Congrats to the OU Sooners

[WA 2 FST]

While I am a UT fan, I still offer congrats to OU on edging out UT for the #2 BCS spot, thereby affording them a chance to play a major let-down of a Big 12 championship game against a completely undeserving Missouri team.

This will have to be the first time in history that the two teams playing in the Big 12 championship have both been beaten by the same opponent (UT).

Oklahoma played the tougher overall schedule (wins over #11 TCU and #13 Cincinnati), and is possibly hotter right now (not sure about that... Texas lost to Tech and then strummed Baylor and A&M as they should have), which is the only way I can see the computers giving them the edge.

While I think Florida is the best team right now, I think if they beat Alabama in the SEC Championship, it should be OU vs. Texas in a rematch for the National Championship. How can Florida jump an 11-win Texas team that they have been behind ALL season?

Or, if OU somehow slips up vs. Mizzou (highly unlikely), then Texas has to be playing for the title.

The Big 12 tie-breaker system completely screwed this up. Instead of letting the BCS poll _decide_ who the winner is, let the BCS poll _eliminate_ 1 of the 3 teams tied for the championship. That would be Tech. THEN let the two teams on the field _decide_ the winner... that would be Texas, who won the head-to-head matchup.

Best of luck to the Sooners, though. Awesome team, and certainly just as deserving as any of the other top 4 teams in the country to be playing for the championship.

[98Cobra]

Ou is one of the luckiest teams out there. Watching that OSU game - if a ball could take a bounce for OU, it did. Without some luck it could have been a very different outcome for OU.

I cant believe that Tech played only half a game against Baylor and didnt drop even one spot.

[WA 2 FST]

I hear ya. I watched the OSU - OU game, too, and OU did get a number of lucky bounces. However, OSU scored one TD right after they fumbled the ball away, but the refs gave it back to them. Still, OU was not dominant for the first 3 quarters of that game.

Tech... sorry fans, I have very little respect for them. If they play Texas _anywhere_, but Lubbock, they get beat by 3 TDs. And then they had to scrap to pull one out against Baylor. Baylor? C'mon. They're improving, but UT and OU wiped the floor with them.

I heard one AP voter say that he wouldn't vote Tech in his Top 25. He said that "any team that loses by 45 points has no business being in the Top 25." I guess his vote didn't count for much. But he has a point.

Assuming UT ends up #3 after next week, I'd sure like to see them play the loser of the 'Bama/Florida game. Would be a good game.

[98Cobra]

Heck, any team that gets blown out by 45 points at LEAST should fall out of the top 10.

My wife went to TCU - she was very disappointed that the loss to Utah in the final seconds of the game blew their BCS bowl chances yet again.

[fuzzie]

This whole BCS thing upsets me. So Leech worked for Stoops we all know that, but after the ass pounding loss OU gave Tech I'd say there was some bad blood between the two...........right..........???????? Leech voted OU over Texas. Then Leech goes on this Graduation trip which Tech was ahead of Texas in that aspect with OU coming in Dead Last. I'm confused on this idiots logic here. I agree with yall that the BCS should eliminate and no team that looses by 45 points should even be in consideration.............Sam Bradford has a bummed hand and Box is out. With a couple fumbles from Bradford and OU's defense weakend I wouldn't completly count Mizz out. Even though its a long shot I can dream cant I haha.....

[WA 2 FST]

While I do not like Mike Leach at all... if I were him, I'd vote OU over Texas. His team did beat Texas and got smoked by OU.

But TTU barely beat Nebraska, barely beat Baylor (two teams who are really pretty poor) and played over their head for one half and took a dropped interception by Texas at the end to pull off the upset of UT. Otherwise, they are not even in the discussion.

I wish Texas would get to play TTU in a BCS bowl game on a neutral site... and end the whining from Lubbock altogether.

[TP Derrick D]

All the top team got loss or close game or both, if you play top teams you're not going to blow everyone out. Yeah UT can play SMU,North Texas,Fla Int, Fla Atlantic or SW PoDunk U,SE PoDunk U every year out of conference and win but it will be held against them in the end. I got a plan that would show top team year to year as it stand now, only thing people hate change and fight change with lies & fear or use the "that want work" just to downplay it. I still would like to see 8-10 team playoff..the finally top 10 w/ the reg. season as the "playoff" to get to the "playoff" or "countdown" like NASCAR & NHRA.
The teams would play 7-8 conf. games as usual, BUT;
1.) The top BCS conf. teams (SEC, PAC10 ,Big10+1 ,Big12, Big East, & ACC)could only play each other for 3-4 out of conf games depending the number of conf. games played(ex: If TTU play 8 conf games, they could play 3 out of conf games againt BCS & 1 out of conf againt FBS. If a BCS school play 7 conf. games, they play 4 out of conf againt BCS & 1 against FBS(ex:7 conf games,Virgina Tech, Arizona,Tennesse,Minnesota,SW Lousiana
2) The BCS conferences can not play D-II schools, meaning Me-she-gan (-vs-) App State is out. This kills the "they didn't play tough out of schedule debate"
3) The FBS conf can play reg conf games and 3-4 games against BCS conf (The more games against BCS conf only showcase FBS school and strenght such as TCU,Boise State,Utah....and show if they belong or not. FBS conf can play other FBS schools or 1 D-II school also. (ex:TCU schedule would look like this: 7 conf games,LSU,Oregon,Boston College,Northwestern,App State
4)schedules made 3-4 years in advance, this also keep the best school from always scheduling current bad schools meaning Baylor might be good and at the top of Big 12 South in 4 years, USC may not be at the top of the PAC 10 in 4 years may be like the SEC with it constantly changing year to year.

Anyway it would go something kinda like that with a necessary tweek or two.

[WA 2 FST]

Derrick, you have some very good points in that plan there.

The problem with scheduling tough non-conference games every year is that they almost ALWAYS are played early in the season before the conf. schedule. ND playing USC last week is an anomoly. But if you're in a traditionally tough conference (SEC, Big 12, and usually the Big 10), then you have very little reason to schedule more than maybe one tough non-conf opponent...especially if you have to play them out of the gate. I know you already know all of this, but if you or I were an Athletic Director at a top school in the SEC with legitimate SEC championship title hopes and potentially BCS championship hopes, we wouldn't be scheduling OU, Texas, Penn State or USC in a non-conference game... certainly not 2 in the same season.

I realize Texas played a couple of weak teams at the beginning, but give me a break... they had the toughest 4-5 games in a row of ANY team in the country. Period. It was literally unprecedented in the history of the game, and that's not just me talking either, since I know what I say doesn't mean diddly. Now, they didn't win all those games, and if they had, this whole thing would be a moot point. They demolished Arkansas who didn't have a poor SEC season (average, I guess), but honestly would have finished down there with TAMU in the Big 12 south. It's too bad games against average SEC opponents hurt a team's strength of schedule. :icon_wink: But the reality is it did. Texas played Arkansas and Rice (who had an excellent season for them) and OU played TCU and Cincinnati.

Forgot you were a 'Bama fan. Should be a good game this weekend vs. UF.

[TP Derrick D]

Derrick, you have some very good points in that plan there.

The problem with scheduling tough non-conference games every year is that they almost ALWAYS are played early in the season before the conf. schedule. ND playing USC last week is an anomoly. But if you're in a traditionally tough conference (SEC, Big 12, and usually the Big 10), then you have very little reason to schedule more than maybe one tough non-conf opponent...especially if you have to play them out of the gate. I know you already know all of this, but if you or I were an Athletic Director at a top school in the SEC with legitimate SEC championship title hopes and potentially BCS championship hopes, we wouldn't be scheduling OU, Texas, Penn State or USC in a non-conference game... certainly not 2 in the same season.

I realize Texas played a couple of weak teams at the beginning, but give me a break... they had the toughest 4-5 games in a row of ANY team in the country. Period. It was literally unprecedented in the history of the game, and that's not just me talking either, since I know what I say doesn't mean diddly. Now, they didn't win all those games, and if they had, this whole thing would be a moot point. They demolished Arkansas who didn't have a poor SEC season (average, I guess), but honestly would have finished down there with TAMU in the Big 12 south. It's too bad games against average SEC opponents hurt a team's strength of schedule. :icon_wink: But the reality is it did. Texas played Arkansas and Rice (who had an excellent season for them) and OU played TCU and Cincinnati.

Forgot you were a 'Bama fan. Should be a good game this weekend vs. UF.

The out of conf schedule is all over the place, Alabama played their last out of conf the 10th game of season against Arkansas St that went 7-5 I believe. You made my point for me, sports world idiots are always debating the toughest conf(SEC top to bottom yearly) so having that many out of conf against conf thats as tough against teams thats as tough produce top games against top conf. You said UT played weak teams which is true as I stated, now if those games was against tougher teams in tougher conf they may be in the Big 12 champ. game. If they lose the tough games then they not the best team. OU got the benefit because of a tougher out of conf schedule so its basically the same as I was saying just drop the Po-Dunk U's and play the big boys, thats with anything. (Is a Vette doing anything by out running Civics & Neons? Hell nah....I started my Mustang just to out run Vettes) so if you can't play/run with the big dogs(tough out of conference games) stay on the porch and don't complaint when you get passed over for team that played tougher schedule. It would help with the conf -vs- conf debate, look @ USC, many say that they're the best team but because the PAC 10 is considered weak this year, USC is left out the mix. If they played 1 SEC,1 ACC,1 Big 12 & 1 Big 10 or keep the traditional ND game then they(USC) may be in better position. You see what happened to Alabama when they beat Clemson- the #1 team in the ACC @ the time, they jumped big time, then they beat Georgia #1 & an SEC power the week after, also beat SEC runner-up '07 in Tennesse, last year National Champion LSU,SEC power Auburn. I watch College Football Live everyday as I am right now and its always the same...some no nothing always posting some non-real comment about how bad a top power team or conf is and its usually coming from a rival or lesser(by record/ranking) teams fan/student..ex: someone just posted that "Flordia is not good, they haven't beat anybody" honestly I believe the conf-conf games on a rotating basis would help solve that debate, I say SEC, I'm sure you say Big 12, I say SEC top to bottom, you say Big 12 top 5 got higher rankings, I say SEC beat each other up top to bottom and Big 12 only got 5 nationally respected & decent teams(OU,UT,TTU,Mizzou,Neb) A&M hadn't been respectable since R.C. Slocum left, Baylor since Grant Teaff left, Colorado since mid '90s, Kansas St had a year or 2 a few years ago, Kansas ,this ain't basketball had a fluke year last year when they didn't have to play the Big 3 of the Big 12 so UT 4-5 game "tuff" schedule wasn't tough to SEC fans that see 6-7 tough games with an out of schedule tossed in there. Wouldn't you like to see SEC-vs-Big 10-vs-Big 12-vs-ACC-vs-Big East w/ ND tossed in tere as an independent and not wait for a bowl game if you lucky certain teams match up? I'd love to see 'Bama play UT,USC,Georgia Tech & Pittsburg along with the SEC schedule they played this year. Like I said tho, fear would keep something like that from happening,Check out College football's BIG, big dogs...they should play more against each other.
CHECK THIS OUT; FOUND IT EARLIER THIS FOOTBALL SEASON
Success of a college football program can be measured subjectively or through objective numerical criteria. Two numerical methods for determining college football's ten most victorious programs are the total number of wins the program has achieved, and their winning percentage over their history. These methods have the advantage that they rely on empirical numerical data. A disadvantage to these methods is that team schedules are not chosen randomly throughout the country and uneven competition faced by different teams could theoretically skew the results



[edit] Top ten programs through 2007 season

The Michigan Wolverines (in maize and blue at right) are the most victorious program by number of wins and winning percentage.[1]The following data was retrieved from the 2008 NCAA Division I Football Records Book compiled in August 2008 (prior to the start of the the 2008 season).[2] The table includes bowl and playoff games.[3]


[edit] By number of wins
Team Years Won Lost Tied† Pct. Total Games
Michigan 128 869 286 36 .745 1,191
Notre Dame** 119 824 278 42 .739 1,144
Texas** 115 820 316 33 .716 1,169
Nebraska 118 808 333 40 .701 1,181
Ohio State 118 798 304 53 .714 1,155
Penn State 121 789 347 41 .688 1,177
Alabama 113 787 314 43 .707 1,144
Oklahoma 113 779 295 53 .715 1,127
Tennessee 111 770 320 53 .697 1,143
Southern California 115 754 302 54 .704 1,110

**On November 27, 2008, Texas finished its regular season 11–1, bringing its overall win total to 831. Notre Dame compiled a 6–6 regular season record, increasing its win total to 830. Thus, Texas now holds the No. 2 spot as of the completion of the 2008 regular season.[4]


[edit] By winning percentage
Team Years Won Lost Tied† Pct. Total Games
Michigan 128 869 286 36 .745 1,191
Notre Dame 119 824 278 42 .739 1,144
Texas 115 820 316 33 .716 1,169
Oklahoma 113 779 295 53 .715 1,127
Ohio State 118 798 304 53 .714 1,155
Alabama 113 787 314 43 .707 1,144
Southern California 115 754 302 54 .704 1,110
Nebraska 118 808 333 40 .701 1,181
Tennessee 111 770 320 53 .697 1,143
Boise State‡ 40 327 143 2 .695 472

Notes:
† Tie games are calculated as half won and half lost. The tiebreaker rule became effective at the start of the 1996 season.[3]
‡ Boise State began FBS play in 1996.[3]



[edit] National championships

The University of Texas won their 800th game in the 2006 Rose Bowl, which also netted them a national championship.[5]Another way to rank programs is to look at which ones have the most most national championships. However, the top division of college football does not have an official championship. Instead, various publications, analysts, and scholars have identified championship teams over the history of college football. Some of these titles have been awarded retrospectively, and many seasons feature co-champions or competing claims to the title. The Bowl Championship Series attempts to solve this problem by having the two most highly-ranked teams play each other at the end of the season.[6] This has not eliminated controversy, however, since choosing the top two teams is still a largely subjective matter.[7] This has led the title of national football champion to be called a Mythical National Championship.

Team Championships Recognized by University Reference
Alabama 12 [8]
Notre Dame 11 [9]
Southern California 11 [10]
Michigan 9 [11]
Pittsburgh 9 [12]
Ohio State 7 [13]
Oklahoma 7 [14]
Michigan State 6 [15]
Minnesota 6 [16]
Tennessee 6 [17]
Miami 5 [18]
Nebraska 5 [19]
Texas 4 [20]


[edit] Sources and references
^ deleted due to size of post"


This page was last modified on 1 December 2008, at 22:22.

[Shiner1]

Being a fan of OU it does not break my heart to see that the sooners jumped the burnt orange pukes from the south but I have to say the system is screwed up. It has been for many years and it will continue to be that way as long as people/computers decide on who plays for a championship or decides who the champion is. When it's all said and done and the "BCS" champion is crowned the AP polls do not have to recognize that team as the national champion. So lets say that OU plays and beats Bama for the BCS title, each team has 1 loss. Texas gets an at large BCS bowl game and wins, it's very possible that the AP ranks Texas over OU in their final poll. CO-Champions..nice..:bs. To the powers that be...lets have a play-off and let the teams decide who the champ is not the Harris, AP, coaches or the computers... maybe Obama can fix it.:d

[dboat]

Good points.. let me make one... at least this was true a few years ago.. there was only one college coach with a winning record against top 20 teams during his tenure.. that coach was Barry Switzer... Fulmer at Tenn was in second place..

Dana

[Mark #2]

If Missouri wins, does Texas go to the big game?

[WA 2 FST]

Like I said Derrick, we've always agreed on a lot of points regarding college FB. It's fun to debate SEC vs. Big 12, but I'm sorry... this year there is no debate. UGA, LSU, Auburn, even Tenn... all way overranked at the beginning and they've proven it. The top 5 in the big 12 would beat all those teams handily... and the pollsters and Las Vegas agree, given where the teams are ranked.

I'm sorry, but saying UT's run of 4 teams ranked in the top 10 isn't a "tuff" schedule by SEC standards is just playing "homer."

At least I give credit where it is due in years where the SEC (or Big 10 or whoever) is a top conference. Dissing the Big 12 this year is just ridiculous.

Who is a legitimate top-10 team from the SEC outside of 'Bama and Florida? Nobody. They all need to go home and sit out the bowl games. The Big 12 has 3 in the top 8, and OSU sitting #4 in the Big 12 south would whip anyone in the SEC besides UF and 'Bama. Don't take my word for it... look at where they are ranked in the polls and BCS standings.

Slamming Texas b/c they didn't have a difficult non-conference schedule is a waste of time. Did OU schedule TCU and Cincinnati thinking they were going to be really good? Of course not. Did Alabama play anyone of substance outside the SEC?

Texas _tried_ to schedule a legitimate SEC team in Arkansas. Look what that got them. Well, Ark did beat LSU (defending nat'l champ... who cares? they obviously were WAY overrated this year), so I guess Texas isn't too bad.

The good thing about this year is it will be a quality BCS title game against two battle-tested teams. OU vs. UF/'Bama should be about as good of a game as we can ask for. USC and Penn St can sit it out and only wonder.

Enjoy the game this weekend. It should be a good one. :tu:

[WA 2 FST]

If Missouri wins, does Texas go to the big game?

I've heard that USC would jump them b/c they won their conference and Texas didn't. I find that hard to believe.

Honestly... I find it hard to believe that if Florida beats 'Bama they should jump Texas. Florida lost to Ole Miss. Who?? Texas lost to a top 7 team. Texas beat the #2 team. Florida, assuming they beat 'Bama would have beaten the #1 team. Texas gets screwed again if UF jumps them.

But yeah... if Mizzou beats OU, Texas has a shot.

[WA 2 FST]

Wouldn't you like to see SEC-vs-Big 10-vs-Big 12-vs-ACC-vs-Big East w/ ND tossed in tere as an independent and not wait for a bowl game if you lucky certain teams match up? I'd love to see 'Bama play UT,USC,Georgia Tech & Pittsburg along with the SEC schedule they played this year. Like I said tho, fear would keep something like that from happening,Check out College football's BIG, big dogs...they should play more against each other


_______

Derrick... you're right on the money here. Yes, I'd like to see, and you're right... no, it will never happen.

The bowls (which is the college post-season) make way too much $$ for the schools. No one will risk that by playing too many high-profile teams out of conference.

[Mark #2]

No college football expert here (I'm the NASCAR expert);)

In fact this is the first year I have really started following college football seriously.

I enjoy the games and players much more than the pros, I went through this same transition on enjoying college basketball games and players more than the pros ~10 years ago.

The stupid stuff that pro athletes are involved in is what has turned me off. Steroids, guns, fighting fans, fighting dogs, retiring and un-retiring over and over, refusing to play and sitting on the bench for $21M a year, and I could go on and on, they have no idea how fortunate they are.

[ZeusSVT]

I've heard that USC would jump them b/c they won their conference and Texas didn't. I find that hard to believe.

Honestly... I find it hard to believe that if Florida beats 'Bama they should jump Texas. Florida lost to Ole Miss. Who?? Texas lost to a top 7 team. Texas beat the #2 team. Florida, assuming they beat 'Bama would have beaten the #1 team. Texas gets screwed again if UF jumps them.

But yeah... if Mizzou beats OU, Texas has a shot.


Today on sportscenter they were talking about the possibliity of OU losing the game and Texas going on to the National Championship. Long shot considering how Mizzou has played as of late. BUT, if it were to happen, they said that the numbers aren't there computer wise for USC to possibly jump texas in the BCS rankings. Human polls it could happen but numbers on paper they said no. Man would it be a slap in the face if OU did lose and were Big 12 Champs, but UT was National Champion Contendors. :eek2: It's a slim chance, but I would love to see it happen.

Oh and the 9 1/2 point margin in the Bama/Florida game. I wonder how close of a game that one will really end up being. Should be a good weekend of football.

[TP Derrick D]

Like I said Derrick, we've always agreed on a lot of points regarding college FB. It's fun to debate SEC vs. Big 12, but I'm sorry... this year there is no debate. UGA, LSU, Auburn, even Tenn... all way overranked at the beginning and they've proven it. The top 5 in the big 12 would beat all those teams handily... and the pollsters and Las Vegas agree, given where the teams are ranked.

I'm sorry, but saying UT's run of 4 teams ranked in the top 10 isn't a "tuff" schedule by SEC standards is just playing "homer."

At least I give credit where it is due in years where the SEC (or Big 10 or whoever) is a top conference. Dissing the Big 12 this year is just ridiculous.

Who is a legitimate top-10 team from the SEC outside of 'Bama and Florida? Nobody. They all need to go home and sit out the bowl games. The Big 12 has 3 in the top 8, and OSU sitting #4 in the Big 12 south would whip anyone in the SEC besides UF and 'Bama. Don't take my word for it... look at where they are ranked in the polls and BCS standings.

Slamming Texas b/c they didn't have a difficult non-conference schedule is a waste of time. Did OU schedule TCU and Cincinnati thinking they were going to be really good? Of course not. Did Alabama play anyone of substance outside the SEC?

Texas _tried_ to schedule a legitimate SEC team in Arkansas. Look what that got them. Well, Ark did beat LSU (defending nat'l champ... who cares? they obviously were WAY overrated this year), so I guess Texas isn't too bad.

The good thing about this year is it will be a quality BCS title game against two battle-tested teams. OU vs. UF/'Bama should be about as good of a game as we can ask for. USC and Penn St can sit it out and only wonder.

Enjoy the game this weekend. It should be a good one. :tu:

I'm not dissing the Big 12 and not being a homer....the SEC is better than the Big 12 top to bottom.UT played a weak out of conf sched, thats a fact & it kept them out the conf champ game whether you believe it or not, I just know it, the BCS proved it by jumping them..just because a team score a few points don't make them a champ(ask Patriots) the same experts you quoted says the Big 12 offenses would have a hard time with SEC defenses and your assessment is exactly why the top teams & conf should play on a yearly basis as I stated earlier, Arkansas was a SWC team until they got smart and jumped to SEC so their game with UT was an old rivalry:D but thats good for them, wish SEC -vs-Big 12 every year/every other year on a rotating basis or twice in 3 years for home-in-home. By the way, the Big 12 is weak,if one loss means you're no good or not of substance ....why? maybe because OU owns the Big 12....UT gets 1 on them here and there, SEC has a different champ every year no more than 2 years running. Stoops got what 6 Big 12 in 10 years?, that leaves 4 for 11 other teams, well take out '06 for UT and thats 3 for 10 teams. And as for as polls & ranking , do you remember at the beginning of the season SEC had 6 teams ranked in the top 20 or 25 where they remained until the parity of the league started them falling, there is no parity in the Big 12, OU, UT & 1 other team, right now that 1 other team is TTU. So if 3 teams gets ALL the wins sure they will stay ranked high but those same teams may lose outside the Big 12 , look at what Flordia State was doing to the ACC until Virgina Tech, Boston College & Miami joined,FSU stopped dominating all the time and the ACC is more equal year to year, or what Miami was doing to the Big East before they joined the ACC, they not dominating like that anymore, but hey we can talk about it or be "homers" all we want ,unless its settled on the field its just that...yapping!!! It won't happen because of fear of change and college football most powerful conf year to year ...the SEC. 3 of 5 last championships,4 of last 10 & 6 of last 20,
the Big 12 won 2 of last 10 & 6 in last 20 if you count the ones Colorado & Nebraska won in the Big 8. During BCS years SEC has 4, Big 12 has 2.
http://www.rauzulusstreet.com/football/college/collegechampionship.htm

[WA 2 FST]

Derrick... good debate, and good arguments on your side (see... I'm being objective). I find it interesting that from your perspective the SEC has parity and the Big 12 is weak b/c only the top teams beat each other up. My perspective is that the SEC (this year) is full of mediocrity and the Big 12 has 3 dominant teams, which is evidenced by the fact Mizzou (who nearly played for the nat'l championship last year... since you've cited last year several times in your post referring to LSU who is a joke this year) and OSU both have a number of losses ... but all three of OSU's losses are to teams _currently_ ranked in the top 8. You say the Big 12 doesn't beat each other up... where did the top 3 teams get their losses from? Granted, it wasn't from the bottom-feeders, but the SEC has those too, or would you say that Kentucky is better than Baylor or TAMU. They aren't.

Frankly, I couldn't care less where teams are ranked at the beginning of the season. That's just "riding the coat-tails" as they say of what is _perceived_ to be a strong conference/team without them actually stepping on the field. (E.g.: UGA, Clemson, LSU, West Virginia... who were all in the top 10, I believe to start this year and 3 of them aren't even in the top 25 now).

Let's put past seasons to bed b/c no one, including me, is arguing about the strength of the SEC year in and year out. I'm talking about this year, and saying the SEC is stronger top-to-bottom or any other way doesn't play out according to the numbers.

Strength of Schedule: Texas 4, OU 1, Alabama 79 (LOL), Florida 12. UGA is 3, so they played some tough teams... and have 3 losses to show for it, while UT and OU have schedules just as tough and have 1 loss each.

BTW, you may know this, but I didn't until I did some more research on the computers in the BCS... Texas didn't get bumped b/c of their SOS (see above, it is barely below OU), but b/c OU got more credit for winning games later in the season. From what I have been reading/researching, the computers give more weight to games won in Nov than they do games won in Oct. I do understand the logic about giving preference to a hotter team, but that should be thrown out when head-to-head matchups take place. Anyway, the bottom line is that Texas seemed to get hurt more b/c of when they played and beat OU, than the fact they played some weaker out-of-conf. games.

I also took the time to see who Alabama played this year. I nearly fell out of my chair. Saying Texas played a weak schedule is saying Alabama got 4 wins by forfeit. :)

Clemson (ranked 52), Tulane (116), Western KY (120), Ark. St (99), while Texas played (Rice 49, Arkansas 57, UTEP 80 and FL Atl 89). Did Alabama even play their starters in 3 of those games?

I do think the SEC's divisions are more balanced right now. The east has Fla and UGA... after that you have no one in the division who would have finished ahead of #4 in the Big 12 south. The west has Bama and ??? ... a bunch of average teams (this year).

Ole Miss #2 in west and Vandy #3 in east would be #5 in Big 12 south and no better than #2 in Big 12 north. There are 3 teams ahead of them in the SEC (FLA, BAMA, UGA), but UT, OU, TTU, OSU and MIZZOU would all wipe them out.

Sure, everyone in the SEC beat each other up... b/c this year (and this year is not the norm) you had a lot of perennial quality teams end up not being very good at all (TENN, LSU, AUBURN... pitiful).

At the bottom of both conferences you have some poor teams... Big 12... Iowa St and TAMU. In the SEC... Kentucky and Miss St. Let's be honest... those 4 teams are terrible right now.

On another note, I'm surprised FLA is favored by 9+ over 'Bama. Wow. I know Las Vegas doesn't get it right all the time, but that doesn't show a lot of parity b/w the #1 and #2 teams in the same conference. Whereas if OU and UT were playing, the spread would most likely be 2-3 points max.

I know FLA is good... do you think 'Bama isn't getting any respect or what? They've done all they could do with the schedule they were dealt... 12-0!! Saban's done an incredible job so quickly. Really its amazing.

[TP Derrick D]

Derrick... good debate, and good arguments on your side (see... I'm being objective). I find it interesting that from your perspective the SEC has parity and the Big 12 is weak b/c only the top teams beat each other up. My perspective is that the SEC (this year) is full of mediocrity and the Big 12 has 3 dominant teams, which is evidenced by the fact Mizzou (who nearly played for the nat'l championship last year... since you've cited last year several times in your post referring to LSU who is a joke this year) and OSU both have a number of losses ... but all three of OSU's losses are to teams _currently_ ranked in the top 8. You say the Big 12 doesn't beat each other up... where did the top 3 teams get their losses from? Granted, it wasn't from the bottom-feeders, but the SEC has those too, or would you say that Kentucky is better than Baylor or TAMU. They aren't.

Frankly, I couldn't care less where teams are ranked at the beginning of the season. That's just "riding the coat-tails" as they say of what is _perceived_ to be a strong conference/team without them actually stepping on the field. (E.g.: UGA, Clemson, LSU, West Virginia... who were all in the top 10, I believe to start this year and 3 of them aren't even in the top 25 now).

Let's put past seasons to bed b/c no one, including me, is arguing about the strength of the SEC year in and year out. I'm talking about this year, and saying the SEC is stronger top-to-bottom or any other way doesn't play out according to the numbers.

Strength of Schedule: Texas 4, OU 1, Alabama 79 (LOL), Florida 12. UGA is 3, so they played some tough teams... and have 3 losses to show for it, while UT and OU have schedules just as tough and have 1 loss each.

BTW, you may know this, but I didn't until I did some more research on the computers in the BCS... Texas didn't get bumped b/c of their SOS (see above, it is barely below OU), but b/c OU got more credit for winning games later in the season. From what I have been reading/researching, the computers give more weight to games won in Nov than they do games won in Oct. I do understand the logic about giving preference to a hotter team, but that should be thrown out when head-to-head matchups take place. Anyway, the bottom line is that Texas seemed to get hurt more b/c of when they played and beat OU, than the fact they played some weaker out-of-conf. games.

I also took the time to see who Alabama played this year. I nearly fell out of my chair. Saying Texas played a weak schedule is saying Alabama got 4 wins by forfeit. :)

Clemson (ranked 52), Tulane (116), Western KY (120), Ark. St (99), while Texas played (Rice 49, Arkansas 57, UTEP 80 and FL Atl 89). Did Alabama even play their starters in 3 of those games?

I do think the SEC's divisions are more balanced right now. The east has Fla and UGA... after that you have no one in the division who would have finished ahead of #4 in the Big 12 south. The west has Bama and ??? ... a bunch of average teams (this year).

Ole Miss #2 in west and Vandy #3 in east would be #5 in Big 12 south and no better than #2 in Big 12 north. There are 3 teams ahead of them in the SEC (FLA, BAMA, UGA), but UT, OU, TTU, OSU and MIZZOU would all wipe them out.

Sure, everyone in the SEC beat each other up... b/c this year (and this year is not the norm) you had a lot of perennial quality teams end up not being very good at all (TENN, LSU, AUBURN... pitiful).

At the bottom of both conferences you have some poor teams... Big 12... Iowa St and TAMU. In the SEC... Kentucky and Miss St. Let's be honest... those 4 teams are terrible right now.

On another note, I'm surprised FLA is favored by 9+ over 'Bama. Wow. I know Las Vegas doesn't get it right all the time, but that doesn't show a lot of parity b/w the #1 and #2 teams in the same conference. Whereas if OU and UT were playing, the spread would most likely be 2-3 points max.

I know FLA is good... do you think 'Bama isn't getting any respect or what? They've done all they could do with the schedule they were dealt... 12-0!! Saban's done an incredible job so quickly. Really its amazing.

Com'on man, U making me LOL too with some of that stuff.... Fla Atl? .....a 5 year old program stronger than an SEC team....I see you don't get it, meaning if those same Big 12 teams played SEC teams they wouldn't be 11-1, that's why the SEC is given 2 losses as a strong season, and its 1 loss in other conf. Can't always go by record, Hawaii went 12-0 last year until a 2 loss Georgia got hold of them in Sugar Bowl. Utah & Bosie State is undefeated, think they would be in the Big 12? PAC 10? Big East? Stronger confs.. Look at LSU last year so if UT,OU & TTU or Mizzou played in a stronger conf they wouldn't be winning ALL the games all the time, that same thing hurt USC, I'm just stating the obvious & backed up by the 10's of analyst on TV. By the way Kentucky & Vandy was ranked several weeks this year so yeah they better than Baylor & Tx A & M as is Tenn, (Tenn losing as much was a shock, even got coach fired)Georgia,Auburn, South Carolina,Alabama,Fla,& LSU so thats 9 of 12 teams that was ranked at some time during the season. Arkansas fell down with change of coach Houston Nutt that went to Ole Miss. Ole Miss, Miss. St. & Vandy are only yearly bottom feeders with 2-3 good years out of 10 tossed in. Ole Miss is on the rise for first time since Eli Manning won 10 games there. So how many of the Big 12 teams even sniffed the rankings this year? OU,UT,Mizzou,Kansas,TTU... is 5 right? Like I said SEC stronger top to bottom, yes this year also...3 teams win em all, it is what it is. When Big 12 get at least 8 of their teams respectable let me know....8 teams, Thats parity ,LOL, SEC had that many go to bowl games last year. oh by the way when I say ranked I use it because somebody that does the rankings thought enough of the team to have them ranked as 1 of the best 25 at that given time. So if it'll make you feel better; This year the Big 3, I mean Big 12 got 3 teams in the top 10 at the end of their no parity season & the SEC had 5 teams in the opening top 10 poll but due to a stronger SEC conf w/ parity they beat each other up and their ranking drop but that don't mean they can't beat higher ranked out of conf teams that's in a weaker conf. :D OK ,I said it, that should make you feel better.:tu:

[WA 2 FST]

Never said FL ATL was stronger than an SEC team. They are stronger than Ark St, which is what I referenced above.

As far as pre-season rankings... that's just based on past history... not THIS season. I'm not debating past history, Derrick. Frankly it means nothing right now, but I wouldn't debate it anyway... I'd be agreeing with you.

If you're ranked in the pre-season or early in the season and you drop out by the end of the year... then you weren't as good as everyone _thought_ you would be, and you should be embarrassed. Period. That is not debatable, unless you're looking through a rose-colored (I mean crimson colored) pair of glasses. The fact that the SEC had 7 teams ranked at one time or another is not a strong argument. It just means they weren't as good as everyone thought at the beginning.

Yes, TTU, MIZZOU and OSU would beat anyone in the SEC except the top-2. BCS computers say so, as do the pollsters. End of story.

Good luck to 'Bama this week. Whoever loses that game falls out of the top 5, and they should. Couldn't beat OU, Texas, USC and probably not Penn State either.

I do get it... and I believe that UT, OU, TTU and OSU would have strong competition with FL and 'Bama this year... other than that, the SEC would get whipped. Just my opinion, and this year the analysts, "experts", pollsters and BCS computers agree.

This year top to bottom the SEC is not nearly as strong as it has been. Claiming that Tenn, Vandy, Kentucky, Miss St, Arkansas, S Car, Auburn or LSU could compete with the top 3-4 in the Big 12 is laughable. The vaunted programs of Tenn, Auburn and LSU took a mighty fall this year and they did it way before playing each other.

Parity = mediocrity.

And there's no denying that really tough non-conference schedule 'Bama played. :rll:

I'm sorry I even bother. I've acknowledged the quality arguments you make, and you just spit it back in my face. :rolleyes: I'm done. As always you're free to get the last word in, and as always I'm sure you'll take it.

[TP Derrick D]

Wes,
Com' on man, I'm not trying to get the last word or spit anything in your face. You & I have had several good back & forths the past couple years. If I remember correctly last year one was about college football and we were talking about the Big 12 & Bayor's new coach, Houston being considered a "small" school & blue chip recruits among other things so I always talk back & forth with you because you are knowledgeable, I thought you knew that.
I also remember during that post we were talking about ND, Michigan & Ohio St and you mentioned the weak conference the Big 10 was with only Michigan & Ohio St winning & ocassionally Penn State. So when these teams (Ohio State) even(Oklahoma) go to bowl games and play the SEC teams they lose because they play weaker teams, in a weaker conf and when they play teams that play tough teams all year, those teams are "battle" tested and ready for teams from other confs. I never said TTU,OU,OSU & UT wasn't good teams. They are, I said the Big 12 is not tough top to bottom and if those 4 teams played in a tough conf top to bottom they would face less chance of going 11-1. Right now the PAC 10 is weak except USC, so USC goes 11-1, 12-0 every year, remember the 70's '80's? The PAC 10 was way tougher with Washington, Washington St, Arizona St, Cal, even Stanford took turns winning the conf and going to the Rose bowl. I too watch every show I can, Mike & Mike, Inside College Football, College Game Day, ESPN you name it I watch it, so I see those same experts saying what I said, even today one show was talking about lack of defense in the Big 12. Com'on man, 65-60 football scores? no defense, those are college b-ball scores. We both have strong opinions about it and probably hear what we want too. I only post about things I can talk about because I'm knowlegeable about it, I don't post about things I have no clue about and its quite a few things on here I don't have a clue about,football is not of of those things, anyway, not doing any of they things you said ,I was only responding. we cool:cool:
Go Army!!! Beat Navy!!

[98Cobra]

I was reading about USC's win over Washington St around Halloween. Final was like 66-3 or something. The article mentioned that Washington St. (at time of writing) had the second worst ranked defense in the country. The worst ranked? North Texas. LOL.

[L8 APEX]

OU is mopping up, not even a half a match up.

Florida had more of a fight with Bama that I expected:tu:

poor Texas, they got hosed this year BCS computer scoring blows...

[WA 2 FST]

Derrick... thanks for the post. I wholeheartedly respect your opinion on CFB (and tried to convey that several times), and appreciate your respect of mine.:tu:

All this talk about the SEC defenses. Bama gave up 31 to a team that runs the option, and some form of the old Single-wing or Wing T... the friggin' option? Yeah FLA throws it a little, but doesn't have the offense that UT, OU, or TTU have. No way on earth the #2 team in the SEC holds any of the top 3 Big 12 schools under 45. 'Bama might score more than 20 on them, but their defense would get pummeled... like most other Big 12 opponents against those 3.

This was my entire argument. If the best schools in the SEC play against a quality offense, they will give up points. That doesn't mean they are bad. Just means they played teams in their own conferences with lousy offenses.

Should be UT and OU in the title game for a rematch, but that wouldn't be any fun. That game was already played, and the best team at the time (maybe not now) won.

OU and Florida should be a good title game, though.

Too bad the other games are all going to be screwed up. USC vs. Penn State in the Rose will be a traditional showdown, but other than that, I am betting we'll all be a little disappointed in the matchups.

Too bad UT and 'Bama can't/won't play. No, UT will get to play Utah or someone like that... with really nothing to play for. If they beat Utah, who cares? If they lose to Utah, then they will look like OU did against Boise State.

Win or lose, you'd rather play against a good team. If they can do #1 vs. #2, at least entertain us with #3 vs. #4.

[TP Derrick D]

Sorry this is late, been a bad week, sick kid (my grandson) with pnemonia & asthma, mom had neck surgery in Alabama and sick 2-3 days afterwards, Christmas tree, yard lights, doing Christmas cards, having the roofers remove our hail damaged roof and put a new one on then strong winds blew off several of the new shingles and/or had them flapping in the wind and the bad news of all my brother-in-law BJ( he went to Lfest 1 & 2 with me) wife passed away after several years of fighting cancer. So its been sadness & concerns for me since my last post , just didn't want you to think I got lost after the Bama/Fla game, other stuff was just more important. Anyway 'Bama lost so the Gators are going to BCS championship game. As far as the other stuff, everyone thinks their conf. is the best. LOL...even voters for the Heisman was jacked up. Not saying Bradford didn't deserve it, they all did, so I had no problem with who won, just the way the vote panned out.....south for Tebow with most 1st place votes, SW for Bradford, so that shows that voters like fans are "homers" as well. Everyone thinks they have the best. Fla is favored due to the defense of OKie. Fla has faced 8 of the top 30 defenses in the country by in playing in the SEC, Okie's toughest D was against #66. Wes I see you wished 'Bama & 'Horns could play, me too, that's one reason in my plan I had, the big dogs would play each other more often in reg season and not just by chance in a bowl game. This will be the first ever game between Fla/Ok and together the schools have played over 2,000 games, there's only 119 D-1A schools:confused:

[WA 2 FST]

Derrick,

Hope your family is on the mend, my friend. That's what is most important.

Should be a good nat'l champ. game with OU and FLA at full strength (Murray and Harvin will be ready). You never know what a month layoff can do, but that's the fault of the system, not the schools playing.

May be a classic Off vs. Def battle, but I think FLA's O is better than people thing, and I think the Okie's D is better than it looks, too. In FLA's case, when you play against good defenses, your offense doesn't look as good, and in OU's case, when you play against the best offenses in the nation, your D doesn't look at good, either.

[L8 APEX]

Damn, that is a lot of family stuff going on there TP... Keep your head up and holler if you need anything:tu:

[dboat]

And why didnt the BCS guys have Bama play TU? arent they the ones that set this whole thing up? I dont get that..that would have made for a second "must see" game for me.. someone please explain that one:confused:

Dana

[ZeusSVT]

And why didnt the BCS guys have Bama play TU? arent they the ones that set this whole thing up? I dont get that..that would have made for a second "must see" game for me.. someone please explain that one:confused:

Dana


Number 1 and number 2 of course play for the National Championship. But number 3 and number 4 can't play against each other. Why is beyond me, I wish there was a better reasoning for it. It's probably the same people that created this BCS computer crap that created that retarded rule as well. None of it ever makes sense. :hammer:

**Coming from a disgruntled UT Fan** :evil

[dboat]

Number 1 and number 2 of course play for the National Championship. But number 3 and number 4 can't play against each other. Why is beyond me, I wish there was a better reasoning for it. It's probably the same people that created this BCS computer crap that created that retarded rule as well. None of it ever makes sense. :hammer:

**Coming from a disgruntled UT Fan** :evil

why cant 3 play 4? who knows the answer? it would make for a great game and a lot of interest..
Dana

[WA 2 FST]

It was just announced that DeMarco Murray will miss the BCS Champ game. That's their best kick/punt returner and best halfback. That will hurt them for sure.

[dboat]

It was just announced that DeMarco Murray will miss the BCS Champ game. That's their best kick/punt returner and best halfback. That will hurt them for sure.

not good news. :(

[Ohmsby]

A playoff system would be welcomed by all

[Shiner1]

A playoff system would be welcomed by all


:tu:

[tiffo60]

how can you do a playoff with 111(if this is accurate) D1 schools out there?

[WA 2 FST]

how can you do a playoff with 111(if this is accurate) D1 schools out there?

There are 119 D1 schools, I believe.

They do it in basketball. They do it in D1-AA, D2, and D3 football, basketball, baseball, hockey, soccer, etc.

The only thing holding it all back is the almighty $$ in conjuction with the bowl system. As crazy as this may sound, the poor economy may help get us a playoff. If less companies can sponsor these huge payouts for all these bowl games, then maybe the # of bowl games will shrink, OR (even better) the payout will be significantly less... so that it will make just as much _financial_ sense to have a playoff as it does _common_ sense.

TD has a good plan, and to me anything is better than nothing. If its a Top-8 according to the polls+computers, that would be good enough for me. If you're #9, too bad/so sad. At least you weren't #3 or #4 like has been the case this year and the last few years. If you're #9 or #10, then you didn't deserve to be playing for the championship anyway.

[Shiner1]

As long as computers or humans (non-players) decide who plays...it's wrong. Take all D-1 teams and put them in a conference. (12 conf should do it) If you don't want to join a conference..NOTRE DAME!! then you don't get a shot at the champ. Then EVERYONE has a conf championship game. When it's all said and done put a playoff bracket together with the conference winners. There could be several venues around the country to hold the tourny (just like the NCAA B-Ball tourny) and alternate the champ game amoung the bigger bowls.

[WA 2 FST]

The only thing wrong with this plan (just my $.02) is that you would eliminate a lot of good teams who didn't win their conference. Basically, if you lose 1 conference game early in the season, you're quite possibly done. The Big 12 has 3 teams deserving to be in the top 8, the SEC has 2 (this year, but often 3). I would not want to see Cincinnati or BYU or someone else playing in the top 8-12.

And if you don't do conferences by region, then costs go up significantly due to travel.

I say let's get rid of the conference champ. games, take the top 8-16/whatever and have them play it out. The human polls/computers won't be leaving anyone out who truly deserves a shot at the prize with this many teams in the playoffs.

[Shiner1]

Good points Wes. My only issue with the top 8 theory that others have suggested is that we are back to the humans or computers who decide who plays. If thats the case I think you have to expand it to the top 16 or so as you brought up. I think you need the long shots in there to keep it interesting. My favorite part of March Madness is to see how far some of those lower seeds can go.

[WA 2 FST]

I'm right there with you on the March Madness thing. That's what makes CBB so much fun to watch. The biggest difference if you expand it too much is that you can only play 1 football game per week.

However, D2 and D3 all have 16-team playoff format systems. But they typically only play 10-11 regular season games. Less reg. season games wouldn't have any affect on the 16 teams who make it, but for those who don't, it hurts them financially. So maybe one way around that is to let the lesser bowls take teams out of the top 16 and let them play, alongside the championship series.

But I think if they ever do a 16-team system, that they would have to eliminate conf. champ. games and probably 1 game off everyone's reg. season schedule.

[TP Derrick D]

I follow and study this stuff like I'm preparing for a real admission test to Phd school- of- know- a -lot. Yeah, its true that a lot of it has to do with the bowl system, and that's straight from several school prez/AD's as seen on several of the many sports shows I watch. The playoffs would resolve all the human guessing, playing favorites & homer issues. WIN IT ON THE FIELD!! The so called better team lost? Oh well, you had a chance. Right Patriots? A playoff would also include the "smaller" non-BCS schools and give them a chance to win instead of just assuming the "big" well known football power BCS schools will automatically win, just ask the Sooners against Boise State couple years ago. A lot of the problem along with the bowls, is the BCS itself. Before it existed schools weren't left out as unworthy. just look at what happened to the SWC, gone,in comes the Big 12 when the SWC & Big 8 merge and then they boot the "smaller", unworthy, so to speak, schools. Before the SWC went away it was pretty good or at least 1-2 teams didn't just dominate with 1 team being the most dominate like in the Big 12, until this year. At least in the SWC TCU, Houston, Baylor & Arkansas gave UT & TA&M all they could handle and took turns winning the SWC. (I know this may be before a lot of you guys time) Now recruits want to go to the "big" schools because whats in it for them such as on TV, ESPN highlites & NFL. Luckily, some low level blue chips & more 2nd tier players are not flocking to the "big" schools to sit on bench. (Jevan Snead behind Colt McCoy & that Mitch Mustain kid behind Casey Dick @ Arkansas) so the "smaller" schools are able to compete a little better now. I personally wish they would cut the # of scholarships from 85 to 65-70,that way more of the blue chip won't/can't always go to UT but also Baylor,TCU,Houston,TT,etc. I know TCU & Baylor is private religious schools but you know what I'm saying. I have always liked the "underdog" so leaving a school like Bosie State, TCU or BYU out because they not in BSC is wrong to me. BYU won the national championship in 1984. Anyway, I said it before and I'll say it again...CHANGE!!!....people are scared of change!!!, they get stuck in their old a$$ outdated ways, then find all kind of excuses not to change, it happens in everyday life & it happens in sports as well.

[TP Derrick D]

I'm right there with you on the March Madness thing. That's what makes CBB so much fun to watch. The biggest difference if you expand it too much is that you can only play 1 football game per week.

However, D2 and D3 all have 16-team playoff format systems. But they typically only play 10-11 regular season games. Less reg. season games wouldn't have any affect on the 16 teams who make it, but for those who don't, it hurts them financially. So maybe one way around that is to let the lesser bowls take teams out of the top 16 and let them play, alongside the championship series.

But I think if they ever do a 16-team system, that they would have to eliminate conf. champ. games and probably 1 game off everyone's reg. season schedule.

One thing you got to remember with B-ball is the number of teams is 64 now up from 32, the football playoffs would take forever at 1 game a week, b-ball is 2 a week in the opening rounds and get farther apart as the teams fall out. B-ball also has the NIT for the teams that didn't make the 64 of the NCAA march madness. They could make a football playoff work with the current # of games, include the bowls based on level like it is now, the Alamo Bowl is not a BCS bowl so why not use it for 2 teams that's ranked low just like now, use the BCS bowls on a rotating system just like now, only add a rotation inside a rotation...confused? example..this year the championship will be in the Orange Bowl, next year its ???, that don't change, but use the bowls to rotate by seed each year, this year #1 & #8 play in the Fiesta,#2 & #& play in Sugar....on thur Rose & Orange,...next year it rotate #1 & #8 in the Sugar 2 & 7 in Rose, etc, I wouldn't mind if the 2nd tier bowls like Cotton,Gator was included so they could make some $$$ also, you know the lower bowls would be more accepting if they was included sometimes or was ensured they didn't lose money.

[WA 2 FST]

Yeah, I'm in total agreement here...and was thinking/promoting things along the same lines. It may just not have come out that way. LOL

You're exactly right... you can only play 1 football game per week, therefore you can't have an unlimited # of teams in the playoffs. That's one reason I said 8 max originally, and referenced the D2 and D3 playoffs (who have 16-team playoffs) only having a 10-11 game reg. season vs. 12+ for D1 CFB teams.

Rotating the bowls is fine with me, but I don't have any $$ in the game, so to speak, so I could see how the "bigger" bowls with the most tradition would balk at this notion. Right now the Championship game only rotates b/w 4 bowls, right? If you have an 8-team playoff using the top bowls, then that is 7 bowls included and mean more bowls would be in the rotation. Lots of politics involved unfortunately.

[TP Derrick D]

Ran across this by accident.

A College Football Playoff?
Every year thousands of NCAA division one football players shed blood, tears, and sweat with the goal of reaching a championship bowl game. Unfortunately, roughly half of all of these football players never make it close to contention for one of the top four prestigious bowls that make up the Bowl Championship Series. This series was created to ensure a true national championship game and place all the major conference champions in major bowls. At the same time, all small conference schools are faced with the predicament of playing in lesser bowls in the end of the season regardless of the level of success they attain. The national television exposure and the millions of dollars that come with a major bowl are taken away due to the size of a school. Non-BCS conference schools are subjected to deficits in spending and cannot recruit the best players, leaving them on an uneven playing field. These small schools deserve an equal opportunity at playing in major money making bowls and the national exposure that comes along with it. There should be a post season playoff for NCAA division one football.
With more than one hundred colleges participating in division one football every year, the NCAA was facing many problems regardi

. . .
A team from outside the six could theoretically play its way in, but in practical terms doing so would be nearly impossible (Suggs “Members” 1).


A playoff post season addresses all issues regarding the national championship game and disparity not only on the field, but more importantly financially on campus. With more money at stake, playoff consideration is affected by growing greed among schools. So in 2001, changes were made to the formula. But at least every regular-season game still matters under this plan, which makes it a good thing (Dienhart and Huguenin 38). Notre Dame, the nation’s most popular[. Small schools would have an equal opportunity at major bowls with a playoff. ], schedule strength and team record (Dienhart and Huguenin 38).


In NCAA basketball, there is a playoff for the purpose of creating an even playing field and encouraging parity. [Congress] criticized the way the series rewards institutions in the Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pacific-10, and Southeastern Conferences and not colleges in the five other conferences in Division 1-A (Suggs “Members” 1). “‘Unlike college basketball, this strengthens the value of the regular season,’ says Kramer, the SEC commissioner” (Dienhart and Huguenin 38).

Common topics in this essay:
Southeastern Conferences, Sports Leisure, Notre Dame, Championship Series, Dienhart Huguenin, Southeast Conference-receive, Series BCS, Mike Tranghese, , II III, post season, dienhart huguenin 38, dienhart huguenin, division football, huguenin 38, conference schools, barrett 55, major bowls, national championship, dienhart 1, bowl championship series, east ten 12, national championship game, major conference, maisel et al,

See the rest of the paper. Join Now!
Approximate Word count = 1319
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)

Already a member? Click here

Click here to Join Now!
by: Credit Card Click here to Join Now!
by: Online Check Click here to Join Now!
by: Phone 1-900




CREDIT CARD ONLINE CHECK



JOIN BY PHONE







Get immediate access to over 100,000
high quality term papers and essays!!!

Webmasters make $$$!




All papers are for research and references purposes only!
Copyright (c) 2001-2008 Mega Essays LLC
All rights reserved. DMCA NEW

[dboat]

Term papers for sale.. you gotta love America..

Dana