The BCS Mess

the arguments against a playoff are EXTREMELY weak at best. The majority of fans want one and have for a while, bowl games can be played just the same as they've always been, and the fans would get a few more great matchups. The best part of the playoff would be the underdog "Hoosiers" factor, where a team like Boise State would be given the opportunity to win. A system where you basically have to play in one of six conferences to win a championship sucks big fat donkey dong....like twinkie boy Colon.

 

Hey, don't I know you?

 

If that were true, you'd be able to rebut those arguments instead of being an impotent bitch. I don't get why people like you can't understand that no one gives a shit what you think unless you can back it up, and you're far too stupid to be saying anything.

The majority of people are stupid. When "the majority want _____" is the best argument you can come up with, that's a big giant clue that you don't have a real reason.

Dumbfuck, Clay just got through complaining about how boring it is for elite teams to play non-elite teams. As you point out, a playoff would make that more common, not less.

 

One game withe marbles on the table, I'll take Southern Cal over anybody. With that defense they would be favored over any other team. Take your pick of Fla, bama, Okla, Texas, the Trojans would be the Vegas favorite because of that defense.

 

Think about the NFL. Very rarely can I remember the team with the best record winning the Super Bowl. In fact, the last three Super Bowl champions have come from the wildcard round. So a playoff is obviously not designed to determine the best team in football.

 

though the best team rarely wins, it is hard to say that the teams that win in every playoff system are not worth of the championship. THe road traveled is plenty difficult enough, because they have to win XX games against the best. Though the best team for the whole year might not win every time, that would be NOTHING new for college football, because sports geeks argue that regardless of the crappy system, which now has a royally crappy system. With the road to the top being so difficult to get to, the championship would be MORE legitimized, and not cheapened. Picking two teams out of the collective hat, especially in years when there are undefeated teams getting screwed out of a chance in the division of football that they are alledgedly competing in, blows. You can say that two schools are happy "sharing" a national championship, but sharing a championship is lame.

 

That's not hard to say at all. The Steelers won the Super Bowl in '05, even though most people outside of Pittsburgh agreed that they lucked into it. A Carson Palmer injury, a shoe string tackle by Roethlisberger, and horrible officiating in the Super Bowl were all major factors in their run.

If you want a playoff system because it would be more interesting, more power to you. But let's do away with the idea that it always produces the best team. I mean, hell, if we wanted to determine the best team, why even have a postseason? Just give the Championship to the team with the best regular season record. Isn't that clear-cut?

 

That's pretty much what they do now. And no one can say for sure that the season produces the best team either. Do you think Utah would go undefeated in the SEC, Big XII or ACC? If not, then it clearly shows that an undefeated team isn't necessarily the best team, just the team with the best record. Usually a team that beats another team on the field is a better team. No matter the excuse, they are the best until they are beaten. Like Ric Flair said so many times, "To be the man, you've got to beat the man." LOL

 

That's right. It is designed to determine the "Champion". Something college football has NEVER had.