Ok. Let's review the arguments made by this NFL fan.
1. Not having a playoff system is "retarded". Ok. Thanks.
2. "Even my kid's Pop Warner football league has a playoff system". Ok. Great. Because your kid's Pop Warner leagues has over a hundred years of history and rivalry to fall back on and protect. Good point.
3. "To say it will affect rivalries is ridiculous". Another well argued "point". I'm not saying the season won't "matter" anymore if theres a playoff system, I'm saying the season won't matter "as much". The rivalries will be moved to the beginning of the year, and be just another conference game, just like in the NFL, where rivalries are just another game. There's a reason why everyone votes Ohio State/Michigan the best rivalry in sports every time there's a poll. Not Cowboys/Redskins or whatever joke rivalries the NFL offers.
4. Your playoff system ideas are so original!
5. With the case of UGA/Hawaii, before that game, that is what EVERYONE wanted to see. They wanted another Boise State/Oklahoma...it didn't happen. Hindsight is 20/20 though isn't it "broncos4ever". Illinois/USC was just a mistake. Flat out. But what if Illinois had won?
6. Lastly, give me a well-thought-out explaination of why the NY Giants were the undisputed best team in the NFL last year, and why the playoff system is MORE accurate than the BCS in determining the team that had the best overall year. You'd be the first, and since you are so articulate and thorough, I'm sure you will be.
1) Why on earth would rivalry games be moved to the beginning of the year? I don't see any reason for that just because of a playoff system. What sense does that make?
2) The Giants beat Dallas at Dallas, Green Bay at Green Bay, and the so-called best team ever on a neutral field, even a guy from Bama should understand how that makes them the best team.
3) Your "best overall team" thing is ridiculous, the point is not who had the best "overall season", it's who is the BEST TEAM, PERIOD. You find that out on a football field, not by punching numbers into a computer or asking pencil-necked writers to tell you.
4) I love football period, whether it's pop warner, NFL or anything in between. Just because Bama will never sniff a pro sports team, don't hate the rest of the world for having common sense.
5) Nobody outside Hawaii or Georgia wanted to see that game, what world are you living in? Everyone knows that Georgia and USC should have played in either the Sugar or Rose Bowl, but since college football is the only sport run by politicians, oops I mean Bowl Committies, that didn't happen.
6) In all honesty, the biggest problem is the Big-10 & Pac-10 presidents from what I can tell, they would rather keep the current system in place that sends borderline top 20 teams (Illinois) to the Rose Bowl, than have a true champion. I think the Big-12 & SEC are already on board to be honest.
Bottom line, if you're more interested in keeping the Bowl traditions in place than having the highest level of competition, then the current system works and should remain the same. If you'd like to see College Football finally crown a true champion after over 100 years of existence, the only chance of that is having some sort of playoff system, either a 4 or 8 team format is most likely.
Be honest dude, you like the system because Auburn got screwed in 04!
First off, let me say that I'm totally fine with a plus-1. 1vs4 2vs3 in the final BCS rankings is totally fine with me, mainly because I can't argue against it...the bowls are already set up to accomodate it. My argument is reserved for an 8 or 16 team format.
1) Because Jim Tressell (as an example) is not going to want to play Michigan heading into an 8 or 16 team meat-grinder of a playoff. USC is not going to want to play UCLA. There's too much emotion and injury that occur in those games to play them right before a bracket. Those rivalry games will become just another conference game...just like in the NFL. Those rivalries mean nothing, because it's all about the playoffs.
2) Did you forget about the rest of the season? Green Bay beat NY at NY, Dallas beat NY at NY AND in Dallas, and NE beat NY at NY. How is that "undistputed"?
3) Isn't the "Best Team" the team that has the BEST OVERALL SEASON who played the most difficult schedule? Because that's what the BCS does...not determine who is the best team in JANUARY. Like the NFL playoffs do.
4) As far as I'm concerned you're either an NFL fan,or a college football fan at heart. You can be an NFL guy and enjoy College ball, or be a College guy and enjoy the NFL. But you're die-hard one or the other, and people who are die-hard in one, shouldn't try to dictate how the other runs things, because they're just flat out ignorant on the subject.
5) Hawaii HAD to play that game...there wasn't a choice. Everyone was moaning about how Hawaii was undefeated and they deserved a shot a big boy, the Sugar Bowl was the best option. They had no choice but to put Hawaii in the BCS. I heard everyone and their mother talking about being excited for that game, then midway through the 1st quarter they decided it was a mismatch and inappropriate.
Lastly...Everyone makes the argument that "everyone else has a playoff system", and that's true. Well, my counterpoint is that College Football is the greatest sport on the planet, and there is a reason for that. If you DON'T think College Football is the greatest sport on the planet, then you have no business in this argument. You're a casual fan and you have no right to ruin the best sport going.
