When was the last Cinderella national champion in basketball? 1988? That's 22 seasons ago. One of the 3 or 4 best teams win the title basically every year.

 

I will try and look that up.

Neither will the BCS if more than one team goes undefeated. Who exactly has Texas beat beside Oklahoma and Oklahoma State who played without their Heisman candidates. TCU's wins are more impressive than Texas'.

 

And yet HUMANS who would determine the important aspect of seeding in a tournament are consistently putting them as the #2 or #3 ranked team in the nation.

I love college football's regular season. Just a few changes I would add would be don't let the polls come out until week 7 or so. Also a plus one great would be a great addition. Other than that I like how it is currently. Every game matters.

Perspective is an interesting thing. Several people have mentioned how college football's regular season is great beccause every game matters. And yet -- to my mind -- college football has actually put together a system in which no games matter.

 

If you can go undefeated while playing a solid non-conference schedule and dominating your conference (see TCU, Boise St. and Cincinnati) and yet still not have a chance to compete at a national title, then what did those wins matter? If you can go undefeated and not get a shot for the national title, then what does it matter if you go 8-4 but win your conference to get a BCS bid? Those four games DID NOT matter. 12-0 Fiesta Bowl = 8-4 Fiesta Bowl.

Perspective is an interesting thing. Several people have mentioned how college football's regular season is great beccause every game matters. And yet -- to my mind -- college football has actually put together a system in which no games matter.

 

If you can go undefeated while playing a solid non-conference schedule and dominating your conference (see TCU, Boise St. and Cincinnati) and yet still not have a chance to compete at a national title, then what did those wins matter? If you can go undefeated and not get a shot for the national title, then what does it matter if you go 8-4 but win your conference to get a BCS bid? Those four games DID NOT matter. 12-0 Fiesta Bowl = 8-4 Fiesta Bowl.

 

Hits the nail right on the head.

So, a team can lose in March Madness and still have a chance to win the championship?

 

Football is the only sport that the national champion is the BEST representative of which team was the BEST during the WHOLE SEASON!

 

That is simply not true. We have had teams in the past go undefeated during the regular season and could be considered the best during the whole season, yet they dont even get a chance to play in the title game. I am not just talking about non BCS schools either, just look at Auburn. Also just look at this year, with how things are going there is a very good chance we will have a team in UC who is in a BCS conference and wont even get a chance to play for the Championship. Then you have a team like TCU, who probably won't get a chance either, and same goes for Boise State. I mean they did what they needed to do, and that is win all there games. Yet based on OPINION and opinion alone, we say well WE THINK these other two teams are better. Do we know for sure that they are? No not at all. So how is that crowning a National Champion who was best during the whole season? Its just crowning a champion on WHO PEOPLE THINK, not really based on who really was on the field.

 

Not to mention you can't compare college basketball tournament to college football. I mean if college football does get a playoff it probably wont be any higher than 16 and more likely just 8 teams. So college football you don't have as many games as college basketball. So say it is just an 8 team playoff, one lost still could keep you out of the playoffs. The season would still have tons of meaning and every game meaning a lot. Football is a different sport, with not as many games played. So one game still could cost a team. So how does that take away from the season? I mean in an 8 team playoff, it probably would be say the 6 BCS conference winners. So that means you would have had to earn it during the season, and only sure way of making it is going undefeated. Then also two at large teams, which would give teams who go undefeated like Boise and TCU a chance to prove or not prove that they are the best team in the country.

 

So if you really want to talk about having a National Champion that was best throughout the whole season, then that would be by having a playoff. You really still have not much room for error at all, and one lost could keep you out of it. So the season would still be just as important, but we also would be crowning a Champion for what they did on the field, not just who we think might be the best team.

Agree with future coach regular season would still mean a lot without enough wins you would not be able to make playoffs. This year there may be more unbeaten teams than usual but in other years there are a lot of 1 lost teams who can make an argument they are best team. All conferences not the same some playoff best way to decide champion.

So, a team can lose in March Madness and still have a chance to win the championship?

 

Football is the only sport that the national champion is the BEST representative of which team was the BEST during the WHOLE SEASON!

 

March Madness only represents the team that was best over a weekend.

 

I remember UK plowing through Wake Forest and someone else over a weekend and they were unbelievable. Next weekened, they weren't on fire as much and lost in the first game.

 

While it is not perfect, it is BETTER than the other collegiate sports in determining a champion that is TRULY the best team of the WHOLE SEASON.

 

Or are you going to stick with the argument that George Mason was one of the 4 best teams in the nation, the year they made a run to the final 4?

 

 

What about the year's where LSU wins it all w/ 2 losses, or Auburn goes undefeated through the regular season and can't claim even a tie of the national title???? Or what about last year, when Oklahoma wasn't even the best team in the Big 12, yet they played in the National Championship game. Or the year Miami had 1 loss, beat Florida State, and then watched them play in the National Championship game. Yeah...the BCS is a cure all.

A playoff tournament does not even do the bolded. Unless you are of the opinion that George Mason was one of the four best teams in the nation.

 

It says who had the best matchups in the bracket that some humans put them in and that bracket was never decided on the field.

 

Every major sport (except college football) is geared toward a post-season that rewards the team(s) that are the best at the end of the season. Of course, the regular season plays a role, because you have to be good throughout the year in most sports to get the opportunity at the end.

 

Obviously, George Mason was much better than everyone expected and, at season's end, they were better than the rest in their region. Maybe there were some teams in other brackets that could have beat them had the pairing been different. We'll never know. And, it doesn't matter. If you're good enough at the end of the season, you get a chance to prove it.

 

Billy Donovan certainly wouldn't have won his first title under a BCS system...are you of the opinion that there was a better college basketball team in March than Florida?

 

The BCS system has its good points, like making big regular season games even bigger. But, as far as crowning a true champion, it falls short...as does any system that doesn't allow it to be settled on the field or court.

 

Personally, I'd trade a few regular season games being "less bigger" to see a real playoff at the season's end to crown a real champion.

 

But, as I said, its all a matter of preference. I don't begrudge anyone for preferring the BCS.

There will likely be two, three, or even four undefeated teams, two from AQ BCS conference, at the end of this year and only one of them will have had the chance to play for and be crowned the National Champion. For all the reasons mentioned previously, that is just ridiculous. There is no legitimate argument for the BCS structure except money. How many more years do the fans, sports writers, and even politicians have to say fix it until the anointed few who have the power to do so take action?

There will likely be two, three, or even four undefeated teams, two from AQ BCS conference, at the end of this year and only one of them will have had the chance to play for and be crowned the National Champion. For all the reasons mentioned previously, that is just ridiculous. There is no legitimate argument for the BCS structure except money. How many more years do the fans, sports writers, and even politicians have to say fix it until the anointed few who have the power to do so take action?

 

If it takes politicians to change the BCS, I hope we have it forever.

 

First, they shouldn't be remotely involved in issues like the BCS...with all the issues facing our country, to think some senator, congressman, etc., would be taking the time to pursue something as ultimately trivial as whether we have a playoff system in college football is beyond absurd. If they can't find the time to read/understand a major piece of legislation (Health Care Plan), then I find it hard to accept that they'd have the time to spend on an anti-BCS movement.

 

Second, how often do they get involved and actually bring about improvement? If they did stick their nose in the BCS, they'd make it worse. We'd be pining for the days of computer rankings and mythical champions and undefeated teams resigned to the Holiday Bowl. Our national championship game would end up being UCLA vs. Florida State because senators from California and Florida would bribe their teams into the game with pork barrel earmarks on a bill. :ohbrother:

 

Apologies for the rant...I agree with your post. I just get irritated when politicians get involved in sports as if that's their job...as if its more important than the things that really matter. What's the guys name from PA...Arlen Specter or something like that? What an idiot.

If it takes politicians to change the BCS, I hope we have it forever.

 

First, they shouldn't be remotely involved in issues like the BCS...with all the issues facing our country, to think some senator, congressman, etc., would be taking the time to pursue something as ultimately trivial as whether we have a playoff system in college football is beyond absurd. If they can't find the time to read/understand a major piece of legislation (Health Care Plan), then I find it hard to accept that they'd have the time to spend on an anti-BCS movement.

 

Second, how often do they get involved and actually bring about improvement? If they did stick their nose in the BCS, they'd make it worse. We'd be pining for the days of computer rankings and mythical champions and undefeated teams resigned to the Holiday Bowl. Our national championship game would end up being UCLA vs. Florida State because senators from California and Florida would bribe their teams into the game with pork barrel earmarks on a bill. :ohbrother:

 

Apologies for the rant...I agree with your post. I just get irritated when politicians get involved in sports as if that's their job...as if its more important than the things that really matter. What's the guys name from PA...Arlen Specter or something like that? What an idiot.

 

No argument here, I agree completely that politician should stay out of sports. However, it seems that the majority of fans, to include the President and sports writers believe the system doesn’t work. I would be willing to bet that most coaches believe change is needed too, but can’t say it publically.

I watch very few college basketball games until the conference starts. The games don't mean anything.

I watch very few college basketball games until the conference starts. The games don't mean anything.

 

I hate when people use this college basketball argument as a reason for why college football should stay the same. For one if college football did get a playoff it wouldnt be 64 teams, or 32 teams. AT MOST it would be 16 teams, and probably more likely 8 teams would be the most. 8 spots is not many spots to fill. Also college football has a lot less games than college basketball. So basically every game would still mean a TON for every team, because one lost could end your chances of making the playoffs then. So people's theory about the games won't mean as much, is just wrong. They still will mean just as much, because the only way to know for sure you make the playoffs is by going undefeated or winning the conference if you in a BCS conference. So I mean seriously every single game would mean a ton then still. Not to mention even with a 8 team playoff, you could still keep all the bowl games. Having a playoff system really would not change much at all with college football, every game would still be just as important. But for the first time ever college football will actually be crowning a champion on the field, instead of based on opinions on who the top 2 teams are.

I watch very few college basketball games until the conference starts. The games don't mean anything.

 

How many college football games matter each weekend? There are 120 teams, which means roughly 60 games per weekend. The only ones that matter involve the top 5-10 teams and many of those games are very similar to bad basketball (Florida/FIU; Alabama/Chattanooga this weekend to prove a point) and do not matter.