NCAA Football 2008-09 Season

While I am all for a playoff of some sort, thats kind of overkill. That would add way to many games for some teams. Also what would that do to bowls for teams that dont make it?

I think the plus 1 format is the easiest to implement and would clear up nearly any question about who deserves the title. Usually there arent more than 2, sometimes 3 that can actually claim to deserve it. Adding a fourth covers all of them and adds the next best team. Win, win.

+ 1 is useless, as some years it would work others would not.
 
I agree!

To those that want to do away with conference championship games, who would you give it to assuming FLA and Bama both win out? Or consider if both were undefeated at this point and win out? The games are about money, sure. They are also essential in conferences with this much talent and all the teams dont play each other. There is a very good chance year in and year out that more than one team could make a legitimate claim for the title. This game settles it.

How do you explain it in the Big 12 where you have 3 of the top teams that get left out of the CCG because they are in the wrong division ..../ With a playoff they are in the hunt and have a chance to win it all
 
+ 1 is useless, as some years it would work others would not.

It would work ALOT better than what we do now. Can you give an example of a time within the last 10 years where a team that had a LEGITIMATE claim at playing for the championsip wouldnt have been included in a plus 1 format?
 
I don't care to see college teams with 3 losses get into a playoff and have a chance at a title.

Is that right ?

If your a SEC or a Big 12 team with 2 losses, there is a very good chance that you may STILL be the best team out there.

Didn't LSU have 2 losses the year they were playing in the NCG ?
 
How do you explain it in the Big 12 where you have 3 of the top teams that get left out of the CCG because they are in the wrong division ..../ With a playoff they are in the hunt and have a chance to win it all


Head to head play within your division. We are talking about a conference championship game between the two divisions. The teams in the same division play each other anyway, so they get the chance to be in the CG already, if they dont win, they dont go.
 
It would work ALOT better than what we do now. Can you give an example of a time within the last 10 years where a team that had a LEGITIMATE claim at playing for the championsip wouldnt have been included in a plus 1 format?

Yes, but not right now as I have to get going to a party.

Cya

Actually it 's the other way around, if you have 2 undefeated teams playing, why should the number 1 team have to beat the #2 and # 3 team to win ?
 
A playoff system would ruin college football. It's the best sport in the world. Why change anything? It has the most meaningful regular season of any sport. Every week, teams need to come out and win if they want a shot at a title. Losses are huge. The NFL has a playoff, and teams with 6, 7, or 8 losses get into the postseason. I don't care to see college teams with 3 losses get into a playoff and have a chance at a title. If you don't compete every week like this is the most important game of the season, you shouldn't play for a championship in college football.
That's the most bogus argument and it's made every year. A playoff would be just as hard to qualify for as the BCS is. The idea that you'd have teams with 7-5 records involved is total nonsense. What a playoff would do is gather the best teams in the country and make every game count. The way it is now everyone hypes the BCS, but 4 of the 5 games are utterly meaningless. The regular season in college football is great and it would still be great with a playoff. What stinks is a system of bowl games that are as important as spring training baseball. Settle it on the field!
 
Yes, but not right now as I have to get going to a party.

Cya

Actually it 's the other way around, if you have 2 undefeated teams playing, why should the number 1 team have to beat the #2 and # 3 team to win ?

Jimbo, they might have to do that in the playoff format that you want, so...:confused:

In any case, there have been instances (auburn) where there were three undefeated, or cases where more than one 1 or 2 loss team (last year) could claim that they should play for the championship. Rarely, if ever, has it gone past 4 teams that could make a legitimate claim for being there though.
 
Is that right ?

If your a SEC or a Big 12 team with 2 losses, there is a very good chance that you may STILL be the best team out there.

Didn't LSU have 2 losses the year they were playing in the NCG ?


Yes they had 2 loss's and proved they were the best team when they KILLED OSU.. Didnt just beat them but destroyed them.. Or was OSU not really the 2nd/1st best team?
 
Last year was an abberration. There were no dominant teams. LSU lost twice, in triple overtime both times. They didn't have 3 losses, they played a tough schedule, and they did setttle it on the field. And as far as the whole "playoffs would render the regular season meaningless being a bogus argument"....you really want to turn college football into a mini-NFL?? Where teams that don't even win their division can be determined as the best team in the league?? Really, now, who among us really believes the Giants were the better team in the Super Bowl. An undefeated Patriots team against a Giants team that didn't even win its division. And had lost to the Patriots, even though the Patriots had nothing to gain playoff position-wise in the regular season. Teams like the Giants who don't even win their division get crowned as champions because of the playoff system in the NFL. That's wonderful. That's great. But it's not college football. 10-6 in the NFL, and you can be crowned the best, over teams that go 16-0. Wonderful for the NFL, but it's not college football. The Giants weren't eliminated from competing because of a decent, but by no means good or great season, and wind up winning the championship. Let's don't get carried away and ruin what makes college football better than the NFL. What's next, actual consideration for paying college athletes??? Let's make the collegiate game just like the pro game!! Let's turn college football into college basketball, where no one even watches the regular season. I watch the NCAA tournament for basketball. I don't even tune into the regular season. I watch the NBA, MLB, and even the NHL playoffs. Don't care to watch 84, 162, or however many games the NHL season has, because they're meaningless anyway.
 
Yeah, which is as it should be. Texas should be 3rd. Florida gets a chance to make its claim against Alabama. I don't remember the top 5 spots being so closely contested in previous years, but maybe I just wasn't paying as close attention this point in the season because my Tide were never in contention...
 
I think Tech jumps Alabama if they both go undefeated in the regular season, then Bama jumps 'em back if they both win the conference title games. Lots of "ifs" there.
 
Let's don't get carried away and ruin what makes college football better than the NFL. What's next, actual consideration for paying college athletes???
Who's talking about paying the athletes? Although that is something that Alabama has some expierience with. :D

Let's turn college football into college basketball, where no one even watches the regular season. I watch the NCAA tournament for basketball. I don't even tune into the regular season.
I wouln't watch the regular season either if I were an Alabama fan. However the regular season in college basketball is great. The Tournament is filled with lots of heartbreak for most teams. If you don't savor the regular season then you're not going to have much to enjoy. Last season in college basketball is a perfect example of why playoffs work. You had 4 great teams (Kansas, Memphis, UNC, UCLA) that no one could reasonably say who was better. The only way to settle it was on the court. They did. Why not allow football teams the same opportunity?
 
The "paying players" thing was Auburn...not Alabama..same state, though, even though that was in the late 80's. And in college basketball, I like Kentucky. And please tell me you haven't missed the people clamoring for college football players to be compensated for making their universities millions upon millions of dollars every year, and paying for every other college sport (like basketball, swimming, golf,etc) that doesn't generate nearly as much capital for the university, some of the sports cost more money than they make. Which is why the concept of a playoff will never come to fruition, because the bottom line is, the AD's and commissioners of the various BCS conferences will not risk screwing up their cash cow. Common sense.
 
I just cant wait for FLA and the tide to settle it on the field. If the tide win I will be supporting them in the NC and if FLA wins, Of course i have to support my orange and blue :)
 
I think Bama's got too much youth to beat Florida. Yesterday was a perfect example of a team not used to the spotlight. Number 1, going against a rival, on the road....just too many mistakes, not enough emotion and intensity, which is what Bama's won on all year. But even if they lose, who would have a thought they'd make it to the Sugar Bowl this year??
 
I think Bama's got too much youth to beat Florida. Yesterday was a perfect example of a team not used to the spotlight. Number 1, going against a rival, on the road....just too many mistakes, not enough emotion and intensity, which is what Bama's won on all year. But even if they lose, who would have a thought they'd make it to the Sugar Bowl this year??

I'm pulling for Bama.

I'm sick of all this Tebow/Urban Mayer worship.
 

Mc Nabb's Yard Vandalized

Alonzo Mourning retires