Skip to comments.
Is This the Death of the BCS? Oklahoma Loses!
Posted on 12/06/2003 8:29:48 PM PST by Lunatic Fringe
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240, 241-260, 261-280, 281-296 last
To: Dan from Michigan
No one could argue with a twelve to twenty-four team playoff. Somehow, sixteen seems about right to me.
You've put a lot of thought into your proposal. Bravo!
To: Paleo Conservative
Yes in deed... couldn't happen to a nicer team.
Trajan88; TAMU Class of '88; Law Hall (may it R.I.P.) Ramp 9 Mule; f.u.p.!
282
posted on
12/07/2003 8:43:35 PM PST
by
Trajan88
(www.bullittclub.com)
To: Beck_isright
Beck is right!
283
posted on
12/07/2003 9:56:39 PM PST
by
PRND21
To: SoCal Pubbie
Was USC undefeated last year? OSU was.
To: Dan from Michigan
There's pne big flaw with your system -- it simply takes too long to play all those games. The playoffs are almost half as long as the regular season!
There's a reason why NCAA football is the only collegiate sport that doesn't have a playoff system -- there are too many teams to consider, and playing one game per week means you'd have to restrict the playoffs to a very few select teams. In doing so, you'd run into controversy about which team deserves to be in the playoffs -- just like the controversy you have now about which teams belong in the BCS bowls.
285
posted on
12/07/2003 10:10:17 PM PST
by
Alberta's Child
(Alberta -- the TRUE North strong and free.)
To: Alberta's Child
Why have Division II & III teams been doing it for years without controversy?
To: Fred Mertz
Because there is very little major media coverage of those playoffs. Most people don't even hear about them until the results of the championship game are announced at the end of a segment on ESPN.
287
posted on
12/07/2003 10:16:48 PM PST
by
Alberta's Child
(Alberta -- the TRUE North strong and free.)
To: ilgipper
So? SC was the best team at the end of the year, not the Mythical National Champions, a title which the Luckeyes rightly deserved. Got that? But the fact is that pretty much every expert around agreed that if there had been a playoff the Trojans would have beaten all comers. They were demolishing everyone they faced at the end, be it Notre Dame, UCLA or Iowa, who were co Big Ten Champs, were they not? They were just not squeaking by like Ohio State.
To: LisaMalia
And SC is better than ALL of them!!!!!!!!!!!!!
To: Paleo Conservative
Texas ain't got nuthin' and sure isn't going to a BCS bowl.
They will wimper into SA since that is a little closer to Austin than Dallas and the Cotton Bowl and hopes are that the 'Horns can bring more than 1200 fans.
Arkansas 38 Texas 28 you got no biz in a BCS bowl.
To: All
K-State gets screwed again despite proving themselves
291
posted on
12/07/2003 10:35:30 PM PST
by
rwfromkansas
("Men stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up as if nothing had happened." Churchill)
To: Beck_isright
Amen.
292
posted on
12/07/2003 10:36:33 PM PST
by
rwfromkansas
("Men stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up as if nothing had happened." Churchill)
To: GOPyouth
Texas is out of BCS bowl games now that OU has lost.
Well, thats one good thing.
293
posted on
12/08/2003 3:36:26 AM PST
by
Arkinsaw
(What LSU game? Huh? No idea what you are talking about.)
To: saminfl
Logically, since the SEC is the best conference, with the toughest schedule, the SEC champs should automatically be national champs, so all this is moot anyway:>
To: Mr. Mojo
Students? Puhleeze.Don't confuse the few college stars who'll make it to the NFL for enough time to actually set themselves up for life with the vast majority of college players who never see an NFL contract. Most of them really are students.
295
posted on
12/08/2003 6:22:32 AM PST
by
RonF
To: Diddle E. Squat
Every other NCAA division does it in football with no problem, and many of those schools are far more rigorous in their academics.And far less rigorous in the amount of time their students are expected to spend on their sport. I have a daughter participating in a highly competitive Division III team (won their conference and within the last few years made the National playoffs), and she has friends who are on Division I teams. She also works for the sports information department and has a lot of contact with the other teams on campus, and we've discussed this issue.
Every other NCAA sport does it, with no problem.
Most other NCAA sports take far less physical toll on their players than football and don't involved nearly as many players. Because of the former, they can also schedule a couple of games on a weekend, instead of only playing one game a week.
Your point about only 8 teams requiring extra games is true. That's presuming that the system stays limited to 8 teams. The NCAA Division I Men's Basketball playoffs used to only be 8 teams. But now it's March Madness (which they stole from the Indiana State High School Boy's Basketball Championships, by the way) and it's 64 teams. The schools are happy raking in millions of dollars plus the marketing advantage that the exposure gives them in attracting new students, and the pressure to achieve the same in football will put pressure to add "one more game" after "one more game".
296
posted on
12/08/2003 6:48:45 AM PST
by
RonF
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240, 241-260, 261-280, 281-296 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson