There is but one fuzzy picture of me onthe internets. Biotch.
Oddsmaker Danny Sheridan recently shared his opinion of the BCS with the New York Times. The verdict -- he no likey:
"The two most important things to have are a good schedule and no conference playoff. It’s very uneven. It’s not a fair playing field.â€
And:
"West Virginia and Missouri are not the two best teams in the country. I think it’s safe to say when the final two teams have emerged, it’s not a fair playing field.â€
No beef with the guy there. Heading into Glendale last season, I was a huge proponent of a playoff system. This year, with the Buckeyes on the cusp of getting back into the championship game, I feel the same way. No fan on the outside whining here -- instead, a fan of a team that's has it good, but is still advocating change.
It's worth pointing out that the conference title games came about not so much in an effort to pick a champ, but more so to pad some wallets. The SEC and Big 12 innovated in this space and I believe the other three major conferences will follow suit eventually, but the powers that be at these conferences can't have it both ways.
They essentially changed the dynamics of the game for their conferences in a money grab and now they don't like the way it's working out.
Alabama resident Sheridan also thinks that UConn would be defeated by "a high school team in Alabama." To be fair, he did call the SEC Championship game back in August, but statements like that make him sound like, well, an Alabamian.
Comments
Since the whole traditions of the Bowl games have been ruined, or at least, tainted by the BCS. I have to say a playoff makes the most sense. If OSU gets a top seed, we could see SEC and PAC-10 teams coming to "The Shoe" in December to see how tough they really are. I really like this idea from Dan Wetzel at Yahoo Sports:
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/...
Great idea, but what about Big Ten Co-Champion years?
Even thought the Buckeyes usually benefit from this current system, I'm growing tired of the political-ness and lame-venue bowl games (Rose excluded). You can't tell me an NFL stadium is better than a College Stadium. Let those SEC whiners come up to play for a change. No more virtual home games for the south and Pac-10.
I still disagree. I think about how important that Michigan game is each year and how irrelevent it would be if we had a playoff. Picture Henne and Hart sitting out preferring to get healthy for the playoffs a la the Colts when they have locked up home field in wk 13 years past.
I'm more a proponent of the +1 game. Don't know exactly how it would work, but would like to keep the significance around every game on the schedule. I still believe the whole season is the playoff.
It used to not be as noticable becuase dominant teams didn't lose, they could run the table for 12 games. More parity now means that schedule plays a larger role in the championship matchup. I don't feel bad that none of these tools in the SEC can keep from losing 2 games each year. Don't lose and play for the title.
Since the Michigan game usually decides the B10 champ, it looses no significance in my mind. There would be 5 At-large spots for Michigan like the 2006 scenario. But you have to win the B10 to get a guaranteed spot. We fight Michigan every year with no idea where we would end up in January, this would make it clear cut. It ADDS significance to the B10 Title, right now, a B10 can mean almost nothing towards the National Title.
I always thought this would work, an 8 team tourney set up as follows:
6 automatic BCS conference champs (keeps regular season important)
4 "at-large" teams play for the final 2 spots.
These 8 teams would play in the 4 major bowl games on Jan. 1 and 2 and the semi-final sites would already be set for two weeks later (allow fans to get travel plans). Then on Saturday, college plays their semi-finals and Sunday would be NFL conference championships. Then college NT game on the weekend before the Super Bowl.
Most colleges are shut down until after MLK day, so only 2 schools would miss one week of school.
OSU plays Michigan, winner take all, for the Big 10.
West Virginia plays UConn, winner take all, for the Big East.
USC plays UCLA, winner (likely) take all, for the Pac-10.
Who needs championship games?
The last thing we need is an irrelevant regular season like those NFL morons. In fact, I'd rather return to the old system and let the voters duke it out. At least we wouldn't have Fox covering the damn thing.
Corey....would your 4 "at-large" teams face off to see who gets the playoff spots and if so would you have them facing off in bowls such as the Capital One & Outback Bowls?
Wil...I would have the 4 at-large teams face off to get the final 2 spots (play-in games and I don't know where I would play them). I would not have them play in other bowl games though, because I think that would eliminate all of these stupid tie-ins. All other bowl games could stay the same and be played in the same cities and time slots.
If you are an "at-large" team and lose the first game, too bad, you had a chance.
Think about this year:
OSU
USC
LSU
V. Tech
Oklahoma
WVU (all assuming the above teams win this weekend)
At-Large (Can't have 2 teams from one conference in at-large)
Hawaii (sorry, but they are undefeated)
Georgia
Kansas or Mizzou
Illinois or Arizona St.??
I like the idea that idea that you can't have 2 teams from the same conference in that at large spot.....that is the 1 complaint that I have with Dan Wetzel's playoff system....I don't think there is ever a situation that a third team from a conference should get a chance at the National Title (he has LSU, Georgia, and Florida all in his playoff, he needs to drop Florida....if you can't crack the top 2 in your conference then you should not have a chance at the National Title)
Hawkeye State - I can see a little bit of that. There's no doubt that there won't be as much of an emphasis on the regular season, but it's not like it will stop mattering completely. The fact that the college season is only 75% of the NFL season will mitigate that. Plus, there's good reason to believe that if a playoff system were to be implemented, the regular season would be rolled back to 10 regular season games instead of 12. With a 10 or 11-game regular season, you can lose once, but you better not lose twice.
Completely agree about Fox, although their championship game coverage last year may have been the only decent aspect of the game from a Buckeye perspective.
We'll get a playoff system, but it may still be 5-10 years out. I just keep coming back to the thought that BCS football is the only sporting event on this planet where an undefeated team may not have a chance to play for the championship. That's mind-boggling.
Danny is a schmuck.
Why would you not like the Southern and West Coast teams. Every final game is a home game.
Lets see how good LSU / Gerogia / Fla / USC play up in the Shoe then we can talk abuot fairness.
The bowls are an oligarchy which dictate their cash money ways on the uneducated masses. the NCAA should tell the bowls thx for everything we will now run this like the NCAA b-ball and take all the money.
OUT