Illegitimate BCS process holds game hostage

[Kingspoint]

I don't care much for the BCS, but until it's beat down in court...
Here's a story trying to explain it all.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-wetzel_football_hostage_illegitimate_bcs_112911

Notice this wasn't an FUCRE thread.

 

[freescooter]

Pretty facinating piece and one I agree with almost entirely. While I don't suppor the idea of a playoff, I just don't see how it makes any difference if you pick 2 teams through a flawed system or 20 teams through the same flawed system, I would love to end the system. I'd like to give "BCS" bowls more flexibility to make matchups that make sense (UCONN-VaTech in the Orange and Stanford-Oklahoma in the Fiesta both would have been better games than what we got) and more flexibility to pick the best team in a conference rather than the champ (I suspect for example that there will be 2 or 3 teams in this year's Big East better than Louisville, yet if UCONN beats Cincy, a 7-5 cardinal team goes to the BCS game). We could do away with 6-6 teams making bowls too. And reduce the number and increase the payout. Make it an reward for a good season not for a mediocre one.

 

[gioff23]

I am not a fan of the BCS, but I have mixed emotions about a playoff system. I say go back to the bowls and the one or 2 times a decade there is a dispute as to the champ, well SI will sell more mags. The advantage of the bowl stystem for a program like UConn is that it allows it (most years) to get another month of practice, hang another banner and tell another story to a recruit. In a 16 team playoff system, IMO, we would have never been invited. I vote for a Plus 2/3, whatever. Play the bowls - make them all conclude by Jan 1 (like the old days) and then design a system to have the top 4 programs, post-bowls, play a 2 week championship format. There's no easy answer here, but be careful about voting for a playoff - it will be slanted against the BE and UConn - unless you want seasons to end in plenty of time to complete your xmas shopping.

 

[Carl Spackler]

i haven't read the article yet but I will. I'll just say first that there's no reason why a playoff system seeded with conference champions to determine a national champion cannot co-exist with an invitation bowl system to reward teams that have played well through the season but didn't win their respective conference title. There would be a ton of money around each of those playoff games.

I actually think there's a pretty strong argument, that running two systems like that together, a conference champion playoff for the national title, in conjunction wiht an invitation bowl system for non-conference champs, and here's the key - with removing the contracted ticket sales guarantees to invitation bowls - doing both a playoff and bowls at the same time, would pretty much eliminate all of the existing corruption around the college football post season and at the same time guarantee that all 120 division 1 football programs had the same path to a national champoinship, which would force independants (Notre Dame) into a conference if they want to compete for a national championship, which in time would move conference structure and affiliation back into a natural geographic fit for all athletics, and normal sizes of 10-12 teams for scheduling, and basically bring order to the universe.

Lots people, wiht lots of money that don't have much interest in any of that happening. though.