A Split National Championship in 2008?

[Fungo Squiggly]

The BCS pollsters are a poor man's version of the AP, and the computers haven't watched a game in their life. All they see are empty numbers with zero context. Smart argument here.and a complete lack of reasoning or context.balderdash. Oregon State crippled them and they never recovered. It's not even comparable to the lessened value of beating OSU.

True, but USC and every other BCS school agreed upon the BCS being the decider of national championships. I don't consider USC's AP championship a national championship because USC agreed to another system that determines the "true" national champion.

I mean, I guess it's as real as any other mythical national championship, just less important. To me, LSU won the "real" one that year because that was the one the participating members agreed to.

If the AP were to award it to Utah, I wouldn't have a problem with them pounding their collective chests about it because they are not a member of a BCS conference. They didn't sign up for it so they can say "fuck the BCS" without losing any respect from me.

 

[Dryden]

There is no split NC the OU and Fla winner gets the trophy. The split NC talk is for the message boards and talk radio. If the NC trophy is to be given out another way it would be gven to Pete Carroll every year because according to some any loss they have can be explained away.

 

[Buckeyefrankmp]

I don't think that a playoff will happen if ever because of the control issue. Those who have it won't /don't want to give that up. It's a money thing.

I agree, it is a money thing. If they can figure out how everyone can be happy financially, you will see a playoff.

 

[UpNorthBuckeye]

Down year for the PAC10?

Dudes, did I hear it right today that the Mountain West (Utah's conference, correct me if I'm wrong) went 5-1 or something against the Pac-10.

THAT certainly doesn't sound like one of the 2 or 3 strongest conferences.

I'm just sayin...

 

[jwinslow]

YES!

Dudes, did I hear it right today that the Mountain West (Utah's conference, correct me if I'm wrong) went 5-1 or something against the Pac-10.

THAT certainly doesn't sound like one of the 2 or 3 strongest conferences.

I'm just sayin...

---DUDES

 

[JXC]

I agree that a playoff is not the whole answer not only for the reasons BKB stated but additionally because it still would leave questions in some fans minds about who gets in and who is left out.
I don't think that a playoff will happen if ever because of the control issue. Those who have it won't /don't want to give that up. It's a money thing.

Not if it is a big enough field...like 16 teams.

Nobody seems to not call the winning of other NCAA playoff systems "national champion" Is Kansas National Champions? Yep...nobody desputes it in the basketball world.

I just don't agree that a playoff wouldn't solve this.

Do people consider the New York Giants world champions? If there were just "rankings" then I guess the Patriots should have been World Champions last year.

Playoffs matter more. Playing late SHOULD matter more. It's all about how you finish. That's how ALL sports are.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Do people consider the New York Giants world champions?

How many people don't consider them world champions?

 

[lvbuckeye]

If the National Title gets slit again then someone will have to tell me how we are better than we were prior to the BCS. I thought that system was put in place, agreed upon by the conferences, and designed to make sure that we would have one true National Champion each year. Now it has somehow become the goal of teams who fail in the regular season to try and get a split NC, and that just feels so 1997.

when the system was first implemented it worked. however it has been tweaked to the point of being useless. the only reason the computers were put in place was to add some unbiased assessment to the equation. that all went out the window after the computers decided that USC wasn't worthy in 2003.

it's been said before, but the problem with the BCS is that the system has always been modified looking backward. it has never been modified looking forward.

 

[Best Buckeye]

Not if it is a big enough field...like 16 teams.

Nobody seems to not call the winning of other NCAA playoff systems "national champion" Is Kansas National Champions? Yep...nobody desputes it in the basketball world.

I just don't agree that a playoff wouldn't solve this.

Do people consider the New York Giants world champions? If there were just "rankings" then I guess the Patriots should have been World Champions last year.

Playoffs matter more. Playing late SHOULD matter more. It's all about how you finish. That's how ALL sports are.

1. the powers that be have a 64 team field now.
2. the powers that be (the university presidents, the bowl owners, and the NCAA and the BSC ) will not change the staues quo until they can see how they can improve their stature.
In other words , it ain't gonna happen. How do you persuade , for example, the Rose bowl to give up what is one of the biggest drawing cards in sports? the presitige and money alone will deny that unless someone figures out a way to let them keep their contracts w/ the pac 10 and B10 and fit it into some other scheme.
As much as a playoff would/wouldn't settle things it s not going to happen.

 

[lvbuckeye]

How many people don't consider them world champions?

i would consider them the Super Bowl champs, but that doesn't mean i think they were the best team last year. what everyone is forgetting is that the best team doesn't always win the championship. in fact, i'd venture to say that more often than not the best team DOESN'T win the championship. i can think of 3 different instances offhand where the #1 overall seed didn't win the playoff THIS YEAR: the college world series, the MLB world series, and the NCAA basketball tourney...

so, let me ask you this: what would a playoff solve? it still wouldn't prove who the best team was.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

i would consider them the Super Bowl champs, but that doesn't mean i think they were the best team last year.

Well, many people say we were the 2003 Fiesta Bowl champs but Miami was still the better team for 2002. Guess who has the crystal football in their trophy case?

so, let me ask you this: what would a playoff solve? it still wouldn't prove who the best team was.

Well then, just how do you prove who the best team is?

 

[lvbuckeye]

i honestly don't think it can be done, because it will ALWAYS be subjective.

but to humor you, for starters, i would go back to the computer models that were scrapped after the '03 season. to whit: include margin of victory, opponents-opponents records, and records against common opponents.

and my post above is the reason that i am against a playoff in college football. the regular season will be diminished by half. and, like college hoops, regular season ratings will drop because it really doesn't matter who wins between and undefeated Tennessee and an undefeated Memphis; they're both going to the dance. only effect it will have is which team is a 1 seed and which team is a 2 seed. whoo.

 

[Bucklion]

i would consider them the Super Bowl champs, but that doesn't mean i think they were the best team last year. what everyone is forgetting is that the best team doesn't always win the championship. in fact, i'd venture to say that more often than not the best team DOESN'T win the championship. i can think of 3 different instances offhand where the #1 overall seed didn't win the playoff THIS YEAR: the college world series, the MLB world series, and the NCAA basketball tourney...

so, let me ask you this: what would a playoff solve? it still wouldn't prove who the best team was.

The biggest argument for the playoff is that it would provide a means to an end. A real end. As in, this is the national championship, this is what you have to do to get it. Make the playoff, and win 4 games. Does that determine the "best" team? WTF is the "best" team? Any two people could argue crippling defense versus 50 point offense until someone dies. Point being March Madness, the NFL Playoffs, whatever...they may not "determine the best team", per se, but they do crown a champion. Every year. And the thing you need to do every year to get that championship is the same. Make the playoff, win 4 games. Yes, computers and polls and all of that would still likely factor in as to how teams get into the playoff, but if you are #17, chances are you lost 2, probably 3, maybe even 4, games, so you have no right to whine. A means to an end, so that 2009 Florida and 2012 USC and 2015 Ohio State and 2018 Texas or whoever the hell wins them can say they all won the same championship, because they accomplished the same thing in a given season.

 

[AKAK]

i honestly don't think it can be done, because it will ALWAYS be subjective.

but to humor you, for starters, i would go back to the computer models that were scrapped after the '03 season. to whit: include margin of victory, opponents-opponents records, and records against common opponents.

Was there the victory over top ten bonus in that one too, or did they scrap that the year before?

 

[Bucklion]

Was there the victory over top ten bonus in that one too, or did they scrap that the year before?

Top 10 when though? Preseason? When they played? At the end of the year?