Started By
Message
My BCS Solution
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:25 pm
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:25 pm
In lieu of last nights embarrassment, try this on...
BCS NC Game- BCS#1 vs BCS #2. Must be Conference Champs to play. (Sorry Bama fans, there has to be a reward for winning your championship)
The 4 next Top ranked conference champs go one each to the Rose, Fiesta, Orange and Sugar.
Next four spots go to the next 4 ranked BCS teams, regardless of conference affiliation, avoid Same Conference if possible, try to keep geographical alignment.
This year would've looked something like this:
BCS NC- LSU vs OK State
Rose- Oregon vs Boise St
Fiesta- TCU vs Stanford
Sugar- Wisconsin vs Arkansas
Orange- Clemson vs Bama
Right? Wrong? I think the problem is the "Automatic Bids." And conference championships should count for something, IMO.
BCS NC Game- BCS#1 vs BCS #2. Must be Conference Champs to play. (Sorry Bama fans, there has to be a reward for winning your championship)
The 4 next Top ranked conference champs go one each to the Rose, Fiesta, Orange and Sugar.
Next four spots go to the next 4 ranked BCS teams, regardless of conference affiliation, avoid Same Conference if possible, try to keep geographical alignment.
This year would've looked something like this:
BCS NC- LSU vs OK State
Rose- Oregon vs Boise St
Fiesta- TCU vs Stanford
Sugar- Wisconsin vs Arkansas
Orange- Clemson vs Bama
Right? Wrong? I think the problem is the "Automatic Bids." And conference championships should count for something, IMO.
11
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:26 pm to elprez00
Conference champs gives you a shiny conference trophy, that's it. There should be no restrictions on 1 vs 2.
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:27 pm to elprez00
Why would the Sugar Bowl give up selecting Alabama? Who do you keep out West Virginia? How do you place a non-AQ team that didn't win their own conference?
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:27 pm to elprez00
I would DEFINITELY not allow 2 loss teams in the game. 
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:28 pm to SabanIsAGod
quote:
Conference champs gives you a shiny conference trophy, that's it. There should be no restrictions on 1 vs 2.
I disagree. It was a farce when OU played in 2003
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:28 pm to elprez00
quote:
Must be Conference Champs to play
This should already be a rule.
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:29 pm to elprez00
So, if all the conference champs have three losses, one of them still gets to go over a one-loss non-champ? What if there had been a three-way tie for a division, are the people who lose the tiebreaker completely out of the running for the BCS championship?
Wrong.
quote:
Right? Wrong?
Wrong.
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:32 pm to TK421
What about independents like ND? What do they have to win?
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:32 pm to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
Why would the Sugar Bowl give up selecting Alabama
Either or, no argument aside from geographical
quote:
Who do you keep out West Virginia?
Ranked below the top 4 conference champs, not in the top ten
quote:
How do you place a non-AQ team that didn't win their own conference
The point is to get rid of the AQ. You shouldn't be guaranteed that spot. Some years, some conferences are more solid than others.
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:34 pm to elprez00
The idea of being Conference Champions to qualify is ignorant. No offense, but it is. The national title game should always be between the two BEST, you have to look at how they performed, and use the eye test. Sometimes, like this year, the two best teams are in the same conference. The idea of a National Title game was always about the two BEST.
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:36 pm to elprez00
Plus one. /thread
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:36 pm to BamaNixon
quote:
So, if all the conference champs have three losses, one of them still gets to go over a one-loss non-champ
The likelihood of the BCS top five mailing it in at the conference CC game is slim. That being said:
ie: LSU loses to UGA in the SEC Championshop, LSU should not play for the NC.
quote:
What if there had been a three-way tie for a division, are the people who lose the tiebreaker completely out of the running for the BCS championship
If everyone had to play a CC game, would solve this.
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:36 pm to AllBamaDoesIsWin
Winnning a conference title has jack shite to do with whether or not you can be considered one of the top 2 teams. Especially when the #1 team is from the same conference.
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:37 pm to AllBamaDoesIsWin
quote:
AllBamaDoesIsWin
The SEC reaches the pinnacle of college football by earning both spots in the BCS title game and these whiny bitches want to cry about it.
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:38 pm to AllBamaDoesIsWin
quote:
use the eye test
Been listening to Fienbaum, haven't we?
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:39 pm to elprez00
I would have rather seen Bama vs Wiscy than I had Clemson.
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:40 pm to swordfishtrombone
quote:
Plus one
This would be best, I agree. Then it can play out on the field.
But I don't think the whole BCS thing is just going to go away, unfortunately.
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:40 pm to delrod03
def.
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:44 pm to elprez00
AQ will be dropped after next year, otherwise the BCS system is perfect.
Posted on 1/5/12 at 4:44 pm to BamaNixon
quote:
So, if all the conference champs have three losses, one of them still gets to go over a one-loss non-champ?
Don't confuse them, they had it all figured out.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News