<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: College Football Rethink</title>
	<atom:link href="http://buckeye.vu/2007/college-football-rethink/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://buckeye.vu/2007/college-football-rethink/</link>
	<description>An Expression of a Buckeye Fan's Obsession</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 12:32:12 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: One Thousand and One Posts</title>
		<link>http://buckeye.vu/2007/college-football-rethink/#comment-591</link>
		<dc:creator>One Thousand and One Posts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2008 19:40:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://montaraventures.com/blog/2007/10/19/college-football-rethink/#comment-591</guid>
		<description>[...] College Football Rethink [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] College Football Rethink [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CFBfan</title>
		<link>http://buckeye.vu/2007/college-football-rethink/#comment-587</link>
		<dc:creator>CFBfan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:47:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://montaraventures.com/blog/2007/10/19/college-football-rethink/#comment-587</guid>
		<description>This is too complicated and doesn't take into account the concerns out there.  I suggest the following:

1) Conference champion of each of the 11 D-1 conferences must be decided by last Sat of Nov.
2) Let teams/Conferences decide to play 10-12 game regular season.
3) Conference champion of each of the 11 conferences invited. Top 5 ranked teams taking into account strength of schedule, regardless of conference and with no limit to number of teams per conference, added to make 16 teams. Seed teams 1-16 based on final season rankings (allows higher seeds easier games first round, while including all conferences and giving "cinderalla" appeal).
4) First round played at home field (or close-by NFL stadium) of highest seed first weekend of Dec. Losers eligible for non-playoff bowl games.
5) Second round played at home field (NFL stadium) of winner of 1st round (#16 seed could have home field if beats #1 seed in first round). This game played the 3rd weekend of Dec, or a few days before Christmas to take into account final exams.
6) Take 4 BCS bowls, add next 2 best (such as Cotton and Peach). Alternate seasons, as indicated below.
6) Semi-final game played on 1/1 at 2 bowls.
7) Championship game played 1 week later at other bowl. The 3 bowls that did not participate in playoffs could still have a bowl based on conference affiiliation or the top 6 ranked teams from round 1 and non-playoff teams. Alternatively, they only participate every other year.

Odds overwhelmingly will dictate that semi-final teams will come from top 8 seeded teams. Thus, semi losers will only travel once and championship teams will only travel twice. If you are a team seeded 9-16 and win your first game, you get home field the 2nd round, and even if you make the semi or championship game (highly unlikely) you will travel 2-3 times.

This formula involves all conferences, does not limit conference participation, will definitively decide an undisputed champion, and will generate a heck of a lot more interest and money (for every conference and team) than the current system. It also keeps the bowl system in tact, and takes into account final exams and travel.

The current BCS system is a mess (perhaps 2 or 3 non-controversial champions over last 10 years). Also, the current BCS encourages scheduling weak OOC games to up your win total. Furthermore, BCS leaves nearly 1/2 of college football teams out in the cold.

The "plus 1" system is flawed too. For those 2-3 times the undisputed #1 played the #2, the winner would then have to play the undisputed #3 or #4 team. What if the #1 then lost? This could create a mess too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is too complicated and doesn&#8217;t take into account the concerns out there.  I suggest the following:</p>
<p>1) Conference champion of each of the 11 D-1 conferences must be decided by last Sat of Nov.<br />
2) Let teams/Conferences decide to play 10-12 game regular season.<br />
3) Conference champion of each of the 11 conferences invited. Top 5 ranked teams taking into account strength of schedule, regardless of conference and with no limit to number of teams per conference, added to make 16 teams. Seed teams 1-16 based on final season rankings (allows higher seeds easier games first round, while including all conferences and giving &#8220;cinderalla&#8221; appeal).<br />
4) First round played at home field (or close-by NFL stadium) of highest seed first weekend of Dec. Losers eligible for non-playoff bowl games.<br />
5) Second round played at home field (NFL stadium) of winner of 1st round (#16 seed could have home field if beats #1 seed in first round). This game played the 3rd weekend of Dec, or a few days before Christmas to take into account final exams.<br />
6) Take 4 BCS bowls, add next 2 best (such as Cotton and Peach). Alternate seasons, as indicated below.<br />
6) Semi-final game played on 1/1 at 2 bowls.<br />
7) Championship game played 1 week later at other bowl. The 3 bowls that did not participate in playoffs could still have a bowl based on conference affiiliation or the top 6 ranked teams from round 1 and non-playoff teams. Alternatively, they only participate every other year.</p>
<p>Odds overwhelmingly will dictate that semi-final teams will come from top 8 seeded teams. Thus, semi losers will only travel once and championship teams will only travel twice. If you are a team seeded 9-16 and win your first game, you get home field the 2nd round, and even if you make the semi or championship game (highly unlikely) you will travel 2-3 times.</p>
<p>This formula involves all conferences, does not limit conference participation, will definitively decide an undisputed champion, and will generate a heck of a lot more interest and money (for every conference and team) than the current system. It also keeps the bowl system in tact, and takes into account final exams and travel.</p>
<p>The current BCS system is a mess (perhaps 2 or 3 non-controversial champions over last 10 years). Also, the current BCS encourages scheduling weak OOC games to up your win total. Furthermore, BCS leaves nearly 1/2 of college football teams out in the cold.</p>
<p>The &#8220;plus 1&#8243; system is flawed too. For those 2-3 times the undisputed #1 played the #2, the winner would then have to play the undisputed #3 or #4 team. What if the #1 then lost? This could create a mess too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zero</title>
		<link>http://buckeye.vu/2007/college-football-rethink/#comment-588</link>
		<dc:creator>Zero</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 05:04:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://montaraventures.com/blog/2007/10/19/college-football-rethink/#comment-588</guid>
		<description>I'm an NFL only fan, simply because the BCS System makes no sense to me. There is no clear cut champion, and this one fact takes all of the interest completely out of college football for me (not to mention that I did not get the opportunity to go to college.)

Most of these things, if implemented, might turn me to the College side of sports.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m an NFL only fan, simply because the BCS System makes no sense to me. There is no clear cut champion, and this one fact takes all of the interest completely out of college football for me (not to mention that I did not get the opportunity to go to college.)</p>
<p>Most of these things, if implemented, might turn me to the College side of sports.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mike</title>
		<link>http://buckeye.vu/2007/college-football-rethink/#comment-590</link>
		<dc:creator>mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Dec 2007 17:00:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://montaraventures.com/blog/2007/10/19/college-football-rethink/#comment-590</guid>
		<description>Thanks Todd, I like it too. But I doubt that it gets any traction. If a change occurs, it's likely to be a lame +1 format.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Todd, I like it too. But I doubt that it gets any traction. If a change occurs, it&#8217;s likely to be a lame +1 format.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: todd clark</title>
		<link>http://buckeye.vu/2007/college-football-rethink/#comment-589</link>
		<dc:creator>todd clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Dec 2007 03:35:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://montaraventures.com/blog/2007/10/19/college-football-rethink/#comment-589</guid>
		<description>what a great idea</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>what a great idea</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

