How much fun would a Tournament be??

BearcatTalk

Help Support BearcatTalk:

All those teams play in BCS conferences- which is head and shoulders better then what TCU or Boise play. They don't need to schedule OOC games. Oregon played Stanford who whipped the floor with VT (Boises only good team this year)

Your argument doesn't hold water. The Big 10 was obviously overrated this year. Look at the bowl games. The Pac-10 had 2 good teams and 1 above average team in USC. Those are games they have to play because they are in those conferences. The fact that if they go undefeated they will more than likely play for the National Title because they are in a BCS conference is the reason the out of conference schedules suck. If you had a tournament, teams would schedule harder out of conference because a loss or two won't matter if they win the conference. Teams schedule scared because of the system. It sucks.
 
Oh and also, why would it be so hard to imagine teams would schedule much harder to prepare them for their conference games because in the end winning your conference will get you a chance to win the NC! A couple loses OOC won't mean you are out of the hunt for the NC.

I Just want to make sure I am understanding you- you think an SEC team would schedule tough OOC games- follow that up with an SEC schedule and championship (meaning of the 10 games they play, 6-7 will be ranked teams) is just as tough as a Non BCS teams chances at a playoff spot? I would LOVE this system as a Boise fan, and TCU would never go to the Big east. They pretty much are fighting with Boise, Utah?, and every few years a new team for two playoff spots.
 
Their is absolutely zero chance BSU or TCU play a harder schedule then any of the other potential playoff teams. I dont care how watered down the BCS teams OOC schedule is- their schedule is always harder then what Non BCS teams play- TCU/Boise can schedule two top 25 teams OOC and dominate in conference and get to the playoffs. BCS schools have a ridiculously hard schedule then on top of that have to play in a conference championship game. Which seems easier to you? Boise State would make the playoffs every year with this system- just not fair to the likes of ANYONE in the SEC.

With this system I think you would see a lot more teams try and go Independent--just easier to get a playoff spot then go through a Big 10/SEC season

Boise State and TCU try to play tough schedules every year but no BCS schools want to play them! What is the advantage to a BCS school to play a Boise State or TCU or Utah for that matter? Why is Utah and TCU going to BCS conferences? Because they will be able to schedule better and have a direct pipeline into the BCS games. Your logic is severely flawed on this topic.
 
Your argument doesn't hold water. The Big 10 was obviously overrated this year. Look at the bowl games. The Pac-10 had 2 good teams and 1 above average team in USC. Those are games they have to play because they are in those conferences. The fact that if they go undefeated they will more than likely play for the National Title because they are in a BCS conference is the reason the out of conference schedules suck. If you had a tournament, teams would schedule harder out of conference because a loss or two won't matter if they win the conference. Teams schedule scared because of the system. It sucks.

Like it or not- those schedules are still harder then Boise or TCU schedule. Right?
 
Boise State and TCU try to play tough schedules every year but no BCS schools want to play them! What is the advantage to a BCS school to play a Boise State or TCU or Utah for that matter? Why is Utah and TCU going to BCS conferences? Because they will be able to schedule better and have a direct pipeline into the BCS games. Your logic is severely flawed on this topic.

I am using that argument if we had a system that someone suggested: the champion of each BCS team gets in, and two non bcs teams get into a playoff. AT that rate you would not see TCU or Utah go to a BCS conference--I think we were talking two different things. You were arguing the current system, I was arguing if we had a playoff system as suggested.

In the current system, they should go to a BCS conference so they have a good schedule.
 
I Just want to make sure I am understanding you- you think an SEC team would schedule tough OOC games- follow that up with an SEC schedule and championship (meaning of the 10 games they play, 6-7 will be ranked teams) is just as tough as a Non BCS teams chances at a playoff spot? I would LOVE this system as a Boise fan, and TCU would never go to the Big east. They pretty much are fighting with Boise, Utah?, and every few years a new team for two playoff spots.

Yes. SEC, Big 10, Big 12, etc schools would all play a better schedule. It doesn't mean that they still aren't going to play the directional state schools too. Those games serve a purpose. Teams in the SEC can get away with poor scheduling because the league is so tough right now. The Big 10 can't. The league sucks. Michigan sucked. Illinois sucked. Indiana sucked. Minnesota sucked. Purdue sucked. That's 5 of 11 off the top of my head. The top of the league was overrated too. The SEC doesn't have that problem so to use them to prove your point is a bit ridiculous. The ACC, Big 12, Pac 10, Big 10 and Big East could all do a better job in scheduling OOC games that actually mean something. The first 4 or 5 weeks of the season has a good game or 2 every week. Sounds like a great system.
 
I am using that argument if we had a system that someone suggested: the champion of each BCS team gets in, and two non bcs teams get into a playoff. AT that rate you would not see TCU or Utah go to a BCS conference--I think we were talking two different things. You were arguing the current system, I was arguing if we had a playoff system as suggested.

In the current system, they should go to a BCS conference so they have a good schedule.

Fair enough. I think you are right we were arguing to separate things. I suggested that system btw and think it would work and work well.
 
Fair enough. I think you are right we were arguing to separate things. I suggested that system btw and think it would work and work well.

Actually you suggested all conference winners go and the next highest BCS ranked teams. (which, by the way, I think would be the best option...if we had to go to the playoff system)The system I was arguing had all conference winners- and then the two highest NON BCS teams. I didnt think that was fair to the BCS teams one bit
 
Their is absolutely zero chance BSU or TCU play a harder schedule then any of the other potential playoff teams. I dont care how watered down the BCS teams OOC schedule is- their schedule is always harder then what Non BCS teams play- TCU/Boise can schedule two top 25 teams OOC and dominate in conference and get to the playoffs. BCS schools have a ridiculously hard schedule then on top of that have to play in a conference championship game. Which seems easier to you? Boise State would make the playoffs every year with this system- just not fair to the likes of ANYONE in the SEC.

With this system I think you would see a lot more teams try and go Independent--just easier to get a playoff spot then go through a Big 10/SEC season

Are you seriously not understanding the logic behind this 8 team argument? I mean I know you are an Eggs fan but come on man this formula is so simple you can't possibly not understand it. I'll make it a little easier for you.

Team A plays in a BCS conference. Team A needs to only win their conference to go to the 8 team playoff. Thus team A schedules two other BCS foes OOC to help them get ready for their conference run to play for the NC. Team A can schedule tougher OOC games because it will not impact their chance of playing for the NC.

That scenario accounts for any team in the 6 BCS conferences. Follow me now? Seeing as there at 69 BCS teams, that allows all 69 teams to have a legitimate chance at playing for the NC, all they must do is win their conference title. This puts more emphasis on the regular season games because now every conference game means that much more to your hopes of playing in the NC. It also allows fans to see better matchups OOC because a loss will not end your shot at the NC.

Now we have 2 at large spots to fill out the 8 team bracket. This will consist of the 2 highest rated BCS(or whatever poll will be used) teams that are not already in the playoff. This means teams like TCU, Boise, Utah, etc must play challenging OOC games because they need to make up some ground on the BCS teams. Going undefeated gets them there. If they lose a game or what have you the scenario changes just as it does today with who should be the final at large teams. Also, if by chance a Non-AQ doesn't have a great season, these 2 at-large spots allow deserving BCS teams who did not win their conference to play for the NC. So in essence, they get a second chance to play for the title seeing as they blew their first by not winning their conference.

Now was that so hard to understand? Also, you can have bowls for the deserving teams at the end of the season just like we have now. Instead of waiting 38 days to play the NC, you would have games start two weeks after the conclusion of the regular season allowing teams to heal/rest/prepare, etc. This gives you 14 days to play your first Playoff game, then it takes only two more weeks to determine a champion. Thus we as fans don't need to wait 38+ days to see the NC, we can instead see in a 28, hell we can even give another week to the 2 finalists before the NC game and still be only at 35 days! And the excuse that its to taxing on the players academics is the biggest pile of $hit excuse ever!
 
Last edited:
Actually you suggested all conference winners go and the next highest BCS ranked teams. (which, by the way, I think would be the best option...if we had to go to the playoff system)The system I was arguing had all conference winners- and then the two highest NON BCS teams. I didnt think that was fair to the BCS teams one bit

Oh yeah. I agree with you on that. Not fair to BCS teams AT ALL. I must have missed that.
 
Back
Top