UF #1, Utah #2, USC #3, Texas #4

[4LSU]

_ I think USC would crush the other 3. Alas, we will never know. Thanks NCAA. _

Well, the SEC tried last year to push though a one + playoff thing, but it was defeated by a group lead by PAC 10 Presidents. The Pac 10 refuses to develop some kinda conference title game as well. They have Califorina and the Rose Bowl and I kinda think they don't want much to change.

It's their right to run their conference as they see fit and it's a great conference, but their actions lead to much of their own problems. imo

[cajunhawk]

_ Well, the SEC tried last year to push though a one + playoff thing, but it was defeated by a group lead by PAC 10 Presidents. The Pac 10 refuses to develop some kinda conference title game as well. They have Califorina and the Rose Bowl and I kinda think they don't want much to change.

It's their right to run their conference as they see fit and it's a great conference, but their actions lead to much of their own problems. imo _

I think the SEC is just as against a playoff as everyone else. The fact is, no BCS conference wants a playoff. Dont put the blame squarely on the PAC10, all BCS conferences are 100% responsible for this embarrasment.

[Cajun Express]

_ I think the SEC is just as against a playoff as everyone else. The fact is, no BCS conference wants a playoff. Dont put the blame squarely on the PAC10, all BCS conferences are 100% responsible for this embarrasment. _

Nobody in the BCS wants a playoff, they just want one more chance amongst themselves.

[MetryCajun]

_ Nobody in the BCS wants a playoff, they just want one more chance amongst themselves. _

Thank you! Right now you have 4 teams beating their chest. A playoff would only allow 1. This is how the BCS conferences want it. I hate the BCS for taking New Years day from me. Bring me a playoff or go back to the way it used to be!!

[4LSU]

_ I think the SEC is just as against a playoff as everyone else. The fact is, no BCS conference wants a playoff. Dont put the blame squarely on the PAC10, all BCS conferences are 100% responsible for this embarrasment. _

Hey, I don't have any insight into the minds of the SEC leadership, but I remember what I read....sometimes...and this was from sports writer Dan Wetzel:

"So it was with renewed hope that two of just such power brokers, two of the sport's most progressive commissioners – Mike Slive of the SEC and John Swofford of the ACC – spoke Monday in fairly bold terms about seriously exploring a "Football Final Four" in the coming months."

And this:

"Standing in the way, of course, are the obstructionists – the Big Ten, Pac-10 and their corporate partner, the Rose Bowl.

Pac-10 commissioner Tom Hansen has gone so far as to say he will pull his league out of the BCS if a Plus One is adopted."

It might not be a full scale playoff, but its a step in direction many want to go and the PAC 10 is not one of that many. imo

[cajun4life]

_ Hey, I don't have any insight into the minds of the SEC leadership, but I remember what I read....sometimes...and this was from sports writer Dan Wetzel:

"So it was with renewed hope that two of just such power brokers, two of the sport's most progressive commissioners – Mike Slive of the SEC and John Swofford of the ACC – spoke Monday in fairly bold terms about seriously exploring a "Football Final Four" in the coming months."

And this:

"Standing in the way, of course, are the obstructionists – the Big Ten, Pac-10 and their corporate partner, the Rose Bowl.

Pac-10 commissioner Tom Hansen has gone so far as to say he will pull his league out of the BCS if a Plus One is adopted."

It might not be a full scale playoff, but its a step in direction many want to go and the PAC 10 is not one of that many. imo _

You know as well as everyone else that unless you adopt a full scale playoff which includes every conference champion the it is a joke.

[NOCajun]

_ And Florida lost to Ole Miss. If Penn State doesn't lose to a last second field goal to Iowa, they would likely have been in the BCS title game. The problem is, there were a number of 1 loss teams could be playing for a national title. Texas and USC were as good or better than OU and Florida and Texas beat OU. It is a joke how these two were selected. The BCS is a farce. A playoff is the only solution and I don't mean a single game after all the bowls. Who would have played in that game vs. Florida - Utah, USC or Texas? And, why are there other BCS bowl games if only one BCS bowl game decides the national championship? They are as meaningless as any other of the 34 or so bowl games. _

While I'm not in complete argeement with your logic here (I was referring to BOWL game results, not regular-season games - I'm only lookiong at what's happening right NOW), I agree completely that we need to have at least a 32-team playoff that includes ALL D1A Conference Champions and that all Conference Champioship games should be abolished in lieu of the playoff system.

[CajunSaint]

1. usc would have skull-drug either or those two teams last night the way they played.
you can disagree all you want, but you can't say i'm wrong. and i can make that claim
because of the abortion of a system called the bcs.
2. a plus-one system would be just as bad. who would determine the "one," the same
system that gives us this joke?
3. imo, anyone who thinks this system works must be just a casual fan. must be at least
8 teams to be viable. better would be 11 fbs conference champions, plus 5 at-large
teams to have a 16 team format tournament that would produce a true champion.
whatever system would have more success "getting it right" with 5 teams to choose.
4. i would hope to live to see the day when my cajuns would win their conference, thus
being included in "the ncaa fbs football championships"!! geaux cajuns!!

[4LSU]

_ You know as well as everyone else that unless you adopt a full scale playoff which includes every conference champion the it is a joke. _

My initial comment in this thread was not to support the current system, but to point out that the PAC 10, which contains USC, was against the simplest playoff form, plus one, and therefore I have little concern that they, USC, didn't get a chance to prove they are the best of the rest. Nothing more and nothing less.

I will admit to you that I am of a different mind than most in that I enjoy having 17 teams leave postseason play as winners and not just one.

[MissingMandy]

_ My initial comment in this thread was not to support the current system, but to point out that the PAC 10, which contains USC, was against the simplest playoff form, plus one, and therefore I have little concern that they, USC, didn't get a chance to prove they are the best of the rest. Nothing more and nothing less.

I will admit to you that I am of a different mind than most in that I enjoy having 17 teams leave postseason play as winners and not just one. _

We need a playoff system but I don't believe the PAC 10 would be the only conference against it. I also don't believe USC would not show up for a playoff game if the Rose Bowl were eliminated. I gained a tremendous amount of respect for the PAC 10 while living in the Pacific Northwest. USC is a powerhouse that produces a tremendous amount of NFL players. I don't believe we leave with 4 post season winners, we usually leave with a team that should have been in the BCS championship game...not in it. This year was one of the few years I agreed with the matchup. Great game.