The old system will work better economically. Did you know the Rose Bowl did not sell out in 2002--the year when Iowa and USC met in the Orange bowl of all places. That had to be the dumbest situation of all time. But, when the pac ten and big ten meet in the rose bowl it's a sellout. Even when mediocre rosebowl games it will sell out, since in the big ten and pac ten states the rosebowl and going to pasadena and southern california is a really, really big deal. The traditions set up with the big ten, pac ten and the rose bowl were set in place and were awesome. The big 8 used to love the orange bowl and sell their ticket allotments. If the sugar bowl matched the sec and big 12 champs every year or the sec and acc champs or big east champs every year it would sell out regardless of whether or not you have the bcs game. Rose bowl people may seem pompous, but they earned it with sell outs and and traditions. In big ten country to go to the rosebowl in January and late december is a big deal. If the other bowls got in fixed arrangements it would be a big deal for them and the conferences. This way you can have two or three potential national championship games. I know the USC thing sticks in our craw, but that sort of stuff makes college football great. The current bcs system creates one big bowl game and three other ones.
I agree with Cajdav 1. I hated the old system. I don't like this one too much, but at least it makes an attempt to match up the #1 and #2 teams. Of course a playoff would be the best option, but no.... that would make too much sence, lol.
The AP lobbyists must have leaned on the NCAA pretty good to get them to leave out the computer rankings. If this happens then Saban will have to do the 'old Nebraska' on all the patsies and stomp the daylights out of them 77-0 every week. This is the only way to sway voters to give a large win an edge over a close win.
Ok I can just imagine the very first meeting these BCS dufuses had. The first out of the head honcho's mouth was: "Ok, how do we make a system that ensures that USC makes it to the BCS Championship this year?" Great going BCS Committee. Let's just go backwards and make it worse. A total travesty. A sham, and a mockery.
The old system had its tradition thats for sure, but it sucked big time to make a clear cut National Champ. The BCS has done a much better job at naming a National Champ (AP,USC check the rules before the season :dis: ) and we now have the chance of playing top teams from any conf. As for the Rose Bowl not selling out two years ago......big deal, USC usually cannot sell out their own home games. I bet the Sugar Bowl has sold out each year. :thumb: Point being untill there is a playoff, the BCS is the better of the two......
Well now that they made the changes they did, it's essentially in the writer's and coaches hands. The chances that top 2 teams in the 2 polls won't be the same is remote. Therefore, the computer polls will more than likely not be used. And now that we no longer look at SOS, I just believe the BCS has given in to the AP and Coaches Poll people and said "here, you take it back". What a f#cking shame!
I think a playoff system is the only way, period. But I don't even think that will truly work unless you have standardized scheduling, like the NFL does. And believe me, I think college football is leaps and bounds better than the NFL, but the scheduling thing is one thing they do right. Think about it, no one ever complains that Team A played a weak schedule to get to the playoffs, and there's no human bias involved. To accomplish this, I think that 1) Division 1A should be cut down to 72 teams, 6 conferences with 12 teams each. Maintain the division structure. You've already got the six conferences, so that's done. Divide the conferences into 2 "leagues" with 3 conferences each. 2) The season must expand permanently to 12 games. You play your eight conference games the way we do now. Then you play 2 teams from the other two conferences in your league in order of finish from the previous year. Still maintain a conference championship game. 3) Here's the kicker though...just as in the NFL, ALL GAMES COUNT TOWARDS YOUR CONFERENCE RECORD. I know this might sound crazy, but if we're throwing out the human polls, there would be no sense playing non-conference games because they wouldn't mean anything. You then take your 3 three conference winners from each league, plus one "wild card" team...an 8 team playoff. Have two weeks of playoffs then a championship game. That's a total of 16 games for the two survivors, only two more games than we played last year. Again, in no way do I want college ball to be like the NFL, I just think there would be much less dispute about who the champion is.
Dude, your system is too much like the NFL. If you cut down to 72 d1-a teams congress will get involved since most mwc, c-usa, and mac, schools get screwed. The senators from Western states like Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico, Nevada, Idaho would demand hearings and so on.
You're right, which is why stomping a mud hole in Oregon St. is important. Comparing how LSU and USC did against the Beavers just might come into play come the end of the season, you know.
