More on Why I Love the Bowls
by Adam Bittner on Dec 22, 2009 1:31 PM EST
Email
PrintYou know why I love the BCS system? Because of this.
Six teams, all 7-7, all realistically in the playoff race with two weeks to go.
If you're one of the people that complains about the bowl system and how it let's .500 teams play in the postseason, then you can't possibly be a fan of this at the same time. If 6-6 teams in college football don't "deserve" to be playing in a bowl, then these mediocre NFL teams don't deserve to be in the playoff race either.
The good thing about the bowl system is that these teams can't compete for the national championship.
And I know, I know, if there were a college playoff, they wouldn't anyway. But 2 and 3 loss teams would, and though they might not be as flawed as a .500 team, they still have their problems, and would only make the title game because they got hot at the right time.
Pardon me for loving a system that allows us to skip right to two undefeated teams, who've played consistently well all season long, playing for the championship.
Maybe the bowl system isn't perfect. Every now and then you get a scenario like this year where three undefeated teams got the shaft. It happens. But the bowl system, at the very least, is unique, and rather than bemoan it's flaws, I'm going to continue to celebrate it.
Thanks for the fanpost! Please do not post any content from a premium site that requires a subscription. Also, if you just want to share a link, quote, or video, please consider using fanshots instead. Thanks.
108 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Fixed.
Pardon me for loving a system that allows us to skip right to two undefeated teams, who’ve played consistently well all season long, playing for the championship.
….. * who’ve played consistently well against Louisiana-Monroe, Wyoming, UTEP, Baylor, Kansas, Colorado, North Texas, Tennessee-Chattanooga and FIU.
And Florida
Everyone has those games on their resume.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 22, 2009 2:04 PM EST up reply actions
Sure
But doesn’t mean it’s right. I have no interest in seeing an undefeated Texas team that hasn’t beaten anyone. My point is that this bowl system limits your possibilities and makes for a much lamer season.
A playoff system, however, puts this Texas team against other undefeated teams, meaning a better shot at perhaps not seeing another OSU-blowout-style MNC. A playoff gives teams like TCU, BYU, Boise, Cincy, etc. a crack at taking on teams like Bama, Texas and Florida.
Seriously, competition makes things much more exciting — why would you even want to limit that?
by smashtheguitar on Dec 22, 2009 2:24 PM EST up reply actions
I don't feel as if it's limited
That’s why we have the other bowl games. We have two unbeatens playing in the Fiesta Bowl. Cincinnati is getting its shot at Florida.
The problem is more FBS being to large allowing for crappy OOC schedules that don’t give us a better look at who’s the best and who isn’t ahead of bowl season. I’m not saying we couldn’t improve on this system dramatically, but the end result doesn’t bother me one bit.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 22, 2009 2:43 PM EST up reply actions
My point with the BCS is this
Who is to say which one is better? I know, I know, settle it on the field. But didn’t the Giants and Patroits settle it on the field (on the Giants own field no less) at the end of December, only to have to resettle it five weeks later? What changed?
College football, at least in theory, attempts to award it’s championship to the team that had the best overall season. Is the method perfect, not exaclty. But it’s certainly more subtle than throwing 16 teams into a bowl and letting them sort it out after a whole season of compeition would have otherwise eliminated all but (at most) four of them from contention.
It’s just different. Deal with it.
Beat LSU
by jesse. on Dec 22, 2009 2:39 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Conference champions only
And Notre Dame. Or Navy, more likely.
by ReadingRambler on Dec 25, 2009 4:20 PM EST up reply actions
Super Bowl
But didn’t the Giants and Patroits settle it on the field (on the Giants own field no less) at the end of December, only to have to resettle it five weeks later? What changed?
Agree totally. People often like to point to that Super Bowl as to why playoffs are so great and, to me, it illustrates how stupid playoffs can potentially be at times.
The Patriots and the Giants played 2 games in the 2007 season, going 1-1 and the Patriots had the far better overall season. And yet the Giants are “champions” based simply on the timing of one game. It’s pretty silly and arbitrary.
[I also hate the concept that “playing well at the end of the season” is somehow more meaningful or important than playing well in the beginning or being consistent all year. Why is playing well at the end better? Makes no sense to me.]
Who is to say which one is better?
MY TURN! Looking at all sports, which ones can you say fairly award championships? The NHL, NBA, and MLB have multi-game series leading up to a championship. The NFL does the same, with single-game series. College basketball has a 65 (maybe more?) team tournament where a 6 game winning streak gets you a crown. College volleyball, baseball, soccer, softball and on and on use bracket style systems. Why does college football use a ranking based system that leads into bowls, where only two teams have a shot at a MNC? Tradition? Hooey. Best season? Why don’t the other sports merit this question?
Many pundits have put forth many different options, some asinine, some meritorious of a second look. I don’t have either, because I don’t have a solution. But when jesse. asks who is to say which one is better, I think a safe answer is every other sporting system, at least semi-major sporting system, in the professional and collegiate ranks. Now before someone (Rambler) goes and quotes me and then says “BUT WAIT! DIVISION 3 COLLEGE FENCING IS RANKINGS BASED!”, I don’t care. The sports I picked above are, in my view, the major, and just under the major, sports in America. If a bracket style system arguably works for all of them (the path to the Super Bowl has never garnered anti-trust or Congressional hearings), why can’t a similar beast work for college football.
One notably absent “sport” from my list above is NASCAR, which uses a points based system to determine Cup Series winners (or so I’m told, I’ve watched less than one NASCAR event in my life and I’m not here to argue the merits of the sport, or lack thereof). However, as jesse. notes, “didn’t the Giants and Patroits settle it on the field (on the Giants own field no less) at the end of December, only to have to resettle it five weeks later?” How is this any different than Jeff Gordon and Jimmie Johnson going head to head 75 times a year (really, doesn’t it seem like they race every week and twice on the holidays?)? They may be incompatible (the BCS and NASCAR, not Gordon and Johnson, though they may be incompatible too), but a NASCAR points based system is the best I could come up with to compare.
Rambling aside, it would not take much to switch to a bracket based playoff to determine the national champ. Who says Alabama and Texas wouldn’t get there anyway? And if Alabama would have lost to TCU in the Final Four, then good, the best team is in the Championship. If a 2-loss PSU team upsets undefeated Texas in the Round of 16, they should move on. How is that any different than Villanova winning the title or the Steelers winning like 14 straight to not only make the playoffs but win the Super Bowl in ‘05. Anyway, that’s all I got for now.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
Boom.
What would happen tomorrow if the NFL announced they were getting rid of the playoffs, and that they would take the two best teams, as voted on by the 32 coaches and a bunch of random people—former players, reporters, etc—to play in the Super Bowl? You think anyone would like that idea? Because that’s exactly what the BCS is.
NittanyWhiteOut.com. Arguably the second best Penn State blog I know of.
That's an epic comment
+1
Except I disagree with you on many fronts.
Would I mind a college playoff? No, I’d still watch, and probably still enjoy it quite a bit. There’s nothing wrong with the idea, and I’m not going to tell you you’re “wrong” for liking it. But you can’t deny that it awards mediocity far more than the bowl system, and that’s why I like it as a change of pace.
And let’s not even get started on money. The NHL and NBA playoffs are two months long and include a ridiculous 16 teams specifically so they can cram “must-win-game 3” down our throats for two months only to end up with the Lakers and Celtics in the Finals anyway. An NHL or NBA postseason can include as many as 105 games, which in my opinion is about 80 too many to determine a champion after and 82-game regular season. Unless my team, in my case the Pens, is involved, I’m not going to tune in, if I ever do, until the Finals for this reason.
As for the NFL, when six 7-7 teams are still in the race with 2 weeks to go, it speaks to how watered down the product is. They aren’t about finding a champion, they’re about keeping as many markets interested as long as possible by adding the wildcard spots.
There’s nothing unfair about any of those systems, but #1, they’re as money driven as anything in college football, and #2 they’re totally unneccesary for the most part.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 22, 2009 3:44 PM EST up reply actions
It was unnecessary
for the Giants to win the Super Bowl? For an 8 seed like Edmonton to reach the Stanley cup a few years back? Sure, maybe 16 of 30 teams is a bit much, but I’d rather be overreachingly inclusive than exclude teams that are better than those playing for the championship! Nothing you say could convince me that Texas is a better team than TCU, and yet what happens? 3 undefeated teams get screwed over. If there has to be a playoff, you’d probably prefer a 4-team one in which an undefeated team STILL gets screwed over, wouldn’t you? How many undefeated teams need to get shut out before we finally do something about it?
NittanyWhiteOut.com. Arguably the second best Penn State blog I know of.
Sure someone can always pull it off...
See the ‘06 Steelers and the ’07 Golden State Warriors. But there’s a reason those teams made history. These things don’t happen. They’re the exception to the rule by an overwhelming margin.
As far as the absurd number of undefeateds this season, it’s the first time we’ve had more than 3, and rarely do we even get that, so I’d make the same argument many do to keep the electoral collage: It works the vast majority of the time in getting the right person elected, or in this case, into the championship game. There’s no reason to scrap a system that works most of the time for freakshows like this year.
And even in years where there aren’t 2 undefeated teams, everyone had a chance to win all their games, stay unbeaten, and get to the title game. Granted if you’re a non-qualifies, you’re probably going to get screwed, but that’s more of a reason to tweak the current system to allow for those teams to qualify in years the BCS leagues don’t have enough undefeated squads than make a new one for them.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 22, 2009 4:19 PM EST up reply actions
They’re the exception to the rule by an overwhelming margin.
They are the BIG exceptions. A team with more losses beats a team with less losses in major sport playoffs more often than “rarely.”
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 22, 2009 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
But the question is how many make it all the way
Edmonton lost to Carolina. Golden State fell out after beating the Mavericks. What made the Giants and Steelers so amazing was how we’d never seen anything like it before. Maybe the idea of that being a possibility intrigues you, and I can’t blame you, but it’s just not as entertaining to me as seeing the two teams who most agree have been the best all season long meet for the title.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 22, 2009 4:40 PM EST up reply actions
If the demand is there, the production will increase as will output. I'm pretty sure that was sound economics, right?
What I’m saying is that as long as Americans (and increasingly, Europeans and Asians) are watching a sport, that sport will increase its airtime. The NHL started with like 6 teams in Detroit, and now they have something like 44. The markets are there, and with the increase in teams comes a need to expand the playoff system. The NBA, MLB, and NFL are the exact same way. Sure the playoffs in the NBA and NHL may seem drawn out, but the winning team could play as many as 28 extra games and as few as 16…that doesn’t seem like an absurd amount to me. It only SEEMS to be 105 more games because there are 16 teams and games every night.
The problem with the BCS is that it already has the built in previous 104 games in lesser bowls, so switching to a playoff is unnecessary in terms of money. Fairness SHOULD trump money, but it never will. What needs to happen for a switch to come is for the BCS to realize that there is more money to be made in a playoff (whether that is true or not, I’m not sure). Playoffs proponents needs the guys from Thank You For Smoking to spin some tales (I think Rahm Emanuel is busy) and get this playoff ball rolling.
Either way, fugi, agree to disagree. Unless you agree with me, then I win.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 22, 2009 3:52 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, it's just not my cup of tea
You see it more as “Who could win the title?” where I see it more as “who should?” It’s more preference than anything else.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 22, 2009 4:24 PM EST up reply actions
Then why have bowls?
Tradition and money aside (which I understand is a BIG aside, but for the moment, honor the aside), why would it even be necessary to have bowls? Why not make the champion whoever is the leading vote getter after the regular season? “Who could win the title?” seems to be a better outlook as it allows teams the chance to win even if they’ve stumbled once or twice. Just because Florida steamrolled Kiski Prep doesn’t mean that they’re any more deserving than Oregon State to be in the finals. Play it on the field. Extend the season to get a 16 team playoff in. Make more money on tickets. “Who should win the title?” can be achieved in a playoff…maybe not a 65 team playoff, but would you be absolutely heartbroken upset if West Virginia (BCS #16) won the title this year? Sure they are #16, but they would have had to beat 4 really good teams to do it. I don’t think there is as big a line between should and could as you see it.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 22, 2009 4:30 PM EST up reply actions
Cuz Bowls Are Fun
I get to go to Disney World in December. That’s why. True, not everyone gets to go to a sweet location, but the bowls began as purely a reason to draw tourists, not to find out who the champion should be.
So in that sense, you should probably be happy the BCS has already established a two team playoff that didn’t exist before. But in my mind, after watching the teams all season, two is enough to know pretty definitively who had the best season, though this season might not have been as definitive as most others.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 22, 2009 4:44 PM EST up reply actions
Then keep the bowls, but add the playoff (or build it in)
The only thing you would get would be more revenue, more viewers, more tickets (see expanding market idea above). I wasn’t saying get rid of all bowls, just using it as a point to show that the one MNC should be the result of some sort of playoff system.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 22, 2009 4:59 PM EST up reply actions
But it is
It’s a two game playoff.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 22, 2009 5:01 PM EST up reply actions
I must be missing something.
Texas and Alabama are playing twice in January? Or are you saying that only the four teams in the B12/SEC Championships should be considered for the MNC?
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 22, 2009 5:13 PM EST up reply actions
I meant two team playoff
My bad.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 22, 2009 5:18 PM EST up reply actions
i'm sorry
2-game playoff sounds just as ridiculous as 1-game winning streak…it’s sort of a meaningless term
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!
Yes, I would be very, very upset if WV won the title.
It makes the entire preceding season a fraud. And it’s part of the reason professional football is so hard for me to care about unti January. The more undesearving teams that “win” championships, the less I care about that sport (probably why CFB is the only sport I still follow fervently).
The playoff argument seems too often to lump in non-playoff complaints in the current system assault. You say “fairness” should trump money, but how would WV getting a shot this season be fair? More importantly, above you rail on the ranking system. A playoff doesn’t necessarily change the ranking system. In fact you just used the ranking system in your argument that WV would make a playoff. Any system where the ranking is ok to determine which undeserving teams get a chance to play for the NC should be ok to you to determine which 2 teams play for it straight up. In fact, I think that is far more “fair” than including WV, LSU, PSU etc this year.
by PSUinBOSSton on Dec 22, 2009 4:48 PM EST up reply actions
Rankings should be the means to the ends, not the ends themselves.
There is no way to arbitrarily pick 16 teams, so rankings are needed. But the rankings shouldn’t be used to decide which two (and ONLY two) teams get to have a shot for the title. And while WVU winning may be upsetting, it would be only because WVU would have beaten four good teams, one of which being Texas or Bama.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 22, 2009 4:56 PM EST up reply actions
Doesn't matter how many good teams they beat.
They still LOST too many to be in contention. You can’t say you want a playoff, because it’s more fair, and then use the (hypothetical) result as your evidence for why it’s fair. That’s results oriented thinking.
If winning the playoff automatically makes the team qualified to be the national champion, let’s take the top 15 teams and the 120th ranked team. Hey if Western Kentucky gets in this year based on being the 120th team and wins, at least they beat good teams to do it.
by PSUinBOSSton on Dec 22, 2009 7:50 PM EST up reply actions
Winning the playoff doesn't make them qualified to be champ
Being in the playoff makes them qualified to TRY to be the champ. That’s where the rankings come in. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be some sort of rankings. That’s asinine. But the rankings should only take you so far, then a bracket style system should be implemented. And as for you “lost too many to be in contention”, as I said above, last year’s Utah would like to talk to you. Where do you draw the line on too many losses? 2-loss LSU? 1-loss Florida over an undefeated? These questions are eradicated with a playoff (unless you advocate a four team playoff and this year is your example).
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 22, 2009 11:19 PM EST up reply actions
Looking at all sports, which ones can you say fairly award championships?
Just as a counter point and FWIW: European soccer leagues uniformly award their championships based on final standings of the regular season. No playoffs, no brackets. Just overall quality of season.
Now, I’m not saying that’s a practical comparison for a ~110 team 1-A football with only 12 regular season games, but it is worth noting that not everything has to be a playoff to determine a champion. Playoffs aren’t necessary the “right” answer for everything.
Personally, I think it’s stupid that conferences use tournaments in NCAA basketball to determine their conference champions when they mostly play round robin schedules anyway. Isn’t that regular season results enough? I love that the Ivy League still doesn’t have a conference tourney.
I have a couple thoughts here
First, college football will NEVER see the parity the NFL sees. Not in the next 100 years or so anyway. Too many variables in college athletics, whereas the NFL is built on keeping the playing field as level as possible. This means no college playoff is likely to have a New York Giant beat a New England Patriot, regardless of format. Remember Boise State beating Oklahoma in 2006? Imagine them coming up with enough trick plays to beat Ohio State, Florida, etc. afterward too. This is my strongest argument for some type of playoff.
Secondly, what about a conditional format??? 2 undefeated FBS teams? Let them play for all the marbles. Even if it ends up being undefeated USC vs. undefeated Utah and USC blows them out, I wouldn’t mind. It’s a reward for USC being the only undefeated BCS team. 4 undefeated teams? Easy playoff. We’ll figure something else out if there’s an odd number of undefeateds….
One thing I like about the bowls
Is that you have a better chance of ending the season on a winning note. The Orange Bowl was a great way to cap off a great season in 2005. Whereas with the pros, unless your team wins it all, you’re going to have a bad taste in your mouth. When my Mariners won 116 games in 2001, it was the one of the greatest summers of my life. But my longest lasting memories of that season are related to the disappointment of losing to the Yankees in the ALCS.
Not saying one or the other is a better, just something I was thinking about.
And since I was talking about baseball-that postseason is not a good indicator at all of who the best team is. You play a 162-game marathon to decide who gets in the postseason and the championship is decided in short series where you don’t even have to use all your starting pitchers. So, a 2-person team (ie the 2001 Diamondbacks) can win the whole thing.
Sort of a threadjack
But Fugi, and any of our other suffering Pirate fans, really needs to read this.
Beat LSU
Not sure where your feelings rest about the Buccos
But the Ramirez trade doomed the Bucs on so many fronts. It’s amazing NH had the balls to come in and do the right thing knowing full well he’d be crucified for the all the trades that have taken place in the last two years.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 23, 2009 11:24 AM EST up reply actions
I've had some manner of season tickets
every year since 2001, I hit about 15-20 games a year. The reason I posted the article is becase I really thought it was just about the most spot on summary of the past ten years of Pirates baseball that one can write. Sad, tragic, stupid, funny, and even endering in parts.
Beat LSU
This decade
It was a crapfest with high notes on the bookends. Moving into PNC Park, even with 100 losses, will always be a high point from me, and the first two years of the NH era have been fun, if not a bit nerver wracking to watch. But the Littlefield years just look worse and worse the more you see this team operate as an actual baseball franshise, despite the results on the field being the same.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 23, 2009 1:06 PM EST up reply actions
Just reading that made my blood boil.
That team is dead to me. I’m thinking of selling my baseball allegiance on eBay.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 23, 2009 12:27 PM EST up reply actions
O c'mon Junny, you're bigger than that
If you enter with no expectations, this team will never disappoint. On the nights they win, you leave hopeful, and on the nights they suck, you chuckle a little bit.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 23, 2009 12:56 PM EST up reply actions
And you always get to experience the sax guy on the bridge
DON’T BE CHEAP, MY KIDS NEED TO EAT!
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 23, 2009 1:11 PM EST up reply actions
The man's actually a doctor
Believe it or not.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 23, 2009 1:31 PM EST up reply actions
A real doctor, or a doctor like Dr. J is a doctor?
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 23, 2009 1:37 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
A Real One
At least that’s what some people inside the offices on Federal St. have told me. I’ve seen him around 5:00ish on my way to the ballpark before the bulk of the crowd begins arriving, and he’s always looking for parking in a black BMW.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 23, 2009 1:47 PM EST up reply actions
Scrubs reference gets a rec.
NittanyWhiteOut.com. Arguably the second best Penn State blog I know of.
I don't know
They got pretty unwatchable in August. Not even I could bring myself to keep going to games toward the end of the season.
Regardless, I say we all pitch in, buy Junny’s allegance, and make him keep being a Pirate fan.
Beat LSU
I'm on board with that. And I promise I won't use the money for women of the night.
I’ll always be a Buccos fan (it played prominently in my best man speech a few months ago), it’s just frustrating as hell when your team is eliminated from playoff contention in April.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 23, 2009 1:22 PM EST up reply actions
I Dunno
I don’t get frustrated. The team right now is bad because it’s young, and not because the players stink, so that dulls things a little for me. And the late Bay-McLouth-Nady-Wilson-Sanchez team was entertaining if nothing else.
Save for the two post-deadline collapses (which were to be expected with all the trades) the past two years, the Pirates haven’t been THAT bad. I also think this year will see a sizeable jump in wins if only because the team will stay together all season. I wouldn’t be surprised if they won between 75-80 and kept their nose in contention until at maybe August, especially if Alvarez gets here in May and starts to make an impact. There’s a lot to be said for consistancy in baseball, and I think now that we have the chance to have that for a full 6 months, 2010 has a real chance not to suck as bad as many think it will.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 23, 2009 1:43 PM EST up reply actions
I'll qualify that
I don’t expect them to win 75+ games, but it wouldn’t shock me.
They’re more looking at high 60s, low-mid 70s.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 23, 2009 1:45 PM EST up reply actions
With all due respect, and I respect your opinion, youre nuts.
People here in the burgh have been saying the same thing for 17 years. “Hope for the best, expect the worst.” When can I start hoping for the worst and expecting the 62 mets? I’ve been hearing “they’re a young team” since I can remember, yet nothing seems to happen. Did these players find the fountain of youth, and no one gets older and realizes their potential? Or is it that the management has their heads so far up their asses they can’t figure out how to run a ballclub (which is somewhat of a lie as the pirates are one of the best per capita earning teams in the league, but money doesn’t bring winning teams, in pittsburgh baseball at least). ARGH!
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 23, 2009 2:04 PM EST up reply actions
Well
It would take me a long time to explain why this time things are different. I highly reccommend Bucs Dugout
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 23, 2009 2:21 PM EST up reply actions
Eh
Everyone knows Fugi is a homer. It’s a fact. :)
by ReadingRambler on Dec 24, 2009 10:45 PM EST up reply actions
So,
correct me if i’m wrong, but you would rather have the Meineke Car Care Bowl over NFL teams being in contention with a 7-7 record? You gots to be kiddin’. I would rather go to a Pirate game than a bowl.
What I said was...
You can’t tell me that this NFL wild card race is the s*** in the same breath that you decry the bowl system. If you like mediocrty in one, you have to like it in the other and vice versa, otherwise your contradicting yourself.
A 6-6 bowl team is no better or worse in it’s sport than a 7-7 NFL team, and the fact that a 7-7 NFL team can win the championship, in my opinion, is why the BCS is a better system.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 23, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions
Keep the 28 bowls that nobody gives a shit about,
let a bunch of teams feel good about themselves, and make an 8 team playoff. What’s hard about this?
NittanyWhiteOut.com. Arguably the second best Penn State blog I know of.
TWSS
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 23, 2009 9:29 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Not hard at all
My point all along has been A) the bowl system is unique/change of pace and B) A playoff rewards the weak.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 23, 2009 9:36 PM EST up reply actions
agreed
I like the tradtion as well but I want the old names back
"A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. "
George S Patton
by psu in the w-b on Dec 23, 2009 10:15 PM EST up reply actions
So you keep the bowl system!
Does anyone really care about the San Diego Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl? The International Bowl? The Beef O’Brady’s Bowl? No, but if you want to keep that, for the fans, for the kids to get a free vacation, sure. Why not. But the games that do matter, the Rose Bowl, the Sugar Bowl, the Orange Bowl would get EVEN MORE gravity, even more import with a playoff system. This isn’t very difficult. At the very least, can you admit that most years there aren’t an absolute top-2? Would you disagree with anyone who says TCU is better than Texas? How about a 4-team playoff? A plus-one, it’s just one extra game, and almost every season, the #3 and #4 are almost equal to the #2. If the top 4 out of 120 is mediocrity, hell, if 8 of 120 is mediocre, I don’t know what elite is, apparently.
NittanyWhiteOut.com. Arguably the second best Penn State blog I know of.
Most Years...
There aren’t 2, or even 3 undefeated teams.
There might be one, and that team gets into the title game.
After that, it’’s about what one loss people think are better, or in LSU’s case in 2007, two loss. I don’t feel any pain for a one loss that gets left out.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 24, 2009 11:49 AM EST up reply actions
Years with 2 or more undefeated teams in the regular season
2009, 2008, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2002, 1999 … etc.
Most years there are two or more undefeated teams. Of course, they’re often left out of the title game, but if one doesn’t care what one-loss teams make it and which don’t, then why would one care about which undefeated teams make it?
I don't
Anyway…
2008-two non-qualifiers: Boise and Utah
2006-Exactly two, both auto-qualifiers
2005-Exactly two, both auto-qualifiers
2004-3 undefeateds, Auburn left out
2002-Exactly two, both auto-qualifiers
1999-3, one a non-qualifier
So Cincinnati and Auburn are the only two undefeated auto-qualifiers in 11 seasons to be left out. Boo hoo. The system is fine.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 24, 2009 4:23 PM EST up reply actions
So you play your schedule
Beat everyone on it, destroy every team in your path, and have zero shot at playing in the title game, and you’re fine? You’re FINE with a system that shuts out half the teams BEFORE THEY PLAY A GAME? Bull fucking shit, Fugi, and I can’t believe anyone would be so obtuse.
NittanyWhiteOut.com. Arguably the second best Penn State blog I know of.
Hey now
No reason to start hurling insults.
I’ll repeat myself one last time:
1. The bowl system is unique
2. A playoff rewards mediocre teams (see above).
Those aren’t opinions, they’re facts, and they’re why I like the bowl system. If you don’t, then I mean, to each his own.
The BCS could always use a tweak or two, but I’m more than happy with 1 vs. 2 at the end of the season.
Merry Christmas.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 25, 2009 2:07 AM EST up reply actions
Crap.
I had a really long response, but inadvertently hit control-w. Suffice it to say, I dissected your argument and made you look foolish.
NittanyWhiteOut.com. Arguably the second best Penn State blog I know of.
You know...
If you don’t post a response you’re just gonna sound like a pompous jerk.
Suffice it to say, I dissected your argument and made you look foolish.
Too late.
by ReadingRambler on Dec 25, 2009 4:19 PM EST up reply actions
I disproved the theory of relativity
but I lost my notes and work, but I swear I totally pwned Einstein!
by dawsonPSU10 on Dec 25, 2009 10:18 PM EST up reply actions
Dude
You must have cheated off of my paper because I did that…
But my dog ate the paper.
I think it was E=Horrible TV but I can’t remember…
GEAUX TIGERS!!!
Here we go
The argument of “rewarding” mediocrity might work in the context of the NBA or NHL playoffs, where teams with a sub-.500 record make the playoffs, and 16 of 30 or 32 teams make the post-season. Even so, the vast majority of the time, you’ll see a 1, 2, or 3 seed make, and win, the championship game. The same philosophy is evident in the NCAA tournament. You’ll see 65 teams in the tournament, but of the final four, how many teams were 13, 14, and 15 seeds? None. And even when one made the final four, in George Mason, they still didn’t win the championship, right? So your argument is practically null right there, whenever you get a number of teams together, the wheat separates from the chaff, no? But when you take 120 teams, it’s practically impossible to assert that the #2 and #3 teams are incredibly separate from one another. Taking the top 4 or even the top 8 of 120 teams means you’re taking 3 or 7 percent of the league, not half, not a third, not even a quarter, like in baseball. A 4-team playoff, or plus-one system isn’t rewarding a team that happened to get hot, but all it serves to do is minimize the amount of complaining that a 3 or 4 seed could have. And oh, the complaining that should take place! What makes Texas so much more deserving than Cincinnati, this year, since you place the auto-qualifing conferences on a pedestal, EVEN DESPITE THE FACT that non-BCS schools have won 3 out of their 4 BCS games! Was Oklahoma, or Alabama, or Pitt simply not trying? Could the Utahs and Boise States and TCUs and BYUs of the world really NEVER be as good as the Texases and Floridas? You seem to think that never, under ANY circumstances, should a non-BCS school make the championship game, which means that a good half the schools are eliminated from post-season contention before the season even starts! And that extends to Cincinnati this year and Auburn a few years back, when your entire championship potential is decided by a handful of AP voters in August! Just because they were ranked low in the preseason meant they had no chance, despite winning out and winning just as well as Texas or as USC. The Bowl System is unique, but since when is that more important than actually determining a champion with upsetting very little? You know what was even more unique than the current bowl system? When tie-ins were SOLELY based on conferences, and we almost never had a title game. What could be more unique than a sport who had random sportswriters COMPLETELY determine a champion, where a guy like Joe Paterno has more than a half-dozen teams that couldn’t have done anything differently and yet only 2 of them ever were “voted” national champions. Give me the argument that the regular season is, in effect, a playoff, or that it’s “too much work” for the kids. But not uniqueness.
You see, adding one more game to the schedule for 2 teams doesn’t upset the balance. You can still have your Holiday Bowl and your San Diego Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl and your Beef O’Brady’s Bowl, but instead of having a number of teams, year-in and year-out who can bitch and moan about the latent unfairness of an antiquated system, you’re adding 1 game, giving 2 more teams a chance, and making sure that there are 3 games that really matter to more than just fans of a certain team. Me, I could care less about the Fiesta Bowl this year, and the same goes for the Sugar Bowl, the Rose Bowl, and the Orange Bowl. I’ll watch, religiously, only the Cap One and the Championship Game. But I watched, religiously, the Texas-Nebraska and Florida-Alabama games. Why? Because those were, in effect, playoff games. It was win and play for the title or go home for those teams, and extending that to a playoff structure couldn’t possibly hurt. The conferences that have the playoff games (because that’s exactly what the conference championship games are) are more exciting and more interesting, right? So wouldn’t you rather watch multiple games that are meaningful than just one?
/whatnowbitches?
NittanyWhiteOut.com. Arguably the second best Penn State blog I know of.
To each his own
I’m not going to tell you any of what you said in that diatribe is wrong. It just doesn’t matter to me. I don’t care whether it’s fair, I like the system as it is. Simple as that.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 26, 2009 12:02 PM EST up reply actions
and the swiss liked getting rich on jew gold
But that didn’t make it right. What you like and what’s the right thing are quite often divergent philosophies.
NittanyWhiteOut.com. Arguably the second best Penn State blog I know of.
by PSUdevon on Dec 26, 2009 2:01 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
The problem with "playoff people" is that they are totally myopic
Your argument is that a playoff is the only right way, because that’s how everybody else does it.
There is really no convincing them of anything else.
Beat LSU
True that
I’m perfectly cool with 1-A college football having no national champion but having a regular season that is intense and fun.
I don’t see a need that a playoff has to be created or that we have to have a national champion. The sport has done just fine without them.
How come I always hear them defend playoffs saying "most of the time."
That is, most of the time the highest ranking seeds win. I hear that every time I point out that undeserving teams can be granted the unequivocal title of champion. “But most of the time the top ranked teams DO win,” I’m told. If that is the validating result, then why do they undeserving teams even get a shot? (I know the answer, it’s because of money, but that was rhetorical)
by PSUinBOSSton on Dec 28, 2009 1:25 PM EST up reply actions
If it's 4 teams
or even 8 teams, they’re all “the best teams” in the country. You do realize how rare it is for a #1 and #2 to completely distinguish themselves from the rest of the pack, right?
NittanyWhiteOut.com. Arguably the second best Penn State blog I know of.
This is basically the crux of the argument.
Playoff proponents (apparently me and devon) will say that the parity at the top isn’t as great as the current system will have us believe and we need a playoff to have more conviction in naming a national champ.
BCS proponents (everyone else) say that the system works as it is because it’s currently fair and the proposed playoffs won’t work.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 28, 2009 1:56 PM EST up reply actions
It doesn't happen every year, but that doesn't make it rare.
Here’s my main problem though. You’re assuming the 4, or 8 team would be “all the best.” Well first off you’re still presumably using a ranking system to determine which teams those are. You haven’t solved the problem of ranking the correct teams.
More importanty for me, if there are more than 2 teams that “clearly distinguish” themselves, then how does expanding the field help capture exactly that number from year to year. If you can’t capture the exact number of teams that have “clearly distinguished” themselves, chances are you are going to capture teams that didn’t distinguish themselved and don’t deserve a chance to play for the NC.
Now it’s not a matter of “settling it on the field” because both methods are arguably “unfair.” The question now comes down to preference, would you rather have teams that didn’t do enough to earn a shot win the championship, or would you rather have teams that sometimes should have had a chance left out? That’s a matter of preference, not science or objectivity or anything like that.
Now I’m not saying we shouldn’t or can’t tweak the current system and make it better, but going to an 8 or (especially) 16 team playoff where you don’t even need to win your own conference sounds to me even more of an arbitrary way to determine a champion than the current system.
by PSUinBOSSton on Dec 28, 2009 3:28 PM EST up reply actions
Well I guess this entire argument comes down to preference.
For me, the other sports with playoffs get it (more) right than the BCS system. Or, put another way, the other sports get it right more often than the BCS system. However, it seems that I will not convince you otherwise, nor will you convince me. Things will not change anytime soon, this is just more fodder for pundits and bloggers to discuss.
It does make the holiday season more interesting though, especially when you’ve got days off. I can only read so much Malcolm Gladwell and Steven Leavitt before I feel the urge to analyze something too much.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 28, 2009 3:40 PM EST up reply actions
You're a superfreak?
Superfreak!
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
Not yet.
That was a present to my dad this weekend with explicit instructions to return it to me once he’s done with it. That’s how I roll on Christmas.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 28, 2009 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
and that's why I'm not in favor of 16 team scenarios
4 or 8, tops.
NittanyWhiteOut.com. Arguably the second best Penn State blog I know of.
I don't hate the idea of a 4 team,
except that i think it’s insane to think they don’t expand it.
I am amenable to 8 also, as long as there are no teams involved that didn’t win their conference. Current BCS conference champs and top 2 non-bcs conference champions.
Despite my opposition, I’m not opposed to all playoff formats, but I am opposed to selling out for any playoff no matter what it looks like.
by PSUinBOSSton on Dec 28, 2009 8:26 PM EST up reply actions
The question now comes down to preference, would you rather have teams that didn’t do enough to earn a shot win the championship, or would you rather have teams that sometimes should have had a chance left out? That’s a matter of preference, not science or objectivity or anything like that.
Great point. And I very much fall under the category of rather seeing teams that should have had a chance excluded than seeing those who don’t deserve a shot get one. A playoff is unnecessarily inclusive, especially if you are talking about 16 teams ones which generally seem the most popular (I’m not much of a fan of 8 team proposals either). I don’t want to see some 3 or 4 loss team get a shot just because they won their conference.
That said, my personally preference, if we want to “correct” current problems, is to go to a “plus one” system that sets a “championship game” matchup after the bowls are played. I think that would preserve the intensity of the regular season and maintain the tradition of the bowls while given more traction to a “champion” earning it on the field (by having to win 2 post-season games). Also, doing it post bowls gives us a ton more info about strength of schedule with all the inter-conference matchups.
Of course, it still wouldn’t be a real championship, but it would give a lot more value to the final opinion polls than come out IMHO. Since people seem to get so caught up in them.
Totally with you.
Scrap the current NC game, go back to 4 BCS games with conference championship tie ins and 2 at large teams. THEN pick the top 2 teams to play one week later.
by PSUinBOSSton on Dec 28, 2009 8:52 PM EST up reply actions
Re: jew gold
I’d say the whole word next time
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
Dynamite drop in, Monty!
Can’t get enough of her, or either of her shows.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 28, 2009 12:14 PM EST up reply actions
While I may disagree with your tone and general asshatery of going about this
I agree with your basic premise. I would almost argue for an 8 or even 16 team tournament, but even if they start with 4, that’s better than what we have now.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 28, 2009 12:15 PM EST up reply actions
MNC
Beat everyone on it, destroy every team in your path, and have zero shot at playing in the title game, and you’re fine?
The primary problem here with your point is that there is no title game and there is national championship. So, no team can really be excluded.
There is some bowl games that are set up to establish who gets the #1 ranking in an opinion poll, but that’s not the same thing as a championship (even if the bowl likes to call itself the “BCS Championship Game”).
I’m fine with people arguing that there should be a national championship in 1-A football (personally, I don’t care much either way). But too many people start with from the premise that there is a championship and it’s executed in a flawed manner and try to “correct” it where no such title exists.
Wrong.
The BCS Championship Game is a game for the Championship of college football (the polls are OBLIGATED to vote its winner as the #1 team), and the BCS system, with the exception of the BCS championship, works. The only problem is that it creates a championship that is exclusionary and elitist.
NittanyWhiteOut.com. Arguably the second best Penn State blog I know of.
No
There is no national championship for 1-A football. There is some opinion polls (incidentally, the AP poll is not obligated to vote the “BCA Championship game” winner as their #1) but there is no officially recognized NCAA champion. The polls are just opinions, they are not real.
Again, if one wants to argue that there should be a national champion and we need to set something up to accomplish that, it’s a reasonable point, but it’s simply incorrect to state that a national championship currently exists.
I don’t really see a problem with some opinion polls determining who will play in a game to determine who is voted #1 in some opinion polls. The Coaches polls isn’t a championship; it’s a power ranking (a biased one at that).
Now you're talking technicalities.
While there may be no NCAA sanctioned national champion, what is that ugly crystal football for? It’s for the national champion.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 28, 2009 12:18 PM EST up reply actions
The ugly crystal football for the winner of the BCS championship game, a bowl game. The winner of PSU/LSU will get a trophy for winning the Capitol One Bowl game as well.
Again, there is no NCAA national champion. There’s a team that ends the season ranked #1 in the Coaches poll and a team that ends up ranked #1 in the AP poll. Those are simply opinion polls. The NCAA does not crown a champion in 1-A football.
Exactly
That’s why I dig it.
God Created the World Out Of Nothing, Paterno Built A National Superpower On Cow Fields...
by Adam Bittner on Dec 27, 2009 11:09 AM EST up reply actions
What obtuse might get ya
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
Two things never happened again after that day.
The Sisters never touched Andy again. And Boggs never walked again. I hear he’s drinking his meals through a straw in a minimum security prison upstate.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 28, 2009 12:17 PM EST up reply actions
From the brie thread, but here, so we can see her
Junny, did you see her in Esquire?
Apparently, she used to be a clown (thought that was funnier than her joke)
A guy walks into a bar and sees a sign that reads, “Cheese sandwich $3.50. Chicken sandwich $4.50. Handjob $5.” He checks his wallet and calls over the waitress. He asks, “Are you the one who does the handjob?”
She smiles at him seductively and says, “I am.”
He says, “Well, wash your friggin’ hands. I want a cheese sandwich.”
About the Jokester: Before Alison Brie was cast as ad executive Pete Campbell’s buttoned-up, neglected wife, Trudy, on Mad Men, the South Pasadena, California, native worked as a clown at children’s birthday parties: “I’d drive down to the office in Compton in a clown suit and pick up a bag of balloons and a boom box.” While she was proud of being the least likely balloon-animal maker in L. A. County, Brie was focused on a slightly more high-brow form of live entertainment: the theater. She was appearing in a local production of Hamlet when she got the call from Mad Men. In addition to her role on that show, Brie plays Annie, one of the students on NBC’s new comedy Community, which also stars Chevy Chase and Joel McHale. Which means it doesn’t look like she’ll be returning to the small stage — or the backyard — anytime soon.
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
I did NOT see this.
Thank you jtot, you are a gentleman and a scallop.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 28, 2009 1:57 PM EST up reply actions
You're an esquire reader too?
Just got a subscription. I was tired of spending 6 bucks every time I went to the airport.
NittanyWhiteOut.com. Arguably the second best Penn State blog I know of.
I am, and my most recent copy (with the Kennedys on the cover) does NOT have this woman inside.
What copy are you looking at jtot?
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 28, 2009 2:19 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe the Matt Damon or Kate Beckinsale issues?
My scrip got jacked a bit when I moved this fall, so I only recently finished a few back issues. I just remembered she was in the Funny Joke section. This section is much more robust. So to speak.
Aside from the fashion sections, the economics of which I just won’t force onto my personal balance sheet, I devour every section greedily each month.
"For me the game wasn’t grounded in reality. It was about the uniform you put on that turned you into a warrior. It was about the mythology of the battle, the victory, the defeat, the struggle." - Mike Reid, PSU '69
Agreed.
I don’t read every article every time, but it’s a solid mag. And some good “office” reading. And women we love is awesome.
"Have I ever told the story of when I met Miley Cyrus?"
by Jeff Junstrom on Dec 28, 2009 2:31 PM EST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE BLACK SHOE DIARIES STORE
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
