Bill introduced into Congress to force a playoff

#1
G

Guest

Guest
#1
Another BCS mess: 2 title slots for 5 teams - College football- nbcsports.msnbc.com

According to the sponsor of this bill, it will either force the BCS to have a playoff or drop the use of the word championship from its name. This is in response to the fact that there are 5 undefeated teams remaining in div 1 football, but yet none of them except Texas or Alabama would ever be considered for the title game under the current system. The small schools also get shafted on BCS $. Apparently there is a lot of support for this in the government because Obama has already said he would rather see a playoff. Personally I think the BCS is garbage, and would welcome a playoff. We already know teams like Boise State can play with teams like Oklahoma as they've already beaten them. They beat Oregon this year, and Oregon is in the Rose Bowl. Time to give these teams a shot and let them see what they can do just like in basketball. I would love to see a George Mason-esque team try to run the table in football.
 
#2
#2
Even if the government had any business meddling with this, they have way bigger problems to address. Even considering this in the present conditions is borderline insulting.
 
#3
#3
Tell em I need my stimulus money ASAP, while your at it. Funds are getting low.
 
#4
#4
Considering D-1 doesn't have a "champion" according to the NCAA, this is all moot.
 
#5
#5
kptvol said:
Even if the government had any business meddling with this, they have way bigger problems to address. Even considering this in the present conditions is borderline insulting.
Click to expand...

I view this as an antitrust matter. Basically, the BCS and larger conferences are conspiring to keep the smaller schools from getting a fair cut of the action. It talks in the article about how a school such as TCU will have to split their BCS $ with up to 50 different schools. Alabama and Texas will have to split it with at most 11 others. Anytime you get stuff like this happening, the government will be keeping an eye on it. This is especially true when entities such as Utah, who has gone undefeated in the past few years yet was denied a shot at the title and also had to share their $, starts complaining to their representatives in Congress.
 
#6
#6
mbushnell said:
I view this as an antitrust matter. Basically, the BCS and larger conferences are conspiring to keep the smaller schools from getting a fair cut of the action. It talks in the article about how a school such as TCU will have to split their BCS $ with up to 50 different schools. Alabama and Texas will have to split it with at most 11 others. Anytime you get stuff like this happening, the government will be keeping an eye on it. This is especially true when entities such as Utah, who has gone undefeated in the past few years yet was denied a shot at the title and also had to share their $, starts complaining to their representatives in Congress.
Click to expand...

Those little schools could always join a BCS conference. Then they'd get BCS money every year. The tradeoff would be never making a BCS bowl.
 
#7
#7
kptvol said:
Those little schools could always join a BCS conference. Then they'd get BCS money every year. The tradeoff would be never making a BCS bowl.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I don't really care about Boise State's complaints.
 
#9
#9
that neb team nearly beating tx and boise st beating oklahoma a couple of years back are two very good arguments for a playoff... how do you say that tcu/boise/cinci have no shot at beating tx or bama...

I'd just as soon have the old AP system... no polls until the sixth week so that no preseason rankings lock one team into a high spot for no reason....
 
#10
#10
Kind of annoying that teams who played 1 or 2 teams with a shot of beating them are whining about getting left out.
 
#12
#12
kptvol said:
Kind of annoying that teams who played 1 or 2 teams with a shot of beating them are whining about getting left out.
Click to expand...
Well said. The major conferences may be a little down, but the teams generally aren't pushovers. In the WAC, you have several teams with no realistic shot at beating any title contender.

And if Cincy wants to complain, just laugh at their defense and move on. If there is any change, it shouldn't be much. Maybe just a plus 1.
 
Last edited:
#14
#14
hmanvolfan said:
Are you serious? Really?
Click to expand...

No. But the reason they are getting into BCS games is because they are not in BCS conferences. A Boise State might be able to get lucky with 18 trick play miracles and beat a mediocre OU team having a bad day, but they would lose several if they were forced to go through a Big 12 schedule. I don't think Boise would want to join a BCS conference.
 
#15
#15
kptvol said:
No. But the reason they are getting into BCS games is because they are not in BCS conferences. A Boise State might be able to get lucky with 18 trick play miracles and beat a mediocre OU team having a bad day, but they would lose several if they were forced to go through a Big 12 schedule. I don't think Boise would want to join a BCS conference.
Click to expand...

Exactly. While I think that a playoff system might be fair in theory, it doesn't work when you have teams playing in bad conferences skewing the records. An undefeated Boise St is not as good as a 2-loss team in the SEC on a good day. To implement playoffs would require a massive restructuring of conferences, otherwise it would be less fair than the BCS.

And it always kills me that every time these no-name teams go undefeated in a pathetic conference they get so angry about not getting a BCS bid. They're almost as delusional as Kentucky fans. :eek:lol:
 
#16
#16
As much as I hate the BCS, it's laughable that Congress would even got involved.

Besides, the government would screw it up even worse.
 
Last edited:
#18
#18
VolsSportsFan said:
As much as I hate the BCS, it's laughable that Congress would even got involved.

Besides, the government would screw it up even worse.
Click to expand...

Yeah screw the government, they never do anything right.

I hate roads and national defense and pharmaceutical research.
 
#22
#22
tvolsfan said:
Whatever. They have far bigger problems than fixing something which everyone loves. (college football, not the BCS)
Click to expand...

I agree but I don't think they'd necessarily screw it up.

And yes, the government does do pharma research. Believe it or not most of the Pharma companies' data and some of their funding comes from the government and government-sponsored research at public universities.
 
#24
#24
kptvol said:
The government is funding drug companies?
Click to expand...

Sometimes directly in the form of a subsidy for vaccines, but yes, almost all pharma research starts with government money into basic science. I know off the top of my head that AZT was discovered by government researchers, and it's certainly not the only drug discovered that way. The entire NIH is dedicated to funding pharma research, for example.
 
#25
#25
Snakes on a Wii said:
I agree but I don't think they'd necessarily screw it up.

And yes, the government does do pharma research. Believe it or not most of the Pharma companies' data and some of their funding comes from the government and government-sponsored research at public universities.
Click to expand...

Some...the majority comes from the private market.

And the data comes from the government because it has to.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top