Running Regular Season 2010 College Football Thread

True dat. I had an interesting conversation with the AD at an FCS school recently. Said he used to like the playoff system, but no longer does because of the toll it takes on the players around the holidays and final exam time. His guys have played as many as 15 games in a season and that is just far too many for players at that age. Listening to him really gave me pause.

Why on earth must we have some "national" champion anyway? The more I see how college football has changed in the last 20 years, the more I like the way it used to be.

 

I pretty much agree completely with you. And I don't really care if there's a playoff. I also loved the way it used to be: Dick Enberg with the Rose Bowl in the afternoon, maybe a little Don Criqui at night with the Orange Bowl - with a special halftime show by the one and only, Nell Carter!

And for the most part I agree with the line "Why on earth must we have some national champion anyway?" But then I think, we would never say that about any other sport at any other level. It would sound ridiculous if someone said that about basketball, baseball, swimming, whatever. And even at every other level of college football it sounds ridiculous. Division III players play 15 games a year if their team makes it to the national title game and they are actually in school for academics, and exam time. Yet they do fine. Obviously the D1 game is much more physically taxing on the players and that's one issue, but somehow I think the school work wouldn't suffer anymore than it already does.

I guess I have nothing. No solution. No strong feelings either way. Other than missing Keith Jackson on the Sugar Bowl.

 

My biggest stance against a playoff is that all the national talking heads think a playoff is so great and all the smaller conferences/their senators whine on and on. So, but by own nature, I dig in and am against whatever they're for.

But through personal experience, I also know that whatever system you have, somebody is going to bitch they were left out. If you do a four-team playoff, No. 5 is gonna raise hell. Eight teams? No. 9 complains. In the basketball tournament they take better than 60 teams and that's apparently not enough.

I cover DII football on my regular beat. I've seen a 10-1 conference football champion not get selected for the playoffs. This past season I also saw a .500 volleyball team that was bounced in the first round of its conference tournament get into the NCAA Tournament after already taking up gear and telling two starters they were no longer a part of the team. Playoffs can still be arbitrary.

From a money standpoint, the cities that host the bowls are probably the real puppet masters to ensure the system stays in place. You can't use the current bowl structure in a playoff. All the millions in tourists dollars will dry up. Let's say Bama or Texas is drawn in the first round against a weaker team in the Whatever Bowl. Their fans aren't going to go to it, then go to the Peach Bowl the next week and the Sugar Bowl after that. They'll skip the first round or two leaving tons of hotel rooms empty that are traditionally packed on Jan. 1.

 

Great job by the Boise State coaching staff and team last night. They were just better prepared than the Tech kids. That and Taylor just looking so unsure as to when to throw the ball and when to run the ball just seemed to be downfall for Tech (oh and the special teams play).

Taylor averaged almost 19 yards a completion. If he would have as much faith in his arm and receivers as he did in his legs, Tech might have been able to hang 40-45 on BSU.

 

New Sagarin ratings (a BCS component): Boise 1, TCU 2.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt10.htm?loc=interstitialskip

 

And even if they did, that'd be fine with me. They will have lost the championship where championships should be lost: on the field.

 

To me Boise St has moved beyond the Cinderella story. They are a perennial contender.

 

In the past that would have been true but I think they're both ranked too high for that to happen this year. I don't think both would get in but one of them would.

 

Boise State needs to be Tech's #1 fan for the rest of the season.

Tech wins out, and Boise will look very, very good. Tech goes 7-4, not so much.

 

If both teams are undefeated and near the top of the rankings, the BCS powers that be will rig it so that they both play each other in the national title game, thus preventing any chance that a BCS team looks bad losing to them. They'll get a "title" that no one respects because BCS-conference fanbois can say it wasn't legit.

 

I'm already tired of the BCS bullshit surrounding Boise after one freaking game.
I donlt catre right now who's goiing to play in January.
How about just enjoying what was a great colllege football game, diminished only by Mushmouth's constant babbling. Boise is no longer some little upstart. It is a legitimate national program.
I thought Tech's playing calling was just awful on the final series after Boise scored.

 

Top flight D-I schools are playing 14 games now.
Adding one game, for just two schools, isn't going to be the end of the world.
An 11-game regular season game schedule, with no conference championship and a 16-team playoff and it reduces the game load for most schools. Even a 32-game playoff, wouldn't do that much damage.
If the schools were actually concerned about the game load on the "student" athletes. But they aren't.

And I have maintained that the winner of last night's game will play for the title and most likely against Ohio State.
There's a greater chance of me playing for the national title then a two-loss SEC team leapfrogging a undefeated Boise or TCU into the championship game.