Get a tournament, for teams with at least a 8-4 or 9-3 record, the rest can fill some bowls regardless of the conference they are from.

It is past time.

I generally agree with the idea, being a traditionalist when it comes to college football, however RunningDawg is right, get a tournament and let them all prove they belong or don't, on the field.

It's not so much that teams are afraid to play them as it is teams are afraid of losing to them and being out of the BCS picture as well. Teams, coaches, and ADs are starting to realize that it is in the best interest of their school and teams to avoid the big non-conference match ups that fans might want to see. The potential for a loss coupled with a conference loss takes you completely out of the national title hunt.

Unfortunately their is so much money tied into the currant Bowl system coupled with teams and conference not willing to give up their Bowl tie ins (Pac 10 and Big10 and the Rose bowl) a playoff system seems very unlikely anytime soon.

It is not what we as fans want to see happen to collage football, but as long as the BCS exists and teams in BCS conferences get rewarded for being undefeated over strength of schedule look for more teams to follow suite. With the way the BCS is set up it doesn't really make since to stack the deck against yourself. The ultimate goal is to win National titles not who has the biggest balls. Like it or not that is what we are stuck with for now.

Michigan won't play Boise because they'll get their a$$es kicked

"It's not so much that teams are afraid to play them as it is teams are afraid of losing to them and being out of the BCS picture as well."

I'm sorry... what's the difference?

And honestly... when teams are denying teams like Boise State a chance to play legitimate opponents, shouldn't that take away their right to bitch about strength of schedule later, when Boise State goes undefeated against the only teams that are willing to play them?

There is a big difference it's called the potential for a loss and ruining your chances for a national title.  If you beat them it doesn't help you because the perception is you should have beat them, but if you lose to them then and go on to lose a conference game you title hopes are all but gone. why take that chance with the current system, just so the rest of the country can feel better.

It's not their non-con schedule that hurts them it's their conference schedule. I personally don't care if the play and beat 2 to 3 BCS conference teams when their conference is a joke. Your conference schedule for the most part should be were you face your toughest challenges with conference rivals. The majority of your games are conference games so why should one are two non- con games determine weather or not you should be in the title game.

To be fair Oklahoma already has several big, marquee games in their future schedule:

2010 - Florida St. and at Cincinnati
2011 - @ Florida St. and Tulsa
2012 - Notre Dame and @TCU
2013 - @ Notre Dame and Tulsa
2014 - Tennessee and @Tulsa
2015 - @Tennessee and Tulsa
2016 - Ohio St.
2017 - @ Ohio St.
2018 - LSU
2019 - @ LSU

So it's not like Oklahoma isn't scheduling tough teams. 

Right, but scared to lose = scared to play them. Plain and simple.

And I understand what you're saying, but since Boise State is in a conference with so-called cupcakes, they HAVE to schedule those other big name schools, just to prove that they're at a high level. It's pretty BS when schools turn them down left and right.

I don't see it that way. with the current system I see it as a smart move not to set your team up for a potential loss. Scared of losing is not necessarily scared of playing them. don't t fault the teams who wont play them fault the system that makes them turn down teams like Boise and tough non-con games. What they are scared of is being shut out of the BSC title game if they lose to them. There is no doubt in my mind that if there was a playoff system that 90% of teams out there would play any team any time any where because if you lose you still have a shot in the playoffs.

It's the systems fault not the schools who turn them down.

These non BCS schools like Boise State, BYU, even TCU, would smash on probably half the schools in a BCS conf.  take the Chokelahoma Sooners for example they lost to both Boise and BYU...

Forget Big Games, Bob Stoops cant win the Medium sized games... See BYU & Miami for examples

I don't think they would be nearly as dangerous if they played in one of the big BCS conference and did not have that chip on there shoulder. That chip allows them to play with reckless abandon and they have nothing to lose and everything to gain. If the lose well then everyone says they should have lost and if they win they are the next greatest thing.

This is why the NCAA does not appeal to me. I can't stand it when teams don't get a somewhat fair shot at competing. How are these small schools supposed to get better recruits, more donations from alumni, etc. if they can't get shots at playing the big boys?

Just because I team is great maybe  last year,this year,and maybe next year ...does NOT mean they will even be in the top 10 or 15,etc  in those years you named.

Right but at least Oklahoma is scheduling big name opponents for future dates...can't say the same about a lot of power programs.

Texas tried to schedule Utah this year but they cowarded off. Sorry, but if your "the best team" you can't pick and choose your opponents.

Sure you can. That's exactly what Florida does.

I am not sure if you are insulting Oklahoma, Texas, or Utah in that.

I just know that Oklahoma has tried to, for this entire decade, schedule one cupcake, one good/ok non-BCS team, one decent/good/ok BCS team. We have played this decade, home/home with Oregon, Tulsa, Alabama, Washington, UCLA, Miami, home games with TCU, UAB, Houston, South Florida. Year in and year out, you can count on Oklahoma to have one if not two marquee, national interest nonconference games.

Insulting Utah, not chocklahoma.

Oops, just did

Sorry I could'nt resist!

Yes, it is time for the Senators on the NCAA committee to realize that:
1.  College football has become a big business.
2.  College football has an overwhelming attraction.
3.  While there is only a small percentage of college players, even in BCS universities, who go on to make an NFL team, there are many who have aspirations to do so.
4.  For the ones who do not, it still remains a great thrill for them to dedicate part of their lives to play football on a grander stage in college.
5.  With the healthy, very intense interest in every part of our great country we should be responsible to fulfill the last part of that puzzle, a well thought out either 8 or 16 team playoff to determine who is #1 with the regular season determining the teams and, of course, the proper seeding. 
6.  Under the heading of walking first before running, I would suggest to begin with an eight team structure and leave the difficult team scheduling (done years in advance) as it is, but by carefully using the right formulas we can at least come close to determining who are the top teams to be included.  Mistakes, of course, but necessary to get started and unlikely to overlook one of the top four teams when we choose eight.
7.  At first there will be so much money coming in from such an event (gate receipts, TV and mega wealthy schools greatly contributing to its future) that we could easily contribute to worthwhile charities (in the name of the schools and players) with the left over profits. Furthermore those charities should probably be earmarked  to improve the USA's not so highly rated (on a world basis) educational system.
8.  Although the details can be worked out by much finer minds than people like me, I would suggest that around the new year we use certain bowl games as one of the going forward rounds of the playoffs, with the lesser bowls catering to the teams who do not make the original cut. In this way we can satisfy the demons (such as the fear of lessening the importance of the major bowls) which have apparently been the major roadblock in our following the "yellow brick road".
9.  "LITTLE BY LITTLE WE CAN DO GREAT THINGS'!

The only way I could agree with the idea of BCS conference teams getting priority is if games against FCS teams no longer count. I am sick of seeing teams in the BCS conferences playing pathetic non-conference schedules and then telling us how great their conference is without having actually played anyone out of conference. Take a look at the SEC for example, as of today's rankings the SEC has played only 2 ranked teams and only has 1 win against a ranked team from another conference.

No one is denying the fact of weak non-con games. What you people need to understand is it's just not going to happen nor is it worth the risk with the current system the way it is. If playing tougher non-con games would actually help your chances in the BCS no would avoid playing them, but again I ask why take the risk when it can only hurt you if you lose and do nothing if you win except make the rest of the country feel better about themselves and your team.

The SEC dose not need to play tough non-con games during the regular season to prove our strength. We do that during bowl season. The SEC is 5-0 in BCS title games 12-5 with a .710 win percentage among conferences with at least 11 BCS bowl appearances, 4 teams in the top ten of teams with the most bowl wins Alabama at #1 with 31 wins all of which is the tops in the country. The SEC has also won the most bowl games in collage football with 190 wins.

What this translates to is "running away scared is what works today". The BCS is the biggest fraud in all of sports.

I agree with the BCS is a fraud, but it is not running away scared it's playing smart and within the system. Why would you play them when it does not benefit you but can hurt you that's just stupid. I don't like it either but I at least understand the reasoning behind it and commonsense of playing within the system to give yourself the best shot.

To suggest I don't understand the reasoning is ignorant. Screw the fans, we know they are stupid enough to pay hard earned money to see Florida play Charleston-Southern and the likes! College football was a better sport before the BCS came along and ended meaningful non-conference games.

I completely agree but there is nothing me or you can do about it. You might understand but why do you blame the schools for playing with in it.

I see the Pac 10 teams playing real non-conference games, I have far more respect for them. Oklahoma is another good example, they take on teams like BYU, Miami, and even Tulsa....all bowl teams. I simply can't respect teams that avoid competition.

The PAC 10 and OU will follow suit as long as the BCS still exists it is just a matter of time. Weather you respect them are not really doesn't matter nor do they care. They don't schedule teams in the hope to make you or even me happy they do it to give them a better chance and that is smart not scared. If a playoff system or something else was in place all of the top teams would be lining up to play anyone IMO because a loss wont knock you out of the hunt.

Until the last few years OU and USC had to go outside the conference to find any real competition but now that their conferences have caught up they find them selves on the outside looking in they will start doing the same thing that Florida and Texas have done as soon as the contracts with teams are up. This is why the BCS is flawed and why it must go. It has taken away the good non-con match ups by forcing the teams to schedule this way to make sure they get there.

Note, USC doesn't lose those non-conference games, they lose Pac 10 games. The Pac 10 has been much stronger than people on the East Coast realize for a lot of years. Maybe if we weren't stuck with the insanity of ABC/ESPN's regional telecasts which prevent the best games being shown nationally, more people would be more aware of the teams outside of their region.

When one team wins the conference for 7 years in a row I think that speaks volumes for how tough the conference is. They lose conference games because finally the rest of the conference has either caught up or they have fallen. They win non-con games against ND and OSU wow that's real tough. I know at least the play them and I agree I would love to play teams like OSU and USC but with the BCS it is not worth it because it wont help you if you win but will hurt you if you lose. Why stack the deck against yourself.

Look at my other comment in this thread...OU will not and has not followed suit with the BCS. Our AD and Coaches philosophy is to schedule one big time non conference game against a BCS conference member, two against good non-BCS teams, and one cupcake each year. From all accounts, USC does the exact same.

For now yes. Lose one of those games 2 out of the next 3 years miss the BCS and see what happens. The longer the BCS stays in place the harder it will for big time programs to not follow suit. The pressure from fans and alumni and the media will force them to play with in the system as well. Like it or not it will happen as long as the BCS in it's current format exists.

This scheduling for both OU and USC hasn't prevented them in playing in a combined 14 BCS games. I know for a fact at OU that the fan base is fully behind playing/scheduling the toughest competition we can get year in and year out. Not only does it give the fans/alumni at least one home game against a HUGE opponent, since our main rivalry game is in Dallas, but it also continues to put the school front in center every year in the national debate. 

When teams that schedule tough non-conference games, they are given the benefit of the doubt if they lose one. Had OU only lost to BYU/Miami this season, they would be in a prime position to play for the national title. Same with USC if they had only lost to Ohio St. If an SEC team gets upset somehow against a far lesser non conference foe (not likely but could eventually happen), then I honestly don't think that they would be given the same benefit of the doubt as the OU's and USC's that schedule tougher and more "real" non conference opponent.

This scheduling for both OU and USC hasn't prevented them in playing in a combined 14 BCS games.

Until now.  Win you win the conference every year because the rest of the teams are way behind of coarse you are going to go to a BCS game. Finally in the last couple of seasons any way the rest of the teams have caught up and now you are losing conference Games if that continues you will not be able to afford to play and possibly lose the big non-con games. Face it it is just a matter of time.


" I know for a fact at OU that the fan base is fully behind playing/scheduling the toughest competition"

As long as you keep wining those games yes but start losing them on a regular bases and see what happens. You are not always going to have the likes of Bradford to carry your team.

Well Stoops has won 6 Big 12 titles with 5 different Quarterbacks so someone else will come along. All of those games are signed and ready to go so unless either school wants to take a huge PR hit, you'll see those games come to fruition.

Hey I agree with you I don't like it either. As a fan I want to play every one but it is just the way it is until it's changed. It will happen. I am sure Texas fans thought the same thing.

Wow, is a Florida fan really knocking USC's non-conference schedule? Get a grip pal, who does Florida play again? By the way, can you tell me what was the only conference to go undefeated in Bowl games last year?

No I am not knocking their non-con schedule just their conference prior to this year and maybe the year before. The PAC 10 went 5-0 and the SEC went 5-2 same amount of wins but at least we had 2 more teams that were good enough to go to bowl games.

Prior to the last 3 years USC has walked through the PAC 10 and had to go out side to find completion. That completion has been OSU and ND which lets face it has not been a real challenge.

You also have 2 more teams period! Plus every SEC team gets to schedule 4 non-conference games, Pac 10 teams only get 3 because they play a 9 game conference schedule. That extra easy win means more teams eligible for bowl games. The SEC plays 11 FCS teams this year, the Pac 10 plays only 3. This BCS fraud needs to be destroyed and replaced by a legitimate playoff that includes every BCS conference champ as well as unbeaten mid-majors like Boise State, Utah, or TCU.

"This BCS fraud needs to be destroyed and replaced by a legitimate playoff that includes every BCS conference champ as well as unbeaten mid-majors like Boise State, Utah, or TCU."
 
Now that is something we can agree on. I am getting tired of this debate every year the same thing my school and conference is better then yours, you are not that good, they don't deserve to be and they do. Every one has good points and reasons why they think the way they do, but there is just no way to know for sure with out some sort of playoff system. Someday hopefully

Hello thanks for the message =)