Reply With Quote
Parity sucks.
Any team can beat any team on any given day. I dont give a about the conference, schedule or opponents........that is why a college football playoff is a must.
I dont want to hear about well OU can whoop.....blah, blah, blah........or oh yeah! Well Florida is overrated, and USC s schedule is................It DOESNT matter!!!!
A playoff is needed more NOW than ever.
Parity sucks.
Tell that to the Spurs.
Actually parity is awesome. This is one of the best college football seasons ever. I love college football, but I got tired of seeing the same teams win it.
USC
Texas
OU
OS
Michigan
Florida
Miami
..................that got old.
Michigan never wins it, lets not take it too far. They are the Dallas Mavricks of NCAA football, but in their case hope is usually lost before the last week of the seasonActually parity is awesome. This is one of the best college football seasons ever. I love college football, but I got tired of seeing the same teams win it.
USC
Texas
OU
OS
Michigan
Florida
Miami
..................that got old.
I must have missed the plethora of OSU championships in the last 35 years.
there are certainly some fans that would love to go back to the old big 8 days when it was just OU & UNL + 6 patsies.
even now it's not a level playing field, the arms race is completely out of control. there are SCHOOLS that are spending more annual money on athletic facilities than academic ones.
but there is enough parity that if you are not doing the right things, you're going to lose.
i can understand how some husker, sooner, or longhorn fans could miss the old days when they simply needed to 'show up' with their 150 scholarship players and victory was ensured, but i think that - at the end of the day - most would agree that is a better era for college football as a whole.
one in the last 10 years, just like ohio state
..........yall know what I meant......the very SAME teams in the top 10 just about every year......it gets old and boring.....IMHO.
tied for one in 10 years and have played for 0 since
So, that means they both have one in the last 25+ years, right?
The reason I say parity sucks is because the College Football system as we know it today is simply ill-prepared to handle it. A Top 25 poll is horribly outdated as we see each week when the "top" teams are constantly "upset" - the truth is, there is no longer a difference between #5-25 or those out of the poll, and all it does is ruin teams championship hopes before the season even begins.
While the arms race is out of control, you can't really use the academic-athletic comparison as most major athletic programs are completely self-funded (relying on only donations and gate revenue) and help pay for a majority of the academic improvements to a campus as well.
Parity is good. But if College Football remains in the format it is today, it will ruin it. A huge overhaul of the game has to be made, and soon. The very first thing that needs to be done is banning any polls from being made until week 5.
Agreed, but wouldn't it be more accurate to say "the college football system sucks" vs. "parity sucks"?
I don't see any reason to root for the dominance of just a few teams in order to save a dated, unfair, and semi-corrupt system.
No BCS in 1998. Do all of OSU's " les" before the BCS not count?
A championship is a championship.
You want a cookie for getting pounded the other time you made it to the BCS championship game?
just keeping the rivalry alive and kickin man
I like it.
As long as USC gets their cally faces shoved in a muddy horse hoof imprint lined with syphilitic smegma every year I'm happy no matter what.
Well there is no doubt there will be a playoffs sometime in the future.
Although a playoff system would be much better it won't change the teams that are winning the national les. Just like in NCAA basketball, the big dogs will still be the teams that are able to string enough wins together to win a le. While USF is a good team and a great story, they wouldn't be able to win enough to get a championship. I still think they should be given the shot if they deserve it, but I doubt they'd be able to do it.
I think they should do a 10 team playoff after the end of the regular season for the championship. Use the BCS to determine the top 10 teams, then reward the #1 and #2 teams with a bye to the semifinal round. The other 8 play to get to that point and that leaves a final 4. Start it a week after the end of the regular season and the championship game could be on New Years day or where it has been the last few years.
College teams can't play up to 15 games in one season, especially when you consider mid December final exams. It just doesn't make sense for college players.
Tell that to I-AA, D2, & D3 teams.
And, for the record, KSU played 15 games (11-4) in 2003. None of the players on that team immediately died or flunked out of school.
They already play 13 or 14 with the bowl game, and it would only be a couple of teams playing 15, if any at all. Get rid of the conference le games for all conferences and with my system a 3 - 10 seed that makes it to the le game would play a whopping 4 games. That's not a stretch.
Nobody cares about them, unless one of their ilk happens to be an overrated I-A team.
The NCAA has tournaments for baseball and basketball, among many other sports, I am sure. It gets back to the fact that only in football does the actual site of postseason games dictate the nature of how a champion is determined (well, not officially). Ultimately you get back to the TV contracts, and for that reason I don't see any change in the status quo coming anytime soon.And, for the record, KSU played 15 games (11-4) in 2003. None of the players on that team immediately died or flunked out of school.
the worst part is that most of the arguments against a playoff are laughable and count on the fans being idiots:
1) missed class time - college football players already miss FAR less class time compared to baseball, basketball, volleyball, most other sports - revenue or not.
2) season is too long already - this argument used to get used a lot, and then they expanded to a 12 game schedule.
3) it gets people talking at the water cooler, controversy is good for the sport - well then let's just name the #15 team in the nation the national champion, that would be really controversial and get people talking.
4) the bowls have great tradition - the bowls lost the right to use this argument when they sold every aspect (including their names) to corporate sponsorship.
You're right. Only schools which care nothing about academics -- the Harvards, Yales, and Princetons of the world -- would subject their players to such rigors.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
