Possible Boise State/Nebraska series stalled because...

[Atlas]

I think I read somewhere that the BCSNCG in 06 was the first time Florida traveled outside the state of Florida for an OOC game since the 1930s.

they havent left FL for an OOC game since 1991...

 

[NAHSTE]

they havent left FL for an OOC game since 1991...

To be fair, you don't have to when you can maintain your OOC by scheduling in state. They were playing a top 5 FSU team every season in the 90s and never had to do it.


But Warner and Larry have hit the nails on the proverbial heads. This is purely financial, and the article proves nothing other than Nebraska is cheap and Bose is stubborn.

 

[FedEx227]

Um.... I think that's what we've all said. At least JH, Atlas and I as well.

It's not simply that Nebraska is cheap, but also that there's absolutely zero reason for Nebraska to pay Boise $1 million for a potential tough game that could result in a loss. To them, why wouldn't it be more beneficial just to schedule New Mexico State pay them half the price and guarantee a win?

 

[FirstTimer]

Um.... I think that's what we've all said. At least JH, Atlas and I as well.

It's not simply that Nebraska is cheap, but also that there's absolutely zero reason for Nebraska to pay Boise $1 million for a potential tough game that could result in a loss. To them, why wouldn't it be more beneficial just to schedule New Mexico State pay them half the price and guarantee a win?

Exactly.

At the end of the day for SOS purposes Boise needs the game WAY more than Nebraska does. Why would Nebraska pay Boise $1 million for something Nebraska doesn't need?

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

....and I must have said 1,000 times in this thread that I don't blame Nebraska, either. It makes more sense to play South Dakota St, although personally I find that lame and have a ton of respect for AD's/HC's who have the guts to play good OOC teams. But the OP is framed in such a way to make you think Boise talks the talk about scheduling quality games, but doesnt walk the walk. And that's false.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

This is yet ANOTHER in the endless reasons to have a playoff.

If you had a playoff with a few "at large" spots available, schools would make a better effort to beef up the OOC schedule to help the resume. Just like college basketball. Under this scenerio, it would be much more beneficial for Nebraska to drop the South Dakota St's, and add the Boise's -- even at the cost of $1M (which is nothing for Nebraska, don't kid yourself. The other bums on their schedule are getting at least $500k-$700k).

DOWN WITH THE CARTEL

 

[FirstTimer]

Unless you have a way in college football of objectively determining who is in a playoff(conference champions only) then having one just to have one is retarded.

The polling system was "broken" so they went to the BCS...which used the polling system to help come up with rankings.

The BCS is "broken" so now people want a playoff system that uses the "broken" BCS(which is heavily reliant on the even older "broken" polling system) to help create a playoff system and assume that won't be broken as well?

The whole playoff discussion for the most part is a circle jerk in idiocy.

Either go back to the way it was pre-BCS and just accept the "broken-ness" of the system and enjoy it or go to a playoff where only conference champs get in(from every conference) and call it a day. Enough with this stupid ass shit trying to use rankings, and at large bids based on systems and rankings everyone says don't work.

 

[FedEx227]

Also, it will eventually just move the argument to something new. I know that it won't be as hardcore of an argument but say they do a 4-team playoff based off BCS and Boise or another mid level team is on the outside looking in of that. It's the same shit just a different argument. You have the polls underrating a potential team, leaving them out of the title game.

Also, anything more than an 8 team playoff becomes ridiculous because I really don't think a 2-loss team should have a chance to play for the National Championship.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

If you have an 8 team playoff, regardless of the method used to pick the teams, the only contraversy would be whether the 7th-10th best teams were "left out". You would be pretty much guarunteed the best 5 or 6 teams would be involved.

The current system, most years you have a team left out that can make a decent claim of being THE BEST team.

I'd rather potentially screw the 7th or 8th best team, than the first or second best team.

EVERY OTHER SPORT IN THE WORLD uses a playoff, you can't come up with an argument that would convince me that college football is the only sport where it wouldnt work. It's absurd to the highest degree, and baffling to me that some people don't want it.

 

[1ke]

Conference champs get it. Let them settle it. Who wouldnt love to see UTEP or La-Monroe play against Oregon and tOSU in the first round?

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Conference champs get it. Let them settle it. Who wouldnt love to see UTEP or La-Monroe play against Oregon and tOSU in the first round?

What the haters of the "little guys" don't understand, is a playoff would finally shut up guys like me, and the Boise's, when the "little guys" get stomped in the playoffs every year.

But to not give EVERYONE a chance at a championship, and just arbitrarily pick two teams to play, is outrageous. Every college football fan should be outraged, and demand change.

 

[FirstTimer]

EVERY OTHER SPORT IN THE WORLD uses a playoff, you can't come up with an argument that would convince me that college football is the only sport where it wouldnt work. It's absurd to the highest degree, and baffling to me that some people don't want it.

And I wouldn't try.

All I'm saying is having at large teams being selected subjectivly by an admittedly broken system kind of defeats the purpose because at the end of the day what everyone is pissed about in regards to a lack of playoff system in college football is the lack of the objective way to determine who plays for the championship.

I guess the hole in my idea is how you seed the teams...not sure how to do that on objective basis.

The only "solution" I can come up with is once the conference champs are determined you have the pollsters vote for those 12-13 teams only and the results of the polling is then the seeding...but that kind of throws a certain amount of objectivity out the window. The seeding would be the biggest hump to get over.

 

[FirstTimer]

Conference champs get it. Let them settle it. Who wouldnt love to see UTEP or La-Monroe play against Oregon and tOSU in the first round?

I'd love it.

 

[1ke]

What the haters of the "little guys" don't understand, is a playoff would finally shut up guys like me, and the Boise's, when the "little guys" get stomped in the playoffs every year.

But to not give EVERYONE a chance at a championship, and just arbitrarily pick two teams to play, is outrageous. Every college football fan should be outraged, and demand change.

I actually wasn't being sarcastic. I would watch those games.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

I'd rather argue about seeding, and who should be #8 or be left out as #9, than argue about undefeated teams being left out in the cold.

 

[1ke]

Im with you guys, And its the best way to do it IMO....

The conference winners..Big 10, 12, Pac 10, C-USA, SEC, Big East, ACC, Mountain West, WAC, Sun Belt, and MAC....Let em all in, seed em based on conference strength and set it off!

 

[FirstTimer]

Im with you guys, And its the best way to do it IMO....

The conference winners..Big 10, 12, Pac 10, C-USA, SEC, Big East, ACC, Mountain West, WAC, Sun Belt, and MAC....Let em all in, seed em based on conference strength and set it off!

Agree. Let every conference at the FBS level in. Figure out a way to seed them and go at it.

 

[CaribbeanJoseph]

What the haters of the "little guys" don't understand, is a playoff would finally shut up guys like me, and the Boise's, when the "little guys" get stomped in the playoffs every year.

But to not give EVERYONE a chance at a championship, and just arbitrarily pick two teams to play, is outrageous. Every college football fan should be outraged, and demand change.

This

If you win your conference you deserve a shot at the NC imo. Obviosly the lower tier champs (Sun Belt, C-USA) are more than likely one and out every year but its only fair.

 

[FirstTimer]

Anyone have any ideas on how to seed the teams in this thing?

 

[FirstTimer]

Hypothetically based on Conference champs only here is who would have been in the "Dance" last season:

Alabama
Texas
Ohio St
Boise St
Cincinnatti
Oregon
Georgia Tech
TCU
East Carolina
Central Michigan
Navy*
Troy

*Treated the independents as their own conference just for the sake of this argument. Realistically if you went to conference champs only with no polling during the season it kind of defeats the purpose of even playing OOC games so it would essentially force independent teams into joining a conference.

Seed those how you want.

Top 4 teams get a "Bye". Use the BCS Bowl sites as the sites for the semi-final games, and the championship game. The 4th BCS game gets relgated to one of the quarterfinal sites for the year and each year the sites rotate. Championship game site goes to quarter final game site the next season and they rotate through.