12th game, there is no way that horse is going back in the barn, so we're stuck with a 12 game regular season (and more D-I vs. D-II games). That being said, convincing the college presidents to add 2-3 more games is not gonna happen....unless alotta ca$h is involved.

Oh, and getting F Jim Delaney outta the Big 10+1 would help immensely. That @zzhole has gots to go now. :mad: Good news is that he is rumored to be headed to the NFL:

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/cs-071126packersbrite,1,6218198.story?coll=cs-bears-headlines

-Kevin