I hate the BCS....

[Gary]

Seriously.. I know they have to take teams from strong divisions but this is getting stupid.. All the best matchups aren't happening!!!

Boise State VS. Utah - I wanted to see this one, but I know they only take one non BCS team with the highest ranking.. Oh well.

I would have scratched the Cincinnati VS. Virginia Tech game. This is a nap waiting to happen. I don't care about this game, and more deserving teams should be there instead of these two. I know they won their division but come on.......

Then there are teams like Hawaii, Notre Dame playing... sigh.. Too many bowl games..

This is what I would do.. PLAYOFFS...

Match up the top 16 teams and do a 4 week playoff. BCS can keep their computer ranking to figure it out (the final rankings).

Made the bracket myself.. Feel free to use it and pick who you think would win!

 

[Gary]

You have some interesting matchups all the way to the finals. I would have liked to see Boise St. take on Utah in a battle of undefeated for the heck of it though... I think the national champ game should be USC against Florida though..

 

[BMiller52]

Texas would beat USC. No way USC wins IMO. They don't have the best QB and the top defenses(Florida, Texas, Alabama) are all pretty much equal IMO.

I love the idea of a playoffs though.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

USC would have given any of the teams that were eligible for the title game before yesterday's games a game. Would they have won? Who knows, but the way they were written off as an afterthought was just silly.

What I never get is why Pac-10 teams can play each other close and it proves what a weak league it is, but the Oklahomas can beat every team they play the last 2 months by 60 points but still be in the toughest division in football?

Playoffs would be nice.

 

[Superman]

USC would have given any of the teams that were eligible for the title game before yesterday's games a game. Would they have won? Who knows, but the way they were written off as an afterthought was just silly.

What I never get is why Pac-10 teams can play each other close and it proves what a weak league it is, but the Oklahomas can beat every team they play the last 2 months by 60 points but still be in the toughest division in football?

Playoffs would be nice.

There's a couple of ways to argue about the Pac-10 vs. other divisions, specifically when talking about USC. It's telling that the only teams to beat USC in the last several years, aside from Texas in the national championship, were all Pac-10 teams. The Trojans have beaten everyone they've played in any other conference for years, so it's kind of hard to say that they are only so dominant because of the conference they play in, when no one outside of their conference can beat them either.

But on the other hand, conferences like the Big 12 and the SEC clearly have more balance and more teams with the ability to make to and win BCS bowl games. Even the Big 10 has had three different champions in the last three years; maybe that's an indication that it's not as good as it used to be, but it also demonstrates a balance that the Pac-10 doesn't have, top to bottom. And there's no doubt that Oklahoma and Texas and Texas Tech, or Alabama or Florida or even LSU, or Penn State (and Michigan about three years ago), would be contenders in the Pac-10.

There's really no way to settle the dispute over who is better than whom without instituting a playoff system. I don't even think you need a big playoff. Six teams, #1 and #2 get first round byes, then there's a semi-final round, and a national championship. That's a maximum of three additional games per season, and the BCS can still have it's bowl games as a part of the playoff. That's my proposal.

 

[LoungeLizard]

You have some interesting matchups all the way to the finals. I would have liked to see Boise St. take on Utah in a battle of undefeated for the heck of it though... I think the national champ game should be USC against Florida though..

Didn't see this thread when you started it, but had to revisit after Utah beat up on Alabama last night. (nice call by the way)

USC was equally impressive against Penn St. I expect to see Texas kill Ohio St. in the Fiesta and then see Oklahoma lose a close one to Florida in the "title" game.

Interesting to note that of the top 16 BCS ranked teams 3 were from the "non BCS" MWC, only the Big 12 had more at 4. SEC also had 3. BCS conferences Pac 10, ACC, and Big East each had 1.

I too hate the BCS.

 

[Spike]

ESPN wanted Playoffs. They pined and whined for playoffs. Guess who gets the BCS in 2010? That's right, ESPN. What haven't we heard from ESPN these past few days? Playoffs.
The playoffs die until the NCAA decides to sack up and keep the money for themselves. I don't see the playoffs as a better situation because the top 8 teams will not get the bids - first take the "conference champs", (since it won't happen without that concession) then what's left?

Pac 10
Big 10
Big 12
ACC
Big East
SEC

Make SOS a factor again. Get rid of I-AA games - they're in a different division for a reason. At the very least, don't let those games count for wins. Should two teams from the same conference appear in the top 8, then send conference champ. Didn't win? Sorry, should have thought about that when you played Ole Miss, or whomever. Now to solve the Pac-10/Big 10 dilemma...oh yeah, the Big 10 sucks. Send two from the Pac-10 instead.

Best I suppose would be to re-seed top 4 after BCS bowl games. Have those 4 play each other.

 

[John Galt]

I hate the BCS for a different reason... I liked it better the old way. Let the bowls invite who they want. Let the Rose Bowl be Big 10 vs Pac 10 every year. And let the subjective polls at the end of the season decide the "champion".

That way a team like Utah can plead their case the best they can (I remember BYU won the "championship" going undefeated in a soft conference and beating a 4 loss Michigan team in a minor bowl... not sure they had a stronger case to make than Utah does now).

ah the good old days.

BCS is so pretentious and sterile.

I freakin hate it.

But I don't think a playoff will solve anything there will still be gripes over seeding and stuff so just go back to the old way and let the bowl commissions invite the teams that will make the best draws they can.

But no... we need more computers, more replays, more playoffs... more and more and more and more rules rules rules.

 

[bdouble013]

I heard on the radio the other day a novel idea. Keep the bowl system the way it was (Rose is Pac-10 v. Big-10), then at the end of the bowl games let the BCS system decide (including what happens in the bowl games) who should play the next week for the National Championship.

For example, if USC goes to the Rose and before the Rose is #5 in the country, then goes crazy and everything thinks they should be 2 (or 1) they can play next week for the title. Seems like its the best of both worlds. It keeps the bowl system AND gives us a better argument for a true national champion.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I heard on the radio the other day a novel idea. Keep the bowl system the way it was (Rose is Pac-10 v. Big-10), then at the end of the bowl games let the BCS system decide (including what happens in the bowl games) who should play the next week for the National Championship.

For example, if USC goes to the Rose and before the Rose is #5 in the country, then goes crazy and everything thinks they should be 2 (or 1) they can play next week for the title. Seems like its the best of both worlds. It keeps the bowl system AND gives us a better argument for a true national champion.

That's not particularly a new idea. Its called the "+ 1" system, and fans of the traditional bowl matchups have been clamoring for it for years as a playoff alternative. Most years it would actually work very well. This year it would still be an absolute train wreck. I do like the idea if there is no way to work the traditional bowls into a true playoff system. I love the Rose Bowl. I'm sure there are other people that feel just as strongly about another particular bowl, although its doubtful that it has quite the same history. I cringe when it isn't the Pac-10/Big-10 matchup.

 

[Monty'sBiggestFan]

I hate the BCS for a different reason... I liked it better the old way. Let the bowls invite who they want. Let the Rose Bowl be Big 10 vs Pac 10 every year. And let the subjective polls at the end of the season decide the "champion".

That way a team like Utah can plead their case the best they can (I remember BYU won the "championship" going undefeated in a soft conference and beating a 4 loss Michigan team in a minor bowl... not sure they had a stronger case to make than Utah does now).

ah the good old days.

BCS is so pretentious and sterile.

I freakin hate it.

But I don't think a playoff will solve anything there will still be gripes over seeding and stuff so just go back to the old way and let the bowl commissions invite the teams that will make the best draws they can.

But no... we need more computers, more replays, more playoffs... more and more and more and more rules rules rules.

This is the SINGLE most reason why I can't stand the BCS - the destruction of what is so special about the bowls, the matchups.

I'm among those that think the playoffs solve nothing, voting seemed to do just fine, even in the years where we had split polls.

But I'll tell you what...Utah beating Alabama was good for my soul.......thank you Utes....now when Florida and Ohio State go down, life will be even better for me...