I totally agree...there is no point in such a long layoff...also its not fair for a team like Boise to go undefeated and not even be number 2...
0
BCS
Started by FrOnT RoW JOE, Nov 15 2006 09:04 AM
25 replies to this topic
#21
Posted 10 January 2007 - 03:11 PM
You'll be proud of our young people in the classroom, in the community, and most especially in 310 days in Ann Arbor, Michigan on the football field. - Jim Tressel
#22
Posted 10 January 2007 - 03:42 PM
QUOTE(#1 boise fan @ Jan 8 2007, 12:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I like it... it gives teams to show what their made out of
If there was a playoff, maybe Boise could've actually made it to a championship game. Instead, they finish undefeated and get ranked 5th.
I just thought you might want to think about that one.
#23
Posted 11 January 2007 - 12:20 PM
I think a playoff system would be ideal for the BCS. I don't think Boise State would have made the national championship in a playoff scenario, but this would be fair and at least give them a chance.
As we saw in the Boise State vs. Oklahoma game, Boise State's defense was exhausted by overtime, having played with them the entire game. I think if Boise State would've been placed in a playoff system, they wouldn't have the endurance to be able to beat 3 teams to win the national championship. They were exhausted by overtime which i think is part of the reason why they went for the two-point conversion. I also think the fact that they had absolutely nothing to gain and everything to lose contributed to that decision, but mainly because they were exhausted and didn't think they'd be able to play with oklahoma any longer.
Having seen their performance against Oklahoma, I don't think they'd have the endurance to beat 3 top-8 teams in 3 consecutive weeks...
Just what I'm thinking.
As we saw in the Boise State vs. Oklahoma game, Boise State's defense was exhausted by overtime, having played with them the entire game. I think if Boise State would've been placed in a playoff system, they wouldn't have the endurance to be able to beat 3 teams to win the national championship. They were exhausted by overtime which i think is part of the reason why they went for the two-point conversion. I also think the fact that they had absolutely nothing to gain and everything to lose contributed to that decision, but mainly because they were exhausted and didn't think they'd be able to play with oklahoma any longer.
Having seen their performance against Oklahoma, I don't think they'd have the endurance to beat 3 top-8 teams in 3 consecutive weeks...
Just what I'm thinking.
#24
Posted 11 January 2007 - 05:32 PM
If we had a playoff system it could only be an eight team playoff system... 16 is too long... but the smaller schools wont have any better luck getting in.. in the BCS they can be in the top 12 i believe and get a BCS Bowl bid, but with the playoffs it wont be right to take them over a 10-2 or a 9-3 team even if they are undefeated!
Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
#25
Posted 11 January 2007 - 09:40 PM
its gotta go, sure it worked for OSU this year and they made it to the championship game. I hate that if you lose 1 or 2 games your virtually out. Your team may improve over the year or you might have key players missing in a couple of games and then you have no shot at all. We need a playoff system and see who is playing the best football at the end of the year. IF DIVSION 1-AA, II, AND III DO IT SO SHOULD DIVISON 1-A. It all comes down to the money though.
#26
Posted 12 January 2007 - 08:40 AM
agree guru....they would lose money in all the bowl games but eventually people will get tired of it and go away from it anyways and all you have left is your bigwigs of college football and the bowls
You'll be proud of our young people in the classroom, in the community, and most especially in 310 days in Ann Arbor, Michigan on the football field. - Jim Tressel
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users