Why was game 12 added over a playoff? Come on...

 

Exactly, game 12 is for money. You knock out game 12 and you add playoffs.

You see, as a college football lover - I don't really care about the money. I care about the game, about the teams, about the fans, and about the players. If they are not good enough to make the top 8, they don't deserve to argue.

That money goes to fund a great deal of collegiate athletic programs that are not self sufficient. It is a financial decision for schools as much as it is a football issue.

 

A playoff does not guarantee that the best team in the nation wins the National title. See Kansas with Danny Manning and Villanova over Gtown for examples of that.

 

To me, the BCS goes a lot farther in trying to get the best team of the whole season as the national champion.

That money goes to fund a great deal of collegiate athletic programs that are not self sufficient.

If that's what NCAA Football has become, just let me know. That's GARBAGE...

If I were in charge, here is how it would play out this season:

 

1) Ohio State vs. (8) Boise State

 

4) LSU vs. (5) USC

 

2) Florida vs. (7) Wisconsin

 

3) Michigan vs. (6) Louisville

 

Then play it out like an 8-team tourney and you will have a true champion. There will be two extra games, but big deal - the season lasts a month extra anyways. Play these games in the major bowls just like always with the top teams staying closer to home if possible. If you love the BCS then use it to choose the top 8 and shut up. Then, we'll solve all the problems on the field.

 

But your leaving out Wake Forest and Oklahoma who won their conferences.

That money goes to fund a great deal of collegiate athletic programs that are not self sufficient. It is a financial decision for schools as much as it is a football issue.

 

A playoff does not guarantee that the best team in the nation wins the National title. See Kansas with Danny Manning and Villanova over Gtown for examples of that.

 

To me, the BCS goes a lot farther in trying to get the best team of the whole season as the national champion.

 

To be the best, you have to beat the best. What's the use of having anything if you want to feed the national title to the number one team. Let's just go ahead and give the NCAA basketball trophy to UNC and stop the season. The NCAA bball tourney isn't so magical because the number seeds all go to the final four and the best number 1 seed wins. Its magical because teams like George Mason makes a run to the final four, or Gonzaga beats Arizona, or Winthrop beats Duke, or whatever...

But your leaving out Wake Forest and Oklahoma who won their conferences.

 

Too bad, they should've played tougher schedules. Oklahoma did'nt play anyone and the ACC sucks this year. Too bad.

Why was game 12 added over a playoff? Come on...

I don't know as I am not a huge follower of college football, but I would assume it had something to do with conference championship games and once again $$$$$$$$$$$$.

 

Those who delude themselves that thing collegiate bigtime sports decisions is not as much about the money as it is about on the field results, need to wake up. If the NCAA could make more money with a playoff, they would.

 

Would you agree that dropping the bowl system to a 8-team playoff would have a HUGE impact on the $$$$ the NCAA brings in? Would you agree that setting up 7 bowl games for a playoff and moving 3-4 New Year's Day bowl games 2 weeks earlier, would have a negative $$$$ impact on the sponsor's of those games? Would you agree that taking the other 24 bowl games and putting them outside of the playoff system would negatively affect the $$$ for that bowl game?

 

I look at this the same way as I look at the Sweet 16. It will not be changed to a classification because too much money is lost if they did.

I don't know as I am not a huge follower of college football, but I would assume it had something to do with conference championship games and once again $$$$$$$$$$$$.

 

Those who delude themselves that thing collegiate bigtime sports decisions is not as much about the money as it is about on the field results, need to wake up. If the NCAA could make more money with a playoff, they would.

 

Would you agree that dropping the bowl system to a 8-team playoff would have a HUGE impact on the $$$$ the NCAA brings in? Would you agree that setting up 7 bowl games for a playoff and moving 3-4 New Year's Day bowl games 2 weeks earlier, would have a negative $$$$ impact on the sponsor's of those games? Would you agree that taking the other 24 bowl games and putting them outside of the playoff system would negatively affect the $$$ for that bowl game?

 

I look at this the same way as I look at the Sweet 16. It will not be changed to a classification because too much money is lost if they did.

 

Is it Sponsor Football or College Football?

If I were in charge, here is how it would play out this season:

 

1) Ohio State vs. (8) Boise State

 

4) LSU vs. (5) USC

 

2) Florida vs. (7) Wisconsin

 

3) Michigan vs. (6) Louisville

 

Then play it out like an 8-team tourney and you will have a true champion. There will be two extra games, but big deal - the season lasts a month extra anyways. Play these games in the major bowls just like always with the top teams staying closer to home if possible. If you love the BCS then use it to choose the top 8 and shut up. Then, we'll solve all the problems on the field.

I think it was HSSB who pointed out that it wouldn't happen as you have it above. Any playoff system would include the conference champs of the

1)Big East = Louisville

2)ACC = Wake Forest

3)SEC = Florida

4)PAC = USC

5)Big 12 = Oklahoma

6)Big 10 = Ohio State

and two at-larges.

 

You had 4 at-larges in your scenario.

Michigan would definitely be one of the at-larges. Then choose one of your other 3 at-larges. You going to leave LSU at home and invite Boise State or leave the second undefeated team in the nation at home.

I don't know as I am not a huge follower of college football, but I would assume it had something to do with conference championship games and once again $$$$$$$$$$$$.

 

Those who delude themselves that thing collegiate bigtime sports decisions is not as much about the money as it is about on the field results, need to wake up. If the NCAA could make more money with a playoff, they would.

 

Would you agree that dropping the bowl system to a 8-team playoff would have a HUGE impact on the $$$$ the NCAA brings in? Would you agree that setting up 7 bowl games for a playoff and moving 3-4 New Year's Day bowl games 2 weeks earlier, would have a negative $$$$ impact on the sponsor's of those games? Would you agree that taking the other 24 bowl games and putting them outside of the playoff system would negatively affect the $$$ for that bowl game?

 

I look at this the same way as I look at the Sweet 16. It will not be changed to a classification because too much money is lost if they did.

You do know the NCAA gets very little money from the Bowl system, and if they go to a playoff the NCAA gets to swim in the cash mountain, right? That takes money away from the schools. If you are not a big follower of the system, why in the world are you making a case for it either way? You don't know what you are arguing by your own admission...

Is it Sponsor Football or College Football?

Do you want the true answer or the answer that makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?

You do know the NCAA gets very little money from the Bowl system, and if they go to a playoff the NCAA gets to swim in the cash mountain, right? That takes money away from the schools. If you are not a big follower of the system, why in the world are you making a case for it either way? You don't know what you are arguing by your own admission...

When I say NCAA, I was talking about the schools. I have read that the SEC even splits the money that the member schools receive from bowl games and gives a portion to those schools that do not go to a bowl game.

 

On you last point, I have begun watching it and keeping up with it more and more over the last 2-3 seasons. Sorta like my beginning fascination with NASCAR.

I think it was HSSB who pointed out that it wouldn't happen as you have it above. Any playoff system would include the conference champs of the

1)Big East = Louisville

2)ACC = Wake Forest

3)SEC = Florida

4)PAC = USC

5)Big 12 = Oklahoma

6)Big 10 = Ohio State

and two at-larges.

 

You had 4 at-larges in your scenario.

Michigan would definitely be one of the at-larges. Then choose one of your other 3 at-larges. You going to leave LSU at home and invite Boise State or leave the second undefeated team in the nation at home.

 

Then make it a 16-team tournament. I don't care, but the Bull Crap System just isn't getting it done.

Then make it a 16-team tournament. I don't care, but the Bull Crap System just isn't getting it done.

Post #10 and Urban Meyer quote.

When I say NCAA, I was talking about the schools. I have read that the SEC even splits the money that the member schools receive from bowl games and gives a portion to those schools that do not go to a bowl game.

 

On you last point, I have begun watching it and keeping up with it more and more over the last 2-3 seasons. Sorta like my beginning fascination with NASCAR.

Have a playoff and that goes away. You already gave those schools a boatload of cash with an extra home game. All I want is the system decided by the rules in place. What we saw last night was a sham. Those outside the Big 11 were going to make sure they didn't cash a double check. Plain and simple...