interesting thought

[stretch]

Look at LSU and Alabama's body of work.

LSU has had a tougher schedule.

LSU beat Alabama on the road.

LSU also won their conference, while Alabama didn't even win the division.

Let's say LSU and Alabama meet in the BCS NC Game. Alabama wins by a narrow 1-2 points.

Who is the true National Champion?

Now obviously, Bama would be considered the champion, but lets say the computer rankings still consider LSU ahead of Bama due to the full body of work. LSU could make an argument for there to be a split-national champion again, or even that they are the true outright champions (even though it would look lame considering they lost the big game)

Shouldn't this be another cause for concern when it comes to the BCS?

In other words... PLAYOFF SYSTEM. I say use a combo of AP and computer rankings through the regular season to determine who gets into the playoffs and their seeding. If I recall, having a 32 team playoff would result in just as many playoff games as bowl games, and you can still keep the sponsor names for each playoff game (ex. Fiesta Bowl Semi-final Game or something like that) so they can still make that money.

[Blake]

Bama would be considered the champion, but lets say the computer rankings still consider LSU ahead of Bama due to the full body of work.

Can that really happen?

If so, it would be so roflmao to see it actually happen.

[stretch]

Can that really happen?

If so, it would be so roflmao to see it actually happen.

I don't know how their systems are actually set up, but I wouldn't be surpised if that was possible. Although if it happened, they would probably do everything possible to keep it from going public, just to save any further possible controversy of the BCS.

[Axe Murderer]

tbh not sure if the playoff system would necessarily solve the theory you just presented.

you could make a case that the 07 Patriots should've been split Super Bowl winners also

let me put it this way

let's say stretch and philip are both 10-0 going into their grappling match. philip wins in 15 rounds, and had the tougher opponents leading up to the game. But then let's say they meet again in the "National Grappling Championship" and stretch wins this one in 15 rounds even though he had cupcake opponents his whole career.

who's really the champion here?

[NFO]

I don't think there are BCS standings after the bowls.

The standings are only (well not only) used to determine the #1 & #2 teams to play in the national championship game. I don't think there is a BCS standings in January after all of the bowls have been played. There is the final AP & Coaches Poll after the bowls are played but not a BCS standings release, as the BCS considers the winner of the national championship game the undisputed champion.

[Blake]

let's say stretch and philip are both 10-0 going into their grappling match.

lol grappling

[stretch]

tbh not sure if the playoff system would necessarily solve the theory you just presented.

you could make a case that the 07 Patriots should've been split Super Bowl winners also

how so? there is no polls in effect as soon as the playoffs start, only for teams to get into the playoffs, and how they are seeded.

let me put it this way

let's say stretch and philip are both 10-0 going into their grappling match. philip wins in 15 rounds, and had the tougher opponents leading up to the game. But then let's say they meet again in the "National Grappling Championship" and stretch wins this one in 15 rounds even though he had cupcake opponents his whole career.

who's really the champion here?

[Sisk]

LSU hasn't won their conference
LSU, apparently, would be the AP National Champs if they beat Georgia

[Axe Murderer]

how so? there is no polls in effect as soon as the playoffs start, only for teams to get into the playoffs, and how they are seeded.

imho there's nothing wrong with your playoff system i was just playing devil's advocate.

At the same time, if Alabama wins the NC game, they should be crowned champions no matter what even if LSU is somehow ranked ahead of them. (If that can really happen it's retarded)

[johngateswhiteley]

At the same time, if Alabama wins the NC game, they should be crowned champions no matter what even if LSU is somehow ranked ahead of them. (If that can really happen it's retarded)

Which is exactly why they should not be allowed to play each other again. Its such a failure of a system.

Per usual, everyone gets in a tizzy with a few weeks left.. worrying about who will play for the title. When it almost always gets sorted out; stakes raise, rivalry games, etc.. teams lose. The cream rises to the top. However, that does not seem to be the case this time around, as it appears almost certain LSU and 'Bama will meet again. A shame.

[vander]

how would a playoffs help? what, one more game for LSU to slip up in, 2 more? so if LSU loses to some other team and Bama wins, that's ok?

have we learned nothing from the NFL? from 18-1, from the 10-6 and even 9-7 teams getting to the SB? in the NFL, the best team wins the SB probably less than half the time, and often isn't even in the SB, how often does that happen in the BCS?

LSU is clearly the best team, the BCS allows them to validate it with just one more victory, a playoffs would make them play 2 or 3 more games, and still wouldn't actually crown LSU even if they lost to Bama, which is probably what should happen if that happened

[Obstructed_View]

The computer's only a small part of the calculation. If the voters put LSU number one then it would happen. The weakness in polls all these years is that losing late counts more than losing early, so voters will reflexively put whoever wins the game at number one.

[vander]

of OK St wins, I hope the voters put them at 2

[Sisk]

of OK St wins, I hope the voters put them at 2

OSU lost to Iowa St.
Alabama lost to LSU

[Hornets78]

Bama had their chance at home to beat LSU. No reason they should get a second chance.

[ChumpDumper]

I think it's hilarious that Southern Miss cost itself about $1 million by winning its conference championship.

Fuck the BCS.

[vander]

OSU lost to Iowa St.
Alabama lost to LSU

they both lost one game, and OK st had the tougher schedule. I'll take schedule over single game

[Monostradamus]

OSU lost to Iowa St.
Alabama lost to LSU

OSU beat 4 current top 25 teams
Alabama beat 2

[Blake]

how would a playoffs help? what, one more game for LSU to slip up in, 2 more? so if LSU loses to some other team and Bama wins, that's ok?

have we learned nothing from the NFL? from 18-1, from the 10-6 and even 9-7 teams getting to the SB? in the NFL, the best team wins the SB probably less than half the time, and often isn't even in the SB, how often does that happen in the BCS?

LSU is clearly the best team, the BCS allows them to validate it with just one more victory, a playoffs would make them play 2 or 3 more games, and still wouldn't actually crown LSU even if they lost to Bama, which is probably what should happen if that happened

So you are saying the nfl would be better off with a bcs system.

K

[Giuseppe]

I think it's hilarious that Southern Miss cost itself about $1 million by winning its conference championship.

Fuck the BCS.

& them beatin' Houston like that went over like a fart in church with Media.

tee, hee.

[vander]

So you are saying the nfl would be better off with a bcs system.

K

nfl don't need a BCS, there's 16 games and only 32 teams, vs. cfb's 12 games and 120+ teams

SOS in the NFL is relatively equal across teams, NFL just needs to cut the amount of playoff teams in half

[johngateswhiteley]

OSU beat 4 current top 25 teams
Alabama beat 2

not only this, but i would argue a different angle. considering OSU beat 4 top 25 teams and their only loss is to a an unranked iowa state, i am more likely to forgive them than Alabama losing to LSU at home.

1) easy to overlook an unranked opponent and slip up; not bringing the 'A' game

2) difficult to overlook a huge match up (LSU v. Alabama) and much more likely to get your 'A' game

..then factor in the plane crash news before the game and everything surrounding. i forgive that.

[Obstructed_View]

As usual, the voters are the reason the system sucks.

[Blake]

nfl don't need a BCS, there's 16 games and only 32 teams, vs. cfb's 12 games and 120+ teams

College football don't need a BCS either if some of those 120+ teams can go undefeated and not have a shot at the title.

SOS in the NFL is relatively equal across teams, NFL just needs to cut the amount of playoff teams in half

If a wildcard wins the Super Bowl, do you think they really don't deserve the title?

[vander]

College football don't need a BCS either if some of those 120+ teams can go undefeated and not have a shot at the title.

that's happened once right? and now with all the bigger conferences and conference championship games, doesn't look like that's going to be a problem

If a wildcard wins the Super Bowl, do you think they really don't deserve the title?

I don't see how anyone could, unless you don't believe that the purpose of the playoffs (and season) is to give the title to the best team.

[ChumpDumper]

Media!

[Blake]

that's happened once right? and now with all the bigger conferences and conference championship games, doesn't look like that's going to be a problem

Several times, but once is enough.

I don't see how anyone could, unless you don't believe that the purpose of the playoffs (and season) is to give the title to the best team.

So you just don't like playoff systems at all as a way of determining a champion.

Strange, imo.

[vander]

So you just don't like playoff systems at all as a way of determining a champion.

Strange, imo.

no, only for football, and only playoffs that let too many teams in. basketball, hockey, and baseball all play series, you can't really lose a series on a fluke play or bad call.

look at the NFL right now, GB is undefeated, is clearly the best in the NFC, and has already beaten the Giants and the Saints and Atlanta. yet, in the playoffs there's a good chance that they will have to beat two of those teams again just to GET to the SB, WHY IS THAT OK?!?!?!?
WHAT IS THE FUCKING POINT OF THE REGULAR SEASON?!?!?
teams should not be forced to replay teams that they have already beaten, and that have 3 or 4 or 5 more losses

NFL needs to go back to 3 divisions per conf. and only the 3 division champs get to the playoffs, with the best team getting a buy. and in the case of a tie at the top of a division in which they split the season series, then you have a play-in game. which is the only thing I'd change about the BCS too, in the case of 3 undefeated teams, you just have a play-in game, 2 and 3 play for the right to play 1

as has been said already, the problem with the BCS is the voters, mostly the coaches poll

[Obstructed_View]

As long as there's TV money, they're going to add more and more teams to the playoffs to try to get the dollars. They do the same thing in college football, which is why teams with losing records are going to bowls this year.

[stretch]

look at the NFL right now, GB is undefeated, is clearly the best in the NFC, and has already beaten the Giants and the Saints and Atlanta. yet, in the playoffs there's a good chance that they will have to beat two of those teams again just to GET to the SB, WHY IS THAT OK?!?!?!?
WHAT IS THE FUCKING POINT OF THE REGULAR SEASON?!?!?
teams should not be forced to replay teams that they have already beaten, and that have 3 or 4 or 5 more losses

Are you fucking retarded? A regular season is incredibly important.

Regular season is how you determine whether a team qualifies to be championship material.

The playoffs is how you determine the best of the best.

If a team truly is the best team, they should have no problem beating what you consider an obviously inferior team, a second time in a playoff situation. Fact is, there are times when they dont end up beating them again, proving that they arent always unquestionably superior, which is the point of the playoffs, as opposed to just giving out a championship trophy to a team with the winningest record. It gives the best teams a chance to play each other, to settle it once and for all, because at times teams end up with great records by playing shit opponents all season (ex. Boise State annually), and other teams that are clearly superior, have a mediocre record due to injuries throughout the season (ex. GB Packers last year). Having playoffs force you to play the best of the best, and prove your case that you deserve to be crowned champions, as opposed to being given a championship by default.

I agree that the biggest problem with the BCS is the voters, but it still is an unfair system that far too frequently screws superior teams out of opportunities to prove themselves on a larger state.

LMAO @ you defending a dumbass system that lets Virginia Tech play a BCS game, but not teams like Arkansas.