| MDX05FAN |
Click the link to see why there will most likely never be a playoff type College Football championship. Most already know, but I have seen a few questions on this forum why they don't go that route.
Playoff type would just add a longer season and then this happens...
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/bowls...tory?id=2248992 |
|
|
| carguy1234 |
quote:
Originally posted by MDX05FAN
Click the link to see why there will most likely never be a playoff type College Football championship. Most already know, but I have seen a few questions on this forum why they don't go that route.
Playoff type would just add a longer season and then this happens...
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/bowls...tory?id=2248992
Yes, acedemics is a real problem.
I'd at least like to see the pre-season dropped as it stands today and have the teams play real games. Then we could better tell who the best teams really are. As it is now, many teams only have a couple tough games a year and play cake walk pre-season schedules so they get blowout wins to boost their BCS ratings.
How about a pre-season like basketball, where a bunch of the top teams play each other at the beginning of the year. Pac 10 champ plays Big 10 champ, etc. |
|
|
| screbr |
That's the excuse the NCAA likes to use, but I'm not sure I by it. For one thing, the NCAA recently approved adding a 12th game to the schedule, which should also negatively impact academic performance, yet they did it anyway. Most schools have a long holiday break (or are between quarters/semesters) in December, which seemingly would cater to a 4 - 8 team playoff.
I think it comes down to money and power from the Universities and boosters and bowl committees that see a significant loss of money if the major bowls weren't hosting an "elite matchup" and a "1 and done" type setting. A playoff system (minus the championship game) would have to be done on a team's home turf to avoid all the travel for players and students (except for the away team obviously), and I think this takes away from the ability of the semi-elite bowls (the other 3 BCS games, plus Citrus, Gator, Peach, etc.) to provide a big draw and a matchup of teams with something still to play for.
I think the playoff system would stop alot of criticism, but frankly I still love watching the bowl games as they are today. Minus a few of the games with teams like Toledo and N. Illinois, it's great to watch teams from disparate conferences go head to head for conference bragging rights and a national spotlight game (such as GT's dismantling of Syracuse last year). Not to mention all the wagering that goes on during the bowl run.....
Interesting article though - nice to see the ACC is one of two conferences reported to have above average academic performance. I wonder if SC and Texas can make that claim???
;) |
|
|
| Maik |
There is only one reason....MONEY!
Even the NCAA's requirement of a 50% graduation rate is a joke, and those schools that can't even attain that paltry level should be ashamed of themselves for expoiting these kids. |
|
|
| MDteX |
Why can Divsion II & III schools have a playoff? Are the kids there smarter than Division I-A? Do have they have different standards?
I think a student-athlete is a student-athlete no matter what division you play in. |
|
|
| Maik |
quote:
Originally posted by MDteX
Why can Divsion II & III schools have a playoff? Are the kids there smarter than Division I-A? Do have they have different standards?
I think a student-athlete is a student-athlete no matter what division you play in.
You have answered your own question. The truth of the matter is that in division II and III, the players are indeed "student-athletes" whereas in division 1-A the athlete's are, with rare exception anything but students. Even those that do graduate, its tough to get a job in some of the rediculious majors that they have persued. |
|
|
| R Stevens |
quote:
Originally posted by screbr
Interesting article though - nice to see the ACC is one of two conferences reported to have above average academic performance. I wonder if SC and Texas can make that claim???
;)
Grad rates for 8 BCS Bowl teams:
Football Program only (4-year avg) Notre Dame-77%, Penn State-74%, USC-58%, Georgia-53%, Ohio St-52%, Florida St-49%, West Virginia-46%,
And Texas brings up the rear with a stellar 34% grad rate.
View for yourself at:www.ncaa.org/grad_rates/2004/d1/index |
|
|
| laborlitigator |
quote:
Originally posted by R Stevens
Grad rates for 8 BCS Bowl teams:
Football Program only (4-year avg) Notre Dame-77%, Penn State-74%, USC-58%, Georgia-53%, Ohio St-52%, Florida St-49%, West Virginia-46%,
And Texas brings up the rear with a stellar 34% grad rate.
View for yourself at:www.ncaa.org/grad_rates/2004/d1/index
That's sad. Based on that, for all the $ they produce for the colleges the, I'd argue that the atheletes should be allowed salaries of some sort. |
|
|
| MDX05FAN |
quote:
Originally posted by laborlitigator
That's sad. Based on that, for all the $ they produce for the colleges the, I'd argue that the atheletes should be allowed salaries of some sort.
One of the reasons those numbers are low is because a good % of that are the athletes turning pro early, which I don't think so be able to happen but that is a WHOLE other topic :2:
Because of that, their "salary" is their FREE education they get while other students are paying 20k or more a year that don't play sports. |
|
|
|
