The W
Views: 98929155
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
16.9.14 0429
The W - Football - Syken: "Don't ruin the moment"
This thread has 3 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.20
Pages: 1
(1128 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (13 total)
Texas Kelly
Lap cheong








Since: 3.1.02
From: FOREST HILLS CONTROLS THE UNIVERSE

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 20 hours
ICQ:  
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.99
Ladies and gentlemen, the following public service message is brought to you by your friends from D-Generation X, who would like to remind each and every one of you that if you're not down with that, we've got two words for you...

After days of looking for it, I finally came across a sportswriter who's daring to be bold in claiming that this year's absolutely tremendous Fiesta Bowl clash between Oklahoma & Boise State is indeed a good argument in the playoff debate - a good argument against one. (Which, for the record, is an opinion I happen to share.)

Educate the masses, Bill Syken (sportsillustrated.cnn.com):


    The game, in other words, was as good as it gets. Which is why I don't get the people who say it was not enough. The Fox broadcasters started in, saying Boise State's performance demonstrated the need for a college playoff. Columnists have since weighed in with similar opinions.

    If anything, I would argue, this game proved the opposite. The system shouldn't be touched, because it creates climaxes like this with no championship on the line. It shows that bowl games work perfectly as an end to themselves.

    In pro football it makes sense that we have only one winner, that every team except one ends its season with a disappointing final result. But every place need not resemble Tolkien's Middle Earth, with one ring to rule them all, and one ring to bind them.

    Boise State's Fiesta Bowl rings will be savored as much as any jewelry that gets minted after the BCS title game because of the power of the memory to which it is attached. It wouldn't have been the same if this were simply a step in a playoff.

Discuss.



e-mail me at texas (dot) kelly (at) gmailread a bunch of incoherent nonsense
now 52% more incoherent!
smark/net attack Advisory System is Elevatedsmark/net attack Advisory System Status is: Elevated
(Holds; June 18, 2006)
While the switch from Cena to RVD should alleviate some complaints, the inevitability of the belt's return to Cena (note where Summerslam is this year) and the poor initial showing by the new ECW are enough to keep the indicator where it is for now. The pieces are in place, though, especially on RAW, for improvements to be made to the IWC's psyche in the near future.
Promote this thread!
wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 12 hours
AIM:  
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.08
Of course I agree. I think what's lost in the playoff debate is the WHY. As in, WHY do we have to have a definitive number one team. Sure other sports do it that way, WHY does college football have to as well. Isn't being different what college football has always been about? No other sport is like it. If anything stop trying entirely and go back to before the BCS. Don't even pretend to try and get a number one team. Let the AP have their poll and name their champ, but don't make it the focus of the sport. These kids aren't pro's yet, it doesn't all have to be about who's number one.

This sport has more tradition and history than anything other than baseball. Some of these teams have been playing for over 100 years. Apparently what they've been doing works pretty well. I've been looking through the ESPN College Football Enclycopedia I got for xmas and I keep saying to myself, "jesus they were playing back then? That bowl was around then? That conference existed in the 1800's?" It just seems crazy to me to now want to rearrange it all and completly change the focus.

Cinderella Boise got it's shot, and got it's win and we all got to enjoy it. WHY does there have to be more?
RYDER FAKIN
Six Degrees of Me








Since: 21.2.02
From: ORLANDO

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 5 days
AIM:  
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.16
Here's a great article. As Deep Throat said - FOLLOW THE MONEY

also included, but not so great - THE PERFECT PLAN. Again.

Click Here (sports.yahoo.com)

FLEA



Demonstrations are a drag. Besides, we're much too high

1ryderfakin.com
Crimedog
Boerewors








Since: 28.3.02
From: Ohio

Since last post: 2673 days
Last activity: 2663 days
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
How does it POSSIBLY ruin the moment if it's a playoff game? Is the Immaculate Reception somehow less great because it was in a playoff game? Home Run Throwback? The Drive? No. They're great moments because they were great moments, regardless of when they happened.

And let's step outside of football a little. You think Bryce Drew is any less thrilled when he thinks about hitting that shot against Ole Miss in the 1998 NCAA tournament because his season ended with a loss?

As for the argument that "Boise State should be happy that it got a chance to play in the BCS," screw THAT. Why shouldn't a team like Boise State get a chance to prove it's the best in the country? Which is a better story: Boise State wins a thrilling Fiesta Bowl against Oklahoma, then goes home for the winter, or Boise State wins a thrilling Fiesta Bowl against Oklahoma, then ends up losing in the national semifinals, making it farther than all sorts of powerhouse programs? Quick, who won last year's NCAA basketball championship? Now, who was the surprise team in the Final Four? I bet you came up with George Mason faster than you did Florida.

Here's the thing that bugs me. All of these arguments against a playoff center around three things: The lessening of the bowl system, money and "academics."

1. Nobody said you couldn't still have bowl games. If you have an eight team playoff, well, then, there's still 56 bowl-eligible teams or whatever out there. Have the bowl games and let the teams that don't make the big show still enjoy a bowl _ just like they do now. You think Ohio U fans are saying "gee, I don't care about this bowl game because it's not part of the BCS (or a playoff)"? HELL no they aren't. They're excited because it's the Bobcats' first bowl game in almost 40 years.

2. I have a really hard time believing that the NCAA, which can get BILLIONS for the rights to its basketball tournament, couldn't make money off a playoff.

3. If there was a playoff, players would be playing during winter break. As it stands right now, OSU players will miss six days of classes because the BCS championship is on Jan. 8. I must have missed all the moral outrage coming from the university presidents about that.

Personally, I'm not saying that there should be some outrageous 32-team tournament or something like that. But give the teams a chance to settle it on the field. We'll never know if Boise State could have beaten Ohio State _ or if Ohio State could have beaten, say, LSU _ because they never got a chance to prove it on the field. Every other sport except for Division I-A football gives teams a chance to earn it. That's all I want.

Java
Goetta








Since: 2.1.02
From: Chandler, AZ

Since last post: 322 days
Last activity: 14 hours
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.89
For those who do not want a playoff, would you support the following:

For basketball, take the top 64 teams, put them in 32 separate games (which I believe is the number of bowl games this year). Take the top 2 from the polls (oh wait, there might be controversy then, but that is good for the sport!) and have them meet in the Tostitos National Championship Basketball game.

Now, if it is good for football, wouldn't it be good for basketball? Especially since they play so many more games and miss more classes. It is about educating the student-athlete, isn't it?
StingArmy
Andouille








Since: 3.5.03
From: Georgia bred, you can tell by my Hawk jersey

Since last post: 37 days
Last activity: 3 days
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.05
One point to consider is what the players want themselves. Some fans want a playoff so that we can have a definitive number one team. Some fans don't care about that and like the current bowl system. But what about the players? And the coaches, for that matter. Do THEY want a definitive number one team? If you listen to Jared Zabransky's (starting QB for Boise State) interview after the Fiesta Bowl, it sure sounds like HE wants the chance to be number one. Plus, I'm sure the schools wouldn't mind the extra revenues and publicity boost that would come with finishing number one.

Just one non-fan-centric perspective.

- StingArmy
Merc
Potato korv








Since: 3.1.02
From: Brisbane, Australia

Since last post: 1251 days
Last activity: 1230 days
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.70
    Originally posted by Java
    >Now, if it is good for football, wouldn't it be good for basketball?


Then do it the opposite way. Have the football teams play a full basketball schedule, including playing tourney games on 3 days break. See how that goes.

The fact is basketball and football are totally diferent games. The fact their methods for finding their champions are different should hardly be surprising.
wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 12 hours
AIM:  
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.08
    Originally posted by StingArmy
    One point to consider is what the players want themselves. Some fans want a playoff so that we can have a definitive number one team. Some fans don't care about that and like the current bowl system. But what about the players? And the coaches, for that matter. Do THEY want a definitive number one team? If you listen to Jared Zabransky's (starting QB for Boise State) interview after the Fiesta Bowl, it sure sounds like HE wants the chance to be number one. Plus, I'm sure the schools wouldn't mind the extra revenues and publicity boost that would come with finishing number one.

    Just one non-fan-centric perspective.

    - StingArmy


Yeah but the other Boise player they interviewed was like, "nope, this was enough for me." The proposal guy. Can't remember his name at the moment.

Anyway, as was said in that article, it doesn't really matter until the people that are complaining actually do something other than just complain. The sport keeps making more and more money each year and gaining in viewers and attendance so they have zero reason to listen to anyone telling them they have to change.
Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 3 hours
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.05
Man, what a wild awesome finish to the Dallas-Seattle game...too bad it was a playoff game and has to be ruined by the next round...





-- 2006 Time magazine Person of the Year --

wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 12 hours
AIM:  
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.08
    Originally posted by Zeruel
    Man, what a wild awesome finish to the Dallas-Seattle game...too bad it was a playoff game and has to be ruined by the next round...




Hey you know what would be cool? If the NFL could make it's first game of the season so important and huge that it would be must see and everything from then on would hinge on it's outcome!

You know, like Texas vs Ohio State.

But hey, playoffs are fun too.
ges7184
Lap cheong








Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 7 days
Last activity: 8 hours
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.40
But should everything hinge on the first game of the season? Doesn't it make more since to build toward a climax instead of starting with one, with everything else being downhill from there? Doesn't that just mean more meaningless games for a lot of teams down the line?

That said, I pretty much agree with your original rant. If the argument is that the BCS is a suitable replacement for a playoff, I am not buying that. However, if the argument is that it is OK not to crown a champ in college football to preserve tradition, I can buy that (I believe they should therefore go back to the old way, no BCS, just bowls and their traditions. If people want to keep doing polls, so be it, but they shouldn't have much significance.) I could also buy that a league of over 100 teams is simply too large to crown a single champion.

But a process based on polls and computers in which only two teams even get a chance to play for the title (and even then, it's not even official until more polls are taken) is just not legitimate.

And that was the point with Boise. Under the current system, they can't win the mythical National Championship. The reasoning is a team like Boise is not good enough to compete against the perceived "real" conferences. They weren't suppose to be able to hang with Oklahoma according to "experts", but not only did they hang with them, they won. But those same people would say that they couldn't hang with Ohio State and Florida. But what if they are wrong? For the championship process to be legitimate, teams like Boise should have a shot.

But if the process is not legitimate, then let's stop pretending that it is, and teams can just focus on winning conference championships.



The Bored are already here. Idle hands are the devil's workshop. And no... we won't kill dolphins. But koalas are fair game.
Java
Goetta








Since: 2.1.02
From: Chandler, AZ

Since last post: 322 days
Last activity: 14 hours
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.51
    Originally posted by Merc
      Originally posted by Java
      >Now, if it is good for football, wouldn't it be good for basketball?


    The fact is basketball and football are totally different games. The fact their methods for finding their champions are different should hardly be surprising.


While I agree they are different games, all other divisions of the NCAA have a 16 team playoff to determine a championship in football. The only sport in the NCAA that does not have a playoff is division 1 football.

I feel the point I was making was valid, that it seems ludicrous to even discuss breaking up March Madness into 32 "bowl" games now, but that is what we do in football.

One other note, I read in the paper yesterday that the Ohio State school semester started. I thought that was one of the big reasons for the bowl games being when they were, so no one would miss school. Oh wait, we could make more money on a Monday night a week after New Year's? Well, a few days missed won't hurt...
wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 12 hours
AIM:  
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.08
    Originally posted by Java
      Originally posted by Merc
        Originally posted by Java
        >Now, if it is good for football, wouldn't it be good for basketball?


      The fact is basketball and football are totally different games. The fact their methods for finding their champions are different should hardly be surprising.


    While I agree they are different games, all other divisions of the NCAA have a 16 team playoff to determine a championship in football. The only sport in the NCAA that does not have a playoff is division 1 football.

    I feel the point I was making was valid, that it seems ludicrous to even discuss breaking up March Madness into 32 "bowl" games now, but that is what we do in football.

    One other note, I read in the paper yesterday that the Ohio State school semester started. I thought that was one of the big reasons for the bowl games being when they were, so no one would miss school. Oh wait, we could make more money on a Monday night a week after New Year's? Well, a few days missed won't hurt...


Academics is not an issue used by most these days. (Try reading the article Flea posted) And no comparing the two isn't valid at all in my view. First the basketball season has more games so you get a better picture of how good each team is. Second, they take so many teams there can be no controversy. Team 65 isn't winning anyway.

If you only take eight or 16 teams, you are easily leaving out teams that could win or at least have a big gripe. Multiple teams.

Yes other college football divisions use a playoff. Their way of picking teams is horribly flawed as well, if you bother following it. Just this year I know Pitt State got screwed, but did anyone hear about it? Nope. No money involved and not enough fans. See what happens the first time Notre Dame or USC gets screwed in that type of system. Not only would they miss the playoffs but whatever bowl they did get would be worth even less than now. No, it's not the same because those other divisions don't have the history, tradition or money involved that DI does.
Thread rated: 5.20
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: Bowl Season
Next thread: Our long national nightmare is over
Previous thread: NFL Coach Firings Thread
(1128 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Off topic, but as someone who did attend the NFL game in London, the biggest cheer in the stadium during the first three (admittedly dire) quarters was everytime highlights from Jacksonville v Dallas was shown on the big screen.
Related threads: Bowl Season - BCS Matchups Set - The State of the BCS - Week 5 - More...
The W - Football - Syken: "Don't ruin the moment"Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.199 seconds.