PDA

View Full Version : http://www.memeticians.com/2008/01/in-congress-january-4-2008.php



FAUoldschool
01-04-2008, 06:03 PM
http://www.memeticians.com/2008/01/in-congress-january-4-2008.php

IN CONGRESS, January 4, 2008: Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of a Championship
By Joseph M. Jamison on January 4, 2008 6:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
The unanimous Declaration of the 120 universities that sponsor NCAA Division 1-A Football:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the gridiron, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Athletics and of Athletics' God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Our founding fathers have spoken. NCAA Division 1-A Football needs to break ties with the current Bowl Championship Series (BCS) and institute a playoff system, but not just for the good of college football. It is for the good of college athletics as a whole.

The history of the present Bowl Championship Series is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these Universities. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
The NCAA and its most powerful universities like the current bowl system for one reason and one reason only: money. The networks pay top dollar to televise bowl games, so the NCAA is happy. The universities receive money, too. If your university is selected to a bowl game, your university and entire conference receives a payout. The five BCS Games (Championship included) payout a whopping 17 million dollars to each team that is selected, regardless if they win or lose. That money is shared with every school in the conference, regardless of their performance during the season. The problem is, the rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer, regardless of their on the field performances. That’s right; even 1-11 Minnesota Golden Gophers squad gets a huge payday.

Is this good for college athletics? Yes and no. Minnesota can fund their entire athletic program of 22 NCAA sponsored sports on a dismal football seasons. What if, however, schools like Minnesota were in the Sun Belt Conference? Troy University has shared the Sun Belt Conference championship for the past two seasons. The Troy Trojans went 8-4 this season, 6-1 in their conference. I know that doesn’t sound too impressive, but their out of conference losses included Arkansas, Florida, and Georgia, all successful schools in BCS conferences. In those games, Troy put up 26, 31, and 34 points, respectively. Not bad.

Unfortunately for Troy, they are not part of a BCS Conference, and were not invited to a bowl game despite their successes this season. The Sun Belt Conference's representative in the New Orleans Bowl this year was Florida Atlantic University, who spent most of the bowl revenue on traveling expenses. As a result, the members of the Sun Belt Conference will receive little money. I know this isn’t the only reason why Troy University can only support 14 NCAA sports, but it certainly doesn’t help. Last year, Troy University played in the New Orleans Bowl and took home just over $40,000. Baylor University will take home 2.6 million dollars this year for finishing dead last in the Big 12 at 3-9, 0-8 in the conference. Does that seem fair to you?

The solution: Combine the traditional bowl games with a 32-team playoff.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of a Championship.

Currently:

-Rankings are fun to discuss, but they're pretty much irrelevant. Rankings are nothing but a bunch of men sitting around arguing about which team is the best. I do that with my friends on the weekend, and that hardly makes me an expert.

-116 NCAA Division 1-A Football teams are separated into eleven conferences.


-Four teams, Notre Dame, Army, Navy, and Western Kentucky, are Independent.


- Western Kentucky will be joining the Sun Belt Conference next year, making it 117 teams in eleven conferences.


- 64 teams (53.3% of teams) are invited or selected to 31 Bowl Games, excluding the BCS Championship Game. Of the 31 bowl games, four are considered ‘BCS Bowls’ and are reserved for the NCAA’s best teams, as determined by the BCS computer ranking system. The top two BCS-ranked teams are invited to the BCS National Championship game.


Proposal:


- Make Notre Dame, Army, and Navy join a conference. Boo-hoo, fellas.


- Develop a 32-team (26.67% of teams) playoff bracket. In a 32-team playoff bracket, there will be 31 total games played, the same amount in the current bowl system.


- Eliminate the ‘BCS National Championship Game’ and all current sponsors place a bid to sponsor the National Championship Game. The game goes to the highest bidder, with the next two highest bidders getting the semifinal games, and so forth. This way, all of the current 31 sponsors get to keep their sponsorships if they choose.


- Shorten the regular season. Every team will be required to play six conference games and two out of conference games. The top two teams in each conference will then play for the Conference Championship. At most, a team will play 14 games, the same as Big 12 and SEC teams who make their Conference Championship and then play in a bowl game.


- The eleven conference winners get automatic bids, just like in basketball. The rest of the field will be at-large bids.


- Here is where the fun begins! The number of at-large bids will be determined by conference strength. How do you determine that? By the previous year’s performance. The conference with the most tournament victories will receive the most bids for the following year and so forth.If a conference winner is the only team that is in the playoffs, and they lose in the opening round, they receive no at-large bids the following year.


- Playoff teams will be seeded by a committee, just like in basketball.


-The more games a team wins, the more money they and their conference will receive.


- Finally, let the athletes decide who the best teams are; not writers, coaches, analysts, or a computer ranking system.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Trojans1andAll
01-04-2008, 09:22 PM
Two things:

1) On paper Troy is a co-champion, and I'm sure the University will acknowledge it, but the true fans don't. FAU won head to head, they went to New Orleans, and they are the champ.

2) I think 32 teams is too many. D-III, D-II, D-IAA (or FCS if you actually like that) all do a 16 team playoff system. It works, it doesn't run too long, and you can get all of the conference champs and runner-ups into it with room for a few at-large.

Room Guy
01-05-2008, 06:36 AM
Does the 16-team bracket really work? Northern Iowa went 11-0 in the regular season, just to lose to Delaware in the third round who finished the season 8-3. Montana and McNeese State both went 11-0. They both lost in the first round to Wofford and Eastern Washington, who was also 8-3. People have been complaining about LSU competing in the title game with two losses, but look at Appalachian State.

Three teams won 11 games in a row with nothing to show for it. A team with two losses, and one that didn't even win its conference walked away with the title. Wofford even beat App. State in the regular season rather convincingly.

So, what was the point of the regular season?

TroJam
01-05-2008, 09:41 AM
Does the 16-team bracket really work? Northern Iowa went 11-0 in the regular season, just to lose to Delaware in the third round who finished the season 8-3. Montana and McNeese State both went 11-0. They both lost in the first round to Wofford and Eastern Washington, who was also 8-3. People have been complaining about LSU competing in the title game with two losses, but look at Appalachian State.

Three teams won 11 games in a row with nothing to show for it. A team with two losses, and one that didn't even win its conference walked away with the title. Wofford even beat App. State in the regular season rather convincingly.

So, what was the point of the regular season?

The same scenario can be said about all playoffs. Why would wild card teams in baseball or football beat conference champions and eventually win it all when on paper they had no reason to do so? A sports season should be and is the combination of Regular Season and Playoffs. The regular season is qualification for the playoff between the best of the best from the regular season. If you are 11-0 in the regular season and lose in the playoffs then your team was not the best for that entire season. In other words, a team is judge on the body of work not one piece of it. It is the best way to decide a champion because it is played on the field not by an opinion, vote and/or computer calculations - period.

College football and it's marriage to the BCS is so contradictive. If the BCS is good and playoffs are bad then why have an extra conference championship game? Why not put the decision on appointed voters and a computer?

Room Guy
01-05-2008, 10:43 AM
If you are 11-0 in the regular season and lose in the playoffs then your team was not the best for that entire season. In other words, a team is judge on the body of work not one piece of it.

Would you say that if the New England Patriots were to lose in the second round of the NFL playoffs this year? Are you saying that a 13-5 (or 12-6) can be better than 16-1? Only two teams in history have gone 16-0, but if they lose ONE game, they weren't the best? Why did they even bother to win those games? They were the only team in their division with a winning record.


What's the point of a championship game in the first place? It's there to see who is the best team in the country. Playoff systems usually only determine who got hot at the right time. Whether it's with the BCS or with a playoff, the only thing that's certain is that someone is going to get screwed over. I will say it now, and I am prepared to concede the argument if it actually works, but a playoff system, the way they're being proposed, will be the death of college football as we know it. It will not fix the problems with the BCS, but only make them worse and create new problems.

If we can't beat Florida at the beginning of the season, we sure as heck aren't going to beat them in a playoff game at their house. Even if we did, we'd be dragging a wounded team in to face the likes of West Virginia to get our faces kicked in there.


College football and it's marriage to the BCS is so contradictive. If the BCS is good and playoffs are bad then why have an extra conference championship game? Why not put the decision on appointed voters and a computer?
Not all conferences can allow for everybody to play everybody. If Auburn and Florida both go undefeated and they don't play each other in the season, a conference title game is the best way to determine the conference champion.

TU/JSU Fan
01-05-2008, 11:28 AM
This was perhaps one of the biggest wastes of time I have read in a long time... 32 team playoff? Strength of 'past' performance in the playoffs determine how many at large bids you get the current year... That is the stupidest thing I have heard. Why would you ever judge how many at large bids a conference deserves by past performance and not the current conference outlook. I would dare say that the Sunbelt was a stronger conference this year than last year. I think in a 32 team playoff Troy should have gotten a bid, but wouldn't have because more than likely we would have been a low seed last year and got beat in the first round which meant only 1 sbc team in the playoffs.. You could very easily say that the ACC was weaker this year than last (look at FSU, Miami, etc...) looking at past performance is so stupid to determine this.

Thank goodness whoever wrote this doesn't have anything to do with the actual system.

Room Guy
01-05-2008, 11:52 AM
32 bowl games couldn't fit us. That's 64 teams and no Troy. That means we get left out the bracket.

TroJam
01-05-2008, 12:22 PM
Would you say that if the New England Patriots were to lose in the second round of the NFL playoffs this year? Are you saying that a 13-5 (or 12-6) can be better than 16-1? Only two teams in history have gone 16-0, but if they lose ONE game, they weren't the best? Why did they even bother to win those games? They were the only team in their division with a winning record.

Yes. They were the best for the regular season but not the entire season (reg and playoffs). As I said before the regular season is the qualification for the play-offs not who went undefeated. You are filtering out the mediocre and bad teams to get to the cream of the crop. Based on your undefeated analogy we should crown Hawaii the NC because they went undefeated. Just like in CFB a NFL team can have a winning record or be undefeated based on the schedule or the conference they play in but it doesn't make them the champs. Granted it's harder in the NFL because of the parity but it's true. That is why you have to play the best head to head.


If we can't beat Florida at the beginning of the season, we sure as heck aren't going to beat them in a playoff game at their house. Even if we did, we'd be dragging a wounded team in to face the likes of West Virginia to get our faces kicked in there.

Bad example we couldn't even beat FAU at the end of the year by default we couldn't go bowling. Do you remember in the '90's (1999 I think) when Florida State beat Florida in the regular season but Florida beat FSU in the Sugar Bowl? It happens.



What's the point of a championship game in the first place? It's there to see who the best team in the country is. Playoff systems usually only determine who got hot at the right time. Whether it's with the BCS or with a playoff, the only thing that's certain is that someone is going to get screwed over. Playoff systems usually only determine who got hot at the right time. Whether it's with the BCS or with a playoff, the only thing that's certain is that someone is going to get screwed over.

Yes, but at least with a playoff the teams are more in control of their destiny then with the BCS. I can accept the fact that my team had a bad day versus some computer and a select few people deciding it for them. Competitive sports were meant to be decided on the field and that comes with all the external factors as well (injuries, emotions, weather, stupidity, etc).


Not all conferences can allow for everybody to play everybody. If Auburn and Florida both go undefeated and they don't play each other in the season, a conference title game is the best way to determine the conference champion.

Exactly my point the conference decides the championship using a head to head playoff to determine the conference CHAMPION. BUT to quote you "...if they lose ONE game, they weren't the best?" Nope - not the best in the conference. Now replace CONFERENCE with NATIONAL. What if you have three or more undefeated college teams how do you settle that? BC$! Now that is an insult to all sports dating back to the beginning of man.

ksdtrojan
01-05-2008, 03:32 PM
College football and it's marriage to the BCS is so contradictive. If the BCS is good and playoffs are bad then why have an extra conference championship game? Why not put the decision on appointed voters and a computer?
Exactly! Why have a championship game in conferences with 12 teams? Just let the same computers and voters figure it out.

ksdtrojan
01-05-2008, 03:37 PM
Also several teams in the NFL and college football for that matter never play each other. For example Boise St vs OU last year. When you are not given the opportunity to prove what you can do you will never know. New England has not played every team in the NFL so who knows if they are better than those that they have yet to play. This is why playoff's work to determine a champion because it places the best teams in a tournament head to head and whoever XYZ team beats to the end they have proven to be on top. JMHO

Room Guy
01-06-2008, 02:07 AM
Yes. They were the best for the regular season but not the entire season (reg and playoffs). As I said before the regular season is the qualification for the play-offs not who went undefeated. You are filtering out the mediocre and bad teams to get to the cream of the crop. Based on your undefeated analogy we should crown Hawaii the NC because they went undefeated. Just like in CFB a NFL team can have a winning record or be undefeated based on the schedule or the conference they play in but it doesn't make them the champs. Granted it's harder in the NFL because of the parity but it's true. That is why you have to play the best head to head.

No one is crowning anybody before a game is played. Hawaii lost their bowl game and everyone saw that they were over-matched. Have you ever gone to a football game to see the second string players get beat up because the game doesn't mean anything? The hot topic on all of the sports networks over the past two weeks has been over whether teams that have clinched playoff spots should rest their players or not. If I'm going to pay for a ticket to a Patriots game, I want to see Tom Brady, not Matt Cassell. What makes college football unique is that every game matters. That's fourteen or fifteen weeks of do-or-die football. A 3-3 start in college is pretty much the end of your title run, whereas in the NFL, it's just a rough start.


Also several teams in the NFL and college football for that matter never play each other. For example Boise St vs OU last year. When you are not given the opportunity to prove what you can do you will never know. New England has not played every team in the NFL so who knows if they are better than those that they have yet to play. This is why playoff's work to determine a champion because it places the best teams in a tournament head to head and whoever XYZ team beats to the end they have proven to be on top. JMHO
Beating Dallas and Indianapolis both on the road doesn't really say much, apparently. Like it or not, the Boise State game was the exception, not the rule. Oklahoma would win that game maybe 8 times out of 10. They and Hawaii both got the chance to prove themselves. Boise State succeeded and Hawaii did not.


Bad example we couldn't even beat FAU at the end of the year by default we couldn't go bowling. Do you remember in the '90's (1999 I think) when Florida State beat Florida in the regular season but Florida beat FSU in the Sugar Bowl? It happens.
Florida State vs. Florida and Troy vs. Florida are apples and oranges. We have enough talent to beat a team like Florida, but we couldn't do it three or four weeks in a row all on the road. Remember 56-0 last year? Remember UAB? We had a better chance of making it into a bowl game this year than we would have making a playoff bracket.


Exactly my point the conference decides the championship using a head to head playoff to determine the conference CHAMPION. BUT to quote you "...if they lose ONE game, they weren't the best?" Nope - not the best in the conference. Now replace CONFERENCE with NATIONAL. What if you have three or more undefeated college teams how do you settle that? BC$! Now that is an insult to all sports dating back to the beginning of man.

Those guys that won the Sugar Bowl... I don't think they won their conference. They still got to play for something. Even if there were three teams that went undefeated in the regular season, how do they choose the fourth seed?

ksdtrojan
01-06-2008, 02:21 AM
I guess my biggest problem with the whole BCS deal and the plus 1 talk is that the non-Power 6 schools are left out of consideration for a NC and a tourney is the only way to get the non-Power 6 into the NC mix. But even with that the Power 6 schools and conferences don't want the have nots to become the haves so it is still and will remain a pipe dream.

Room Guy
01-06-2008, 02:28 AM
I guarantee you that if Hawaii had won the Sugar Bowl and a WAC team went undefeated in 2008, they'd get a shot at the title, unless there were other undefeated teams from stronger conferences. Until mid-major programs prove that they deserve a shot on a more regular basis, they're not going to get one.

TroJam
01-06-2008, 12:10 PM
Bottom line, the playoffs are and will always be better than voters and a computer computation. Whether it's an 1+, 8, 16 or 32 game playoff it is better than what we have today. The game is meant to be played and decided on the field. The fans want to see it, it could make more money and it would garner more interest. I'd rather see a game that will determine the eventual champion than a meaningless bowl matchup between two 6-6 teams. The sports that use external means (judges) to determine a champion (Diving, Gymnastics and Figure Skating); and that is only because that is the only way to determine a winner. Unless the participant make an obvious screw-up the determination of the winner is purely subjective. Hmmm maybe they should add computers to the mix and really screw it up.

ksdtrojan
01-06-2008, 12:29 PM
I guarantee you that if Hawaii had won the Sugar Bowl and a WAC team went undefeated in 2008, they'd get a shot at the title, unless there were other undefeated teams from stronger conferences. Until mid-major programs prove that they deserve a shot on a more regular basis, they're not going to get one.
I agree and understand your point of view but the system is not fair to all 119 soon to be 120 FBS teams. I get that the non-Power 6 don't really deserve a shot because they have not proven it but even with Hawaii and Boise State going undefeated in the regular season no real opportunity was given to either to see if they could beat the system's top team. Obviously Hawaii was not ready for the big stage but the 2006 Boise State team could argue the point. They would have been left out of a plus 1 system and I am sure the Power 6 would have made sure they were left out of a 8 team playoff. I think the non-Power 6 schools and even the Power 6 schools who don't have the prestige, tradition, and history of some of the more recognizable names in college football deserve more than just playing for their conference championship and bowl invite.

I personally think they should go to 10 conferences of 12 teams each conference with 10 regular season games and a conference championship game to culminate the regular season. Then the 10 conference champions get the auto bid to a 16 team tournament and have 6 at-large teams selected from the best teams left out with no conference getting more than 1 at-large bid. You could even have an NIT type tournament to recognize those who did not make the NCAA tournament like basketball. Then you still have 32 teams with recognition in the post season.