[QUOTE=Labrador Deceiver]
Two or three? Do you even live in the US?
[/quote]
Oops, there are four or five, depending on which one or two teams per conference you qualify as “power programs.” Ny the way, that’s out of ten or eleven conferences, so very nearly half the conferences aren’t important at all and have no chance at even playing for a national championship. My point absolutely stands, despite your efforts to undermine it via technicality. Next time, bring argument.
[QUOTE=Labrador Deceiver]
Bullshit. All they have to do is add some difficult OOC games. Penn State & FSU did it, so can everyone else.
[/quote]
Thanks for bringing this up. Scheduling is another extremely broken part of the college football season. Upstart programs aren’t able to schedule tougher OOC games because powerhouse schools won’t take the risk on a potentially tough team. Why should they? They get votes on name alone, regardless what they do on the field. Schedule your early season cupcakes, take care of business against inferior in-conference programs, and you’re in. Schools like Hawaii and West Virginia are criticized and ignored in polling because they don’t have the tougher OOC schedules… but they can’t get them! How is this fair? It’s easy for traditional powerhouse schools, like say, Penn St. and FSU, to schedule tough OOC games, they carry all the clout. Missouri isn’t getting those games.
[QUOTE=Labrador Deceiver]
Talk about moronic. Tell that to LSU, or OSU, or Florida, or Miami… this is boring… / Oh look, another qualifier. See the above point re OOC scheduling.
[/quote]
I’ll make this more clear since you seem to have trouble understanding a simple concept. I’m a nice guy, I’ll make it a list for your convenience.
Your games do not count (and are thus not important or meaningful) if…
[ul]
[li]You are in a conference other than a powerhouse conference.[/li][li]If you are in a major conference (but aren’t a powerhouse team) and lose a game, your remaining games are meaningless.[/li][li]If you are a powerhouse program and you lose (so long as other powerhouse programs don’t lose), or if you lose twice (so long as other powerhouse programs don’t lose tw… ugh, don’t you see how stupid this is?)[/li][/ul]
That cancels out a large majority of the college football games played each season. A typical season has two very obvious national championship contenders, and everyone else doesn’t matter. So what are we actually looking at? A total of a dozen meaningful games in a typical season? Two dozen? Why does everyone repeat the argument that the regular season matters? It’s idiotic. The college football regular season is just as meaningless as any other sport, the damn thing relies heavily on polls for crying out loud, but everyone keeps rattling off this robotic talking point probably because they heard it once and never bothered to think about it.
[QUOTE=Labrador Deceiver]
Cite?
[/quote]
Nice, the ol’ SMDB trump card. What a lazy response. Can you even cite conventional wisdom? I’m curious. What are you actually looking for? A blog? A hand written note? Am I supposed to write a letter to every coach and AP voter who votes in the polls? Or, more likely, do you have “Cite?” on your clipboard in case you come across an argument you can’t counter? Just listen to the radio during college football season, you’ll hear it a few times.
[QUOTE=Labrador Deceiver]
LSU didn’t have much of problem with late losses this year.
[/quote]
…that’s because it’s LSU, a perennial powerhouse. (Are you even following along? Leonard? Is that you? Maybe you should tattoo my arguments to your body between “Find him and kill him,” and “John G. raped and murdered my wife.”) LSU is going to get a major push in the polls for just being LSU. This is exactly proving my point; the system is broken. Sometimes you can’t lose any games, sometimes you can lose one, sometimes you can lose two, but only if the voters consider you a powerhouse team.. There are no legitimate rules, and thus, no legitimate results. Hell, there isn’t even anyone who can explain how the BCS works, because the computer generated portion of the rankings is unknowable. Your sport is determined, in part, based on a computer system that no one actually understands. Didn’t Douglas Adams write about something like that?
[QUOTE=Labrador Deceiver]
But whatever. Let’s do things the way every other college sport (the regular seasons of which nobody watches) does it. That way, we can water down the games & screw up a great sport, but we’ll have a National Champion that makes the NFL fans happy, by god.
[/quote]
It would make the fans of legitimate competition happy. Fans who value the integrity of figure skating or American Idol probably would not be happy. Your games are already watered down, you just don’t know it yet.
As a final thought, here are some other competitions that have more definitive and legitimate results:[ul]
[li]Baseball[/li][li]Basketball[/li][li]Political races[/li][li]Pie-eating competitions[/li][li]Dog shows[/ul][/li]
Actually dog shows are a great comparison to college football. If you’re a mutt, you can’t even play (like mid majors and traditional bottom feeders in powerhouse conferences). Then, you are judged on how good you look, even if you lose a competition. But at least in dog shows, every dog there is judged the same way. So it stands, dog shows have more legitimate results than college football.