College Football Question

[TheNamelessPoet]

I don't have a problem with it.

Unless you also think people shouldn't get academic scholarships.

I also think football players should be able to take Route Running 101, followed by Blitz Pickup 100 and Touchdown Celebrations as an elective.

If dude has chosen professional football as his career path, that should be equal to Accounting or Pre-Med. There's no guarantee that your Journalism degree is going to get you a job with the New York Times and there's no guarantee that your 4 years as a Michigan Football Wolverine is going to get you a job with the New York Jets.

These kids go to college to play football, and advance their football careers. We shouldn't waste time making them get a degree when they want to be football players. Those that WANT to get a degree in something else should have that opportunity, but no reason to force them.

I agree to a point....

start a minors for football then... baseball has it...

[OldFatGuy]

My question.....If, as BCS backers always say, the college football regular season is a playoff, how are Boise St & Ball St getting no mention for the National Title Game? If the season itself is a playoff, and you don't lose a game, you then play for the title, right?

Don't get me wrong, I think OU or UF would smoke either team by a bare minimum of 30, but you can't say one thing (regular season is a playoff) & then not carry out such a statement to its full extent (undefeated teams not only not playing for a national title, but Ball St likely not even playing in a BCS game)

Don't forget Utah ! I think that Utah is also undefeated, although could be mistaken about that. I just thought when I was watching the game the other night the announcers mentioned two teams undefeated, one was Boise State and the other Utah. LOL, didn't even know about Ball St. Or maybe the other one they mentioned was Ball St. and for some reason I'm getting things mixed up again.

[flapper]

I agree with that college is supposed to be about academics. Problem is, when there are many undefeated teams like this year, there is always going to be talk about playoffs. I am for playoffs in college football. That being said it will never happen. They make too much money on the BCS and other bowl games to want to change it now.

[OldFatGuy]

I agree with that college is supposed to be about academics. Problem is, when there are many undefeated teams like this year, there is always going to be talk about playoffs. I am for playoffs in college football. That being said it will never happen. They make too much money on the BCS and other bowl games to want to change it now.

I've heard this before, and I'll admit I'm no expert, but would they really make less money on a playoff system? It's hard for me to imagine the TV networks not wanting to plunk down a huge chunk of change for a set of playoffs, plus a playoff system would be a few more games, thus more gate revenues to.

Besides which, you could still have consolation "Bowl" games for teams not eligible for playoffs.

I dunno, maybe this system is making more money. I mean, you must be right because I've heard it before, it's just hard for me to imagine that a playoff system might not in fact generate more revenues.

[flapper]

They probably could make more money if marketed right. The games would actually would mean more to those playing too. They have like 36 bowl games now so they would lose like 5 games for a 32 team playoff. They don't need to discard the concept of BCS, just use it to seed the teams. That way each of the top 32 has a chance to win. There would not be complaints about Ball St or Boise St being not included. I think it would be better for the game in the long run too. More people would be interested.

[kenny1234]

A 32-team playoff gives the winner 5 games. Are you going to shorten the regular season - or have the national champions play 3 or 4 more games in the year than they currently do?
When college football playoffs come up, it is usually in the context of an 8-team playoff - with the BCS standings determining the 8 that make it. I'm still not sure that would resolve the problem - I doubt both Ball St. and Boise St. would be included in the top 8.

A solution that would actually resolve the problem is to require that any school that is going to participate in the BCS must have a schedule that meets a 'strength of schedule' requirement. This might include a minimum number of games against top teams, or some average measure of opponent quality. This would mean that an undefeated team had actually played against top quality opposition allowing for easier comparisons between teams.

[flapper]

Look at Div 1-aa, where schools like App St(they beat Michigan in 07) and Georgia Southern play. They use a playoff (16 team) and they play 11 games a season before that. The original format of the 11 game season should work to help lead to a play off. I chose 32 teams as my guide because there are 36 or so bowl games and also, we would have some teams in top 25 whining about not being included. We could also eliminate FBS/FCS games being played too. That would put a little more weight on better scheduling.

[gRYFYN1]

Here's the thing .. everyone in college FB want to know who the BEST team, even a playoff won't always settle that.

Does the best team always win the MLB playoffs? NFL playoffs? The NCAA basketball tourney ?

If you have some desire to crown a champion then whatever, they decided on a 2 team playoff.

So don't think a playoff will give you an unequivocal best team every year.

[EP Hotties]

Well, there's no way to crown the "best" team. This is simply impossible. Best is an opinion, not a fact. But we can get as close as possible, by allowing more teams to compete, and having a fair way to select these teams. For those of you who like to think of student-athletes, why not have the tiebreaker(like the one used in the Big 12 South) be graduation rates?
The question with an 8-team playoff, is do you do it with:
6 BCS conference champs, and two at-larges
OR
the 8 highest ranked teams (BCS rankings, I suppose)
I'd chose the 8 highest ranked teams. Having an 8-team playoff leads to 7 games that would almost certainly raise the same, if not more, revenue than the
5 current BCS bowls. Then you could have like 30 other bowl games, which would presumably make the same amount of money. I would suggest that these be scheduled on non-Tournament days, in order to get more $.
This year my predicted match-ups would be:
1 Oklahoma vs. 8 Penn State
4 Alabama vs. 5 USC
2 Florida vs. 7 Texas Tech
3 Texas vs. Utah
Can you imagine how much money any of those game would make. A playoff would be soooo awesome! I'm really just to the point that I just hate the BCS, cuz it SUCKS!

[Arctic Blast]

BINGO!!!
and dont give me crap they are not getting paid... a free / partialy free (that you dont have to pay back) education is getting paid

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! That was entertaining.

Seriously...colleges don't give a sh*t about player educations. College athletics exist for one thing only...making colleges big dollars.