Running bowl thread

OK, so results mean nothing. Thanks for enlightening me.

 

Sorry, where did I say that?

 

Daisy chains really don't. You win or you lose. Margins and things like that don't really mean much.

 

If by "within 3 touchdowns" you mean 1 point, you were damn close.

 

Over a season, they sure the hell can, Rick. And those denigrating Boise would also tend to disagree with you.

 

Here's the way out. Make the field elastic with a minimum of 16 teams.

The top 16 teams in the BCS get in ... guaranteed. But they are not guaranteed to avoid a preliminary round game.

What of the conference winners not in the BCS top 16? They are in too, but must play a preliminary round game against teams in ascending order from the No. 16 spot on up.

Here's how it would work:

Preliminary round, Dec. 5
East Carolina at No. 16 West Virginia
Troy at No. 15 Miami
Central Michigan at No. 14 BYU

If a non-top 16 conference winner is ranked No. 17-25, they are seeded against the lowest top 16 team. (For example, had No. 22 Nebraska won the Big 12, they'd automatically play No. 16 WVU). That wasn't the case this year as ECU, Troy and CMU are all unranked in the BCS. In that case, they are given the most geographically friendly matchup.

First round, Dec. 12 (campus sites)
No. 16 West Virginia or East Carolina at No. 1 Alabama
No. 9 Georgia Tech at No. 8 Ohio State
No. 11 Virginia Tech at No. 5 Florida (No. 11 seed moved to avoid 5-12 SEC vs. SEC)
No. 13 Penn State at No. 4 TCU
No. 15 Miami or Troy at No. 2 Texas
No. 10 Iowa at No. 7 Oregon
No. 14 BYU or Central Michigan at No. 3 Cincinnati
No. 12 LSU at No. 6 Boise State (No. 12 seed moved to avoid 5-12 SEC vs. SEC)

-- From the quarterfinals on ... a mix of five traditional bowl sites -- Miami, New Orleans, Dallas, Phoenix, Pasadena -- along with two cities that bid for playoff games, for the sake of argument, lets say it's Indianapolis and Minneapolis, will host the remaning games.

Quarters, Dec. 19
No. 1-16 winner (projects as Alabama) vs. No. 8-9 winner (Ohio State) (at New Orleans)
No. 4-13 winner (TCU) vs. No. 5-11 winner (Florida) (at Dallas)
No. 2-15 winner (Texas) vs. No. 7-10 winner (Oregon) (at Minneapolis)
No. 3-14 winner (Cincinnati) vs. No. 6-12 winner (Boise State) (at Indianapolis)

Semis, Jan. 1
No. 1-16-8-9 winner (Alabama) vs. No. 4-13-5-11 winner (TCU) (at Miami)
No. 2-15-7-10 winner (Texas) vs. No. 3-14-6-12 winner (Cincinnati) (at Phoenix)

Championship, Jan. 8
At Pasadena (Alabama vs. Texas)

 

They're wrong, then. Every game is different. If the goal was to win by as many points as possible every time, coaches would game plan in a completely different way and you'd get different results.

 

I didn't ask if you thought Alabama would win. Don't let words and language get in your way.

I've watched Alabama and Florida play enough this year -- and so had a lot of other people -- to know that not very many people would have guessed, much less expected, Alabama to hang 30+ on the Gator defense. Using your logic, to guess that would have been "fucking idiotic."

My point is that you might have watched Iowa and TCU play every single minute of every single game. You don't have a damn clue if TCU can score 34 against Iowa, and neither do I. So get over yourself. If you want to make an argument, make an argument. If it's that good of an argument, you don't need to call people fucking idiots.

 

Thank you, Crash.

 

So, to sum up your argument, it's ok for somebody to say TCU would score 34 on Iowa.

But it's not ok for me to say TCU wouldn't score 34 on Iowa.

That's just fucking brilliant.

 

I deleted the rest so this wouldn't take up too much space.

The reason the play-in idea wouldn't fly is this - the conferences that would be forced into the play-in games would be the same conferences that are already "shut out" in the current system. They aren't going to agree to a new system if their lot in postseason life doesn't change.