Official College Football Thread

[IlliniKrush]

From the same article:

 

Whether you’re for a playoff or not, everything is in place for things to be changed right now, and if everyone really wanted to make it happen, it would. (Wouldn't Fox be much happier if it got a four-team playoff instead of the current system? The ad buys would go through the roof.) The BCS Championship Game is already there a week after the bowl games; it's not like the system would have to be altered.

 

However, as always seems to be the case, they're going to screw it up. The first plan, for after 2010, would be to play the BCS bowls sticking with the traditional ties (Big Ten vs. Pac 10 in the Rose, Big 12 to Fiesta, SEC to the Sugar), and then come up with another post-bowl BCS ranking to determine No. 1 vs. No. 2.

 

Two major problems: 1) It's not fair. What if No. 1 Ohio State plays No. 2 USC in the Rose Bowl, and No. 3 Florida gets No. 21 Big East champion in the Sugar? Florida gets a walk-in-the-park, while the Rose Bowl winner has to beat its head against the wall to move on. 2) What if No. 1 Ohio State beats No. 2 USC in the Rose Bowl in a triple-overtime thriller, and USC finishes No. 2 in the final, final BCS rankings? Should there be a repeat a week later?

 

It should be this simple: The No. 1 conference champion (Ohio State, this year) vs. the No. 4 conference champion (Louisville) in one game, the No. 2 conference champion (Florida) vs. the No. 3 conference champion (USC) in another (with the caveat that if Notre Dame finishes in the top four, it's in), with the winners playing in the BCS Championship game. No one outside of Boise, Idaho would have any beef of any sort, the integrity of the regular season would remain intact because you have to win your conference title to get in to the Final Four, and there’s no fluky playoff with only the one extra game. I want to hear one sane, rational argument about why this can’t be done right now, and I want to hear it from …

 

Don’t pay any attention to the men behind the curtain … It’s time to stop being obtuse and using (cue the dramatic music and use a big, booming voice) The College Presidents as a barrier to get by before we have a rational way to make 99% of the college football world happy. If the NCAA didn’t cower to the bowl people, it would have its playoff, or plus-one, tomorrow. (Again, cue the dramatic music and use a big, booming voice) The College Presidents don't have as much to do with this, and they don't care, as much as you might think.

[knightni]

Walker was foolish to leave.

 

 

Ah well.

 

He would have lost a lot of carries next season to Aldridge anyway.

[RockRaines]

One system that could work would be to go back to the old bowl system and restore tradition, then take the top 2 teams and play the title about a week later. The only problem is you could end up with everyone winning. For example, 2006 would look like this-

 

Rose-Ohio St. vs. USC

Sugar-Florida vs. Michigan

Orange-Wake vs. Louisville

Fiesta-OU vs. LSU

 

Then you would have to make one of the other bowls a BCS game.

Those are some pretty solid bowl pairings you have there. The only question is what determines who goes to the BCS title game?

 

The funny thing is. Back in the day there was a vote to determine the national champion. Everybody hated that because it didnt allow for a game to decide, and it ended in split titles.

 

Now we have voting to decide who plays the game, and has also ended in split titles. What really has changed other than teams waiting an extra week to play?

[ZoomSlowik]

I think the real problem to consider is that under the BCS, an OSU vs. UM championship game was a very, very real possibility. Then we go out and see those teams each lay a turd in their respective bowl games and it really has to bring into question the system itself. My primary problem is that it is essentially a 2 team play-off where the selection process is arbitrary. The BCS method of crowning a champ should be done away with and replaced either with the original bowl system or with a 4 or 8 team play-off.

 

For sake of argument, assume that if they had played USC would have beaten OSU in a bowl. I think this is a fair assumption considering the bowl game outcomes.

 

In the old system, USC and OSU would have played in the Rose Bowl and USC wins. UF plays probably ND in the Sugar Bowl and wins handily. UF is named champion. Same outcome... but there is a lesser threat of a real fraud (UM or OSU) being named the champion. I think the season itself and the outcomes of the bowl games has gone as long a way as possible to either eliminate the current system or to arrange a play-off.

 

The problem with that is that in a lot of years that doesn't really answer the question either. The BCS came about because of the 1997 split title between Michigan and Nebraska. Auburn or USC still would have gotten screwed in 2005 (Auburn probably plays and beats Oklahoma, which might have put them ahead of USC), it would have had the same result as the BCS in 2004, and last year probably ends up in a split title. Plus even this year Michigan still might have beaten a lesser team under the old system and entered the discussion (although I think it's the same result if they play LSU).

 

I like that they try to pit the two best teams against each other, it often ends up with more conclusive results than the polls. The only problem is that it still doesn't help when there are 3 undefeated teams, or 3 one-loss teams, or one undefeated team and 2 or 3 one-loss teams. I'd like to see them go to a 4-team playoff, that means the regular season still matters, but you get a few more of the good teams fighting it out.

 

Those are some pretty solid bowl pairings you have there. The only question is what determines who goes to the BCS title game?

 

The funny thing is. Back in the day there was a vote to determine the national champion. Everybody hated that because it didnt allow for a game to decide, and it ended in split titles.

 

Now we have voting to decide who plays the game, and has also ended in split titles. What really has changed other than teams waiting an extra week to play?

 

It seems like the current setup at least eliminates some of the split titles. For instance, instead of having Texas over USC last year, you probably would have had another split title with USC probably beating OSU and Texas crushing whomever they would have drawn. Either that or Texas wins without really earning it because USC loses to a pretty strong OSU team while Texas gets a much easier draw.

 

I'd much rather see them at least try to settle it on the field than having the champ decided by a vote. Plus you get much better bowl matchups. PSU-Nebraska in 1994 would have been something, and the same with Michigan-Nebraska in 1997.

Edited January 12, 2007 by ZoomSlowik

[Rex Hudler]

The only viable way they could have a playoff now without turning college football upside down as we know it, would be to have a PLUS ONE. It would have to include a 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3 in the bowls, however.

 

You could not just play the bowl games and then take #1 and #2 afterwards. We'd basically be right back in the same position we are in now.

[WhiteSoxfan1986]

Those are some pretty solid bowl pairings you have there. The only question is what determines who goes to the BCS title game?

 

The funny thing is. Back in the day there was a vote to determine the national champion. Everybody hated that because it didnt allow for a game to decide, and it ended in split titles.

 

Now we have voting to decide who plays the game, and has also ended in split titles. What really has changed other than teams waiting an extra week to play?

 

You would have BCS standings after the bowl games.

 

From the same article:

 

The guy makes a point, but it's also not fair that florida gets to play a tough game every week in the SEC while teams can just roll through the big east or ACC. USC had it prett easy the last few years in the PAC-10.

 

You could just do #1 VS. #4 and #2 vs. #3 in the games. But it would ruin a lot of tradition.

[knightni]

Not sure if anyone is aware (or cares for that matter), but the rumor is that Weis is having a Press Conference this Thursday. Most are speculating that at the very least Rick Minter is fired. Some are thinking up to three coaches could be fired and that Weis already has replacements that he's ready to announce.

 

Ultimately, no one really knows what's going on. Should be interesting if true.

 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...-home-headlines

 

Chicago native Corwin Brown, the defensive backs coach for the New York Jets, is expected to be named the defensive coordinator at Notre Dame.

[WhiteSoxfan1986]

Rice head coach Todd Graham has been named the new head coach at Tulsa.

[Rex Hudler]

The Houston Chronicle reported yesterday that Major Applewhite will become the quarterbacks coach at Alabama.

[Jimbo's Drinker]

Illinois fans who is Ed Warriner, he is the new OC at Kansas.

[thedoctor]

Illinois fans who is Ed Warriner, he is the new OC at Kansas.

 

warriner was our o-line coach and i think he previously held that position at kansas (maybe d-line coach there, too) so he had some jayhawk connections. in terms of his performance, our o-line was so-so last year. we were pretty good at run-blocking but bad at pass blocking. and talent wasn't a problem on o-line, considering we had two kids who were five-star prospects starting at points this year (millington and o'donnell). he did do a good job bringing matt maddox along.

[Jimbo's Drinker]

I know Illinois had a good run approach, but it seems like a risky move..Thanks for the info doctor.

[Rex Hudler]

Brian Brohm staying at Louisville for his senior season.

[He_Gawn]

Ginn headed to the NFL. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?i...ce=NCFHeadlines

 

Also, Jerimy Finch of Warren Central decommits from Michigan and gives a verbal to Coach Hep's Indiana Hoosiers. He is the number one player out of Indiana. This program is on the rise, and rising very fast with virtually all their team back next year.

 

http://indiana.scout.com/2/609859.html

[thedoctor]

Ginn headed to the NFL. http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?i...ce=NCFHeadlines

 

not a surprise, especially considering he hasn't attended a class since returning from arizona last tuesday. expect pittman to go, too.

 

next year will be the more tradition jim tressel offense with a heavy reliance on beanie. expect that dude to get 25-30 carries a game.

[RockRaines]

not a surprise, especially considering he hasn't attended a class since returning from arizona last tuesday. expect pittman to go, too.

 

next year will be the more tradition jim tressel offense with a heavy reliance on beanie. expect that dude to get 25-30 carries a game.

The defense will be better, but the offense should run the ball all day long. Chris Wells should start showing how good he really is.

[Rex Hudler]

Colt Brennan declared today, but may withdraw within the 72 hour window. Guess he hasn't made up his mind completely. I am assuming today was the deadline to declare?

[greasywheels121]

Colt Brennan declared today, but may withdraw within the 72 hour window. Guess he hasn't made up his mind completely. I am assuming today was the deadline to declare?

 

I believe so. I think it has to be by 4 PM today.

[Rex Hudler]

I believe so. I think it has to be by 4 PM today.

 

Which makes sense why Peterson and Pittman added their names to the list this afternoon.

[WhiteSoxfan1986]

As has been rumored, Mitch Mustain is gonna transfer.