NCAA signing day.

OUSOONERSOU wrote:

Wolfgangsta wrote:

Signing day is where the rich schools get richer and the poor schools stay poor. No parity in college sports. And when small schools do compete on a national level, the system is designed to shut them out. I am surprised college football is as popular as it is in light of this.

Come on really? Your surprised college football is that popular? Might be the dumbest thing you have ever said. Very very easy to figure this one out. Just feel like writing something Wolf? Come on now.

I understand why it is popular, but you can't tell me the lack of parity and the rigged system don't hurt the sport and arent a risk to the sport? Scott Van Pelt and other ESPN figures voice the same thing as I do. What I am saying is nothing new.

The fact CFB is as popular as it is is pretty astounding, but if they went to a playoff and eliminated the BCS and automatic bids to the big conferences, the sport could possibly eclipse the NFL, and would probably over-take March Madness in terms of college athletics.

Noregret, stop playing the cheerleader. Also, don't get so offended. You bash me just like I bash you, difference is mine are clever, clearly hurt your feelings, and go beyond "moron" which is all you really say, over and over and over.

Take it up with me in the garbage dump if you have any more concerns noregret. This isn't the forum for that, and neither is MMA.

Imagine a Boise or another Cinderella running through a tournament and making it to a title game. Dollars and eyes from mid major schools would blow the fuck up.

College football could be much bigger than it is now SOONER.

Wolfgangsta wrote:

OUSOONERSOU wrote:

Wolfgangsta wrote:

Signing day is where the rich schools get richer and the poor schools stay poor. No parity in college sports. And when small schools do compete on a national level, the system is designed to shut them out. I am surprised college football is as popular as it is in light of this.

Come on really? Your surprised college football is that popular? Might be the dumbest thing you have ever said. Very very easy to figure this one out. Just feel like writing something Wolf? Come on now.

I understand why it is popular, but you can't tell me the lack of parity and the rigged system don't hurt the sport and arent a risk to the sport? Scott Van Pelt and other ESPN figures voice the same thing as I do. What I am saying is nothing new.

The fact CFB is as popular as it is is pretty astounding, but if they went to a playoff and eliminated the BCS and automatic bids to the big conferences, the sport could possibly eclipse the NFL, and would probably over-take March Madness in terms of college athletics.

Noregret, stop playing the cheerleader. Also, don't get so offended. You bash me just like I bash you, difference is mine are clever, clearly hurt your feelings, and go beyond "moron" which is all you really say, over and over and over.

Take it up with me in the garbage dump if you have any more concerns noregret. This isn't the forum for that, and neither is MMA.

No I agree with the whole no parody and rich getting richer and blah blah, I agree with that. Just thought it was odd how you said you can't believe it is so popular when you obviously already stated the answer. Big schools with big fanbase and rich alums getting richer and richer. Well you know, I know I don't have to explain it.

Wolfgangsta wrote:

OUSOONERSOU wrote:

Wolfgangsta wrote:

Signing day is where the rich schools get richer and the poor schools stay poor. No parity in college sports. And when small schools do compete on a national level, the system is designed to shut them out. I am surprised college football is as popular as it is in light of this.

Come on really? Your surprised college football is that popular? Might be the dumbest thing you have ever said. Very very easy to figure this one out. Just feel like writing something Wolf? Come on now.

Noregret, stop playing the cheerleader. Also, don't get so offended. You bash me just like I bash you, difference is mine are clever, clearly hurt your feelings, and go beyond "moron" which is all you really say, over and over and over.

Take it up with me in the garbage dump if you have any more concerns noregret. This isn't the forum for that, and neither is MMA.

Really now? Im pretty sure the post I made in the off topic area trumped anything you said. Its not a competition, and talking about a guy's dick size over the internet is about as clever as someone putting cheese on macaroni.

Please Wolfy, you are not god's gift to insults or wit. You have never tried to match wits or insults on here with me because you know better. You try to be the alpha male and you nor I, nor anyone on here is.

Maybe if you would stop with the insults, you wouldnt get any in return, and maybe more posters on here would respect the stuff you have to say...but until then...

Wolfgangsta wrote:

Imagine a Boise or another Cinderella running through a tournament and making it to a title game. Dollars and eyes from mid major schools would blow the fuck up.

College football could be much bigger than it is now SOONER.

I really don't agree, I don't think a playoff would make it anymore popular then it is now. It might make fans happier, but IMO football isn't losing any fans because of it. People will always root for their teams no matter how fucked the system is. I don't think a playoff would help the sport grow in popularity.

The only thing wrong with CFB is the post-season, or lack thereof. There should definitely be a playoff to ensure that the best team wins the title. This season I think the polls got it right for the national title game but in most years there is controversy because other teams have a claim to the game. It's really complete bullshit that there isn't a playoff right now. It's how every other level of football decides it's champions, why the fuck can't major college football do the same?

Can you imagine how much more interest there would be for postseason games if they were playoffs??? It would be insane. As it is now, most people only care about the game their team is playing in and maybe the BCS bowls. If there were a playoff system there would be major interest in more games. It's a shame the powers that be are so thick-headed.

Bigs03 wrote:

The only thing wrong with CFB is the post-season, or lack thereof. There should definitely be a playoff to ensure that the best team wins the title. This season I think the polls got it right for the national title game but in most years there is controversy because other teams have a claim to the game. It's really complete bullshit that there isn't a playoff right now. It's how every other level of football decides it's champions, why the fuck can't major college football do the same?

Can you imagine how much more interest there would be for postseason games if they were playoffs??? It would be insane. As it is now, most people only care about the game their team is playing in and maybe the BCS bowls. If there were a playoff system there would be major interest in more games. It's a shame the powers that be are so thick-headed.

They would have to cut out the early season non-conference games if they did a playoff system. Or at least cut them down a couple games.

They dont want these guys playing an NFL length football season.

Personally, I would love to see a playoff. I would like to see a Boise State or Utah or TCU win a modern National Championship.

Unfortunately, I dont think its going to happen.

Im rooting for Boise State this year. I believe they play AT Virginia Tech in their season opener and also play Oregon State in their non conference games, if they go undefeated maybe it will be enough to put them into a title game this year.

Bigs03 wrote:

The only thing wrong with CFB is the post-season, or lack thereof. There should definitely be a playoff to ensure that the best team wins the title. This season I think the polls got it right for the national title game but in most years there is controversy because other teams have a claim to the game. It's really complete bullshit that there isn't a playoff right now. It's how every other level of football decides it's champions, why the fuck can't major college football do the same?

Can you imagine how much more interest there would be for postseason games if they were playoffs??? It would be insane. As it is now, most people only care about the game their team is playing in and maybe the BCS bowls. If there were a playoff system there would be major interest in more games. It's a shame the powers that be are so thick-headed.

Big boys don't want to share the money, trying to hold on to that power as long as possible.

I don't think they realize they'd make even more money with parity and a playoff.

SOONERS you can't tell me the buzz around a college football playoff wouldn't be nuts. Fanbases for all teams could grow.

I don't watch hardly any BCS games and neither do a lot of my NFL following friends, at my office for instance CFB is third or fourth back on the sports talk agenda, and every I talk to cites these same reasons. These guys are March Madness obsessed too.

Wolfgangsta wrote:

I don't think they realize they'd make even more money with parity and a playoff.

SOONERS you can't tell me the buzz around a college football playoff wouldn't be nuts. Fanbases for all teams could grow.

I don't watch hardly any BCS games and neither do a lot of my NFL following friends, at my office for instance CFB is third or fourth back on the sports talk agenda, and every I talk to cites these same reasons. These guys are March Madness obsessed too.

OK I suppose I could have misspoke. Popularity could grow even more, alteast the postseason. But I do atleast mostly agree with the concept that college football has the best regular season in all sports. It is very hard to slip up early and still come back to win it all, unless you get help from a few teams. I agree the postseason could be huge and the already insane fanbase could become slightly more insane.

I don't buy that "can't slip up, best regular season" argument. I hear it, and superficially it makes sense, but it's usually the last resort for those who like the status quo as it is. Not saying anything against you sooner, as you no doubt heard that postulated on the radio or whatever, but think about it.


A week 1 loss is ten times as less significant as a week 8 loss. The system is still weighted against no loss mid majors. So only a few teams really benefit from this supposed crucible of a regular season. And if there were only 8 or 12 teams, I don't think that changes the significance of the regular season as much as it supposedly would. Seeding would still be hugely important, probably more important than in any other playoff, and the rest of the teams that would be in an 8 team feild, how many 2 loss teams would we really even have?


Also, these are college kids, so this kind of pressure on them to win every game doesn't make a lot of sense. Shouldn't we be more concerned with the best team winning anyway?

Wolfgangsta wrote:

I don't buy that "can't slip up, best regular season" argument. I hear it, and superficially it makes sense, but it's usually the last resort for those who like the status quo as it is. Not saying anything against you sooner, as you no doubt heard that postulated on the radio or whatever, but think about it.


A week 1 loss is ten times as less significant as a week 8 loss. The system is still weighted against no loss mid majors. So only a few teams really benefit from this supposed crucible of a regular season. And if there were only 8 or 12 teams, I don't think that changes the significance of the regular season as much as it supposedly would. Seeding would still be hugely important, probably more important than in any other playoff, and the rest of the teams that would be in an 8 team feild, how many 2 loss teams would we really even have?


Also, these are college kids, so this kind of pressure on them to win every game doesn't make a lot of sense. Shouldn't we be more concerned with the best team winning anyway?

This is true, but like I said you have to have help from other teams. You have years like 2 years ago when everyone lost and LSU with 2 losses gets into the game. They got help from a ton of teams to make that happen. Then you have years like last year where 4 teams go undefeated, in a year like that the early slip ups never have a chance to make it to the top, they didn't get the help needed from the other teams. It is very difficult to slip early and make it back to the top, unless everyone else is slipping up as well.(the help I'm talking about).

OUSOONERSOU wrote:

Wolfgangsta wrote:

I don't buy that "can't slip up, best regular season" argument. I hear it, and superficially it makes sense, but it's usually the last resort for those who like the status quo as it is. Not saying anything against you sooner, as you no doubt heard that postulated on the radio or whatever, but think about it.


A week 1 loss is ten times as less significant as a week 8 loss. The system is still weighted against no loss mid majors. So only a few teams really benefit from this supposed crucible of a regular season. And if there were only 8 or 12 teams, I don't think that changes the significance of the regular season as much as it supposedly would. Seeding would still be hugely important, probably more important than in any other playoff, and the rest of the teams that would be in an 8 team feild, how many 2 loss teams would we really even have?


Also, these are college kids, so this kind of pressure on them to win every game doesn't make a lot of sense. Shouldn't we be more concerned with the best team winning anyway?

This is true, but like I said you have to have help from other teams. You have years like 2 years ago when everyone lost and LSU with 2 losses gets into the game. They got help from a ton of teams to make that happen. Then you have years like last year where 4 teams go undefeated, in a year like that the early slip ups never have a chance to make it to the top, they didn't get the help needed from the other teams. It is very difficult to slip early and make it back to the top, unless everyone else is slipping up as well.(the help I'm talking about).

Unless you're from the SEC.

NoReget...oh yeah? Well what about this year? What if Auburn did pull that upset on Bama and Bama still beat Florida? What if Bama lost 1st game of the season and won out to still win SEC? There would have been no SEC team in title game since they didn't get any help from other teams.

In a way, there would be less margin for error in an 8 team playoff, considering ten teams get BCS bids counting the bowls and the title games.

As it is, during the last weeks of the season, the title has already been widdled down to a tiny handfull of teams, rendering a bunch of good teams and their games less valuble, or is filled with discussion over "which 1 loss/no loss team is going to get fucked in the ass". A 12 team feild makes it a bit more interesting because it highlights mid majors and "bubble" teams down the stretch. This could make the regular season more interesting, if more teams are in the hunt.


"Can Utah, TCU and Boise all win out? Who is the last team in?"



Regular season stays the same at least, but probably gets better.

OUSOONERSOU wrote:

NoReget...oh yeah? Well what about this year? What if Auburn did pull that upset on Bama and Bama still beat Florida? What if Bama lost 1st game of the season and won out to still win SEC? There would have been no SEC team in title game since they didn't get any help from other teams.

You're reaching. The SEC has a huge leg up on everyone for a bunch of reasons. And teams would still need tons of help to make a playoff. That wouldn't go away. None of the good stuff would change, it would just be fairer.

Wolfgangsta wrote:

OUSOONERSOU wrote:

NoReget...oh yeah? Well what about this year? What if Auburn did pull that upset on Bama and Bama still beat Florida? What if Bama lost 1st game of the season and won out to still win SEC? There would have been no SEC team in title game since they didn't get any help from other teams.

You're reaching. The SEC has a huge leg up on everyone for a bunch of reasons. And teams would still need tons of help to make a playoff. That wouldn't go away. None of the good stuff would change, it would just be fairer.

Cheers to that Wolfy

Sooner- Yes, I do buy that even had Bama lost that game and then beaten Florida...that YES they woulda been playing for the title game still.

Wolfgangsta wrote:

OUSOONERSOU wrote:

NoReget...oh yeah? Well what about this year? What if Auburn did pull that upset on Bama and Bama still beat Florida? What if Bama lost 1st game of the season and won out to still win SEC? There would have been no SEC team in title game since they didn't get any help from other teams.

You're reaching. The SEC has a huge leg up on everyone for a bunch of reasons. And teams would still need tons of help to make a playoff. That wouldn't go away. None of the good stuff would change, it would just be fairer.

Yes they have a leg up but they are not immune. They also need help just like everyone else to recovery from a loss. 1 loss SEC team will not play over an undefeated Big 12 or Pac 10 team. I agree they do have an advantage, they can have the same amount of losses as just about any other team and get the nod, but they need that team to lose just as many as them. No help, no title.

OUSOONERSOU wrote:

Wolfgangsta wrote:

OUSOONERSOU wrote:

NoReget...oh yeah? Well what about this year? What if Auburn did pull that upset on Bama and Bama still beat Florida? What if Bama lost 1st game of the season and won out to still win SEC? There would have been no SEC team in title game since they didn't get any help from other teams.

You're reaching. The SEC has a huge leg up on everyone for a bunch of reasons. And teams would still need tons of help to make a playoff. That wouldn't go away. None of the good stuff would change, it would just be fairer.

Yes they have a leg up but they are not immune. They also need help just like everyone else to recovery from a loss. 1 loss SEC team will not play over an undefeated Big 12 or Pac 10 team. I agree they do have an advantage, they can have the same amount of losses as just about any other team and get the nod, but they need that team to lose just as many as them. No help, no title.

Yeah, but there were no undefeated big 12 or pac 10 teams that were in the hunt last year (excluding Texas who was in the title game already)

NoRegret wrote:

Wolfgangsta wrote:

OUSOONERSOU wrote:

NoReget...oh yeah? Well what about this year? What if Auburn did pull that upset on Bama and Bama still beat Florida? What if Bama lost 1st game of the season and won out to still win SEC? There would have been no SEC team in title game since they didn't get any help from other teams.

You're reaching. The SEC has a huge leg up on everyone for a bunch of reasons. And teams would still need tons of help to make a playoff. That wouldn't go away. None of the good stuff would change, it would just be fairer.

Cheers to that Wolfy

Sooner- Yes, I do buy that even had Bama lost that game and then beaten Florida...that YES they woulda been playing for the title game still.

I disagree, I think the little guy(Cinci or TCU) would have edged them out. Pollsters would have made it happen.

Not to mention the Pac 10 was highly overrated last year.

Everyone talked about how it was an up year for that conference and then they went like what 2-4 or 2-5 in bowl games?

It was an up year for my Big 10 this year though... 4-3 in bowl games and Northwestern SHOULDA COULDA WOULDA won that game against Auburn! lol and Im still clueless as to how Minnesota lost to Iowa State...thats embarrasing...and that was a combined 4 points between those two losses.

God damn Syracuse landed another Akron running back! lol they landed Dalone Carter or however you spell his first name who was fuckin great but got hurt and then came back strong this past year.

Now they're gettin my boy Tyson Gulley from Akron who's gonna kill it up there too!

you owe me regret!

Pick out the av then ya prick! lol

k lol