New BCS Format

KurtBevacqua · 06-11-2004, 10:09 AM

From the Miami Herald this morning. It seems to me the BCS thing has become a pride issue now. These guys are willing to try anything but a playoff simply because they didn't want a playoff when they entered into the whole BCS mess, and now that just about everyone else wants one but them, pride gets in the way and the powers that be will never give in because that would be an admission of failure of the whole BCS concept, which 98% of all college football fans agree it already is.

So now we have to wait 5 weeks after the season ends to build up to the bowl games, then just one week later play a made up title game, that you are still likely to have just as much controversy over which teams are chosen. Just because it would have solved last year's mess doesn't mean it will solve something else. What if Ohio State and USC go into the Rose Bowl undefeated, #1 and #2? They play that game then the winner gets 11-2 Miami in Orange Bowl part II? Gee, that makes much more sense.

For the BCS, it's the payoff, not the playoff

ARMANDO SALGUERO

asalguero@herald.com

Bowl Championship Series commissioners went on a nationwide conference call Thursday and announced their grand plan to take a flawed college football system and tweak it just enough so that it remains ridiculously broken.

We knew the commissioners were going to add a national-title bowl to follow the Orange, Rose, Sugar and Fiesta and hoped that game would match the two best teams from those traditional games. But the clarity of that hope was muddled by the commissioners' contempt for anything resembling a playoff.

''A playoff game as opposed to this model is just one step toward full-fledged NFL-type playoffs, to which there is adamant opposition,'' said Dave Fronhmayer, the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee Chairman.

So instead of doing the right thing and spicing the BCS with a dash of playoff flavor, the commissioners simply added the new bowl game at the end of the season.

That means the new bowl game will promise a title, but instead will crown an illegitimate champion.

WILL IT WORK?

The extra game will rotate among the BCS bowl sites, including Miami, giving those cities not one, but two games once every four years. That is supposed to be a boon for local economies, but might also bust the integrity of the traditional BCS bowl games.

''When you get a national championship, there's not a way that second game [in your city] will get equal treatment and coverage,'' Capital One Bowl chief Tom Mickle told ESPN.

This defective system, which starts in the 2006-07 season, will do nothing to prevent a repeat of last season, when USC staked a rightful claim to the national title even while Oklahoma and LSU played in the BCS championship game.

A playoff system would erase such inconclusive seasons and offer the kind of postseason drama enjoyed by practically every collegiate sport other than football. But that which is good and right is simply not what these people want for college football.

One of the many arguments BCS commissioners and college presidents use against a playoff system is that football, unlike other sports, is driven by regular-season ticket sales (read: money). A playoff system, they argue, would dilute the importance of the regular season and hurt ticket sales (read: money leaving their wallets).

''We want to do nothing to destroy the appeal of a strong regular season,'' Fronhmayer said.

STILL NO PLAYOFF

That, of course, rings hollow coming from folks who allow athletic departments to regularly pad regular-season schedules with games against such powerhouses as Lower Eastern Valley Tech.

Talk about destroying appeal.

University presidents simply don't care that the public wants a playoff system and television networks would pay through the remote for the right to broadcast the postseason.

Those presidents and commissioners latch on to any lame excuse they can grasp as a reason for not instituting a playoff system. One such reason is that a football playoff might bleed the season into a second semester, and that could cause the student-athletes undue academic hardship.

Never mind that on Thursday those same people, so concerned about the length of the season, added yet another controversial game.

akw4572 · 06-11-2004, 11:40 AM

BCS Presidents=Big Confernece Presidents=Idiots.

boilermaker · 06-11-2004, 05:15 PM

As 100% of all college football fans want a playoff system, I would reckon that makes the BCS the most clueless group of people in the history of sports. Gary Bettman should feel relieved.

PurdueBrad · 06-11-2004, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by boilermaker
As 100% of all college football fans want a playoff system, I would reckon that makes the BCS the most clueless group of people in the history of sports. Gary Bettman should feel relieved.

Well, you may want to make that 99.9% of all college football fans because I'm one of those traditionalists who still likes the bowl system.

jnshmoo · 06-11-2004, 05:42 PM

Do you mean you like what USED to be the bowl system? or the BCS System (I believe that the C is silent).

The bowl system was fine before they screwed it up with all this national champion crap. Gone now are the interdivision rivalries of the old system.

PurdueBrad · 06-11-2004, 06:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jnshmoo
Do you mean you like what USED to be the bowl system? or the BCS System (I believe that the C is silent).

The bowl system was fine before they screwed it up with all this national champion crap. Gone now are the interdivision rivalries of the old system.

Good point. Actually, of the three alternatives (the old bowl system, the current BCS system, and the playoffs), I prefer both types of bowl systems over a playoff.

KurtBevacqua · 06-11-2004, 10:51 PM

I am a fan of the playoffs, but if my choice was between the BCS and the old bowl system, I'd go old bowl system hands down. It seems these guys only make things worse every time they change it.

matskralc · 06-12-2004, 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by PurdueBrad
Well, you may want to make that 99.9% of all college football fans because I'm one of those traditionalists who still likes the bowl system.

<---another one

Skipaway · 06-13-2004, 03:53 AM

Hahahah, whatever system that let the rich teams screw the poor teams is a good system.

College football would be even better if we separate all major conferences from the smaller ones to form a superior/premier league.

rem · 06-13-2004, 04:04 AM

If we can't all agree on the 2nd best team in the country, they how are we to agree on the 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, or 12th best?

Skipaway · 06-13-2004, 10:49 AM

Why do we have to? It's not like any league with a playoff system cared about that.

CMH · 06-13-2004, 11:34 AM

Just drop the BCS, adopt the old system again and let there be co-champions if the AP and Coaches disagree with each other.

From my memory it caused less drama.

The only reason it happened was because of Michigan and Nebraska sharing a championship. I didn't think it was that big of a deal. Both sides had strong arguments as to why they should be co-champions, especially in a sport where every team doesn't play one another. Can you honestly think there can be ONE champion when you only play 11-12 games in a 100+ team season?

Skipaway · 06-13-2004, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by YankeePride
Can you honestly think there can be ONE champion when you only play 11-12 games in a 100+ team season?

That's why I think it's better if we get rid of the non-BCS conferences. A league with about 40 teams would be great.

CMH · 06-13-2004, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skipaway
That's why I think it's better if we get rid of the non-BCS conferences. A league with about 40 teams would be great.

Ah, I skipped over that part in your post.

That's a good idea. It wouldn't make a difference (based on what you said...they are already non-BCS conferences), anyway, so it wouldn't change much but help the system make sense.

Eckstein 4 Prez · 06-13-2004, 02:39 PM

Yeah, the old bowl system was viable, and a playoff system would be viable as well, although traditionalists might take some time getting used to it.

But the current system is crap. I love how they crowned a fake national champion last season..... good times.

06-11-2004, 10:51 PM	#7
KurtBevacqua Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 2,968	I am a fan of the playoffs, but if my choice was between the BCS and the old bowl system, I'd go old bowl system hands down. It seems these guys only make things worse every time they change it. __________________ "The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D. The radical vice of all these schemes, from a sociological point of view, is that C is not allowed a voice in the matter, and his position, character, and interests, as well as the ultimate effects on society through C's interests, are entirely overlooked. I call C the Forgotten Man" - William Graham Sumner

06-13-2004, 03:53 AM	#9
Skipaway Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Where you live Posts: 11,017	Hahahah, whatever system that let the rich teams screw the poor teams is a good system. College football would be even better if we separate all major conferences from the smaller ones to form a superior/premier league. __________________ Jonathan Haidt: Moral reasoning is really just a servant masquerading as a high priest.

06-13-2004, 04:04 AM	#10
rem Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: College Park, Md. Posts: 5,024	If we can't all agree on the 2nd best team in the country, they how are we to agree on the 4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, or 12th best? __________________ OTBA: Washington Filibusters CLBR: Minnesota Twins 2005 Winner of LL's Pick the Loser Contest! - 15-0

06-13-2004, 10:49 AM	#11
Skipaway Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Where you live Posts: 11,017	Why do we have to? It's not like any league with a playoff system cared about that. __________________ Jonathan Haidt: Moral reasoning is really just a servant masquerading as a high priest.

06-13-2004, 02:39 PM	#15
Eckstein 4 Prez Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: The OC Posts: 6,358	Yeah, the old bowl system was viable, and a playoff system would be viable as well, although traditionalists might take some time getting used to it. But the current system is crap. I love how they crowned a fake national champion last season..... good times. __________________ Looking for an insomnia cure? Check out my dynasty thread, The Dawn of American Professional Base Ball, 1871.

06-11-2004, 10:09 AM	#1
KurtBevacqua Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 2,968	New BCS Format From the Miami Herald this morning. It seems to me the BCS thing has become a pride issue now. These guys are willing to try anything but a playoff simply because they didn't want a playoff when they entered into the whole BCS mess, and now that just about everyone else wants one but them, pride gets in the way and the powers that be will never give in because that would be an admission of failure of the whole BCS concept, which 98% of all college football fans agree it already is. So now we have to wait 5 weeks after the season ends to build up to the bowl games, then just one week later play a made up title game, that you are still likely to have just as much controversy over which teams are chosen. Just because it would have solved last year's mess doesn't mean it will solve something else. What if Ohio State and USC go into the Rose Bowl undefeated, #1 and #2? They play that game then the winner gets 11-2 Miami in Orange Bowl part II? Gee, that makes much more sense. For the BCS, it's the payoff, not the playoff ARMANDO SALGUERO asalguero@herald.com Bowl Championship Series commissioners went on a nationwide conference call Thursday and announced their grand plan to take a flawed college football system and tweak it just enough so that it remains ridiculously broken. We knew the commissioners were going to add a national-title bowl to follow the Orange, Rose, Sugar and Fiesta and hoped that game would match the two best teams from those traditional games. But the clarity of that hope was muddled by the commissioners' contempt for anything resembling a playoff. ''A playoff game as opposed to this model is just one step toward full-fledged NFL-type playoffs, to which there is adamant opposition,'' said Dave Fronhmayer, the BCS Presidential Oversight Committee Chairman. So instead of doing the right thing and spicing the BCS with a dash of playoff flavor, the commissioners simply added the new bowl game at the end of the season. That means the new bowl game will promise a title, but instead will crown an illegitimate champion. WILL IT WORK? The extra game will rotate among the BCS bowl sites, including Miami, giving those cities not one, but two games once every four years. That is supposed to be a boon for local economies, but might also bust the integrity of the traditional BCS bowl games. ''When you get a national championship, there's not a way that second game [in your city] will get equal treatment and coverage,'' Capital One Bowl chief Tom Mickle told ESPN. This defective system, which starts in the 2006-07 season, will do nothing to prevent a repeat of last season, when USC staked a rightful claim to the national title even while Oklahoma and LSU played in the BCS championship game. A playoff system would erase such inconclusive seasons and offer the kind of postseason drama enjoyed by practically every collegiate sport other than football. But that which is good and right is simply not what these people want for college football. One of the many arguments BCS commissioners and college presidents use against a playoff system is that football, unlike other sports, is driven by regular-season ticket sales (read: money). A playoff system, they argue, would dilute the importance of the regular season and hurt ticket sales (read: money leaving their wallets). ''We want to do nothing to destroy the appeal of a strong regular season,'' Fronhmayer said. STILL NO PLAYOFF That, of course, rings hollow coming from folks who allow athletic departments to regularly pad regular-season schedules with games against such powerhouses as Lower Eastern Valley Tech. Talk about destroying appeal. University presidents simply don't care that the public wants a playoff system and television networks would pay through the remote for the right to broadcast the postseason. Those presidents and commissioners latch on to any lame excuse they can grasp as a reason for not instituting a playoff system. One such reason is that a football playoff might bleed the season into a second semester, and that could cause the student-athletes undue academic hardship. Never mind that on Thursday those same people, so concerned about the length of the season, added yet another controversial game. __________________ "The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D. The radical vice of all these schemes, from a sociological point of view, is that C is not allowed a voice in the matter, and his position, character, and interests, as well as the ultimate effects on society through C's interests, are entirely overlooked. I call C the Forgotten Man" - William Graham Sumner

06-11-2004, 11:40 AM	#2
akw4572 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Kentucky Posts: 2,601	BCS Presidents=Big Confernece Presidents=Idiots.

06-11-2004, 05:15 PM	#3
boilermaker All Star Starter Join Date: May 2004 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 1,956	As 100% of all college football fans want a playoff system, I would reckon that makes the BCS the most clueless group of people in the history of sports. Gary Bettman should feel relieved.

06-11-2004, 05:42 PM	#5
jnshmoo All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Not Here Posts: 1,226	Do you mean you like what USED to be the bowl system? or the BCS System (I believe that the C is silent). The bowl system was fine before they screwed it up with all this national champion crap. Gone now are the interdivision rivalries of the old system.

06-13-2004, 11:34 AM	#12
CMH Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 5,057	Just drop the BCS, adopt the old system again and let there be co-champions if the AP and Coaches disagree with each other. From my memory it caused less drama. The only reason it happened was because of Michigan and Nebraska sharing a championship. I didn't think it was that big of a deal. Both sides had strong arguments as to why they should be co-champions, especially in a sport where every team doesn't play one another. Can you honestly think there can be ONE champion when you only play 11-12 games in a 100+ team season?