soccer10k

That's my other big issue. Every game matters in college football. If you lose one game your national championship dreams might be over. That's what makes college football different from the other sports and that's one aspect of college football that I love. Would the OSU-Michigan game have meant as much if both were assured of going to the playoffs? Of course not. It would still be OSU-UM but it wouldn't mean as much. The potential for one loss to end your title hopes adds that extra interest to the season.

YES!

Carolina needs to be up by more than 2 at halftime and win the game by more than 3.

Way too many teams. Why? How do you pick the teams involved? What happens if a team with 4 losses wins the National Title? I'm not concerned about this. I just don't see the point of putting teams in like Rutgers, Arkansas, West Virginia, Va Tech and Notre Dame in there. They aren't going to win and it just prolongs the season unnecessarily. That's why I wouldn't mind a 4 team playoff like you suggested. I think any more than that is unnecessary. The 4 team is also the most realistic because you don't have to appease all the conferences by having to take each major conference champion (like the current BCS or an 8 team playoff would force you to do). I like the BCS and don't really care if it's changed or not but if it is, I would support a 4 team playoff.

Week 13: vance: 6-9 Mark: 0-1 ndistops: 9-7 soccer: 5-11 Ryan: - Truffle: 13-3 UMfan: - rawaction: - ChiCubsFan: - Overall: vance: 87-83 Mark: 38-48 ndistops: 88-99 soccer: 87-99 Ryan: 27-27 Truffle: 58-40 UMfan: 46-76 rawaction: 28-35 ChiCubsFan: 30-37 Note: There have been 6 ties overall (2 in Week 3, 2 in Week 5, 1 in Week 7, 1 in Week 11) EDITED for MNF game.

Week 13: vance: 6-9 Mark: 0-1 ndistops: 9-7 soccer: 5-11 Ryan: - Truffle: 13-3 UMfan: - rawaction: - ChiCubsFan: - Overall: vance: 87-83 Mark: 38-48 ndistops: 88-98 soccer: 87-99 Ryan: 27-27 Truffle: 58-40 UMfan: 46-76 rawaction: 28-35 ChiCubsFan: 30-37 Note: There have been 6 ties overall (2 in Week 3, 2 in Week 5, 1 in Week 7, 1 in Week 11) EDITED for MNF game.

Also under that format, you could have major rematch issues bigger than what happened this year. In a conference that has a title game (SEC/ACC/Big 12) you could have Team A lose to Team B twice (once during the year and once in the conference title game) but still make the playoffs. What happens if Team A beats Team B in the national title game? Those first two games would be completely devalued.

Way too many teams. Why? How do you pick the teams involved? What happens if a team with 4 losses wins the National Title? What do you do about the current schedule? Theoretically that could mean 17 games for a team like Florida this year who has already played 13. This is one thing that ticks me off: people who just suggest a playoff system then give absolutely no insight as to how they would go about doing it. I have no problem voicing an opinion but back it up with something.

co-sign I've heard people say that, but what does co-sign mean? You completly disagree with the poster's opinion uh...co-sign? =D> :lol: :lmao:

I, for one, don't mind this method too much. If you miss something in a 40-page thread it's hard to get caught up. Well, it's a concise 11 in premium format. hmmm . . . so Premium hides the worthless comments? :D Yes! Sign up today! :D Hey guys, I can't read what BBB said. Can someone summarize?

co-sign I've heard people say that, but what does co-sign mean? You completly disagree with the poster's opinion Not exactly.

He should go to an AL team so he can DH.

Way too many teams.

To be fair, some AP voters probably don't watch many of the games either. I doubt most have seen a team like BYU even once this year. I think if they look at box scores of games and read recaps, they can at least inform themselves enough to put a decent top 25 together. I'd also be willing to bet that a large part of putting most coaches' top 25 polls is done by someone other than the head coach. Someone probably puts a top 25 together and then the coach maybe makes a couple of tweaks before submitting it. I'm willing to bet that the AP voters do a hell of a lot more to stay informed than the coaches do. Obviously there are probably some exceptions but the majority of AP voters watch more than the coaches do. And that doesn't even factor in team and conference bias into the coaches vote.

yeah I didn't really hash out how the BCS rankings would be done in my system, because I liked the playoff that resulted, regardless of what formula the BCS was using that week. But I agree, get the AP back (I think they'd come back if you installed a 4 team playoff). I voted "2 but fix the current system". I don't mind having a 2-team national title and that's that, but the way they do it now puts too much variability in. There's really no way to eliminate "variability" if you stay at 2 and use human polling. I guess variability was the wrong word. I just would really prefer to eliminate the coaches' poll from the equation. One of these days the party-line voting by conference, the coaches voting their own teams way too high (Stoops had Oklahoma fourth, Schiano had RUTGERS seventh), and the ignorance (my own school's coach didn't rank ARKANSAS) is going to get catastrophic. Whatever system is implemented, the Coaches poll has to be eliminated from that system and the AP poll should be brought back. I don't understand how you can let coaches vote when they likely don't watch any other games besides their own. They might watch some if they play early in the day (like the Big 10 usually does) but there is no way a coach playing the night ESPN game is thinking about anything other than his game.

The whole team choked after his gaff. He does seem to escape criticism, doesn't he? 99.9% of non-Cubs fans mention Bartman whenever Game 6 is brought up and I correct them every single time.

If Gonzalez fielded the ball cleanly, it would have been hard to turn the double play. He would have had the out at second which would put runners on first and third with two outs and the Cubs up 3-1. Then Derrek Lee doubles. Cabrera stopped at third on Lee's double anyway which means only one run scores. Cubs still lead 3-2 with 2 outs and Lowell up. They walked Lowell - which they probably would have done in this situation as well - to face Jeff Conine. Conine popped out. Inning ends with the Cubs up 3-2.

I have a feeling that -9 line is more because they want action from ND fans than that they actually think ND is worth a crap enough to keep them that close. Yeah, I'll probably have to get in on that one as well. Hopefully the line will drop by a point or two before the game.

UCLA is a clear #1 in both polls this week.

Some early lines from sportsbook.com OSU (-8) vs UF LSU (-9) vs ND UL (-10) vs WF (I'm gonna have to get in on that) OU (-8.5) vs BSU UM (-1.5) vs USC Arkansas (-1.5) vs UW OSU (-4) vs Missouri UCLA (-5.5) vs FSU

I fail to see how either point is even worth mentioning. It was a simple comment, no need to rip him for it.

Just don't screw up too much on offense and you'll be fine against the Raiders. Our offense will set you up to score plenty of times.

Actually a Big 10 title game would have featured an OSU-UM rematch. Both UM and UW had 1 loss in conference and UM beat UW.

He obviously took a class in Pat Riley hairstyling.

The Problem is that not one of the so called elite SEC schools played a decent non-conference road game. Only Tennessee played a decent non-con home game. There really is no proof that the SEC is this superior conference that the persistant whining coach of Florida says they are. Truth is Florida would have lost 1 or 2 games in the Big Ten also. I am guessing that Penn St would give them all they could handle in Happy Valley also. The SEC schools keep saying how tough they are because they are ranked so high but seem to not consider that Michigan was ranked higher until some humans used poor judgement and put Florida in front of them because they dont want a rematch. I actually came in to post about how funny it was that Michigan didnt even take part in the hokey fox bowl selection pokey. Carr left a quote for them though that was pretty typical of him. The Fox guy than kind of called Carr out without mentioning all the incesant whining done by a certain Florida coach the last couple of weeks while Carr had been pretty classy even when past by USC. Lasty again I just think this whole thing shows the dire need for some sort of playoff. I mean LSU is completely locked out after 2 tough road losses. Louisville doesnt even get a shot. What happened to Oklahoma. Boise St being undefeated. All of these teams at least deserve a shot at playing for a title, not to mention the pissing match between Michigan and Florida supporters. I will give Urban Meyer credit for at least saying there still needs to be a playoff even after the BCS worked out for his team. I think it is getting a lot closer know that several SEC schools and I would think now Michigan are in favor. The point is that one could argue quite easily that two of the teams Auburn defeated (LSU and Florida) are very good teams. You can't make that same argument with a single team Penn State defeated. The argument defending Penn State starts and ends with the fact that the 4 games they lost were to teams with a combined record of 44-4. That's all well and good. But that says nothing about a team. You need to look at who a team beat. Penn State beat nobody. Not a single good team. That's why the argument that Penn State is comparable to Auburn is so ludicrous.