06/07 Ncaa bowl games

[HatManTC]

is this the year that the BCS will add the Plus one game?

[Cyclopsis Joe]

Uh, no?

[jkrdevil]

It's not the plus 1 system. What happens is this year there are 5 BCS bowls: the Fiesta Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Rose Bowl, Orange Bowl, and the new National Champion Championship Game which will be players a one of the above sites. The 1 and 2 teams in the BCS Standings will play in the championship game and the other 4 bowls will pick the matchups they want from the rest.

[NJTank]

Great its more confusing now

[HatManTC]

this is why there should be a playoff.

i thought it was who ever won the

1 vs. 2 and 3 vs 4 would play for the title

[ZBoyer]

Great its more confusing now

No, actually, it's just two more teams. It's really not that much more difficult.

[HatManTC]

well they should just take the top 8 teams and have a mini playoff with them.

[HedleyLamarr]

well they should just take the top 8 teams and have a mini playoff with them.

For some conferences, that would mean a team playing a 16-game season. (12 regular season games, 1 conference championship game, and at most 3 playoff games.)

There is no reason why these college student-athletes should be playing an equal amount of games as the pros. If you want to see a college football playoff, play it out on your X-Box.

You want to improve college football? Get rid of all rankings until mid-October. You want a college football playoff? Each game is like a playoff game: One loss, and you almost lose out on the championship. Lose twice, kiss the championship goodbye.

What's more intense than a matchup of undefeateds in Texas-Oklahoma, Georgia-Florida, Miami-FSU, Michigan-Ohio State, USC-Notre Dame throughout the season, knowing the loser has lost their chance at the national championship?

[NJTank]

I agree its time to do a 16-team playoff with the Confernce winners and other few top teams it will be the most watched College Games ever.

[HatManTC]

well they should just take the top 8 teams and have a mini playoff with them.

For some conferences, that would mean a team playing a 16-game season. (12 regular season games, 1 conference championship game, and at most 3 playoff games.)

There is no reason why these college student-athletes should be playing an equal amount of games as the pros. If you want to see a college football playoff, play it out on your X-Box.

You want to improve college football? Get rid of all rankings until mid-October. You want a college football playoff? Each game is like a playoff game: One loss, and you almost lose out on the championship. Lose twice, kiss the championship goodbye.

What's more intense than a matchup of undefeateds in Texas-Oklahoma, Georgia-Florida, Miami-FSU, Michigan-Ohio State, USC-Notre Dame throughout the season, knowing the loser has lost their chance at the national championship?

but you never get a clear cut National champ. only twice in the history of the BCS has there ever been a true national title game. so why not clear that up and let them play it.

[HedleyLamarr]

but you never get a clear cut National champ. only twice in the history of the BCS has there ever been a true national title game. so why not clear that up and let them play it.

If you want an arguement in vying for the National Championship, don't lose a game. It is very rare to have more than two undefeated teams in a season.

And in those instances where there is more than two undefeateds, I do like the idea of having a computer determining the top two. After all, you can't play a 3-team football game. You're asking student-athletes to either play the playoffs during Finals, or three weeks into January.

These college student-athletes are amateurs, not paid professionals that only play football. They have academics to maintain. Playing 15-16-17 game seasons cuts in heavily into their sole purpose of being in college: academics.

[HatManTC]

but you never get a clear cut National champ. only twice in the history of the BCS has there ever been a true national title game. so why not clear that up and let them play it.

If you want an arguement in vying for the National Championship, don't lose a game. It is very rare to have more than two undefeated teams in a season.

And in those instances where there is more than two undefeateds, I do like the idea of having a computer determining the top two. After all, you can't play a 3-team football game. You're asking student-athletes to either play the playoffs during Finals, or three weeks into January.

These college student-athletes are amateurs, not paid professionals that only play football. They have academics to maintain. Playing 15-16-17 game seasons cuts in heavily into their sole purpose of being in college: academics.

yet the same happens during March for basketball

it doesnt effect the kids in D-1aa,D2, or even d3. those 3 levels all have playoff systems.

if anything cut two non-conference games. do you really need to play Youngstown state 3rd game of the year if you're Penn State?

[See Red]

but you never get a clear cut National champ. only twice in the history of the BCS has there ever been a true national title game. so why not clear that up and let them play it.

If you want an arguement in vying for the National Championship, don't lose a game. It is very rare to have more than two undefeated teams in a season.

And in those instances where there is more than two undefeateds, I do like the idea of having a computer determining the top two. After all, you can't play a 3-team football game. You're asking student-athletes to either play the playoffs during Finals, or three weeks into January.

These college student-athletes are amateurs, not paid professionals that only play football. They have academics to maintain. Playing 15-16-17 game seasons cuts in heavily into their sole purpose of being in college: academics.

But schools not even in session when these games would be played, and they spend the entire month practicing anyway. I don't think the system is as flawed as most people seem to, but the argument that it takes kids away from classes just isn't right. Besides, if I remember correctly, I believe finals are before Winter Vacation anyway.

[Mac the Knife]

These college student-athletes are amateurs, not paid professionals that only play football. They have academics to maintain. Playing 15-16-17 game seasons cuts in heavily into their sole purpose of being in college: academics.

C'mon, Hedley. Calling most of these guys student-athletes is like calling Adolf Hitler the popularly elected leader of Germany in 1944: while it technically may be true, the perception of reality is far different, and anyone who thinks football or basketball players who think they have a shot at the NFL or NBA are at a college primarily for academics anymore is deluding themselves.

My suggestion would be to go back to an 11-game schedule, with every conference required to have a championship game. A team's bowl game would be its 13th, and then have a two-round playoff between the top four teams with the national title game being played on the Saturday of the Super Bowl.

[OMMF]

These college student-athletes are amateurs, not paid professionals that only play football.  They have academics to maintain.  Playing 15-16-17 game seasons cuts in heavily into their sole purpose of being in college: academics.

C'mon, Hedley. Calling most of these guys student-athletes is like calling Adolf Hitler the popularly elected leader of Germany in 1944: while it technically may be true, the perception of reality is far different, and anyone who thinks football or basketball players who think they have a shot at the NFL or NBA are at a college primarily for academics anymore is deluding themselves.

I would call those at 1-AA and lower student-athletes. 1-A are more like athlete-students.

[HedleyLamarr]

These college student-athletes are amateurs, not paid professionals that only play football.  They have academics to maintain.  Playing 15-16-17 game seasons cuts in heavily into their sole purpose of being in college: academics.

C'mon, Hedley. Calling most of these guys student-athletes is like calling Adolf Hitler the popularly elected leader of Germany in 1944: while it technically may be true, the perception of reality is far different, and anyone who thinks football or basketball players who think they have a shot at the NFL or NBA are at a college primarily for academics anymore is deluding themselves.

My suggestion would be to go back to an 11-game schedule, with every conference required to have a championship game. A team's bowl game would be its 13th, and then have a two-round playoff between the top four teams with the national title game being played on the Saturday of the Super Bowl.

They can't play if they aren't in class. They can't play if they don't pass their classes.

Most football players stay in school through their senior season (and for most of them, their 5th year at that school). Most college football players won't be playing any football once their college career ends.

So, yes, college football players are student-athletes.

The Saturday before the Super Bowl? You're extending the season a month longer! The season should end around New Year's Day or shortly after, not late-January or early-February.

Most schools have their Finals in mid-December. Their Spring semester begins a week after New Year's. Under a playoff format, you would be asking these unpaid student-athletes to be playing 2-3-4 games (depending on if 4-8-16 teams are involved):

A - during Finals.

B - during their Winter/Holiday break

C - during the beginning of Spring semester.

And this doesn't even take into consideration the financial terms or how you're going to fill these stadia evenly in a week's amount of time.

[ZBoyer]

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, Hedley. Regardless of whether or not it's true, schools and coaches like to think that the players are going to class. By scheduling games through that second and/or third week of December and well into the New Year, they're taking that opportunity away from the players.

I think that the playoff format, while great, would never work unless schools would be able to be convinced to adopt it, which isn't likely given the amount of money the school and conference makes from the bowl games and committees. Sure, the computer rankings aren't perfect, but that's what's going to happen when you have anywhere from three or more undefeated teams going for the championship in one game. At that point, while you aim to take the two better schools based upon stength of schedule and the like, one team will be left out and they will always be complaining about getting the shaft. But really, what other better, reasonable way is there to fix a scenario like that?

[Fred T. Jane]

They can't play if they aren't in class. They can't play if they don't pass their classes.

Apparently not at Auburn!

[HatManTC]

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, Hedley. Regardless of whether or not it's true, schools and coaches like to think that the players are going to class. By scheduling games through that second and/or third week of December and well into the New Year, they're taking that opportunity away from the players.

I think that the playoff format, while great, would never work unless schools would be able to be convinced to adopt it, which isn't likely given the amount of money the school and conference makes from the bowl games and committees. Sure, the computer rankings aren't perfect, but that's what's going to happen when you have anywhere from three or more undefeated teams going for the championship in one game. At that point, while you aim to take the two better schools based upon stength of schedule and the like, one team will be left out and they will always be complaining about getting the shaft. But really, what other better, reasonable way is there to fix a scenario like that?

some schools dont make money when it comes to bowl games. being that they have to pay for traveling expenses,housing and food during that entire week that they are getting ready for the game.

[TNT44]

Most universities and conferences have rejected the idea of a playoff because it is less $$$ for them. However, and idea of a changes-every-season playoff isn't too crazy. What I mean is, after all the regular season and bowl games a series of playoffs be played between the rest of the undefeated teams still standing. So let's say there are only two undefeated teams left. Then they play one national championship playoff game. What if there are three? Then they take the three teams ans re-seed them 1, 2, & 3 and 2 & 3 will play each other with the winner facing 1 in the NC. And with four there would be a 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 with the winners facing each other in the NC. And if there are no undefeated teams left, they do the same with one-loss teams. Then we can get rid of the BCS and not worry about matching up the one and two seeds at the end of the season in a championship game, possibly creating another situation like the one with Auburn a year ago.