College Football is the Best Sport on the Planet....
Every game is a MUST WIN
Yea, but what about the teams like Pen St or Auburn in the past the went undefeated yet were not given the chance to win the championship, is that fair? Of course not. Do you really think that the big games would be any less meaningful with a play-off? I argue that not only would those select few continue to have great importance, but others such as Cincinnati/Pitt for example would take on added significants. The current set-up blows big time...
0
Quote Originally Posted by DoubleUp4Life:
College Football is the Best Sport on the Planet....
Every game is a MUST WIN
Yea, but what about the teams like Pen St or Auburn in the past the went undefeated yet were not given the chance to win the championship, is that fair? Of course not. Do you really think that the big games would be any less meaningful with a play-off? I argue that not only would those select few continue to have great importance, but others such as Cincinnati/Pitt for example would take on added significants. The current set-up blows big time...
Of all of the games last weekend how many actually mattered? When i say matter i mean impact the national title which is all i care about? Georgia -georgia tech? Meaningless. Usc-ucla? Nope. Lsu-ark? Even this thursdays oregon-ore st game. Sounds good right winner goes to the rose bowl? So what that has no impact on the natl title. Who ever wins that game can have a cookie for going to the rose bowl.
[/Quote]
I think you've really hit on the crux of this issue: ifdeterming a champion is your be-all and end-all, then you're right. However, LSU/Arkansas was "meaningless" and great. UGa/Tech was "meaningless" and great. I even got nostalgic chills watching SC and UCLA set offensive football back 20 years. College football is the best sport in the United States. I'm not even sure there's a close second. I worry about any attempt to "improve" or "fix" the game just so we can crown a national champion in a way that settles all debate - as to the champion. But all a tournament gives you is a tournament winner. That may or may not be the best team. What if a team, say Texas, was clearly the best team in the nation - killed everybody it saw, blew out a top five team in the conference title game, but had it's QB knocked out in an "opening round" game against Utah? OU, who Texas beat by four TD's in the regular season, goes on to win the crown. Are we better off for crowning the second-best team the champ? Surely there would be no debate, just like no one seriously argues that Georgetown is really the 1985 or Houston the 1983 hoops champ, even though they were probably ten+ points better than Villanova and NC State respectively. I guess I've reached an age where which bunch of felons gets to lift the trophy at the end is less important to me than the roller-coaster ride we all take to get there.
0
Of all of the games last weekend how many actually mattered? When i say matter i mean impact the national title which is all i care about? Georgia -georgia tech? Meaningless. Usc-ucla? Nope. Lsu-ark? Even this thursdays oregon-ore st game. Sounds good right winner goes to the rose bowl? So what that has no impact on the natl title. Who ever wins that game can have a cookie for going to the rose bowl.
[/Quote]
I think you've really hit on the crux of this issue: ifdeterming a champion is your be-all and end-all, then you're right. However, LSU/Arkansas was "meaningless" and great. UGa/Tech was "meaningless" and great. I even got nostalgic chills watching SC and UCLA set offensive football back 20 years. College football is the best sport in the United States. I'm not even sure there's a close second. I worry about any attempt to "improve" or "fix" the game just so we can crown a national champion in a way that settles all debate - as to the champion. But all a tournament gives you is a tournament winner. That may or may not be the best team. What if a team, say Texas, was clearly the best team in the nation - killed everybody it saw, blew out a top five team in the conference title game, but had it's QB knocked out in an "opening round" game against Utah? OU, who Texas beat by four TD's in the regular season, goes on to win the crown. Are we better off for crowning the second-best team the champ? Surely there would be no debate, just like no one seriously argues that Georgetown is really the 1985 or Houston the 1983 hoops champ, even though they were probably ten+ points better than Villanova and NC State respectively. I guess I've reached an age where which bunch of felons gets to lift the trophy at the end is less important to me than the roller-coaster ride we all take to get there.
Of all of the games last weekend how many actually mattered? When i say matter i mean impact the national title which is all i care about? Georgia -georgia tech? Meaningless. Usc-ucla? Nope. Lsu-ark? Even this thursdays oregon-ore st game. Sounds good right winner goes to the rose bowl? So what that has no impact on the natl title. Who ever wins that game can have a cookie for going to the rose bowl.
I think you've really hit on the crux of this issue: ifdeterming a champion is your be-all and end-all, then you're right. However, LSU/Arkansas was "meaningless" and great. UGa/Tech was "meaningless" and great. I even got nostalgic chills watching SC and UCLA set offensive football back 20 years. College football is the best sport in the United States. I'm not even sure there's a close second. I worry about any attempt to "improve" or "fix" the game just so we can crown a national champion in a way that settles all debate - as to the champion. But all a tournament gives you is a tournament winner. That may or may not be the best team. What if a team, say Texas, was clearly the best team in the nation - killed everybody it saw, blew out a top five team in the conference title game, but had it's QB knocked out in an "opening round" game against Utah? OU, who Texas beat by four TD's in the regular season, goes on to win the crown. Are we better off for crowning the second-best team the champ? Surely there would be no debate, just like no one seriously argues that Georgetown is really the 1985 or Houston the 1983 hoops champ, even though they were probably ten+ points better than Villanova and NC State respectively. I guess I've reached an age where which bunch of felons gets to lift the trophy at the end is less important to me than the roller-coaster ride we all take to get there.
0
Sorry; lost the quote the first time:
Quote Originally Posted by Osirus13:
Of all of the games last weekend how many actually mattered? When i say matter i mean impact the national title which is all i care about? Georgia -georgia tech? Meaningless. Usc-ucla? Nope. Lsu-ark? Even this thursdays oregon-ore st game. Sounds good right winner goes to the rose bowl? So what that has no impact on the natl title. Who ever wins that game can have a cookie for going to the rose bowl.
I think you've really hit on the crux of this issue: ifdeterming a champion is your be-all and end-all, then you're right. However, LSU/Arkansas was "meaningless" and great. UGa/Tech was "meaningless" and great. I even got nostalgic chills watching SC and UCLA set offensive football back 20 years. College football is the best sport in the United States. I'm not even sure there's a close second. I worry about any attempt to "improve" or "fix" the game just so we can crown a national champion in a way that settles all debate - as to the champion. But all a tournament gives you is a tournament winner. That may or may not be the best team. What if a team, say Texas, was clearly the best team in the nation - killed everybody it saw, blew out a top five team in the conference title game, but had it's QB knocked out in an "opening round" game against Utah? OU, who Texas beat by four TD's in the regular season, goes on to win the crown. Are we better off for crowning the second-best team the champ? Surely there would be no debate, just like no one seriously argues that Georgetown is really the 1985 or Houston the 1983 hoops champ, even though they were probably ten+ points better than Villanova and NC State respectively. I guess I've reached an age where which bunch of felons gets to lift the trophy at the end is less important to me than the roller-coaster ride we all take to get there.
A playoff system works in the FCS series, why not the FBS?
It "works," sort of. Teams can bid for home games, so little teams often get shafted into playing lower ranked teams away from home. We used to call the tournament "The Marshall Invitational" back in the day. The title game is also played practically on App. State's campus, so that's certainly aided the Mounties of late. There are other reasons, some of which Steel Blade explained, where the two are not comparable, but I'm too punchy to articulate them now.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Warblade:
A playoff system works in the FCS series, why not the FBS?
It "works," sort of. Teams can bid for home games, so little teams often get shafted into playing lower ranked teams away from home. We used to call the tournament "The Marshall Invitational" back in the day. The title game is also played practically on App. State's campus, so that's certainly aided the Mounties of late. There are other reasons, some of which Steel Blade explained, where the two are not comparable, but I'm too punchy to articulate them now.
I think you've really hit on the crux of this issue: ifdeterming a champion is your be-all and end-all, then you're right. However, LSU/Arkansas was "meaningless" and great. UGa/Tech was "meaningless" and great. I even got nostalgic chills watching SC and UCLA set offensive football back 20 years. College football is the best sport in the United States. I'm not even sure there's a close second. I worry about any attempt to "improve" or "fix" the game just so we can crown a national champion in a way that settles all debate - as to the champion. But all a tournament gives you is a tournament winner. That may or may not be the best team. What if a team, say Texas, was clearly the best team in the nation - killed everybody it saw, blew out a top five team in the conference title game, but had it's QB knocked out in an "opening round" game against Utah? OU, who Texas beat by four TD's in the regular season, goes on to win the crown. Are we better off for crowning the second-best team the champ? Surely there would be no debate, just like no one seriously argues that Georgetown is really the 1985 or Houston the 1983 hoops champ, even though they were probably ten+ points better than Villanova and NC State respectively. I guess I've reached an age where which bunch of felons gets to lift the trophy at the end is less important to me than the roller-coaster ride we all take to get there.
Yeah those games may have been good over the weekend but i enjoy watching sports with the excitement building up to who gets crowned the champ. After all thats what we play for right?
0
Quote Originally Posted by MaineRoad:
I think you've really hit on the crux of this issue: ifdeterming a champion is your be-all and end-all, then you're right. However, LSU/Arkansas was "meaningless" and great. UGa/Tech was "meaningless" and great. I even got nostalgic chills watching SC and UCLA set offensive football back 20 years. College football is the best sport in the United States. I'm not even sure there's a close second. I worry about any attempt to "improve" or "fix" the game just so we can crown a national champion in a way that settles all debate - as to the champion. But all a tournament gives you is a tournament winner. That may or may not be the best team. What if a team, say Texas, was clearly the best team in the nation - killed everybody it saw, blew out a top five team in the conference title game, but had it's QB knocked out in an "opening round" game against Utah? OU, who Texas beat by four TD's in the regular season, goes on to win the crown. Are we better off for crowning the second-best team the champ? Surely there would be no debate, just like no one seriously argues that Georgetown is really the 1985 or Houston the 1983 hoops champ, even though they were probably ten+ points better than Villanova and NC State respectively. I guess I've reached an age where which bunch of felons gets to lift the trophy at the end is less important to me than the roller-coaster ride we all take to get there.
Yeah those games may have been good over the weekend but i enjoy watching sports with the excitement building up to who gets crowned the champ. After all thats what we play for right?
College Football is the Best Sport on the Planet....
Every game is a MUST WIN
Best sport thats a joke. Every regular season game being a must win? That is a flaw not a strength. We DONT crown champions based on regular seasons. Regular seasons in sports are used to determine the final group who will challenge for a title. Who will it be a must win for in clem-gt sat? Neither of those 2 can go anywhere besides a meaningless orange bowl.
0
Quote Originally Posted by DoubleUp4Life:
College Football is the Best Sport on the Planet....
Every game is a MUST WIN
Best sport thats a joke. Every regular season game being a must win? That is a flaw not a strength. We DONT crown champions based on regular seasons. Regular seasons in sports are used to determine the final group who will challenge for a title. Who will it be a must win for in clem-gt sat? Neither of those 2 can go anywhere besides a meaningless orange bowl.
Yeah those games may have been good over the weekend but i enjoy watching sports with the excitement building up to who gets crowned the champ. After all thats what we play for right?
Again, and to my point, I really don't give a rat's ass who winds up being crowned national champ, so long as I get 14 great Saturdays every fall. The WNBA crowns a champ (or so I've heard), and I don't watch that. I understand people who disagree with me. They're wrong, but I understand them.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Osirus13:
Yeah those games may have been good over the weekend but i enjoy watching sports with the excitement building up to who gets crowned the champ. After all thats what we play for right?
Again, and to my point, I really don't give a rat's ass who winds up being crowned national champ, so long as I get 14 great Saturdays every fall. The WNBA crowns a champ (or so I've heard), and I don't watch that. I understand people who disagree with me. They're wrong, but I understand them.
the post season is irrelevant for all but a handful of schools. having a bowl game for a school that goes 7-6 is like giving out lollipops for participation. if the economics are as such to continue this baffoonery, then by all means...lollipops for everyone! that's why its the WORST post season around.
having a BCS playoff makes a lot of sense = 6 bcs bids and 2 at-larges. That means adding semifinal and finals games, only 4 schools would have an additional one game, and the finalists would be the only schools to have two additional games on their current schedule.
If you really hate all the bowls...DON'T SUPPORT IT. DON'T TALK ABOUT IT. DON'T BET IT. DON'T GO TO THE GAMES. Of course, if you want a lollipop, i suggest you suck your thumb!
Really like this idea... At least an 8 team playoff system.
Another way to do this is to mimic the UEFA Co-efficient system that is used in euro soccer, where the better leagues get more spots (so here we could have the better conferences , SEC, Pac-10, etc.. have a couple spots and make it a 16 team playoff). Have them at neutral sites.
It can be done, but the problem is they won't budge. It's a TERRIBLE system, it's a damn shame TCU is going to get left out, they have a legit shot at winning the National Championship they are that good... and yet they are going to be left out of the cold.
It's way past the time to implement a playoff system
0
Quote Originally Posted by sergio1994:
the post season is irrelevant for all but a handful of schools. having a bowl game for a school that goes 7-6 is like giving out lollipops for participation. if the economics are as such to continue this baffoonery, then by all means...lollipops for everyone! that's why its the WORST post season around.
having a BCS playoff makes a lot of sense = 6 bcs bids and 2 at-larges. That means adding semifinal and finals games, only 4 schools would have an additional one game, and the finalists would be the only schools to have two additional games on their current schedule.
If you really hate all the bowls...DON'T SUPPORT IT. DON'T TALK ABOUT IT. DON'T BET IT. DON'T GO TO THE GAMES. Of course, if you want a lollipop, i suggest you suck your thumb!
Really like this idea... At least an 8 team playoff system.
Another way to do this is to mimic the UEFA Co-efficient system that is used in euro soccer, where the better leagues get more spots (so here we could have the better conferences , SEC, Pac-10, etc.. have a couple spots and make it a 16 team playoff). Have them at neutral sites.
It can be done, but the problem is they won't budge. It's a TERRIBLE system, it's a damn shame TCU is going to get left out, they have a legit shot at winning the National Championship they are that good... and yet they are going to be left out of the cold.
It's way past the time to implement a playoff system
The hell with a playoff it proves nothing except which team got hot at the right time. Give me exciting betable bowl match ups The best team does not always win .a championship remember the Giants beat the 16 and 0 Patriots. College football is different win your bowl game and you are a champ. Why wreck a wonderful tradition to satisfy some small minded people who need to have just one winner. In the greater scheme of things it matters little who is crowned national champs
0
The hell with a playoff it proves nothing except which team got hot at the right time. Give me exciting betable bowl match ups The best team does not always win .a championship remember the Giants beat the 16 and 0 Patriots. College football is different win your bowl game and you are a champ. Why wreck a wonderful tradition to satisfy some small minded people who need to have just one winner. In the greater scheme of things it matters little who is crowned national champs
Then saban should be fired asap. I dont buy that for 1 sec. Sounds like your making an early excuse if they lose.
You're posting on this forum, so I'm going to assume you gamble. Are you telling me you've never factored in a "letdown" scenario as part of your wagering? That's what it was, plain and simple. They got beat, sure. By a better team? Doubtful.
And Osirus, you inadvertently made the point FOR why the college football system makes every game important when you said, "We DON'T crown champions based on regular seasons. Regular seasons in
sports are used to determine the final group who will challenge for a
title." Guess what: College football does. That's why people say the regular season is the playoffs. There's nothing wrong with that. You think it's all about the playoffs or a tournament or whatever. Remember the Patriots going 16-0? I guess since they didn't win in the playoffs they just weren't the best team. You are acting there is no such thing as an upset in a playoff system. If you feel that way, fine. But all the kids and coaches in college football know that if you want to win a title you have to win all your games. Period. If you do that, there's a 99% chance you will win the title. If you don't do that, and someone else does, they will win over you. Seems okay to me.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Osirus13:
Then saban should be fired asap. I dont buy that for 1 sec. Sounds like your making an early excuse if they lose.
You're posting on this forum, so I'm going to assume you gamble. Are you telling me you've never factored in a "letdown" scenario as part of your wagering? That's what it was, plain and simple. They got beat, sure. By a better team? Doubtful.
And Osirus, you inadvertently made the point FOR why the college football system makes every game important when you said, "We DON'T crown champions based on regular seasons. Regular seasons in
sports are used to determine the final group who will challenge for a
title." Guess what: College football does. That's why people say the regular season is the playoffs. There's nothing wrong with that. You think it's all about the playoffs or a tournament or whatever. Remember the Patriots going 16-0? I guess since they didn't win in the playoffs they just weren't the best team. You are acting there is no such thing as an upset in a playoff system. If you feel that way, fine. But all the kids and coaches in college football know that if you want to win a title you have to win all your games. Period. If you do that, there's a 99% chance you will win the title. If you don't do that, and someone else does, they will win over you. Seems okay to me.
The hell with a playoff it proves nothing except which team got hot at the right time. Give me exciting betable bowl match ups The best team does not always win .a championship remember the Giants beat the 16 and 0 Patriots. College football is different win your bowl game and you are a champ. Why wreck a wonderful tradition to satisfy some small minded people who need to have just one winner. In the greater scheme of things it matters little who is crowned national champs
0
Quote Originally Posted by ALXFREED13:
The hell with a playoff it proves nothing except which team got hot at the right time. Give me exciting betable bowl match ups The best team does not always win .a championship remember the Giants beat the 16 and 0 Patriots. College football is different win your bowl game and you are a champ. Why wreck a wonderful tradition to satisfy some small minded people who need to have just one winner. In the greater scheme of things it matters little who is crowned national champs
Utah was the National Champ in my mind last year....This year TCU may be the best team when they line up against the loser of UF/Ala and spank them. I seriously hope that Texas loses so that TCU gets their fair shot. 8 team playoff is the only way it works. 6 BCS league champions and 2 at larges. Force shit ND into the Big 10, split and have a championship. No way it diminshes week to week matchups b/c you still have to come through the season unscathed. No playoff in college football is ridiculous. And I think college coaches should take less money and put money into a trust for these kids when they are done with college football.
0
Utah was the National Champ in my mind last year....This year TCU may be the best team when they line up against the loser of UF/Ala and spank them. I seriously hope that Texas loses so that TCU gets their fair shot. 8 team playoff is the only way it works. 6 BCS league champions and 2 at larges. Force shit ND into the Big 10, split and have a championship. No way it diminshes week to week matchups b/c you still have to come through the season unscathed. No playoff in college football is ridiculous. And I think college coaches should take less money and put money into a trust for these kids when they are done with college football.
I like watching both college bball and football, just like I like watching the NFL and NBA. Overall, I would have to say I am more of a football fan than a basketball one.
IMO, the difference between the "specialness" of the regular season in the basketball vs. football arenas comes down to how many games each plays as well as how the championship is determined. If college football consisted of 32 games instead of 12 (or the NFL consisted of 82 instead of 16) of course each of the regular season games wouldn't mean as much as they do now. The reason you can only have a single loss or have to go undefeated in football is related to the limited schedule as compared to basketball as much as because there is or isn't a playoff system and how many teams it contains.
Michigan/Ohio State... USC/UCLA... Texas/Oklahoma... these are huge rivalry games and would be special no matter what. However, have you ever watched Duke/UNC in basketball? Those regular season games are just as special even though they play at least twice a year and could play up to four times if they met in both the ACC and the big dance. The special matchups between colleges are just that and are just as special regardless of championship tournaments (would the Tennessee/Alabama regular season game mean any less if they also met for the SEC title?).
Having said this, I agree that the way CFB determines its best in the most important division is stupid. Smaller divisions have a playoff system... every other team sport has a playoff... HELL, you can't even win many conference titles without playing an extra game that you have to earn your way into. How stupid is that?
Face it, the reason we have the system we have now is that the "owners" of CFB are in bed with the people who run the bowls because of the hospitality they personally get and the money that is generated for their institutions. If this was politics, this would be known as corruption instead it is "what is best for the game".
0
I like watching both college bball and football, just like I like watching the NFL and NBA. Overall, I would have to say I am more of a football fan than a basketball one.
IMO, the difference between the "specialness" of the regular season in the basketball vs. football arenas comes down to how many games each plays as well as how the championship is determined. If college football consisted of 32 games instead of 12 (or the NFL consisted of 82 instead of 16) of course each of the regular season games wouldn't mean as much as they do now. The reason you can only have a single loss or have to go undefeated in football is related to the limited schedule as compared to basketball as much as because there is or isn't a playoff system and how many teams it contains.
Michigan/Ohio State... USC/UCLA... Texas/Oklahoma... these are huge rivalry games and would be special no matter what. However, have you ever watched Duke/UNC in basketball? Those regular season games are just as special even though they play at least twice a year and could play up to four times if they met in both the ACC and the big dance. The special matchups between colleges are just that and are just as special regardless of championship tournaments (would the Tennessee/Alabama regular season game mean any less if they also met for the SEC title?).
Having said this, I agree that the way CFB determines its best in the most important division is stupid. Smaller divisions have a playoff system... every other team sport has a playoff... HELL, you can't even win many conference titles without playing an extra game that you have to earn your way into. How stupid is that?
Face it, the reason we have the system we have now is that the "owners" of CFB are in bed with the people who run the bowls because of the hospitality they personally get and the money that is generated for their institutions. If this was politics, this would be known as corruption instead it is "what is best for the game".
You're posting on this forum, so I'm going to assume you gamble. Are you telling me you've never factored in a "letdown" scenario as part of your wagering? That's what it was, plain and simple. They got beat, sure. By a better team? Doubtful.
And Osirus, you inadvertently made the point FOR why the college football system makes every game important when you said, "We DON'T crown champions based on regular seasons. Regular seasons in sports are used to determine the final group who will challenge for a title." Guess what: College football does. That's why people say the regular season is the playoffs. There's nothing wrong with that. You think it's all about the playoffs or a tournament or whatever. Remember the Patriots going 16-0? I guess since they didn't win in the playoffs they just weren't the best team. You are acting there is no such thing as an upset in a playoff system. If you feel that way, fine. But all the kids and coaches in college football know that if you want to win a title you have to win all your games. Period. If you do that, there's a 99% chance you will win the title. If you don't do that, and someone else does, they will win over you. Seems okay to me.
99% of the time if you go unbeaten you win the title? What? There may be 4 unbeatens this year. Honestly 1 loss teams or 2 loss teams can still be considered the best in the country. Champions are crowned by tournaments. I realize the giants probably dont win that game more than once out of 7 but they did and they are the champs. These teams tcu, boise, cincy all would have a shot in basketball. Not saying they win but they would have a shot. Sometimes, actually alot, the only reason a team gets in is because they lost earlier than another team. Thats great. Makes sense.
0
Quote Originally Posted by KJParlay:
You're posting on this forum, so I'm going to assume you gamble. Are you telling me you've never factored in a "letdown" scenario as part of your wagering? That's what it was, plain and simple. They got beat, sure. By a better team? Doubtful.
And Osirus, you inadvertently made the point FOR why the college football system makes every game important when you said, "We DON'T crown champions based on regular seasons. Regular seasons in sports are used to determine the final group who will challenge for a title." Guess what: College football does. That's why people say the regular season is the playoffs. There's nothing wrong with that. You think it's all about the playoffs or a tournament or whatever. Remember the Patriots going 16-0? I guess since they didn't win in the playoffs they just weren't the best team. You are acting there is no such thing as an upset in a playoff system. If you feel that way, fine. But all the kids and coaches in college football know that if you want to win a title you have to win all your games. Period. If you do that, there's a 99% chance you will win the title. If you don't do that, and someone else does, they will win over you. Seems okay to me.
99% of the time if you go unbeaten you win the title? What? There may be 4 unbeatens this year. Honestly 1 loss teams or 2 loss teams can still be considered the best in the country. Champions are crowned by tournaments. I realize the giants probably dont win that game more than once out of 7 but they did and they are the champs. These teams tcu, boise, cincy all would have a shot in basketball. Not saying they win but they would have a shot. Sometimes, actually alot, the only reason a team gets in is because they lost earlier than another team. Thats great. Makes sense.
I just love football season period! Even if my team doesnt go to the big bowl or any bowl there is nothing better than College ball on Satuday oh hell any day and i am glad now just about anyday during the season you can watch football and even see some teams you have never seen because they werent shown on TV because of the conference they were from. as for me I will take college or Pro ball over basketball but do also like college basketball too.
0
I just love football season period! Even if my team doesnt go to the big bowl or any bowl there is nothing better than College ball on Satuday oh hell any day and i am glad now just about anyday during the season you can watch football and even see some teams you have never seen because they werent shown on TV because of the conference they were from. as for me I will take college or Pro ball over basketball but do also like college basketball too.
College Football is the best sport to watch and the best to bet on. Why does everybody need clear cut "National Champion" anyway? I'd like a tourney too, but just watching these 18-23 year olds playing their a$$es off, leaving it all on the line in the best game ever invented for 14 weeks is good entertainment too. If you don't think so, you aren't a true fan and obviously you have never put on a pair of shoulder pads and played the game.
0
College Football is the best sport to watch and the best to bet on. Why does everybody need clear cut "National Champion" anyway? I'd like a tourney too, but just watching these 18-23 year olds playing their a$$es off, leaving it all on the line in the best game ever invented for 14 weeks is good entertainment too. If you don't think so, you aren't a true fan and obviously you have never put on a pair of shoulder pads and played the game.
College Football is the best sport to watch and the best to bet on. Why does everybody need clear cut "National Champion" anyway? I'd like a tourney too, but just watching these 18-23 year olds playing their a$$es off, leaving it all on the line in the best game ever invented for 14 weeks is good entertainment too. If you don't think so, you aren't a true fan and obviously you have never put on a pair of shoulder pads and played the game.
I am a huge fan of every sport out there. MLB, NBA, NHL, NFL, coll basketball.. but college football really annoys me. By the way you say "true sports" fan, well there are a ton who just like football and nothing else. Those arent really sports fans. Great you like 1 sport just because everyone else hypes it up.
0
Quote Originally Posted by SDChargers09:
College Football is the best sport to watch and the best to bet on. Why does everybody need clear cut "National Champion" anyway? I'd like a tourney too, but just watching these 18-23 year olds playing their a$$es off, leaving it all on the line in the best game ever invented for 14 weeks is good entertainment too. If you don't think so, you aren't a true fan and obviously you have never put on a pair of shoulder pads and played the game.
I am a huge fan of every sport out there. MLB, NBA, NHL, NFL, coll basketball.. but college football really annoys me. By the way you say "true sports" fan, well there are a ton who just like football and nothing else. Those arent really sports fans. Great you like 1 sport just because everyone else hypes it up.
I can understand both points of view. I'd like to see a playoff.........not necessarily so that a "Champion" can be crowned, but more so I could see how some of these teams stack up. Some of the best games could be the early ones, where you'd have a Boise vs Florida, etc. When I watch March madness my fav games are the 2/15's & 3/14's, etc. because you get to see true underdogs take their best shot at a more reknowned team........& occasionally knock one off. That's fun......
That being said, CFB will always be my fav sport to watch, regardless of whether or not they implement a playoff system.
GLTA in the bowl games...........all 34 of 'em
0
I can understand both points of view. I'd like to see a playoff.........not necessarily so that a "Champion" can be crowned, but more so I could see how some of these teams stack up. Some of the best games could be the early ones, where you'd have a Boise vs Florida, etc. When I watch March madness my fav games are the 2/15's & 3/14's, etc. because you get to see true underdogs take their best shot at a more reknowned team........& occasionally knock one off. That's fun......
That being said, CFB will always be my fav sport to watch, regardless of whether or not they implement a playoff system.
Would you play the games at the higher seeded teams home field? If you did, that would not be fair. If you played at neutral sites, then the logistics of getting 70,000 to 100,000 fans to a game with 1 week notice would be almost impossible. With basketball, you have 4 or 8 teams playing at a venue and they only have to fill 15,000 to 20,000 seats.
i never did get to answer this..those "quarter finals" can be played at the higher seeded field. It's not fair, but its better than the system we have now where we rely on the computers and the pollsters to determine who plays in the final. This round of games can be played the last week of December. After that the semifinal would be played the 1st week of January at a neutral site, and the final would be a week later. The majority of tickets would be split 35%/35% or so to both schools and 30% for Gen public sale. There is no way there would be an issue of not selling out this game. That addresses all your points, Thorpe. Like i said earlier, only the two finalists would have to "worry" about getting their people to the final. Given the interest and the undisputed nature having a legit national championship, i don't think your concerns will be an issue given all the love and support college football seems to have.
If all this is too mind blowing...we could do baby steps and start with a semi-final and final set up with 3 bcs bids and one at-large.
0
Quote Originally Posted by thorpe:
Would you play the games at the higher seeded teams home field? If you did, that would not be fair. If you played at neutral sites, then the logistics of getting 70,000 to 100,000 fans to a game with 1 week notice would be almost impossible. With basketball, you have 4 or 8 teams playing at a venue and they only have to fill 15,000 to 20,000 seats.
i never did get to answer this..those "quarter finals" can be played at the higher seeded field. It's not fair, but its better than the system we have now where we rely on the computers and the pollsters to determine who plays in the final. This round of games can be played the last week of December. After that the semifinal would be played the 1st week of January at a neutral site, and the final would be a week later. The majority of tickets would be split 35%/35% or so to both schools and 30% for Gen public sale. There is no way there would be an issue of not selling out this game. That addresses all your points, Thorpe. Like i said earlier, only the two finalists would have to "worry" about getting their people to the final. Given the interest and the undisputed nature having a legit national championship, i don't think your concerns will be an issue given all the love and support college football seems to have.
If all this is too mind blowing...we could do baby steps and start with a semi-final and final set up with 3 bcs bids and one at-large.
Utah smacked Alabama last year because Bama didn't give a shit. They lost to Florida and missed the title game after going undefeated, they didn't give two shits about Utah or that game.
The same thing will happen to whomever loses the Bama/Florida game this year.
tell that to the scouts and thier futures
0
Quote Originally Posted by andarmac99:
Utah smacked Alabama last year because Bama didn't give a shit. They lost to Florida and missed the title game after going undefeated, they didn't give two shits about Utah or that game.
The same thing will happen to whomever loses the Bama/Florida game this year.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
