Playing? That's not what is being questioned. It's the lack or equal opportunity to play the games that is an issue. The fact that 6 conferences control all the money.

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

There shouldn't be equal oppertunity because the 5 BCS conferences have so much better teams. The other teams are called mid major for a reason.

Exactly! That's the point of playing the game!

Who decides which teams are more or less equal. Does a vote decide it? Does bias based on past performance decide it? Since teams play almost 75% of their games in conference & rarely challenge themselves out of conference, there is very little basis for deciding who is better than whom.

That's why there is a need for a play-off system to which all teams & conferences have equal access. Let it be decided on the field.

Correction: There are SIX BCS conferences - whether you like it or not.

But a 8-3 from one of the 5 BCS conferences should get in over a 10-1 team from a mid major (the Big East, for example).

Ignorance persists. ::) There are 6 BCS conferences.

Of couse, at-large bids won't matter in a truly national tournament. If all conference champions are invited, then everyone ultimately has access to show what they can do on the fiels. If some conferences are favored with a second or third team, I have no problem with that, regardless of who they are or what conference they come from.

It should be the top 8 or 16 teams from the average of the coaches poll and the media poll.

Who cares if you're the conference champ from a mid major like the Sun Belt or Big East?

Bisonfan, I'd have no problem with that. It would be a huge improvement over the current system. With 16 teams, anyone who could conceivably have a shot at the title would be there.

Moved to BCS Banter Forum: 1/4/2004

_________________


@ncaasports csi.com/facebook


Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.

Whow! No post since this thread has changed forums. We will have to change that.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but not everyone who writes a sports column, or host a sports talk show, gets to vote in the AP poll. Therefore, the poll is by defination, limited. How hard would it be for the BCS to ask journalist to vote in their BCS poll. I believe that most would consider it an honor. It would replace both the AP and Coaches poll for the BCS, and be run by their (BCS) rules. That poll could easily become one of, if not the most respected polls. Problem solved.

Now if you want a play-off, that is a different matter. First, you have to overcome NCAA rules. The NCAA could do that tomorrow if it wanted to, but it would take a vote by the school presidents, and they apparently do NOT want a play-off. Therefore the discussion, as I see it, is how to bring the presidents slowly around the idea. Any ideas?

FBfan

<<Now if you want a play-off, that is a different matter. First, you have to overcome NCAA rules. The NCAA could do that tomorrow if it wanted to, but it would take a vote by the school presidents, and they apparently do NOT want a play-off. Therefore the discussion, as I see it, is how to bring the presidents slowly around the idea. Any ideas?>>

Let them keep on the current track. They will start killing the bowls who will then push them for a playoff. Having the piggy-back championship game the next week will hurt not just the first game at the site, but will also shift emphasis off New Year's Day. The fixed conference alignments (for example: #3 Big 10 vs. #2 P10 every year) already are hurting some of the bowls.

They keep tweaking the BCS and keep coming up with more controversy. And it is likely to really get controversial w/o the AP poll. So their credibility has been hurt.