College Football 07-08 Season
 

I have loved the roller coaster ride this season has been so far with all the upsets. However, this poses the question everyone seems to be asking does college football need a play-off or does the BCS do its job?

I believe in the BCS system and i didnt before this season. The reason this season has made me believe is 2 of the 3 best teams are in the championship game (usc is the 3rd in my mind). People argue for Hawaii saying how they're undefeated but, they had a weak schedule the toughest opponent they played was Boise State who was at 17 and they almost lost to Washington team that has had a mediocre season at best. However, this bowl series will test my faith in the system as far as Ohio State plays if they tank again then clearly the system isnt really working because of the varying talent levels in conferences.

I'd like to hear some more opinions about this.

I know people clamour for play offs, but at the end of the day these are SCHOOLS we're talking about - and while a small percentage of these guys will go on to big money pro careers, the rest of the them need an education, along with the fans who follow them around. Tossing in 3 extra play off games in December, for example, would be pretty detrimental to that goal.

For eight-to-sixteen teams out of 120. Teams who are already practicing all the time when the players aren't in class.

So, those kids (and don't forget, the squads are made up of kids who will not ever pull on an NFL jersey) should play more games and hurt their education during exams?

Yeah, I'd like to see a more certain number one, but not at any cost.

Besides, we'd still have arguments over who did and did not make the play offs and if the champ of a weaker conference is more worthy of entry into the play offs than the second place team in a stronger conference.

highthief, I think you would be dismayed at the number of football players that actually attend classes at Division I universities. The percentage declines at the traditional powerhouses. On the flip side, schools that actually expect players to attend classes have poor records, almost as a rule.

The same statistics stand for basketball, with a few notable exceptions (Duke, the entire Patriot League, etc.).

It is a sad fact that most Division 1 athletes are not there to learn. Most are there to continue to play. It is even more unfortunate when you learn that the same fact holds true in Divisions II and III, albeit to a much lesser extent.

You're assuming that they will not find any time to study and the guys on the teams that spend all there time on football or basketball or working out for them are the guys who can make it to the nfl and they are on those 8-16 teams that are elite and anyway it is up to the athletes themselves how much they study or attend class regardless of football or any sport the practices wont take up more than 3 - 4 hours and they might study film for an hour or so. Depending on which classes they are taking and when they are they probably have plenty of time to get their education. Also dont forget about 1/5 of them are red-shirted in their freshman year and have already graduated.

Doesn't seem to hurt the basketball tournament any, or any other level of college football. That's where the academic argument is proven incorrect; every other level of football has their playoffs the same time, and they work it out.

And since schools are willing to pull down their own pants, bend over, and apply their own lube for the money involved, I think they'll figure out a way to work out the exams.