In partnership with CBSSports.com
We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.
Where the madness isn't just in March.
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Calm down Bama brothers. I'm with the Duck fan on this. Let the 11 conference champs play for the crystal. We can just slide over to the Sun Belt and worry about ULM being our only tough game and heading to the playoff each year. No sweat off my rump how we get there if that is the plan they think is best.
The proposal that will likely pass is the following
Highest rated conference champions, as long as they are ranked #6 or higher. If there are not 4 conference champs who qualify, like last year, then the next highest rated team or teams get in.
The reason I like this, is that it does provide a balance to the polls for any sort of regional or perceptive bias, and it still maintains CFB's regular season as the most important in all of American sports.
I would like to see a small addition that any team ranked #1 automatically gets in as well.
As to your contention that conference champs already get preferential treatment, I would disagree. Last season Okie St won their conference, accomplished more on the field, yet still fell behind Alabama. Now personally do I think that Oklahoma St was better than Alabama, no I do not.
Unbowed, Unbent, Unbroken
That is incredibly stupid. If you don't want the best team you to win you are ruining CFB to either help your own team win a tained championship, or ruining it out of spite or stupidity.
Last year's regular season did matter. We only lost one game and it wasn't to some 6-6 team or anything like that. Some of you are acting like we went 9-3 and still played for the title.
Translation: If you are a fan of a traditional power, you hate this stuff. You want rankings based on reputation and oddball computer rankings. Having to prove games on the field only hurts you because you can't just rely on your image.
This is why the BCS sucks.
I am on board with the current proposal and I think that is fair. More often than not, pollsters side with conference champions. There are very limited seasons where non champs end up in the title game. Last year happened because pollsters believed exactly what you you did. People will cry foul because of the rematch but the BCS system is designed to put the top 2 teams against each other. That loss to Iowa State cost OSU their shot. I still can't believe they blew a 17 point lead that night. with the collapse of OU, they had a cakewalk to the title game.
So losing to 6-6 Iowa State is okay, but losing to #1 LSU is bad? K.
Sounds like fans of a lot of teams just want to water things down even more so that you might FINALLY get a chance to play for a title. You're ruining CDB, not us.
It's not a matter of wanting. It is a matter of getting it done on the field, not looking great coming off the bus. Green Bay did not get it done, not my fault, also not my fault that Bama lost at home.
I'd rather have a playoff with teams that win the games on the field. I have watched MSU plummet in rankings the past 2 years after losing close battles with good football teams. Losing to Notre Dame, Wisconsin, or Iowa is nothing to be ashamed of, but because we aren't a traditional power, we fall deep. We got screwed out of a BCS bowl the past 2 years because other teams have been selected in front of us from our own conference that are "sexier" (Michigan, Ohio State, Wisconsin).
I no longer have any faith in the system and it's all about making money. You are an Alabama fan and Alabama makes money. It is good for you to support Saban's stance and the continued ranking based on a "formula" that won't fully be submitted to the public.
However, my team MUST win our conference in order to go to the Rose Bowl or a BCS NCG. Otherwise, the "formula" will drop us down lower than other schools and we get screwed. Funny how that works out for a non-traditional power compared to a bigger, traditional program.
MSU is not ruining college football, we're trying to be part of the growing change and win games on the field. Our coach and AD have talked about it enough to let their stance be known.
Meh they need some kind of help- whining about how our image helps us obviously isn't working out for them so they need to rig a system that gives them an advantage.
undeniable proof? That is not true at all.
LSU still accomplished much more, and was overall the better team than Alabama last year. Alabama won in the 1 game that was deemed the championship game, but anyone calling that undeniable proof, has low IQ and not worth debating with.
Who is them? and how would require winning equate to rigging a system?
We've averaged 12 wins a year the last 4 years. I'd say we're getting plenty done on the field.
9-6 <<< 21-0 IMO
You're losing to those teams after they have losses- that's the problem. Losing to an undefeated one of those teams is nothing to be ashamed of, but losing to them after they have losses looks bad. Not to mention it's obvious that your own losses count against you more the more you lose, and then when you factor in the record of your latest loss, it just looks worse.
I'm sorry you feel that the system is against you, and to an extent it is because other schools, like Alabama, have a history and tradition that works a slight influence on voters minds. But we earned that on the field and you shouldn't make the system give you an advantage because of it. You have every opportunity to earn your own tradition on the field.
If not facing off against the best teams because you can exclude one or two because they aren't conference champions makes your road easier to the championship, it's rigging the system.
1-1 vs each other and LSU had the better overall season. I am sorry if I do not find undeniable proof as you say.
10-15 teams could (not necessarily would, but could) have beaten LSU on that day, that certainly is not undeniable proof of superiority, it is just one game.
No, they couldn't have.
Not really, it is simply providing a balance to inherent poll bias. You do not know who are the best teams. Wisconsin going into the bowls was ranked #10 based on 2 freak hail mary completions. If not for that, they would have been #2, and quite possibly ended up national champ. A little divergent, but I just don't trust the polls, with great reason, to tell us who the best 4 teams are at the end of the regular season.
Actually, we just made them look that bad. We were the only team in the Country that could have beaten them.
regular season ?
at the end of the regular season LSU was looked at by most everyone (outside of Ttown) as the clear cut #1 team
Bama proved LSU was clearly the #2 team in the NCG .
thus proving that in 2011 the best two teams played for the NC.
Wow, you don't trust the polls because they don't favor your team?
So losing to Oregon in what would amount to a playoff game in the proposed new format didn't answer the question ? IF so.... According to you the proposed format of conference champions only wouldn't answer the question... Because that would have still been a playoff game with that format.
This post was edited by SignalBama 2 years ago
"Accomplisments during the season?". Who beat LSU during the season? Who beat Alabama? They should have played, because they were better than everyone else. LSU could have tried not to get horsewhipped. They absolutely would have horsewhipped anyone else. What does that say about everyone else?
The way to a woman's mouth is through her phone.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports