Congress to ban BCS?"There's somethin' wrong with the world today, The light bulb's gettin' dim" - Aerosmith
View External Link [sports.espn.go.com]
Back to Link List
|Jeremy - Always thinking of, but never about, the children.|
|Alex - I don't need to get steady I know just how I feel|
|In case it isn't apparent, I believe this to be a vagrant overstepping of the responsibility of the federal government as well as a complete waste of tax payer dollars. Whether or not a playoff would be better is completely beside the point.|
|Matt - 3354 Posts|
|Jeremy - I hate our freedoms|
It's almost right out of the "you can't make this shit up" bin. Ignoring that it's a stupid waste of time for the moment*, what in the world could posses these people to think that they just get some sort of say in this? About the closest you could come is that many of the colleges are public universities, but not all, and that's a weak argument anyway. Also, it's not better that they "aren't telling college they have to have a playoff" because all they're doing is saying they can't use the word "champion" without playoffs. In my opinion, it's worse. It seems like just a really sniveling/weaselly way to go about it. "What? We aren't naming your kid. We're just saying the name you pick has to be 4 letters, begin with 'Al' and end with an 'x'. Go nuts." On top of that it almost seems like it takes them out of something they don't have much right to meddle with (college fb) into an area they have even lesser rights (ownership of words in the dictionary)
*Moment over: Yes, sure, you can walk and chew gum at the same time. However, this is something that actually needs to be discussed, debated, written up, altered, etc. Every second you spend on this is a second you aren't spending on something else, and likewise with any aide or fellow representatives you talk about it with. Yes, there can obviously be lots of irons in the fire, but the point is there are lots of way more important things going on and there are indeed only so many of them that can be tended to. Computers are excellent at multitasking, but that doesn't mean an infinite amount of tasks can be run at once.
|Micah - I didn't make that! It fell out of your hair that way!|
|Leaving aside the fact that I completely agree with everyone, wasn't the issue with the BCS more of an anti-trust argument, and the fact that 6 conferences are arbitrarily handed millions of dollars more than every other conference just because that then makes more money for said conferences and ESPN. I know every other sport is just as much a monopoly, but I think the argument stems from there, rather than Joe Congressman demanding a playoff because it would be more exciting (which it would be).|
|Jeremy - 8953 Posts|
There might be some elements like that, but that's not what they're talking about. The two things people seem to be forgetting, as always, is the the whole point of the computer rankings was to rank them by the numbers and ignore all the ways our emotion filled brains do things. Losing game one isn't better than losing game five. It's supposed to be different than the biased filled lists people come up with. Likewise, though it would be better because more teams would have a chance, the teams that make the playoffs would be chosen and seeded just as arbitrarily.
Furthermore at least the current method ensures that both teams in the game are top teams. Indeed, part of what makes the NFL exciting is the one and out playoffs, but it also means that the "Champion" is rarely actually the best team, because a mediocre team just needs to get hot, or catch a couple breaks, to get to the Superbowl, and often doesn't even upset the actual best teams themselves.
I have a feeling that people would love the playoffs system, until a team with 3 losses, one of them a non-conference upset against We-barely-have-enough-students-to-form-a-team State, who eked into the playoffs thanks to weak competition in their conference, wins 2-3 games at the end, and is declared champion.
|Micah - 584 Posts|
Really? I think just the opposite. People love an underdog, and I think that would make people even more interested. Your last paragraph exactly describes the NCAA basketball tournament, which a lot of people, myself included, consider to be the most exciting time in sports. And even with 65 teams, the majority of the time the one that wins the championship is at least a Top 10 team. Say you apply the BCS argument to baseball, then you would have the entire AL East and no one from the Central in the playoffs every year because they had a harder strength of schedule so clearly the Blue Jays are "better" than the Twins and deserve to be there. I get that there's more than 30 teams in college football, but sometimes you have to pick what is more fun to watch, even if it may give you an "imperfect" champion. It is just a game, after all.
By the way, who is winning fantasy football?
|Jeremy - 8953 Posts|
|I think they should do playoffs too, and I do think almost everyone would find it more exciting, but if your goal is to ensure that who emerges is really the best team, then this will almost assuredly make matters worse, and almost can't make it better.|