Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Total BS!!!

Nor Valvano's Wolfpack win the crown.

do you think they could beat 'bama, or auburn? I just think that the SEC plays at a different level. (donning my flamesuit).

It's simple, the SEC thinks their balls are bigger than they really are. That's why they convienently wont come west to play.
Pussys........all of them.

The worst SEC team would bury any of those ankle biters like TCU and Boise...

moore would be lucky to survive one quarter with a defensive lineman like auburns nick fairely planting him in that sissy blue turf lolol

Sean ... We had a LONG discussion the other night about the pros and cons of both a 'functionally correct" BCS system and a playoff system. If I recall we both agreed that both can work, but you still favor the playoff system.

Personally, what I do like about the BCS approach (as opposed yo a one-and-done playoff system) is that you eliminate the possibility of a true, worthy contender being knocked out of the tournament by a lesser team because they had a bad night. The problem with the BCS though is that it can often be hard to figure who really are THE two teams that should be playing in the championship game.

Going to a playoff system also puts more favor on the team that's hitting their stride at the end of season instead of rewarding the teams that earned it all during the regular season.

I don't want to see the regular season in college football be reduced to where teams are simply vying for a spot in the playoffs ... Which I feel could happen with a playoff system ...

I'm an SEC pimp too, but truth be told, I think they'd have a shot at winning the SEC East this year.

May be able to find out with a playoff

we've heard that a lot. Then the super tough- we've never seen that kind of speed and athleticism team seems to have an 'off' night. I could just as easily speculate that BSU would destroy Auburn but then I'd sound silly too. We'll more than likely have some more questions answered towards the end of the season.

Either a play off, to be the best you must beat the best, or play one championship game when the #1 and #2 combatants can't be unanimously decided... I think the play off is a better way to decide the outcome.

When Number 4 beats Number 6 its . . . . .


Ummm . . . . .


Expected.

Not a jump to Number 1.

That math don't work.

Oregon Pounded the schit out of UCLA (weaker this year) but still a serious program.

Oregon plays USC this week. Also, down this year, but holder of numerous national titles. Another serious program.

Exactly when does Oregon get the #1?

Again, the computer produced garbage.

BMT

Copied this from myself in another discussion. Everybody should already know how I feel about a play-off.


120 D-I teams
Make 12 pools of 10 teams each.
Look back a given number of years that is thought to be
appropriate and match the teams in each pool as to
strength. This would make each pool competetive.
Pool play would make for 9 games.
For the 10th game, pools would be matched against each other,
based on a draw. #1 would play #1, #2 would play #2, etc.
For the 11th game, pools cross once again, with winners playing
winners and losers playing losers.
For the 12th game, pools cross once again, with winners
playing winners and losers playing losers. This stage of
the festivities will present a glitch because we have now
reached 3 teams. One will receive a bye. (See notes
below for byes and ties.)
The 13th game will be the "CHAMPIONSHIP ROUND" for each place,
1st through 10th, with places 1-5 coming from the right
(winners') side of the bracket and places 6-10 coming from
the left (losers') side of the bracket.
After all of this, the traditional bowls are held for the fun
that they were intended to be.

Notes:
Ties for spots within pools are determined thusly:
First tie-breaker = the LOSER in head-to-head. (This
makes much more sense than the winner, since the
loser's loss came against a better opponent.)
Second tie-breaker (AND: determiner for getting 12th
game bye) = greater/est improvement over previous
year's record.
Third tie-breaker = lower/est athletic budget.
Pools would be refigured based on records each X number
of years.
Home games for play-offs would be based on second and
third tie-breaker rules.
Conferences could still exist with their current
members. Many conferences don't have all of
their members playing each other anyway, so that
shouldn't be any big deal. At the end of the
season, the supporters of each conference
could brag about the records that their members
achieved without cutting down the number of wins
given away while beating up on each other.

VERY IMPORTANT NOTE: The author of this plan does not wish for it to be implemented. He wishes that we could just return to the days when each game was an enjoyable event in and of itself, conferences existed so that each team within that conference could play each other team in it, a conference championship was the goal of the season, and the bowls were played as a reward for a good season. He offers this only out of frustration with the whole play-off, gotta-have-a-CHAMPION fixation of which he is so fricking tired. He realizes that he is in a tiny minority (alone?) in his feelings, but he still likes to express them. Best to all, John
_________________________
Not a real member - just an ordinary guy who appreciates being able to hang around and say something once in awhile.

Right here is the SEC fan biggest scare in a nut shell and why they like the BCS polls. Its called a playoff system the NFL uses it every year and works great.

+1

Oregon 48 Tennessee 13

Like I said Garbage in Garbage out

Quite simply, I'd like to see the BCS stay in place to determine the rankings, but with one small change to the way the champ is decided ... If/when there is a discrepancy in determining who should be playing in THE game at the end, there should be a pseudo playoff of however many teams are in the mix ...

I am NOT in favor of a pre-set number of teams getting into a playoff tournament because I have never liked the idea of a cinderella story simply like what happens at times when a one-and-done playoff system is in place ...

Tennessee hasn't won but about 2 games this year. Auburn has beaten the following top 25 teams, Miss St, LSU, South Carolina, and Arkansas. Clemson and Kentucky were in the top 25 when they beat them. Auburn has gotten better as the year moved along. Hopefully they will get even better before season ends. They were jipped out of playing for the national championship in 2004 with a very good defence that year, and also a good offence. Oklahoma played instead and got trashed by USC. Auburn would have played better and at least made a game of it with their defence.

+1

UCLA 34 Texas 12

Any team that has worked hard all season long to prove they are the best should be worried about the inherent possibility of a fluke happening in a playoff system ...

I bet you do! most SEC fans love the BCS.