Official 2011 College Football Bowl Season thread

[Noop]

Alabama was the best team all season. Oklahoma State would have gotten beaten up by that Alabama defense, and worn down by the Alabama offense.

I felt that Alabama's QB really grew up last night. He was dialed in from the first play until the last, and I feel that bodes well for their future.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Nah, just felt that way

Bray at UT, Brantley at UF, Relf at MsSt, Newton at UK, Murray at UGA, Jefferson at LSU, partially Smith at Vandy (until mid-season) all had significant experience at QB. That 6 (or 7) of the 12.

Arkansas, Alabama, Auburn, Ole Miss, South Carolina were playing mostly a new guy.

That's a list of some of the poorest QBs in the league. Netwon, Rodgers (who finished Vandy) and Jefferson were three of the worst rated QBs in the nation. Brantley, Bray and Murray were the best - but none were even top 25 QBs. It was a pretty rough year for SEC QBs.

[Jas_lov]

Originally Posted by digamma

Why is it that we will accept the results of a playoff in all other sports and crown a champion no matter their regular season performance (see Packers last year, Duke basketball last year, Cardinals World Series, etc.) but in college football where we have a play-off that preserves the value of the regular season better than any other sport we have to find some way to not devalue the winner of the championship game?

How does it preserve the value of the regular season when during the regular season LSU beats Bama in Bama and then has to beat them again in the championship? That LSU victory over Bama is null and void. It meant nothing. So if we're going that route let's just go to a playoff of 4 to 8 teams where there may be rematches but at least the other worthy teams have a chance to prove themselves on the field. Last night was the lowest rated BCS title game so a change will be made when this contract is up.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Actually they were the best team in both their division & conference, as Ben alluded to earlier, there were people who knew that all along.

Link?

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Because those sports don't use polls and computers to determine who gets to play for a title? Shrug. Seems pretty easy to understand.

Right. I get the source of the frustration, but we're still talking about how teams are selected (and how many teams are selected). The argument seems a little phony though to scream for a play-off but then not accept the results of a championship game. Would Alabama beating Clemson and Oregon in the first two rounds of a play-off make their beating LSU in a championship game more legitimate?

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Jas_lov

How does it preserve the value of the regular season when during the regular season LSU beats Bama in Bama and then has to beat them again in the championship? That LSU victory over Bama is null and void. It meant nothing. So if we're going that route let's just go to a playoff of 4 to 8 teams where there may be rematches but at least the other worthy teams have a chance to prove themselves on the field. Last night was the lowest rated BCS title game so a change will be made when this contract is up.

Well, by their definition, play-offs devalue the regular season, but my statement was it preserves the value better than other sports. THe reason I say that is because with only two teams making the championship game you really have to have an outstanding regular season to be in consideration. That's not the case in most other sports where winning 60% percent of your games will typically get you into the post-season.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by digamma

Right. I get the source of the frustration, but we're still talking about how teams are selected (and how many teams are selected). The argument seems a little phony though to scream for a play-off but then not accept the results of a championship game. Would Alabama beating Clemson and Oregon in the first two rounds of a play-off make their beating LSU in a championship game more legitimate?

I personally have no gripes with how it went down. System selected those two, Alabama won handily and are natl champs. Even as I dislike the system, I've never viewed the BCS champ as illegitimate.

[Arles]

My biggest issue with the BCS is teams rarely have to face multiple good teams/styles. If a Pac-12 team goes 11-0 and then faces Oklahoma in the championship, they may never have had to deal with the speed of the SEC. If two SEC teams meet, they may never have had to deal with a top tier QB...

Having a 4 or 8 team playoff means that you will atleast have to beat 2-3 top tier teams to win and that increases the chances that you end up facing different styles. Most college football powers schedule maybe 1 tough non-conference foe and have 3-4 tough conference games max. I think you have a better chance at finding that "best team" in a tournament of 4-8 since the odds of facing tough non-conference opponents are so low.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Otherwise lets just agree that Clemson and GT will play the NC game next year in Clemson, we know their the best teams

Speak for yourself

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Arles

That's a list of some of the poorest QBs in the league. Netwon, Rodgers (who finished Vandy) and Jefferson were three of the worst rated QBs in the nation. Brantley, Bray and Murray were the best - but none were even top 25 QBs. It was a pretty rough year for SEC QBs.

No disagreement from me on that, I was just curious & looked to see how many of them really were "new", figured I'd share the results. No claim of quality was intended on my part at all.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Jas_lov

at least the other worthy teams have a chance to prove themselves on the field.

There were no other worthy teams to be in that game this year.

Last night was the lowest rated BCS title game so a change will be made when this contract is up.

Reasonably small slide vs last year and is still the second most watched program in the history of cable television ... right behind last year's BCS NCG.

Welcome to being on cable instead of broadcast.

[EagleFan]

There's an easy solution for the debate, use the playoff format from my dynasty and it will provide the best way to crown a champion. Win your conference and you are in the playoffs, be among the top ranked teams that didn't win your conference and you'll get in. Both preserve the importance of the regular season and don't detract from anything that college football currently has to offer.

You'll also get a championship where the teams playing won't be rusty from having a month and a half off as they would have been playhing their way to the title.

You also get to keep bowl games for all non-playoff teams (and even some pllayoff teams that suffered an early exit). Everyone wins.

If Alabama and LSU end up meeting because they both won their way through the playoffs there could not be a complaint (as they both earned it directly on the field and not because of what amounts to figure skating judging).

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

There's an easy solution for the debate, use the playoff format from my dynasty and it will provide the best way to crown a champion. Win your conference and you are in the playoffs, be among the top ranked teams that didn't win your conference and you'll get in. Both preserve the importance of the regular season and don't detract from anything that college football currently has to offer.

You'll also get a championship where the teams playing won't be rusty from having a month and a half off as they would have been playhing their way to the title.

You also get to keep bowl games for all non-playoff teams (and even some pllayoff teams that suffered an early exit). Everyone wins.

If Alabama and LSU end up meeting because they both won their way through the playoffs there could not be a complaint (as they both earned it directly on the field and not because of what amounts to figure skating judging).

I endorse this post, every point in there, especially the rust part.

[molson]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

There's an easy solution for the debate, use the playoff format from my dynasty and it will provide the best way to crown a champion. Win your conference and you are in the playoffs, be among the top ranked teams that didn't win your conference and you'll get in. Both preserve the importance of the regular season and don't detract from anything that college football currently has to offer.

You'll also get a championship where the teams playing won't be rusty from having a month and a half off as they would have been playhing their way to the title.

You also get to keep bowl games for all non-playoff teams (and even some pllayoff teams that suffered an early exit). Everyone wins.

If Alabama and LSU end up meeting because they both won their way through the playoffs there could not be a complaint (as they both earned it directly on the field and not because of what amounts to figure skating judging).

Are you in the "Middle Tennessee needs to be in there because they won a conference" camp? Unless it's like basketball and almost everybody with a pulse gets in anyway, I'm glad the big schools will never allow a system where the most important factor in getting in is how small and irrelevant your conference is.

[Ksyrup]

I would have no problem with Alabama and LSU meeting, even after a 4 team playoff. As it stands, Alabama might be national champion this year, but they shouldn't have been in a position to win it, rematch or no.

[whomario]

Originally Posted by molson

Are you in the "Middle Tennessee needs to be in there because they won a conference" camp? Unless it's like basketball and almost everybody with a pulse gets in anyway, I'm glad the big schools will never allow a system where the most important factor in getting in is how small and irrelevant your conference is.

it´s only 11 conferences while there´s 32 in Basketball. Bets are that you could easily accomodate those champions and still have a good field.

Maybe do an 8-team play-in (with the lesser conference champions and maybe a couple "wildcards") and then a 16 team field (couple big conference winners + best non-champions + 4 winners of play-in).

[molson]

Originally Posted by whomario

it´s only 11 conferences while there´s 32 in Basketball. Bets are that you could easily accomodate those champions and still have a good field.

Maybe do an 8-team play-in (with the lesser conference champions and maybe a couple "wildcards") and then a 16 team field (couple big conference winners + best non-champions + 4 winners of play-in).

But the relevant number is 16 v. 64. Everybody that matters gets in in basketball (which hasn't curbed the whining every year, so let's eliminate that as an argument for playoffs). If it's only going to be 12, or 16, a sun belt or MAC championship is WAY too insignificant an accomplishment to warrant one of those sports In pro sports, I like importance being placed on a winning a division or conference, but in pro sports, all of the divisions/conferences are roughly equal, subject to year-to-year fluctuations, and the composition of the divisions/conferences is set by the central league. In college sports, the teams make those deals on their own. In college football, there's never going to be a year where winning the sun belt or MAC is as impressive as winning even a single SEC or Big 12 conference game, so why are people so anxious to reward teams just for playing in weak athletic conferences?

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by molson

In college sports, the teams make those deals on their own. In college football, there's never going to be a year where winning the sun belt or MAC is as impressive as winning even a single SEC or Big 12 conference game, so why are people so anxious to reward teams just for playing in weak athletic conferences?

Because of our penchant to see if an underdog can topple a top team. I think that doing the top 12 standings or some such thing where teams from those leagues can earn their way in, would be enough for me. I don't think they deserve an automatic bid simply for beating up on the bottom feeders in their league. But if they somehow rank in the top 8-12 or something, then I say yes..they should get in and see if they can win.

[Easy Mac]

Hypothetical 24 team playoff, based on who won their conferences and the next 13 teams in the BCS. Teams are then seeded based on their BCS rankings.

The playoffs are 5 weeks, from December 10 - January 7. Re-seeding could be an option after week 1, or all weeks.

This year's field

Week 1 bye (seeds 1-8).
LSU
Alabama
OSU
Stanford
VT
Houston
Boise St.
Arkansas

Week 1 matchups:
1 #16 Michigan v. #17 Baylor
2 #9 Oregon v. #24 Louisiana Tech
3 #12 South Carolina v. #21 Southern Miss
4 #13 Michigan St. v. #20 West Virginia
5 #14 Georgia v. #19 Clemson
6 #11 Kansas State v. #22 Arkansas State
7 #10 Oklahoma v. #23 Northern Illinois
8 #15 Wisconsin v. #18 TCU

So without re-seeding, in order to get to the title game, LSU would have to take out RGIII or Denard Robinson, then either Arkansas or Oregon's offense, then likely Andrew Luck, all in succession.

On the other side, it's possible Alabama would have to go through TCU or Wisconsin, Boise or Oklahoma, then Oklahoma State to get to the title game.

Meanwhile, it seems like Stanford and Oklahoma State would have pretty much a cake walk to at least the final four.

[Ksyrup]

All pipe dreams, though. I think one of the reasons they are so open to a small playoff now is because they know it will basically preserve the status quo while eliminating most of the griping. If they bend a little and give us a 4 team playoff within the existing structure, most of us will be happy with that. I know I will.

You'll always have an argument over the last seed(s), but that's nothing compared to the injustice of simply seeding the top 2 without a playoff. And once they get rid of that, we'll have little to gripe about.

[RainMaker]

Just set it up using the earned access system from lower levels. Basically a conference champ gets an auto-bid if they finish in the top 20 or so of the BCS. That way a Houston gets in but not the Sun Belt champ.

[whomario]

Also, while i´m no expert i can´t be the only one who thinks that it is absolutely ludicrous for the teams in the championship game to have 5 or 6 weeks off after the last game before that (same for some of the other late bowls)

I realize that it´s different in football and maybe there rest is worth more and rust isn´t as much of a factor, but there is nothing even close to that in any other sport.

Also, again no expert but explain me this : How is it rational/ok/an option to relieve your starting QB when he has the first bad game all season but it isn´t one to go back to that guy when the replacement has a game just as bad in the title game ? Shouldn´t you at least try that ?
Again, i don´t know much but just thought it was harsh when Lee was pulled in the first place ...

[RainMaker]

Also in regards to the bowls. Attendance down, ratings down, and likely losses increased for schools. Congrats, you found a way to make football less popular.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by whomario

Also, while i´m no expert i can´t be the only one who thinks that it is absolutely ludicrous for the teams in the championship game to have 5 or 6 weeks off after the last game before that (same for some of the other late bowls)

I realize that it´s different in football and maybe there rest is worth more and rust isn´t as much of a factor, but there is nothing even close to that in any other sport.

Also, again no expert but explain me this : How is it rational/ok/an option to relieve your starting QB when he has the first bad game all season but it isn´t one to go back to that guy when the replacement has a game just as bad in the title game ? Shouldn´t you at least try that ?
Again, i don´t know much but just thought it was harsh when Lee was pulled in the first place ...

I think it's just a bad set up that will never be changed because so much tradition and history is built into it. I don't think you'll ever do anything to divorce the end of the season from the post-New Years set-up, and I don't think you'll get anything more than a 4-team playoff for years to come. So there's really no way to not take a month off, yet maintain the history/tradition of the New Years bowls and their tie to determining the champion.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

All pipe dreams, though. I think one of the reasons they are so open to a small playoff now is because they know it will basically preserve the status quo while eliminating most of the griping. If they bend a little and give us a 4 team playoff within the existing structure, most of us will be happy with that. I know I will.

You'll always have an argument over the last seed(s), but that's nothing compared to the injustice of simply seeding the top 2 without a playoff. And once they get rid of that, we'll have little to gripe about.

Every march fanbases and even neutral observers go bathshit crazy over NCAA tournament omissions, and that's teams that aren't even in the top 30. It's true that people will have less LEGITIMATE reasons to complain, but the complaints will only go up the more teams you grant access to. The only team that can really complain this year is Oklahoma St. (and that's BARELY legitimate because they had their chance and blew it). Make it 8-12 teams, and there will be 5-10 more fanbases flipping out every year, whining about conspiracies and whatnot. Of course, more bitchy fans is probably not a rational reason NOT to have a playoff, I'm just saying the complaints would go up a ton. Because the tournament itself becomes the reward, like in basketball.

[Ksyrup]

Nah. I think the fact that the bowl system is so entrenched and the playoff will be part of the bowl system itself, that the bitching will be muted. And really, with 4 teams, you have to figure at least 2 will be no-brainers, then it's just down to the next 4-6 teams for the final 1-3 spots.

[Ksyrup]

[Kodos]

That's pretty funny.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Heh

[Ksyrup]

Brett McMurphy @McMurphyCBS
College football sources told @CBSSports there's "strong support" to increase bowl eligibility to 7 wins in 2014

[Ksyrup]

Brett McMurphy @McMurphyCBS
Last 2 years 27 6-6 teams went to bowls - nearly 20% of field RT @Tuskaloosa: @McMurphyCBS How many teams this year would have quallified?


I know there were a couple of 7-5 teams that got screwed this year (WKU comes to mind), but honestly, if this is typical every year, I can't see the TV and bowl people agreeing with this. And if all that would happen is a bunch of 6-6 teams petition for eligibility to fill open bowl slots, then what's the point? Heck, this might further push teams to scheduling all cupcakes for their OOC games, if it means needing 3 or 4 conference wins to be bowl eligible. OTOH, maybe it lessens the chance of scheduling FCS teams.

[Easy Mac]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Heh

Their longest drive of the night was 23 yards. There's no guarantee they would have scored on that field.