NCAA Football Playoff System

[Hugar Twriker Eats Spam]

Ahh you see even with playoffs people will still complain that not enough teams are getting in. Plus with the reduction of the season to ten games you are costing the midmajor money as they have less games to schedule the elite teams which basically bank rolls all of their sports.

[Guest J-Money808]

I think that to have a play-off, every conference should be involved, and if there is a tie for a conference that doesn't have a championship game(IE: WAC, MWC,Sun-Belt), then if there is 2 teams with the same record, they should play again with the winner going to the play-offs.

You know, if it happened this year these would be the teams playing for the National Title.

ACC: Virginia Tech(11-2)

Big 12: Oklahoma(11-2)

Big East: West Virginia or UConn. seeing as they both have the same conference record. I'll just say West Virginia(11-2 after beating UConn again to determine who goes to the play-offs)

Big 10: Ohio State(11-1)

Conference USA: UCF(10-3)

MAC: CMU(8-5)

MWC: BYU(10-2)

Pac-10: Arizona State or USC, have them play again to determine who goes on. I'll say USC(11-2 after the game)

SEC: LSU(11-2)

Sun-Belt: Troy or FAU. I'll say FAU(8-5 after the win)

WAC: Hawaii(12-0)

As for the independents, the team with the best record goes on. In other words, Navy(8-4).

The teams with the not-so-good overall, or if they had to play an extra game to determine the outright champ, plays in the first round.

SO the play-offs would be like this I'll say.

CMU vs. Oklahoma

WVU vs. UCF

BYU vs USC

Navy vs. FAU

That would be the first round to determine who moves on, seeing as they all had the not-so-good overall record compared to the other teams. Next round.

Ohio State vs. Navy

Oklahoma vs. LSU

Virginia Tech vs. WVU

Hawai'i vs. USC

Semi's would look like this.

Ohio State vs. LSU

Virginia Tech vs.Hawa i'i

Yes I say Hawai'i pulls the upset! Now National Title......

Virginia Tech vs. LSU.

Now about the other bowl games, I think the other 4 major bowls will also be played, with the other teams in it.

Rose Bowl(3rd place): Hawai'i vs. Ohio State

Fiesta Bowl: USC vs. WVU

Orange Bowl: Oklahoma vs. Navy

Sugar Bowl: UCF vs. BYU

Cotton Bowl: FAU vs. CMU

That way every conference has a chance to play in the major bowls. Well this is how I think the play-offs should be, that way it gives every conference a chance to win the National Title, I mean it is the NATIONAL title, so every school in the nation should have a chance to win it, not just the BCS conference schools.

Edited December 5, 2007 by J-Money808

[oldskool]

Ahh you see even with playoffs people will still complain that not enough teams are getting in.

[Lowerdeck]

As for the independents, the team with the best record goes on. In other words, Navy(8-4).

That would only work if there were more than four independents. What happens if they all suck one year? Does 5-7 Western Kentucky deserve a playoff spot?

[buck...]

no one really wants to play Hawai'i. at least not this year. That was why michigan turned them down. They went there one year and bout got beat and since then, just flat out refused to. I would rather seen any kind of tournament right now. bcs is bullshit.

[Guest J-Money808]

no one really wants to play Hawai'i. at least not this year. That was why michigan turned them down. They went there one year and bout got beat and since then, just flat out refused to. I would rather seen any kind of tournament right now. bcs is bullshit.

[buck...]

and the fact that they have a greater chance of getting beat. not that it mattered to michigan this year but, point stands.

[DMN in the House]

I think that to have a play-off, every conference should be involved, and if there is a tie for a conference that doesn't have a championship game(IE: WAC, MWC,Sun-Belt), then if there is 2 teams with the same record, they should play again with the winner going to the play-offs.

You know, if it happened this year these would be the teams playing for the National Title.

ACC: Virginia Tech(11-2)

Big 12: Oklahoma(11-2)

Big East: West Virginia or UConn. seeing as they both have the same conference record. I'll just say West Virginia(11-2 after beating UConn again to determine who goes to the play-offs)

Big 10: Ohio State(11-1)

Conference USA: UCF(10-3)

MAC: CMU(8-5)

MWC: BYU(10-2)

Pac-10: Arizona State or USC, have them play again to determine who goes on. I'll say USC(11-2 after the game)

SEC: LSU(11-2)

Sun-Belt: Troy or FAU. I'll say FAU(8-5 after the win)

WAC: Hawaii(12-0)

As for the independents, the team with the best record goes on. In other words, Navy(8-4).

The teams with the not-so-good overall, or if they had to play an extra game to determine the outright champ, plays in the first round.

SO the play-offs would be like this I'll say.

CMU vs. Oklahoma

WVU vs. UCF

BYU vs USC

Navy vs. FAU

That would be the first round to determine who moves on, seeing as they all had the not-so-good overall record compared to the other teams. Next round.

Ohio State vs. Navy

Oklahoma vs. LSU

Virginia Tech vs. WVU

Hawai'i vs. USC

Semi's would look like this.

Ohio State vs. LSU

Virginia Tech vs.Hawa i'i

Yes I say Hawai'i pulls the upset! Now National Title......

Virginia Tech vs. LSU.

Now about the other bowl games, I think the other 4 major bowls will also be played, with the other teams in it.

Rose Bowl(3rd place): Hawai'i vs. Ohio State

Fiesta Bowl: USC vs. WVU

Orange Bowl: Oklahoma vs. Navy

Sugar Bowl: UCF vs. BYU

Cotton Bowl: FAU vs. CMU

That way every conference has a chance to play in the major bowls. Well this is how I think the play-offs should be, that way it gives every conference a chance to win the National Title, I mean it is the NATIONAL title, so every school in the nation should have a chance to win it, not just the BCS conference schools.

You're an idiot.

1. West Virginia won the Big East, because everyone plays everyone else, and they won the head up game with UCONN.

2. USC won the Pac 10 because they won the head up game with ASU, and everyone plays everyone.

3. FAU won the Sun Belt, because they won the head up game with Troy, and everyone plays everyone else.

4. Navy dosen't deserve to be anywhere near a playoff. They're an 8-4 team who lost to Delaware. They didn't beat anyone, and, really, never do.

5. Having the bowls AFTER the playoffs is stupid, because it dosen't solve the 'too many games' problem, and just adds to them. Plus, you're throwing mid major conference teams... AND NAVY... into bowls they don't deserve.

If you don't know shit about college football, and numbers 1-3 show that you don't, then you shouldn't be trying to propose a playoff system.

[paulbd]

First every BCS conference will havve to have a conference championship. Then the winner of each BCS conference will be entered into the tournament with two at-large teams decided by the BCS and whether or not a team was undefeated. Seeding would also be decided by the conference winners BCS standings then the at-large teams. So this year the playoff would look like.

First Round

1-8 Ohio State vs. Hawaii (ironically witch I thought should be the national title game because it would probably generate the least controversy)

4-5 Oklahoma vs. USC

3-6 Virginia Tech vs. West Virginia

2-7 LSU vs. Georgia

Semi-Finals

1-5 Ohio State vs. USC

3-7 Virginia Tech vs. Georgia

Finals

1-7 Ohio State vs. Geogria

Winner: Georgia

Now a guy I work with threw out his playoff system. You get rid of the conference championship games and force all the independents to join a conference. Which I think is impossible because you'll never be able to make Notre Dame to join a conference. Then you take the top two from each BCS conference and the winners of each of the other conferences and you have a 16 team playoff with a play-in game. You also rank them by there bsc standing. So the playoff would look like this.

Play-in game

Central Michigan vs. Troy State

Round One

1-16 Missouri vs. Troy State

8-9 Boston College vs. Hawaii

5-12 Virginia Tech vs. Illinois

4-13 Kansas vs. BYU

3-14 Ohio State vs. UConn

6-11 LSU vs. Tennessee

7-10 USC vs. Arizona State

2-15 West Virgina vs. Central Florida

Quarter-Finals

1-9 Missouri vs. Boston College

5-13 Virgina Tech vs. BYU

3-6 Ohio State vs. LSU

2-7 West Virginia vs. USC

Semi-Finals

5-9 Virginia Tech vs. Boston College

6-7 LSU vs. USC

Finals

5-6 Virginia Tech vs. LSU

Winner- LSU

[DMN in the House]

If you're going to say that each BCS conference needs a conference championship game, then you also need to give GOOD answers to these questions, keeping in mind the ranging concerns that are different to each conference.

1. What two teams will you be adding to the Pac 10?

2. What one team will you be adding to the Big 10?

3. What four teams will you be adding to the Big East?

4. What do you propose are done with the leagues which you have now likely emasculated by removing their best teams?

5. Pending your other answers, what do you do with Notre Dame?

These are open to anyone, as I think it could be an interesting conversation.

[HailtotheYo]

If you're going to say that each BCS conference needs a conference championship game, then you also need to give GOOD answers to these questions, keeping in mind the ranging concerns that are different to each conference.

1. What two teams will you be adding to the Pac 10?

2. What one team will you be adding to the Big 10?

3. What four teams will you be adding to the Big East?

4. What do you propose are done with the leagues which you have now likely emasculated by removing their best teams?

5. Pending your other answers, what do you do with Notre Dame?

1 - Hawaii/Fresno St - They join the PAC. To me, these are the two schools that make the most sense in terms of competition and geography when looking at all of the eligible teams in this scenario.

2 - This is the hardest of the spots to fill, but I have to but Notre Dame here. Yeah, they're in the Big East for all their other sports, but they're really the only team that can fit here when dealing with comp/geography.

3 - The Big East inherits Army/Navy, East Carolina from Conf USA, and then gets Temple back from the MAC. Temple has been in before, Army/Navy are in Big East country.

4 - The rest of the conferences shake up like this. The newly formed MAC still has the number of teams needed for a split conference thanks to the re-addition of Marshall.

Conf USA swells to eighteen teams consisiting of (FAU, FIU, Troy, Midd Tn St, UCF, Sth Miss, Memphis, UAB, Ark St, Tulsa - NT, Lous Tch, Houston, Tulane, Rice, SMU, ULL, ULM)

The Mountain West swells to sixteen teams consisting of (SDSU, Air Force, Utah, New Mexico, Wyoming, Colorado State, UNLV, BYU, Boise State, Nevada, Utah State, New Mexico State, Idaho, San Jose State, UTEP, TCU)

The WAC (which has alwasy been under scrutiny and had a revolving door of membership is finally disbanded, as is the upstart Sun Belt, which sees its teams move on to green pastures anyway.

5 - see above

now EVERY conference has a conf title game, and a playoff system can be put in place.

Edited December 5, 2007 by HailtotheKing

[DMN in the House]

I'm not going to tear it apart, because its a bitch to try and do it anyway, and it was pretty much a set-up question.

You can't add Hawai'i or Fresno to the Pac 10. They don't have the academics. That was the real set-up, because there's NO team in the west, outside of maybe BYU, who could slot into the Pac 10 and have the academics. Competition wise, yeah, Fresno might be able to do it, eventually, and so could Boise, and probably BYU, but I don't know about Hawai'i. They're good now, but they were bad for a long time. In the end, academics ruin it.

I'm not sold on Army/Navy to the Big East. Navy could compete, as long as they kept Johnson, but neither team is going to be able to recruit in any way to compete on a consisten level, unless another world war starts. If anyone, I take Marshall, Temple, and Buffalo. Yeah, Buffalo is really bad, but they fit the geographics, and, as a state school, could eventually recruit and compete.

Notre Dame to the Big Ten is the only choice. Unless you send them to the Big East, and take Miami of Ohio, who could compete.

For the most part, I'd actually leave the other conferences alone, or shrink down D-1A, cutting some of them, combining the others. I'd have to think on that one.

[Guest J-Money808]

I think that to have a play-off, every conference should be involved, and if there is a tie for a conference that doesn't have a championship game(IE: WAC, MWC,Sun-Belt), then if there is 2 teams with the same record, they should play again with the winner going to the play-offs.

You know, if it happened this year these would be the teams playing for the National Title.

ACC: Virginia Tech(11-2)

Big 12: Oklahoma(11-2)

Big East: West Virginia or UConn. seeing as they both have the same conference record. I'll just say West Virginia(11-2 after beating UConn again to determine who goes to the play-offs)

Big 10: Ohio State(11-1)

Conference USA: UCF(10-3)

MAC: CMU(8-5)

MWC: BYU(10-2)

Pac-10: Arizona State or USC, have them play again to determine who goes on. I'll say USC(11-2 after the game)

SEC: LSU(11-2)

Sun-Belt: Troy or FAU. I'll say FAU(8-5 after the win)

WAC: Hawaii(12-0)

As for the independents, the team with the best record goes on. In other words, Navy(8-4).

The teams with the not-so-good overall, or if they had to play an extra game to determine the outright champ, plays in the first round.

SO the play-offs would be like this I'll say.

CMU vs. Oklahoma

WVU vs. UCF

BYU vs USC

Navy vs. FAU

That would be the first round to determine who moves on, seeing as they all had the not-so-good overall record compared to the other teams. Next round.

Ohio State vs. Navy

Oklahoma vs. LSU

Virginia Tech vs. WVU

Hawai'i vs. USC

Semi's would look like this.

Ohio State vs. LSU

Virginia Tech vs.Hawa i'i

Yes I say Hawai'i pulls the upset! Now National Title......

Virginia Tech vs. LSU.

Now about the other bowl games, I think the other 4 major bowls will also be played, with the other teams in it.

Rose Bowl(3rd place): Hawai'i vs. Ohio State

Fiesta Bowl: USC vs. WVU

Orange Bowl: Oklahoma vs. Navy

Sugar Bowl: UCF vs. BYU

Cotton Bowl: FAU vs. CMU

That way every conference has a chance to play in the major bowls. Well this is how I think the play-offs should be, that way it gives every conference a chance to win the National Title, I mean it is the NATIONAL title, so every school in the nation should have a chance to win it, not just the BCS conference schools.

You're an idiot.

1. West Virginia won the Big East, because everyone plays everyone else, and they won the head up game with UCONN.

2. USC won the Pac 10 because they won the head up game with ASU, and everyone plays everyone.

3. FAU won the Sun Belt, because they won the head up game with Troy, and everyone plays everyone else.

4. Navy dosen't deserve to be anywhere near a playoff. They're an 8-4 team who lost to Delaware. They didn't beat anyone, and, really, never do.

5. Having the bowls AFTER the playoffs is stupid, because it dosen't solve the 'too many games' problem, and just adds to them. Plus, you're throwing mid major conference teams... AND NAVY... into bowls they don't deserve.

If you don't know shit about college football, and numbers 1-3 show that you don't, then you shouldn't be trying to propose a playoff system.

[gunnar hendershow]

Couldn't you put BYU and Utah in the Pac-10? Aren't they both up-to-par academically? I seem to remember reading that somewhere. If I recall the Pac-10 could also take New Mexico or San Diego State? I'm not as informed on the academic aspect as much as I'd like to be.

But in regards to Pac-10 and Big East not being able to hold championship games, I think the NCAA should change that rule. 2 divisions of 5 teams would work great for the Pac-10.

Pac-10 North

California

Oregon

Oregon State

Washington

Washington State

Pac-10 South

Arizona

Arizona State

Stanford

UCLA

USC

And with the Big East you would almost definitely have to add 2 schools, but there are much more that fit the geography and academic standards than the Pac-10. Buffalo is a school which, while maybe not competitive, would be able to fit. Temple was in the Big East if I recall as well. So just let them back in, see if they can build back up their program. Marshall, Tulane could both enter too. I'm sure the Big East execs would relish adding a school from yet another new state.

And then you could have 2 divisions as follows:

Big East North

Cincinnati

Connecticut

Rutgers

Syracuse

Temple (Or Buffalo, Marshall, etc)

Big East South

Louisville

Pittsburgh

So Florida

Tulane (Or Marshall, etc)

West Virginia

[DMN in the House]

You know I don't take to fondly of being called an idiot, and for your information, I DO know jack shit about college football.

Well, you aren't showing it, and continued to not show it in this post. Oh, and if you don't want to be called an idiot... don't post like one.

USC vs. Arizona State WOULD happen again, cause even though USC beat Arizona State the first time, ASU did something USC didn't, which was beat Stanford.

Great, USC lost to Stanford. They also lost to Oregon, which means they have two conference losses. ASU lost to Oregon, and... USC... WOW. They are so tied! I mean, its not like USC won the first tiebreaker, which might be... I dunno... the head to head match-up. The loss to Stanford means nothing, because, by virtue of winning the head to head match-up, USC is outright conference champions.

Same goes for WVU and UConn. WVU lost to Pittsburgh, whilist UConn. beat them.

Again, Pittsburgh is meaningless, because they finished with the same amount of conference losses, and West Virginia beat UConn.

You know, for someone who thinks they know something about college football, you do a really good job at hiding that fact.

Alright sure my play-off system might suck, but it's giving a chance to EVERY team in the nation.

Not every team in the nation deserves a shot. If they all played comparable schedules, you'd have an arguement. But they don't, and neither do you.

Why should teams from BCS conferences get a better chance at winning a NATIONAL title??

Because, by virtue of playing in a BCS conference, they play better teams than a team in the Sun Belt.

That's why I implemented my system, to give every team, including shitty ass schools, a chance to win the NATIONAL title.

But not all those 'shitty ass schools' deserve a shot. You haven't even attempted to convince me otherwise, and, in fact, have done the opposite, by calling them 'shitty ass schools'. Which they aren't, by the way, they just don't have the resources of 90% of the BCS conference schools.

And so what if I'm throwing mid-major conference teams into bowls they don't deserve. The entire BCS system is crap as it is.

If you are unwilling, or unable to come up with a system that is able to at least attempt to keep the value of the bowls, you're wasting yours, and our, time. Without that, no one is ever going to take your 'system' seriously, because the bowls are important for reasons I have stated in previous posts.

How could Michigan be getting ranked in the middle of the season, after losing to Appalachian State, a frickin FCS team?? That my friends is a bunch of BS.

I dunno, it might be the fact that the Oregon loss started to look a lot 'better', and the fact that they started winning games against BCS conference opponents, up until the Wisconsin game. It also has to do with the fact that they're Michigan, for what its worth. I also don't see how this proves anything against the BCS, since they were never a factor there, outside of being a spoiler if they had beaten OSU.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Couldn't you put BYU and Utah in the Pac-10? Aren't they both up-to-par academically? I seem to remember reading that somewhere. If I recall the Pac-10 could also take New Mexico or San Diego State? I'm not as informed on the academic aspect as much as I'd like to be.

I'm not breaking your post up to be an asshole like I did with J-Money's, just to make it easier on me to respond.

BYU and Utah might work. They'd be able to compete, eventually, in football, they have decent basketball programs, not sure about their other sports. They'd also fit the Pac 10's system of 'traveling partners', as the teams in the Pac 10 tend to do things in pairs, like USC will play Washington while UCLA will play Wazzou. I'm not sure on New Mexico, and I don't think San Diego State has the academics, the only California schools in the Pac 10 for football and basketball (not sure on the other sports, I think for everything but wrestling) are UC schools (Cal, UCLA), or private schools (Stanford, USC), so I don't know if they'd take a Cal State school.

But in regards to Pac-10 and Big East not being able to hold championship games, I think the NCAA should change that rule. 2 divisions of 5 teams would work great for the Pac-10.

Pac-10 North

California

Oregon

Oregon State

Washington

Washington State

Pac-10 South

Arizona

Arizona State

Stanford

UCLA

USC

Yeah, that would work, but I really don't see the need, considering that all the schools in the Pac 10 play each other already. They determine a true champion on the field, as do the Big East, unlike the Big 10 where everyone misses 2 schools each year (and, in many years, a school will miss both OSU and Michigan, which are the only consistently good teams in that conference), or the Big XII, ACC, or SEC, where a team, say Texas, could beat everyone they play BUT OU, and then not win the conference because a 6-6 team from the North somehow upsets OU. Conference championship games are solely based on making money, not determining a true champion, only having everyone play everyone else will do that.

And with the Big East you would almost definitely have to add 2 schools, but there are much more that fit the geography and academic standards than the Pac-10. Buffalo is a school which, while maybe not competitive, would be able to fit. Temple was in the Big East if I recall as well. So just let them back in, see if they can build back up their program. Marshall, Tulane could both enter too. I'm sure the Big East execs would relish adding a school from yet another new state.

And then you could have 2 divisions as follows:

Big East North

Cincinnati

Connecticut

Rutgers

Syracuse

Temple (Or Buffalo, Marshall, etc)

Big East South

Louisville

Pittsburgh

So Florida

Tulane (Or Marshall, etc)

West Virginia

I couldn't see them adding Tulane. Louisiana's too far away. I could see Navy, Buffalo, or Marshall. Marshall might get an arguement from WVU, though. Like the Pac 10 though, I think that with only 10 teams, you should just have everyone play everyone, and only have three non-conference games. I don't see them re-adding Temple until they prove something in the MAC.

Edited December 6, 2007 by DMN

[HailtotheYo]

BCS games are solely based on making money, not determining a true champion, only having everyone play everyone else will do that.

There, fixed ... and so true. But, with teams like USC/Texas/and a big 10 school I can't recall at the moment, ducking teams like Hawaii the system will continue to blame THEM for that instead of itself. You want to qualify whether a team is good enough as far as 'academic' standards for a conference in a discussion about athletics ? Fine, we can do that. However, the system in question is the BCS. That system has absolutely nothing to do with academics. Every single college that fields an athletic team meets the academic standards of the NCAA in order to do so and be a member of the NCAA while doing it. Based on that regard, they ALL deserve a shot to win the NCAA National Title do they not ? I mean, they are all members of the NCAA and meet the requirements, so why the obvious lack of equaility in opportunity ?

I'm curious as to where this 'academic' standard for the Pac 10 came from. I'd love to look at something and see just who could cut it 'academically' in the BCS conferences (out of those that aren't currently in one). I only ask this because a study released in September of last year dealing with graduation rates of athletes (in D-1 and D-1AA schools) and Cal was 204th while Zona was 217th. That same study also showed USC to have only a 55% graduation rate for football while SDSU had a 76% rate.

As for your "it was a set up" question, I merely answered the questions that were asked. I didn't look into it at all. I just took one example of what could be done to put every team in the nation on as even of a field as the NCAA WILL ALLOW.

Edited December 6, 2007 by HailtotheKing

[DMN in the House]

Oh, I didn't mean it to start an arguement or anything. I was more looking for the person who posted to respond.

As far as academics go, I'm not talking about that in terms of graduating athletes, or even in terms of how academics pertain to the athletics in any way. I'm speaking on the academics of the institution as a whole. The Pac 10 has some of the most prestigious universities in the nation (as do most of the other major conferences), and some of the smaller conference schools are not as well thought of.

And I do agree with you about the BCS being simply for money. It always has been, and always will be. Thats what the world is about. However, I disagee that all the teams in D-1A are equal, because thats just wishful thinking. Should they all have an equal chance at a title? Yes, definately. Thats not how it is, though.

And that Big 10 school you're thinking of is Michigan. Hawai'i offered to come to the Big House in place of Appalachian State. I applaud Florida for picking up Hawai'i next year, but I don't know how good the Warriors will be, as Brennan graduates, many of the recievers will likely leave, and there are rumors that June Jones will go to the NFL.

I really don't think we're disagreeing on this issue. I'm for a playoff, I just think you need to find a way to keep the bowls as well. I'm also anti-conference championship game, which we might disagree on, but what can you do?

EDIT: The 'set-up' was that I knew someone would suggest a team like Hawai'i for the Pac 10, when they aren't a good fit at all. The Pac 10 is really difficult to find two teams that fit, academically as an institution, and overall as an athletic program. You have to remember, the Pac 10 is arguably, overall, the best conference in terms of athletics in the nation.

Edited December 6, 2007 by DMN

[HailtotheYo]

No, we're not disagreeing at all actually. I just wasn't understanding the 'academic' bit as you were meaning it because for the Stanford, you have the Arizona State. Of course, that is true with any conference. BUT, going on 'off the top of the head' or in terms of 'general fan knowledge' the names of Pac 10 schools come up in terms of 'smart'. I absolutely agree with that.

The only reason I put Hawaii in the Pac 10 is because of logistics. That meaning, travel mainly. It only makes sense when you look at it that way. The Pac 10 is really the only move that they (or the NCAA could) make.

With the Big East shuffling, Conf USA/WAC revolving memberships, and recent influx (last ten years) of schools at the 1-A level ... it isn't THAT far fetched to align the conferences from above (i.e. - the NCAA). IT CAN BE DONE, a realignement that is. The schools of 1-A football are geographically located well enough to make equal conferences with an equal number of 'powers' in order to establish a level opportunity for everyone.

[TheSqauredCircleMessiah]

Or you repeal the completely arbitrary rule that states that a conference must have 12 teams to play a conference championship game.

And boo hoo for Hawaii, 117 out 119. That's all I have to say. Plus, the fact that they hate to come to the mainland but expect everybody else to come to play the mighty Rainbows. The small school usually has to travel to the big school for a payday, not the other way around.

Also, since when did determing a college football champion become about making money for smaller schools? That kind of BS is how garbage like I-A schools playing I-AA schools happened.

[Guest J-Money808]

Or you repeal the completely arbitrary rule that states that a conference must have 12 teams to play a conference championship game.

And boo hoo for Hawaii, 117 out 119. That's all I have to say. Plus, the fact that they hate to come to the mainland but expect everybody else to come to play the mighty Rainbows. The small school usually has to travel to the big school for a payday, not the other way around.

Also, since when did determing a college football champion become about making money for smaller schools? That kind of BS is how garbage like I-A schools playing I-AA schools happened.

Edited December 6, 2007 by J-Money808