Go Vote for the Vols!

#26
#26
Since Tennessee almost beat LSU, does this poll also reflect that most people think that OSU will beat LSU?
 
#28
#28
jakez4ut said:
i did, and it's not that i don't want to see those games played.

it's the methodology at which the teams were selected.
Click to expand...
Try looking at it from a completely different perspective....

If you peel the bracket away from those matchups, what do you have? A bowl season with no conference tie ins.

So, play those, let the pollsters have another go with those results, then play another set the next week, 'til you land in one championship bowl.

Without conference intervention in bowl eligibility, the bowl system would be miles more appealing.
 
#29
#29
orange+white=heaven said:
Try looking at it from a completely different perspective....

If you peel the bracket away from those matchups, what do you have? A bowl season with no conference tie ins.

So, play those, let the pollsters have another go with those results, then play another set the next week, 'til you land in one championship bowl.

Without conference intervention in bowl eligibility, the bowl system would be miles more appealing.
Click to expand...
i would agree with that.

but my biggest issue with any 16 team playoff that is the result of the BCS rankings is that it renders regular season games played between it's contestants in head to head matchups meaningless.

i absolutely cannot stand the thought of the loser of these big games thru out the reg. season sluffing it off because they still get in the playoffs at the end with a chance at a national title.

we beat GA, GA didn't even play for the conf. title, but no matter, they're in the national title picture because the polls say they are. FL throttled us and we lost the Conf. title game......no matter, we did "just enough" to still have a shot at the national title? why should the possibility exist for FL have to play us again or for us to play GA again or FL and LSU to play each other again or LSU and VT again?

what was the point of playing them in the first place then?

i will just always maintain that the integrity of the regular season being as important as it is now is the best part of college football and it will always out weight any possible gain from a 16 team playoff determined by the same process that we all despise now.

gimmie a plus one and be done with it.
 
#30
#30
jakez4ut said:
i would agree with that.

but my biggest issue with any 16 team playoff that is the result of the BCS rankings is that it renders regular season games played between it's contestants in head to head matchups meaningless.

i absolutely cannot stand the thought of the loser of these big games thru out the reg. season sluffing it off because they still get in the playoffs at the end with a chance at a national title.

we beat GA, GA didn't even play for the conf. title, but no matter, they're in the national title picture because the polls say they are. FL throttled us and we lost the Conf. title game......no matter, we did "just enough" to still have a shot at the national title? why should the possibility exist for FL have to play us again or for us to play GA again or FL and LSU to play each other again or LSU and VT again?

what was the point of playing them in the first place then?

i will just always maintain that the integrity of the regular season being as important as it is now is the best part of college football and it will always out weight any possible gain from a 16 team playoff determined by the same process that we all despise now.

gimmie a plus one and be done with it.
Click to expand...

I see your point, but if we ever want an undisputed champ that no body can bitch about, we need a playoff. I think the rematches look awesome in the grander scheme of things. There is nothing like a little redemption. No need to wait til next season for some.
 
#31
#31
jakez4ut said:
i absolutely cannot stand the thought of the loser of these big games thru out the reg. season sluffing it off because they still get in the playoffs at the end with a chance at a national title..
Click to expand...

I'm not in total agreement with the concept of a diminished regular season.

One, the conference title will always be a team's number one goal.

Two, there are not enough games available to take one off and finsh the season highly ranked.

Three, a national championship is a postseason award.

I respect your stand, goodness knows it is a popular one. I don't see a postseason playoff as being quite so detrimental as you. But in the whole you have valid concerns...
 
#32
#32
rpvol said:
I see your point, but if we ever want an undisputed champ that no body can bitch about, we need a playoff. I think the rematches look awesome in the grander scheme of things. There is nothing like a little redemption. No need to wait til next season for some.
Click to expand...
agree to disagree.

realistically in most years there's 3-6 teams with a legit shot at the national title. there is absolutely no reason to have this large a playoff field when you have so many games during the regular season that pick off the pretenders and expose the contenders.

if you really want to change something, what should be changed is how all conferences, competing for the same national title, determine their confercne champions.
 
#33
#33
orange+white=heaven said:
I'm not in total agreement with the concept of a diminished regular season.

One, the conference title will always be a team's number one goal.

Two, there are not enough games available to take one off and finsh the season highly ranked.

Three, a national championship is a postseason award.

I respect your stand, goodness knows it is a popular one. I don't see a postseason playoff as being quite so detrimental as you. But in the whole you have valid concerns...
Click to expand...
only if you make that a qualifier for said playoff.

cause i would show you the NCAA basketball season as exhibit A as to how important conf. titles are relative to post season tourney play. no one really cares who won what conference in basketball (in the power conferences), and over enough time, no one would care about winning the conf. in football either if you got booted in the playoff, dare i say, it might get to the point where sesons like that could be construed as "failures".

the NFL is another example, does anyone care who won the AFC or NFC if they don't win the superbowl? what about who won their respective divisons?

i appreciate your comments OWH, and i truly do believe that if we went to a BCS rankings based 16 team playoff, college football would suffer during the regular season.
 
#34
#34
jakez4ut said:
agree to disagree.

realistically in most years there's 3-6 teams with a legit shot at the national title. there is absolutely no reason to have this large a playoff field when you have so many games during the regular season that pick off the pretenders and expose the contenders.

if you really want to change something, what should be changed is how all conferences, competing for the same national title, determine their confercne champions.
Click to expand...

That is something I agree with whole heartedly. I still think a playoff could be incorperated in even with that happening as well. Maybe not a 16 team playoff, but an 8 team with a play in game for the weaker conferences or Div. II. It could work. I hope the mess we have this year will move us closer to that, but in reality if it was to move us closer to anything it would probably be the plus one. I am not holding my breath for either though. I would definately take the plus one over what we have now for sure.
 
#35
#35
i guess as someone that has been a CFB fan for 30 years, and seeing where we've come from where we were, i like the fact that a lot of the old barriers were torn down in regards to the bowls, and the prognositcation and conjecture and bragging rights that this system provides for its fans is second to none.

OWH brought up the conf. tie ins, and that's still a valid point to a degree, but w/out the BCS we don't get Miami/OSU, USC/TX, OU/LSU etc....you don't get FL/OSU or LSU/OSU either.

i think one of the tragic parts of the BCS that still does exist from the old bowl system is in the other BCS Games. even w/out a plus one, there's no way USC/Ill shold be a BCS game. No way WVU/KS should be a BCS game. No way GA/HA should be a BCS game.

this is where you lose the "matchups" that OWH spoke of, and i agree with that whole heartidly. there are 5 BCS games, a total of 10 teams are going to play in, and you have to be in the top 12 to be eligible. 2 of which are autmatically put in the title game. so you are left with 10 teams and 4 bowl games. 2 teams are going to get screwed. it may be because you're the 3rd team of a BCS conf and aren't eligible, ok. but what it's really designed to do is to give the remaining BCS games choices as to who they want. and those choices widen if a BCS champ is ranked outside the top 12.

take this year.....OSU/LSU are in title game. both conf. champs.

VT, USC, OU and WVU are all in as conf. champs. what's left to choose from for the bowls are the following teams: GA, MO, KS, HA, ASU and FL. once the bowls start picking in their pre determined order, where a team is ranked has no real bearing. if that were the case, KS would be going to Dallas and MO would be in Miami.

anyway......
 
#39
#39
jakez4ut said:
i would agree with that.

but my biggest issue with any 16 team playoff that is the result of the BCS rankings is that it renders regular season games played between it's contestants in head to head matchups meaningless.

i absolutely cannot stand the thought of the loser of these big games thru out the reg. season sluffing it off because they still get in the playoffs at the end with a chance at a national title.
Click to expand...
Division 2 has a playoff and it does not diminish the regular season games one bit. This is because the higher seed is rewarded with home field or a bye in the playoffs which is a huge reward.
 
#40
#40
crazyguy said:
Division 2 has a playoff and it does not diminish the regular season games one bit. This is because the higher seed is rewarded with home field or a bye in the playoffs which is a huge reward.
Click to expand...
disagree. no one cares about the 1AA except 1AA.

it's not even close to being a good comparison.

it's like comparing the NFL to college football 1A.

can't do it.
 
#41
#41
jakez4ut said:
disagree. no one cares about the 1AA except 1AA.

it's not even close to being a good comparison.

it's like comparing the NFL to college football 1A.

can't do it.
Click to expand...
We will have to disagree. I think it would relate and work better than the bowl system. Can you imagine a playoff game in neyland, death valley, the swamp, or any other number of loud stadiums.
 
#42
#42
jakez4ut said:
it would serve the same purpose it would serve any year. 1-4 would play each other. OSU vs. OU and VT vs. LSU. the winners play for the national title.
Click to expand...

What about USC? They have an argument as well. Why do we need to see VT play LSU again?
 
#43
#43
crazyguy said:
We will have to disagree. I think it would relate and work better than the bowl system. Can you imagine a playoff game in neyland, death valley, the swamp, or any other number of loud stadiums.
Click to expand...
yes, and while that does sound attractive, that's the primary reason it will never happen. the bowls are not going to give up their venues for such a process and the universities aren't going to give up the revenue that comes with going to bowls.

couple that with the revenue sharing the conferences do with the bowls, the conferences will put up a fight as well, unless some other alternative presents and equal or greater revenue stream.

and it's not that i don't think a playoff could make money, it would, and it would probably wind up making more all totaled up, but you have to ask the question, who would be making that money?

anyway, there are a lot of obstacles to a playoff, money being a huge one, but that's secondary to me as a fan.
 
#44
#44
jakez4ut said:
yes, and while that does sound attractive, that's the primary reason it will never happen. the bowls are not going to give up their venues for such a process and the universities aren't going to give up the revenue that comes with going to bowls.

couple that with the revenue sharing the conferences do with the bowls, the conferences will put up a fight as well, unless some other alternative presents and equal or greater revenue stream.

and it's not that i don't think a playoff could make money, it would, and it would probably wind up making more all totaled up, but you have to ask the question, who would be making that money?

anyway, there are a lot of obstacles to a playoff, money being a huge one, but that's secondary to me as a fan.
Click to expand...
the payoff from an additional home playoff game would be huge. It would bring up the cost of season tickets (a chance at playoff tickets) and/or VASF type donations. There could be sponsors for each round/game and there would be a percentage for the conference. I agree that this would be difficult to pull off but I would love to see it happen.
 
#45
#45
VOLinthaATL said:
What about USC? They have an argument as well. Why do we need to see VT play LSU again?
Click to expand...
well that's the beauty of the regular season. USC's gripe would cease when you show them the score of the Stanford game.

and rematches will inevitably happen. it's happened before in bowl games. but they've never happened with teams from the same conference. IE, both LSU and VT earned their ranking by winning their conference. if it just so happens that they are slated to play each other again, so be it.

what i'm against is having GA, TN, KS, MO, BC etc....all still in it, with the potential of having to play teams they've already LOST to inconf, in the reg. season, to determine who the best team in that conf. is, play again for the national title.
 
#46
#46
i voted for ....drumroll.....wait for it....

TENNESSEE, and we still down 50% so go vote!
 
#47
#47
What if they cut the regular season back to 10 games, require a confrence championship, took into the equation the mid-major conferences, used those confrence champions as automatic locks to get into the 16 team field, and rounded out the field with at large bids, using the final BCS poll for seeding. Then use the different Bowl games as regional sites for the games. This way you make the Music City bowl mean something, plus teams that are 6-6, kinda like Alabama, dont get in because any bowl that is not being used for this will be taking higher ranked teams that may have just missed the cut.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top