BCS to meet with congress

[rlh]

Thought it would be interesting to see how you feel about a college football playoff a the highest level.  Congress has called the BCS in for meetings...is this all Congress needs to be concerned about?  What say yea?

[covufan]

I would like to see a college football playoff, just not forced by Congress. 

[vuweathernerd]

I would like to see a college football playoff, just not forced by Congress. 

seconded. our federal politicians have far more pressing issues to deal with. which means they should have a deal worked out on this by the end of next week. 

[valpo04]

I'm gonna play devil's advocate here...

College football is the only sport where you are pretty much guaranteed to see the two best teams from the regular season in the championship.

There are occasionally a 3rd or 4th team that might have an argument for being there, but year in and year out, the two top teams in the country play.  You can't say that with any other sport. 

The 2006 World Series Champion Cardinals were a very mediocre 83-78, playing in a very mediocre NL Central.  I don't think anyone would "select" them to play for the title, let alone argue that they were anywhere close to the best team in baseball that year.

Again, just playing devil's advocate here...

[covufan]

I'm gonna play devil's advocate here...

College football is the only sport where you are pretty much guaranteed to see the two best teams from the regular season in the championship.

There are occasionally a 3rd or 4th team that might have an argument for being there, but year in and year out, the two top teams in the country play.  You can't say that with any other sport. 

The 2006 World Series Champion Cardinals were a very mediocre 83-78, playing in a very mediocre NL Central.  I don't think anyone would "select" them to play for the title, let alone argue that they were anywhere close to the best team in baseball that year.

Again, just playing devil's advocate here...

With all other sports you have a playoff or tournament system that determines the champion.  In other divisions of NCAA football they have playoffs.  A playoff system would remove all doubt who is the champion.  There is still the argument, especially with one and done playoffs, of who was the best.  If the Patriots and Giants of 2007 played three times, who would win 2 out of three?  The Patriots may have been the best team, but there is no doubt that the Giants were the Super Bowl (and NFL) champions. 

I think this is why most people would like to see some kind of playoff system in NCAA Division I football.  You are absolutely correct that in most years the BCS championship game will get the two best teams.  Given the whole bowl structure, it would be difficult to do any other way. 

I would suggest having an eight team playoff.  The Big Ten, SEC, ACC, and PAC-10 champions would get into the playoffs, as would the Big 12 champion, based on league tie-breakers.  I would then have three at large teams from the pool of other schools.  There would be no second teams from the top 5 conferences.  The conference champion is the sectional winner, so to speak.  You could use four bowl games sometime before Christmas, two bowl games on New Year's Day, and the championship game a week later.  You could also rotate the hosting bowls within the bowl system.  Having a bowl/playoff system like this could take some attention away from the newer/lesser bowls, and make them go away.  We don't need more 6-6 teams playing in bowl games. 

Just my $0.02. 

[vuweathernerd]

I'm gonna play devil's advocate here...

College football is the only sport where you are pretty much guaranteed to see the two best teams from the regular season in the championship.

There are occasionally a 3rd or 4th team that might have an argument for being there, but year in and year out, the two top teams in the country play.  You can't say that with any other sport. 

The 2006 World Series Champion Cardinals were a very mediocre 83-78, playing in a very mediocre NL Central.  I don't think anyone would "select" them to play for the title, let alone argue that they were anywhere close to the best team in baseball that year.

Again, just playing devil's advocate here...

i can't argue against the 06 cards too much, despite them making my first semester of college memorable and saddening at the same time (i really wanted them to win in 04 so i could go to the parade. that couldn't happen in 06.) as my dad likes to say, they just got hot at the right time, and did what they needed to do and came out on top. kind of like what the heat are doing right now. they're not the best team in the nba - they're just playing well when they need to.

[StlVUFan]

I'm gonna play devil's advocate here...

College football is the only sport where you are pretty much guaranteed to see the two best teams from the regular season in the championship.

There are occasionally a 3rd or 4th team that might have an argument for being there, but year in and year out, the two top teams in the country play.  You can't say that with any other sport. 

The 2006 World Series Champion Cardinals were a very mediocre 83-78, playing in a very mediocre NL Central.  I don't think anyone would "select" them to play for the title, let alone argue that they were anywhere close to the best team in baseball that year.

Again, just playing devil's advocate here...

i can't argue against the 06 cards too much

I can.  They finished in 1st place in their division.  As long as the best team in each division advances to the post-season, I have no problem whatsoever with calling the MLB postseason a tournament (albeit of the best-of variety instead of single elimination), and let the chips fall where they may.  I have absolutely no embarrassment whatsoever over 2006.  If the Padres can't win even one game at home, if Billy Wagner can't keep from grooving one to So Taguchi, if Tiger pitchers can't throw to 1st or 3rd base to save their lives, none of them deserve to win the WS.  And even if I wasn't rooting for the Cardinals that year, I'd still be perfectly fine with that.

On the other hand, I couldn't care less about college football, so do what you want...

Except: I find this obsession with making sure the best teams square off for the championship amusing.  I regularly listen to WSCR (on podcast delay, mind you, and I just recently decided I'd had enough of it) and the afternoon drive show loosely represents the peanut gallery of College Basketball (and I fear they are in the majority) who have been sneering at the NCAA tournament for several years now.  Butler taking on UConn for the national title?  They can't mock it enough for their tastes, grousing about how boring it is since the best teams aren't playing.

Now, their elitism does *not* run in the direction of BCS vs. Mid-Majors, except on rare occasions -- and even then it's not relevant because they don't consider Butler to be a Mid-Major (or Cinderella or Hoosiers or any of the other ridiculous hype).  In their defense, they don't hate Butler.  They hate the hype, but that's another story.

The catch here is: whenever we talk about "I want the best teams playing for the title", we're being very subjective about "best" -- it's usually "best team on paper".  I may be weird, but I want the teams *who are playing the best in the tournament* to play for the title.  You're pissed, Mr. Big-time commentator (secretly an NBA-elitist most likely), because Kansas isn't playing for the title?  Take it out on Bill Self, not the NCAA.  If the best team on paper wants to play for the title, then they have to play like they are the best or they go home.  I am so sick and tired of idiots trying to tell me the NCAA tournament is broken.  I don't crap all over the NBA in public.  Leave my game alone.

All that being said, the BCS does seem to be an idea whose time has come and gone.  As little as I care about College football, when I was listening to WSCR I was put off by all the Boise State hate I heard.  From what I can tell, as much as I hate the RPI, it sounds like I'd hate the BCS formula even more.