How Should the National Championship Be Decided

How Should The National Championship Be decided?

  • The Old System

    Votes: 5 3.3%
  • The BCS System

    Votes: 30 19.7%
  • A +1 System

    Votes: 47 30.9%
  • A Playoff

    Votes: 70 46.1%

  • Total voters
    152

TRUTIDE

All-SEC
Oct 14, 1999
1,502
0
0
Spanish Fort, AL
How on earth could a playoff or a +1 exclude that possibility? It increases that possibility because it puts teams like that in for sure. Also, if you want to talk about close calls, well a extra game is a extra chance for a close call to be the difference. I'm failing to see the logic in arguing that including TCU for sure will somehow prevent TCU from playing for a championship. Your scenario just makes that more likely on any given year...

So what happens if Texas and FL lose this weekend? We will have a nobody who has beat nobody playing a undefeated SEC team for the NC. Is there any way possible that a undefeated TCU team is better than a 1 loss Florida or Texas? This is where we are headed with the BCS. A +1 would at least make them beat a solid team before making it to the big game and would legitimately give a 1 loss SEC team a well deserved 2nd chance. Any time you have two undefeated teams going into the SECCG, there is little doubt that these two teams are the top two teams in the nation.
 

Highway59

1st Team
Jan 29, 2009
979
85
47
In Alabama off "highway59"
I would probably have to say keep system as is. Usually I feel like the better team winds up with title. I'm sure some feel there are some things that need to be tweaked with BCS. But when I look at the playoff system the first thing I think of is the logistical nightmare it would seem to create for the fans. The way it is now with scheduling you've got your dates for the season, but tv messing with times can be a pain. After regular season is over you have a month or so to work out the travel plans for a bowl game wherever it might be. But to come home after a playoff game that you win at home and watching another game on tv wondering will the next game be in Norman or Columbus on the following Saturday. Just seems to me to be to much sugar for a dime. But I have problems with the simplest travel plans.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
Marty Lyons was on Mike & Mike this morning saying it should be like 1AA, the top 16 teams.

I agree with him.
Yeah, because clearly a 10-2 BYU, 9-3 LSU and 8-3 Oregon State deserve a shot at 12-0 Texas, Alabama and Florida. Seriously???

Why not? LSU gave us and Florida all we could handle...
Because the game was already played and they lost!

I am not going to debate this again this week. We need to stick together. But my theory is that a loss to a team proves nothing other than you can be beaten by that team on a given day...
Then a playoff proves nothing either...

Here's the thing that people here keep missing for some reason. A playoff would never be completely fair, in fact even on this supposedly pro-Alabama forum I've seen people advocate for only conference champs to play in a playoff. That means you hypothetically have a 8 or 16 team playoff in which the SEC only sends a single team. That's a complete joke but you'd better believe the WAC or Mountain West would fight for that (or in the least guaranteed inclusion no matter what).

Secondly, the SEC and BCS are already a playoff of sorts. Some people here get that, but what some don't get is that the powers that be will not recognize the SEC championship game because most conferences do not have one. If there is a playoff, the SEC will be handicapped because either the game is completely redundant, or the SEC has a extra elimination game.

The only way the SEC fits in with a bigger playoff is to disolve the SEC championship game and declare the West and East as seperate champs basically, pushing both into a playoff. I don't see how that betters the SEC but at least it wouldn't put the SEC at a disadvantage. Why though? Why toss out a system that works and makes money for the SEC, puts them in the championship game, etc... Some people here are (rightly so) arguing against a TCU or Boise State getting the chance to play for a championship at all. However, some of those same people support a playoff. A playoff insures they have a shot, that's all it does. It means a proven and tested team like Alabama has to take a few more teams best shots before they can be champion. I don't care how good you are, the longer you play the more likely a fluke play, call or injury leads to a loss. Saying a team like TCU doesn't deserves to get there, so let's insure they are in a playoff is a absurd sort of logic.

I'm still dumbfounded by some people here that think a 14-0 Florida, Texas or Alabama just wouldn't be enough... are you people really Alabama fans?

SAny time you have two undefeated teams going into the SECCG, there is little doubt that these two teams are the top two teams in the nation.
So why on earth would you put any additional hurdles in their way? I agree, as far as I'm concerned the SECCG IS the championship game, but there's still a bowl game to play. Why make it two (or even more than that) instead of one extra game? It's like saying a guy who wins a marathon shouldn't have to run a sprint after wards because he clearly won. Instead, he should run two sprints after wards... Yeah ok, it's a tiny bit unfair so let's make it more unfair! That's the fix!
 
Last edited:

BamaBoy3684

1st Team
Nov 28, 2006
754
0
0
Dothan
Because whoever wins it among UF, Texas and Bama will have earned it. And even with a playoff how do you know you have the right Champ? Do you really think the 07 Giants were better than the 07 Patriots? You can't justify that.

I'll venture a guess and say that 90% of the people that post in this forum would admit that college football is there favorite sport. Do you ever wonder why it's your favorite sport? The college system gives a better picture of who the best team in the country is year after year. There's a reason college football is your favorite sport. Why tamper with it?

Can you look back on the 11 year history of the BCS and find one undeserving champion? I can't.
The reason people are loyal to college football is not because of the bowl system... it is the worst postseason of any sport. However, I don't believe you mess up the regular season with a playoff. Tell me, if you attend Bama games, were you still interested in Bama when we were 7-6? How about 4-9? I would say that not one Bama fan lost intrest. College football is special, but not because there is not a playoff.

The current system gives us a regional look at teams with opinions of sports writers and that's it.

Thinking back over the 11 years of the BCS I can think of at least 2 injustices off the top of my head... Auburn going undefeated and not having a chance to play for the title and a 2 lose LSU team being in the NC when there were other 2 loss teams available. As an SEC fan, YOU may think that is fair but ask others around the country and see.

The BCS is flawed and until we have a true playoff the regular season will be great but the post season will yield only a mythical NC.

By the way, Giants 14, Pats 10.
 
Last edited:

Nick4Bama

1st Team
Sep 8, 2007
608
0
0
Columbia, tn
Let me post again and say I don't want it changed at all right now because it would more than likely put the SEC at a disadvantage.

I would like some sort of playoff. I have always thought an 8 team would work, but that is not possible without have 8 conference championship games. 8 conferences with 12 per conference equals 96 schools. For those of you that think that would be unfair for the other 30 and Notre Dame go ahead and a "wild card" team that number 8 has to play first.

Anyway,
The pac and big 11 will add a conference championship game as soon as one of them goes undefeated, and is left out of the BCS Championship game because 2 undefeated teams that played conference chamionships got to go to the show. It will probably take that stuborn bunch a couple of times, but that's the only thing that would change it.

If that would have happened to USC when Auburn went 12-0 the pac would have one now, but what happened that year just proved to them how special they really are.:wink:
 

RedStar

Hall of Fame
Jan 28, 2005
9,628
0
0
39
The Shoals, AL
As an SEC fan, YOU may think that is fair but ask others around the country and see.
You aren't the voice of the rest of the country. You should want the system that helps your team the most. In this case it's the BCS. It's that simple. Why should I care what a fan of some other team on the other side of the country thinks?
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
Seriously... at least in round 1. That's how a playoff works.
Which is exactly why I'm against it. If Florida, Alabama or Texas go undefeated this year it's almost impossible to fully express how utterly absurd the notion is that they should have to then re-win their championship in a playoff. You want Alabama to play LSU again? Good for you, thank god you're not one of the powers that be.
 

mjstide

1st Team
Nov 20, 2005
646
0
0
37
Fort Walton Beach, FL
This is pointless, it is an argument between regular season vs. two or 3 weeks of playoffs.

No matter which way you slice it the playoff system will devalue the regular season because there won't be as much stress on winning every week. As a bama fan i would not care if we came into the playoffs as an 8 seed because if your going to be the best you have to beat the best all i would care about is making it in....

So the debate is over whether you want to enjoy 12 weeks of football with several games of intrigue each week or 2 or 3 weeks of football with everything on the line. That is the way the NFL is now and it is certainly the way the NCAA basketball system is now, i doubt even half our fans even know basketball has started already.....
 

BamaBoy3684

1st Team
Nov 28, 2006
754
0
0
Dothan
Which is exactly why I'm against it. If Florida, Alabama or Texas go undefeated this year it's almost impossible to fully express how utterly absurd the notion is that they should have to then re-win their championship in a playoff. You want Alabama to play LSU again? Good for you, thank god you're not one of the powers that be.
What's funny is that if next year Alabama and Florida meet in the SECCG, they will be playing twice (once in the regular seaon and then again in the SECCG) giving you the exact same "utterly absurd" scenario you presented here.

Last year, the Titans were 13-3 at the end of the season with the best record in the AFC... in your world they should have been in the Super Bowl.

You act as if a playoff is a novel idea... Div 1A College Football is the ONLY sport in the world without a playoff... heck, even my kids soccer league has a playoff.
 

TRUTIDE

All-SEC
Oct 14, 1999
1,502
0
0
Spanish Fort, AL
So why on earth would you put any additional hurdles in their way? I agree, as far as I'm concerned the SECCG IS the championship game, but there's still a bowl game to play. Why make it two (or even more than that) instead of one extra game? It's like saying a guy who wins a marathon shouldn't have to run a sprint after wards because he clearly won. Instead, he should run two sprints after wards... Yeah ok, it's a tiny but unfair so let's make it more unfair! That's the fix!
I'm not even at the point of considering a playoff as a viable option. This would destroy the SEC and be too hard to implement into a bowl system. Crimson Chuck had a good plan drawn up but I do not see the "powers that be" (especially in the northeast) doing anything that would legitimately benefit the SEC at all. Those people wanting a playoff system want to slow down the SEC not put the best teams against one another. In a legitimate playoff system, the SEC could be the top seed in 3 of the 4 divisions in any given year. This would never be allowed to happen.

I do not think it would be all so terrible on the players for there to be one extra game (+1) tacked on. The bowls could be backed up a week and have the NC game on New Years day. The useless month off between the last game played and the NC game is ridiculous and belittles the end result. I do not see the +1 as negatively affecting SEC teams. I see it as making teams like TCU actually do something to earn their spot. You know as well as I do that if FL State or Miami start blowing through their conference again, they will be up in the 1 or 2 spot on a regular basis. Who would they have beaten to get there? What if Notre Dame hires a decent coach? We know they are already media darlings. What if they start winning? Where does that leave SEC teams? 3 or 4 or 5 spot? Has the SEC earned enough respect to overcome these biases on a yearly basis? How many years in the past has the SEC champ been undefeated? We have just been lucky that FL State, Miami and Notre Dame have been really bad these past 10 years.

All conferences are not created equal (except in the eyes of the northeast and west coast voters). Then you have coaches from weaker conferences banding together against SEC teams in the coach's polls.

I'm sure that there are legitimate problems with a +1 system but I personally think it would help more than it would hurt (especially for the SEC). The current BCS system is far from perfect but much better than anything a biased playoff system would offer. There is no perfect system. Alabama actually did best with the old system where the highest ranked team after the regular season was awarded king. At least with the old system, the players did not take a month+ off between games and the bowls were basically used as a celebration and for preparation for the following season.
 
Last edited:

BamaBoy3684

1st Team
Nov 28, 2006
754
0
0
Dothan
I'll end my part by saying here that there is no way that my idea will ever come to fruition anyway. I think we'll be lucky to get a plus 1 even, so this conversation is really useless.
 

bayoutider

Administrator Emeritus & Chef-in-Chief
Oct 13, 1999
29,712
27
0
Tidefans.com
The PAC 10 already has a playoff called the regular season they play every team in their conference. The Big 10+1 needs another member, they rotate 2 members off their schedule each year and play 8.
 

RedStar

Hall of Fame
Jan 28, 2005
9,628
0
0
39
The Shoals, AL
I'll end my part by saying here that there is no way that my idea will ever come to fruition anyway. I think we'll be lucky to get a plus 1 even, so this conversation is really useless.
I wouldn't say it's completely useless. This same poll 3 years ago showed that only 2% supported the BCS, that number is now up to almost 27%. 69% supported a playoff system, now only 46% support it.

For whatever reason, the support for a playoff system is dwindling.
 

Dallas4Bama

Suspended
Sep 27, 2006
3,882
0
0
Dallas, Texas
The PAC 10 already has a playoff called the regular season they play every team in their conference. The Big 10+1 needs another member, they rotate 2 members off their schedule each year and play 8.
I know you aren't suggesting it, but can you imagine playing all 11 other SEC teams? I would be willing to bet the conference's bowl win record would be abysmal. After facing all 11 teams in the SEC you would have half your team on crutches and in a cast of some type by seasons end. They wouldn't have any gas left for a bowl game or a playoff.
Posted via Mobile Device
 

Dallas4Bama

Suspended
Sep 27, 2006
3,882
0
0
Dallas, Texas
I wouldn't say it's completely useless. This same poll 3 years ago showed that only 2% supported the BCS, that number is now up to almost 27%. 69% supported a playoff system, now only 46% support it.

For whatever reason, the support for a playoff system is dwindling.
For the same reason politicians pass laws and then exempt themselves from those same laws. Its always different when your in a position of power vs. on the outside looking in.
Posted via Mobile Device
 

RedStar

Hall of Fame
Jan 28, 2005
9,628
0
0
39
The Shoals, AL
For the same reason politicians pass laws and then exempt themselves from those same laws. Its always different when your in a position of power vs. on the outside looking in.
Posted via Mobile Device
True, I know I've changed my tune. But I don't see the SEC losing strength in the coming years, if anything, most teams have shown improvement this year over last. For the foreseeable future, the SEC will have to beat itself senseless to be on the outside looking in.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
One thing needs to be said. I don't think everyone's idea is ridiculous or absurd, but most of the playoff ideas are radically different from any playoff we would get.

Right now the playoff has momentum through ambiguity and the whole "grass is always greener phenomenon" the problem is some fans are inadvertently supporting a playoff that would not at all go along with what they'd want to see.

When you see a playoff vs BCS poll, your playoff vote is being used to advocate for a particular playoff, not necessarily what you have in mind. In other words, if you guys keep calling for a playoff eventually someone might listen. The problem is when you vote for change (political refference is intentional) you might not like the change you get.

Once this poll blows over I am tempted to provide a poll with more specific playoff options to see if there is really overwhelming support for any particular type of playoff or if it's just a scattershot of different playoff scenarios.

For now I'll pose the question. Are the playoff advocates here in favor of any playoff over the BCS? Or is your support of a playoff conditional according to how it is set up? To me it becomes a careful what you wish for scenario, I'd like to see how pro-playoff people react if a playoff comes to be that lets Notre Dame get in easily for example.
 

BamaBoy3684

1st Team
Nov 28, 2006
754
0
0
Dothan
One thing needs to be said. I don't think everyone's idea is ridiculous or absurd, but most of the playoff ideas are radically different from any playoff we would get.

Right now the playoff has momentum through ambiguity and the whole "grass is always greener phenomenon" the problem is some fans are inadvertently supporting a playoff that would not at all go along with what they'd want to see.

When you see a playoff vs BCS poll, your playoff vote is being used to advocate for a particular playoff, not necessarily what you have in mind. In other words, if you guys keep calling for a playoff eventually someone might listen. The problem is when you vote for change (political refference is intentional) you might not like the change you get.

Once this poll blows over I am tempted to provide a poll with more specific playoff options to see if there is really overwhelming support for any particular type of playoff or if it's just a scattershot of different playoff scenarios.

For now I'll pose the question. Are the playoff advocates here in favor of any playoff over the BCS? Or is your support of a playoff conditional according to how it is set up? To me it becomes a careful what you wish for scenario, I'd like to see how pro-playoff people react if a playoff comes to be that lets Notre Dame get in easily for example.
I agree with you, not any playoff system will do. I have preferences, but I wouldn't go for just anything, even though maybe I have sounded that way.
 

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.