Thread: The last straw for the BCS?

First, I don't blame the Sooners because all they did was what they needed to do. I do somewhat blame the Big 12 for having a stupid tie breaker system, but more importantly I blame the BCS. I hope this mass chaos will bring about some change. So if head to head between UT and OU on a neutral field does not matter then if Alabama loses to Florida should they still be ahead of them? Or since Texas is now third if Florida beats Alabama will the voters and polls have the balls to put UT and OU in the BCS game, or are they going to punk out and move Florida up ahead of Texas? As I said I would be just as bitter about the BCS if it had gone the other way, but obviously it didn't.

you could blame the Big XII for having a conference championship set-up. I mean you all brag about "oh well <blank> is better because that conference has a championship game" really? so by having Oklahoma playing Missou is fair? shouldn't it actually be THE BEST 2 TEAMS IN THE CONFERENCE that play each other?

If youre going to have conference championships it needs to be like basketball or at least the top 2 teams in the conference. Of course Rock going to be all like "but itz teh more fairszzzzz"

If you are going to have a conference with more than 8 teams you should have a conference championship. Look at the Big 10, who actually have 11 teams. They do not play every team every year, they play 8 of the other 10. So if your team and my team have the same record, but I played the 2 best teams, and you did not, how is that "fairszzzzz"? I don't think the system is perfect, but look at the NFL, teams with a crappy record will win the division this year, and teams with a better record will miss the playoffs.

in the pac-10 you have to play all 9 teams (since you can't really play yourself) to win the championship. If we had a conference championship it would mean likely Oregon St. or USC wouldn't play in the championship.

So how is it more fair that Oklahoma has to beat Missou to get the Big XII trophy instead of having to beat the second best team (Texas).

As I said, it is not a perfect scenario. Some years one division is stronger than the other, but not always. For that matter UT already beat the second best team on a neutral field. My point is the voters in the BCS are a bunch of nutless muppets, and I hope that this sparks the fire that burns it to the ground. If OU and UF win their conference championships the following teams from major conferences will all have 1 loss; Texas, OU, TT, USC, PSU, Alabama, and Florida. How do you decide out of those seven who the "best" 2 are? If I am Texas I am pissed because I lose out to a team I beat head to head on a neutral field, and if Florida wins they will probably pass me too to make it to the BCS title game. If I am Texas Tech I am pissed because I will probably be ranked 6 or 7 in the BCS, but not make a BCS bowl game because Texas and OU will. If I am USC I am pissed because I lost one game early, and I am just as hot late as any other team. Complete and utter BS, they just have an added C.

If every other college game, and every other division of college football, can have a tournament/playoff why not D1 college football? The answer is simple, the schools are to blame because they care more about the money than doing what is right. I guess we can gripe, but since it is the ADs and such that vote on the system that controls them it is their own dang fault.

Originally Posted by Nuckle

Roll Tide!!!!

One of my best friends is a Bama fan, and if it weren't for Dick Saban I might kinda like them, but for the good of chaos I am rooting for Florida, sorry Nuck.