Live Chat W/ Coach Mccarney

[ColoradoEagle]

And to paraphrase, you are in favor of keeping the current system, which guarantees we'll never have shot at equal footing. Kind of counter productive?

Honestly, I'm open to anything that expands the current horizons, crowns a true national championship, and starts to erode the inherent inequity of the BCS system.

We will never have a true national champion or equal footing, because there will always be handicaps given to the current AQ schools unless the NCAA steps in, which they've shown they will not. Our best hope is to aim for inclusion in an AQ conference ourselves.

[untjim1995]

The playoff thing that would be a good start would be the Plus One game. Make the Top Four of the BCS--this year Auburn, Oregon, TCU, and Wisconsin, play in the New Years Day Games, then the championship game would be played 2 weeks later. It would keep a lot of the same stuff in play for the non-AQs, so that is there as a carrot for our leagues still, plus it would incorporate the playoff idea in a fashion simlar tot he Final Four in hoops.

I believe that if a playoff system gets adopted, UNT will get to particpate in one. It will just be a middle ground between FCS and AQ teams. It would be treated like the AAA playoffs in baseball, media-wise, though. Would it get coverage? Sure, and it would be higher than the current FCS playoffs, because there are many non-AQ leagues with enough name recognition to get attention. But the wish for a playoff system that included everybody and was sanctioned by the NCAA, similar to March Madness, just seems like a pipedream to me.

The beauty of the current system is that literally every game matters, that even if you lose a few games during the regular season, there is still a reward at the end of the year available to the school, and there is precedent set to have non-AQ teams invited to play in those games. You can look at a team like Texas Tech and you can argue that they have a chance to sell recruits on making it to a BCS game because of conference affiliation, instead of a team in a non-AQ league, but a recruit could easily see, too, that Tech would have to have an almost perfect year to have that happen because of the minefield that they have to play every year in the Big XII-II. A good recruiter at a school in the MWC or CUSA could also tell these same recruits that to get into a BCS game, we have to go undefeated, which is hard to do, but we really have a better shot to do that here at our school in the MWC or CUSA than at places like Tech, OSU, A&M, KU, K-State, Mizzou, etc. because these schools have historically beaten each other up and they still have to play OU and UT every year, as well. If Boise State or Fresno State go undefeated in the MWC, they will get invited to a BCS game. The chances of doing that are much better than the chances of the Bottom 8 of the Bevo 10 ever doing that. Yes, KU snuck in one year, but they played neither of the big 2 in their conference that year, which isn't the case anymore. Now each of those schools have to play everybody. Sure maybe one of those schools will drop down, like Texas this year, but realistically, beating both Texas and Oklahoma in the same year doesn't happen very often and probably won't happen in the future, either. I just think that a good recruiter can play some of this against the lesser of the AQ leagues, but the key is that you have to be a great non-AQ team. No one in the SBC gets to claim this right now, but there are teams in these other non-AQ leagues that we can emulate and be able to sell our school in the future to some really good recruits.

Is it fair, hell no. But the current system is fairer than what I think could easily be put in place by the AQ-leagues if the screws got tightened against them.

[FloMoGrad]

So how about that Dan McCarney live chat yesterday. He passion and energy are infectious.

[Yellow Snow]

The playoff thing that would be a good start would be the Plus One game. Make the Top Four of the BCS--this year Auburn, Oregon, TCU, and Wisconsin, play in the New Years Day Games, then the championship game would be played 2 weeks later. It would keep a lot of the same stuff in play for the non-AQs, so that is there as a carrot for our leagues still, plus it would incorporate the playoff idea in a fashion simlar tot he Final Four in hoops.

I believe that if a playoff system gets adopted, UNT will get to particpate in one. It will just be a middle ground between FCS and AQ teams. It would be treated like the AAA playoffs in baseball, media-wise, though. Would it get coverage? Sure, and it would be higher than the current FCS playoffs, because there are many non-AQ leagues with enough name recognition to get attention. But the wish for a playoff system that included everybody and was sanctioned by the NCAA, similar to March Madness, just seems like a pipedream to me.

The beauty of the current system is that literally every game matters, that even if you lose a few games during the regular season, there is still a reward at the end of the year available to the school, and there is precedent set to have non-AQ teams invited to play in those games. You can look at a team like Texas Tech and you can argue that they have a chance to sell recruits on making it to a BCS game because of conference affiliation, instead of a team in a non-AQ league, but a recruit could easily see, too, that Tech would have to have an almost perfect year to have that happen because of the minefield that they have to play every year in the Big XII-II. A good recruiter at a school in the MWC or CUSA could also tell these same recruits that to get into a BCS game, we have to go undefeated, which is hard to do, but we really have a better shot to do that here at our school in the MWC or CUSA than at places like Tech, OSU, A&M, KU, K-State, Mizzou, etc. because these schools have historically beaten each other up and they still have to play OU and UT every year, as well. If Boise State or Fresno State go undefeated in the MWC, they will get invited to a BCS game. The chances of doing that are much better than the chances of the Bottom 8 of the Bevo 10 ever doing that. Yes, KU snuck in one year, but they played neither of the big 2 in their conference that year, which isn't the case anymore. Now each of those schools have to play everybody. Sure maybe one of those schools will drop down, like Texas this year, but realistically, beating both Texas and Oklahoma in the same year doesn't happen very often and probably won't happen in the future, either. I just think that a good recruiter can play some of this against the lesser of the AQ leagues, but the key is that you have to be a great non-AQ team. No one in the SBC gets to claim this right now, but there are teams in these other non-AQ leagues that we can emulate and be able to sell our school in the future to some really good recruits.

Is it fair, hell no. But the current system is fairer than what I think could easily be put in place by the AQ-leagues if the screws got tightened against them.

This is a really, really good post. You are absolutely correct. The notion that a team like Iowa State (for example) can gain a recruiting advantage over a team like UNT (for example) because of our BCS bowl chance is flawed at best. Frankly, the chance of winning the national championship is the same for both of these teams. If I was a recruit and Paul Rhoads told me "come to I-State instead of UNT because you have the chance to play for all the marbles here.." i'd probably smirk or something...

The fact that alot of the kids we recruit were passed over by Texas, A&M, Oklahoma, etc. is a much bigger advantage because we actually get to play these schools. Our guys want to prove people wrong. They don't come to Iowa State because they hope to win a national championship, they come because they hope to punch a Longhorn in the teeth.

Edited December 17, 2010 by Yellow Snow

[NT80]

I'll take the BCS over a playoff. I have yet to hear of a playoff system that will allow us anywhere near the opportunities that the bowl system does. Right now 60+ teams compete in bowls. The absolute largest playoff pool I've heard is 24 teams....and no gaurantee that each conference is represented. Without that simple gaurantee, playoffs are a no for me....and should be for the rest of the non-AQ conferences and teams.

Be careful what you wish for...

The Bowls would not need to go away with a true playoff, they could be incorporated into every level of playoffs or for just a select number of non-playoff matchups.

The current BCS-BS that allows a 4-loss UConn team into the Top10 Bowl slots just because of their conference affiliation is a sham.

Every level of football from high school to other college levels to pro has playoffs, except for the FBS subdivision.

[Mean Green 93-98]

Maybe Mark Cuban and Coach Mac can hash this thing out.

[FloMoGrad]

The Bowls would not need to go away with a true playoff, they could be incorporated into every level of playoffs or for just a select number of non-playoff matchups.

The current BCS-BS that allows a 4-loss UConn team into the Top10 Bowl slots just because of their conference affiliation is a sham.

Every level of football from high school to other college levels to pro has playoffs, except for the FBS subdivision.

Agreed.

[TIgreen01]

Most every playoff system I've seen called for leaves some of the smaller bowls in place for teams that don't qualify for the playoff, think NIT.

A Playoff and Bowl games aren't mutually exclusive.

The Bowls would not need to go away with a true playoff, they could be incorporated into every level of playoffs or for just a select number of non-playoff matchups.

The current BCS-BS that allows a 4-loss UConn team into the Top10 Bowl slots just because of their conference affiliation is a sham.

Every level of football from high school to other college levels to pro has playoffs, except for the FBS subdivision.

Uh, huh. So you guys watch the NIT? The point is that no playoff scenario presented affords 60+ teams the opportunity for postseason play. Good/bad? Who knows. Maybe the ratings of the lower level bowls are so low, already, that the playoff doesn't render them obsolete...but I bet it would. The NIT is the perfect example. Once the NCAA increased their tourney to 64 teams, the NIT sued them. Why? B/c they could no longer field enough top teams to make their tournament profitable. The ONLY reason you see the bowl games being "included" into any of the playoff scenarios being bandied about is to try to prevent the inevitable lawsuits that would come up once a playoff prevented the bowls from attracting the top matchups.

I just think people need to tap the brakes on the playoff talk. The grass isn't always greener...esp. if the current political big shots running college football are calling the shots on any new tournament style playoff.