re: Delany: If you don't win your division, you can't win it all...

I don't mind the you have to win your conference thing. There are years where conferences are strong, and the champ comes out with 2 losses, but is the best team in the country (see 2007). In that year, if WVU and Mizzou win their games, LSU, who was the best team in the country, doesn't get a shot. They do in the new proposed system.

There is no perfect system, but I think a system where conference champs are rewarded can, in most years, keep the media out of the endgame.

Everyone knew Bama was a great team last year, but it still doesn't mean they should have been in the game.

How many years does the team playing the best at the end of the year not make the national title game? It happens with 18-22 year olds not playing at a high level every week

I don't understand how a reasonable person can advocate including teams simply because they won a conference or dismissing one because they did not.

Equalizing the conferences would also be a big failure, I hope it is never a consideration.

Well I agree with that. I'm just saying that you can't even consider it until there's some sort of streamlined method, equality, and governance like the NFL. That will never happen because individual conferences won't give up power. I am glad conferences exist. I'm sorry they are becoming less regional.

quote:

---

Theres just too much Bama in them for them to admit that. You notice that it went silent on the Bama argument once I told the Bama fans would be in the playoffs.

---

The problem is that Alabama would not be in under the caveat Delany added about having to win your division. I'm not sure why people are missing that subtle change. If he was advocating that higher ranked at large teams that didn't win their conference go ahead of conference winners not ranked in the Top 6 then I agree that's a very fair compromise. The problem is that he just tried to sneak the "win your division" argument in there which would have excluded both Alabama and Stanford in favor of Wisconsin because they'd be the next highest conference winner because nobody else ranked in the Top 6 either won their conference or even won their division (see Alabama and Stanford. Boise State may have been eligible for the 4th spot even though they didn't win their conference due to semantics of them not being in a division within their conference.

The having to win your conference and be in the Top 6 is actually a pretty good setup. The have to win your division basically cancels out that very caveat because in almost every case this situation will involve a 1 loss team in the same division as one of the BCS playoff participants. It won't ever involve teams from separate divisions because those teams would always end up playing each other in a conference championship game. Incredibly sneaky move by Delany and he's a moron if he thinks Slive and others are stupid enough to fall for that rule.

Yet when the big moment came along they failed to produce. I love that the scar BAMA created will remain livid for many generations to come

21 - Zereaux

quote:

---

LSU 2011

Conference: SEC (some say it's tough)
Conference games: 9 (counting SECC game)
OOC opponents away from home: Oregon and West Virginia (both BCS bowl winners)

I think that's who he's referring to.

---

You might be right but I took him to mean 9 conference games excluding the CCG because in his other remarks he talked about PAC 12 teams playing 9 conference games.

But even if we was referring to LSU it doesn't support his arguement because LSU got plenty of respect from the pollsters. They weren't snubbed at all.

Bottomline, if any team plays the schedule he describes & goes undefeated they're going to be in the top 2 of the BCS rankings. If they lose a game or 2 then they might get left out based on what other teams do. I just don't really see his point.

He's correct


4 conference champs takes away all media bias and bs


can't win your division/conference shouldn't make some national championship game, don't see what the big problem with that is.....except for one fan base

There's a few of you who will never live down the 21-0 beatdown. Delaney is a pompous, arrogant idiot. He turned down the chance for playoff when the SEC pushed for it. He sat up there and smugly took swipes at the SEC for years, saying how they do things right and don't get teams put on probation, followed by Michigan and Ohio St getting nailed. He's tried to present those northern schools as being intellectually, and morally better and his proposal is nothing more than trying to better his conference and standing, not the betterment of college football as a whole. He's all mouth, nearly always wrong, and is all over the media, because he is probably getting his ideas crushed in the meetings, so he feels publicity might help.

I just don't understand why LSU, being in the SEC, would want to limit their ways of getting to the BCSCG. It seems to be a purely reactionary point of view.