While I agree that Alabama was the best team overall this year, they still shouldn't have been in the NC game PERIOD.
Why should a team who wasn't even good enough to play in their conference championship game be in the national championship? The logic behind that is pure folly.
If you have a playoff with only 4 teams and non conference winners are involved, then it will be no better than what we have now.
0
While I agree that Alabama was the best team overall this year, they still shouldn't have been in the NC game PERIOD.
Why should a team who wasn't even good enough to play in their conference championship game be in the national championship? The logic behind that is pure folly.
If you have a playoff with only 4 teams and non conference winners are involved, then it will be no better than what we have now.
While I agree that Alabama was the best team overall this year, they still shouldn't have been in the NC game PERIOD.
Why should a team who wasn't even good enough to play in their conference championship game be in the national championship? The logic behind that is pure folly.
If you have a playoff with only 4 teams and non conference winners are involved, then it will be no better than what we have now.
BCS is designed to have the two best teams play each other for the BCS title. What do conferences have to do with it?
0
Quote Originally Posted by lillefty:
While I agree that Alabama was the best team overall this year, they still shouldn't have been in the NC game PERIOD.
Why should a team who wasn't even good enough to play in their conference championship game be in the national championship? The logic behind that is pure folly.
If you have a playoff with only 4 teams and non conference winners are involved, then it will be no better than what we have now.
BCS is designed to have the two best teams play each other for the BCS title. What do conferences have to do with it?
Me, and about 100000000 Bama fans, really couldn't give a shit... Pointless thread... Jealousy.
I wouldn't call it a pointless thread. It's pretty obvious nobody with a full set of teeth believed these were the two best teams in the country. Therefore people didn't watch. The play on the field says it all. If those were the two best teams then college football is in pretty bad shape. ESPN got the game they wanted because they thought two big name schools like LSU and Alabama would sell. They were wrong. After the financial disaster this game turned out to be I would bet anything there won't be an SEC team in the NCG next year. In the end ABC/ESPN run college football they need ratings to pay the schools the big bucks. The SEC proved it can't deliver the ratings. Congrats to LSU and Alabama for making it to the NCG but in the end they ruined the reputation of SEC football.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Tappy:
Me, and about 100000000 Bama fans, really couldn't give a shit... Pointless thread... Jealousy.
I wouldn't call it a pointless thread. It's pretty obvious nobody with a full set of teeth believed these were the two best teams in the country. Therefore people didn't watch. The play on the field says it all. If those were the two best teams then college football is in pretty bad shape. ESPN got the game they wanted because they thought two big name schools like LSU and Alabama would sell. They were wrong. After the financial disaster this game turned out to be I would bet anything there won't be an SEC team in the NCG next year. In the end ABC/ESPN run college football they need ratings to pay the schools the big bucks. The SEC proved it can't deliver the ratings. Congrats to LSU and Alabama for making it to the NCG but in the end they ruined the reputation of SEC football.
I wouldn't call it a pointless thread. It's pretty obvious nobody with a full set of teeth believed these were the two best teams in the country. Therefore people didn't watch. The play on the field says it all. If those were the two best teams then college football is in pretty bad shape. ESPN got the game they wanted because they thought two big name schools like LSU and Alabama would sell. They were wrong. After the financial disaster this game turned out to be I would bet anything there won't be an SEC team in the NCG next year. In the end ABC/ESPN run college football they need ratings to pay the schools the big bucks. The SEC proved it can't deliver the ratings. Congrats to LSU and Alabama for making it to the NCG but in the end they ruined the reputation of SEC football.
Who gives a shit about what some guy that idolizes a Scottish tennis player thinks about SEC football.
If you think that Alabama and LSU haven't demonstrated that they are the two best teams than you should just stick to jerking off to reruns of the Thailand Open.
Oh and the SEC's reputation is thriving as usual,maybe even more so as they placed 3 teams in the Top 5 and 4 teams in the Top 8 of the final coaches poll.
No other conference had more than 2 teams ranked in the Top 10 (PAC12-4,7 and BIG- 9,10).
Oh and did I mention that the SEC has now ruled college football for the sixth year in a row.
Good day sir!
0
Quote Originally Posted by AndyMurray:
I wouldn't call it a pointless thread. It's pretty obvious nobody with a full set of teeth believed these were the two best teams in the country. Therefore people didn't watch. The play on the field says it all. If those were the two best teams then college football is in pretty bad shape. ESPN got the game they wanted because they thought two big name schools like LSU and Alabama would sell. They were wrong. After the financial disaster this game turned out to be I would bet anything there won't be an SEC team in the NCG next year. In the end ABC/ESPN run college football they need ratings to pay the schools the big bucks. The SEC proved it can't deliver the ratings. Congrats to LSU and Alabama for making it to the NCG but in the end they ruined the reputation of SEC football.
Who gives a shit about what some guy that idolizes a Scottish tennis player thinks about SEC football.
If you think that Alabama and LSU haven't demonstrated that they are the two best teams than you should just stick to jerking off to reruns of the Thailand Open.
Oh and the SEC's reputation is thriving as usual,maybe even more so as they placed 3 teams in the Top 5 and 4 teams in the Top 8 of the final coaches poll.
No other conference had more than 2 teams ranked in the Top 10 (PAC12-4,7 and BIG- 9,10).
Oh and did I mention that the SEC has now ruled college football for the sixth year in a row.
I was quoting the coaches poll (USAToday) who doesn't recognize USC as being eligible for consideration.
Funny how people use, or misuse, information to support their claims.
The low TV #'s simply means that the matchup, being a regional sort, just lost a lot of the casual cfb fans. There were 3 of us in my HT room watching it but many people I've talked to since just werent that interested. The same thing would happen if USC & Stanford were the matchup.......or VT/FSU.
0
Quote Originally Posted by -29-:
Stanford Cardinal
I was quoting the coaches poll (USAToday) who doesn't recognize USC as being eligible for consideration.
Funny how people use, or misuse, information to support their claims.
The low TV #'s simply means that the matchup, being a regional sort, just lost a lot of the casual cfb fans. There were 3 of us in my HT room watching it but many people I've talked to since just werent that interested. The same thing would happen if USC & Stanford were the matchup.......or VT/FSU.
BCS is designed to have the two best teams play each other for the BCS title. What do conferences have to do with it?
Think about the logic. Alabama wasn't good enough to be in their own conference championship game. If they were truly the best team, they should win their conference.How can you not be 1 of the 2 best teams in your conference, yet be 1 of the 2 best teams in the country?
By having Bama in the NC, you just made the whole reg season meaningless. If there is a 16 team playoff then it is a different story. Any 4 team playoff should only include conference winners.
The biggest problem with the BCS is that they weight the wrong things. Why is there no weight to winning your conference? Instead they place way too much emphasis on polls. Meaningless preseason polls influence way too much of what goes on. A team like Houston starts so low in the preseaon rankings that they can not possibly be in the hunt even if they won every game 100-0. Granted Houston lost to render that argument useless, but a team like Houston or Boise st in the past, will never have a chance as long with the system in place. That won't change and actually will become less likely with a 4 team playoff system.
0
Quote Originally Posted by thorpe:
BCS is designed to have the two best teams play each other for the BCS title. What do conferences have to do with it?
Think about the logic. Alabama wasn't good enough to be in their own conference championship game. If they were truly the best team, they should win their conference.How can you not be 1 of the 2 best teams in your conference, yet be 1 of the 2 best teams in the country?
By having Bama in the NC, you just made the whole reg season meaningless. If there is a 16 team playoff then it is a different story. Any 4 team playoff should only include conference winners.
The biggest problem with the BCS is that they weight the wrong things. Why is there no weight to winning your conference? Instead they place way too much emphasis on polls. Meaningless preseason polls influence way too much of what goes on. A team like Houston starts so low in the preseaon rankings that they can not possibly be in the hunt even if they won every game 100-0. Granted Houston lost to render that argument useless, but a team like Houston or Boise st in the past, will never have a chance as long with the system in place. That won't change and actually will become less likely with a 4 team playoff system.
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.