|
|
Post by cliff "woo" harris on Dec 7, 2009 16:40:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Dec 7, 2009 17:57:48 GMT -5
Agree completely, had this conversation last night with a few friends
|
|
|
|
Post by ashes on Dec 7, 2009 18:17:01 GMT -5
It's a good system. I don't think there's any point in having the MAC, Sun Belt, etc. champs there, but hey, whatever it takes to get a playoff.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazymike2021 on Dec 7, 2009 18:20:18 GMT -5
Looks cool to me
|
|
|
|
Post by zyme on Dec 7, 2009 19:12:29 GMT -5
It's a good system. I don't think there's any point in having the MAC, Sun Belt, etc. champs there, but hey, whatever it takes to get a playoff. You could make an argument for much of the NCAA BB tourney, but hey, wierder things have happened. I dont agree with his first three rounds at the home stadium. I'd prefer there be the first two at the home stadium with the final four and the final be at a neutral site. |
|
|
|
Post by ashes on Dec 7, 2009 19:21:47 GMT -5
It's a good system. I don't think there's any point in having the MAC, Sun Belt, etc. champs there, but hey, whatever it takes to get a playoff. You could make an argument for much of the NCAA BB tourney, but hey, wierder things have happened. I dont agree with his first three rounds at the home stadium. I'd prefer there be the first two at the home stadium with the final four and the final be at a neutral site. Not really, the difference in sports allows for as big as a 64 team field in NCAAB. At that point it's like, fuck it, why not? |
|
|
|
Post by zyme on Dec 7, 2009 19:25:37 GMT -5
No I totally agree, there should be a playoff. The +1 thing makes no sense and an NFL model really doesn't pass the smell test for me when you try it for college. I like his model, its one of the first I actually felt was anything resembling fair (If this was implemented I pray they don't shove in the Notre Dame special exemption like the BCS has).
|
|
|
|
Post by Clifford "Poop" Harris on Dec 7, 2009 22:00:57 GMT -5
I think the +1 is the most realistic and 1000x fairer compared to what is in place right now.
Let everyone play there bowl games, then have the 2 at top of polls after, play eachother.
|
|
|
|
Post by kobe24 on Dec 7, 2009 22:02:54 GMT -5
I think the +1 is the most realistic and 1000x fairer compared to what is in place right now. Let everyone play there bowl games, then have the 2 at top of polls after, play eachother. What if there are still more then 2 undefeated teams left? |
|
|
|
Post by donatello2424 on Dec 7, 2009 22:04:14 GMT -5
I think the +1 is the most realistic and 1000x fairer compared to what is in place right now. Let everyone play there bowl games, then have the 2 at top of polls after, play eachother. The problem with that is that the #3 team may feel shafted. Let's say Bama, Cincy, and TCU all wins, someone will be left out of the title. |
|
|
|
Post by Clifford "Poop" Harris on Dec 7, 2009 22:06:08 GMT -5
I think the +1 is the most realistic and 1000x fairer compared to what is in place right now. Let everyone play there bowl games, then have the 2 at top of polls after, play eachother. What if there are still more then 2 undefeated teams left? You see how they do. In BCS bowls, the best teams are facing eachother, so it's very possible those undefeateds can lose. It's very rare that 3 teams finish the season undefeated after bowl games. I'm not sure that's ever happened. |
|
|
|
Post by Clifford "Poop" Harris on Dec 7, 2009 22:07:14 GMT -5
I think the +1 is the most realistic and 1000x fairer compared to what is in place right now. Let everyone play there bowl games, then have the 2 at top of polls after, play eachother. The problem with that is that the #3 team may feel shafted. Let's say Bama, Cincy, and TCU all wins, someone will be left out of the title. Are they not already shafted? I mean, based on what we have now. It's 1,000 times better. A bcs bowl vs. a legit team should make a team easier to judge and at the very least, the voters can make a more educated vote. |
|
|
|
Post by donatello2424 on Dec 7, 2009 22:09:24 GMT -5
What if there are still more then 2 undefeated teams left? You see how they do. In BCS bowls, the best teams are facing eachother, so it's very possible those undefeateds can lose. It's very rare that 3 teams finish the season undefeated after bowl games. I'm not sure that's ever happened. It is also possible that they all win. You are then left with 2 undefeated teams. Or lets say you end up with only 1 team being undefeated (not this year of course), then you are left with trying to decided which of the 1 loss teams is the best. The problem with any system (even a playoff) is that some teams will be on the outside looking in. If you decide the 16 teams via a poll, then you have the same problem as the bcs has now since the 17th team will be a legit argument about why they didn't get in. |
|
|
|
Post by kobe24 on Dec 7, 2009 22:09:51 GMT -5
If you aren't completely fixing the system then no reason to change it. This year 3 teams could very will finish undefeated.
|
|
|
|
Post by donatello2424 on Dec 7, 2009 22:11:26 GMT -5
The problem with that is that the #3 team may feel shafted. Let's say Bama, Cincy, and TCU all wins, someone will be left out of the title. Are they not already shafted? I mean, based on what we have now. It's 1,000 times better. A bcs bowl vs. a legit team should make a team easier to judge and at the very least, the voters can make a more educated vote. The system is flawed, but every system is flawed since having conferences really messes things up. You can't say they should have a system like the mlb or nfl because it won't translate. The BCS only decides the BCS champion, the coaches can still vote a different champion. |
|
