Most Difficult Sport to Win National Title

[Satsuma Illini]

Got into a discussion on another board about this but what would you consider is the most difficult sport to win a national championship? I'm sure a Virginia fan would say tennis.

Illini Tennis

[floridatennisdude]

Any sport that crowns individuals like tennis, golf, swimming, track, or cc would be in the discussion, for the individual title.

Team sports can get a few talented athletes to take them far. It's hard to know if tennis is or isn't. For Florida and USC it hasn't been impossible. For other teams, it seems like it is lately.

My vote would go for:

Easiest = men's basketball
Toughest = men's golf individual

[floridatennisdude]

I'd also add that football might be the toughest team sport. Many schools are out of contention when they finalize their schedules a year or more in advance. It is probably the most near impossible task for a MAC school to have a shot at a BCS title.

[CaldwellYSR]

Originally Posted by floridatennisdude

I'd also add that football might be the toughest team sport. Many schools are out of contention when they finalize their schedules a year or more in advance. It is probably the most near impossible task for a MAC school to have a shot at a BCS title.

Yeah for football the way the BCS is I might go as far as to say football is the hardest to win if you're not in the SEC...

[Satsuma Illini]

Basketball and tennis seem to have the most fair and balanced way fo choosing a champion; a 25ish-game season, a conference tournament, and then 60 some teams chosen for a national tournament. Golf and gymnastics can be exciting but really hard to figure out. Football could be so great but continues to screw it up. But as long as it makes money, who cares?

[CaldwellYSR]

Originally Posted by Satsuma Illini

Basketball and tennis seem to have the most fair and balanced way fo choosing a champion; a 25ish-game season, a conference tournament, and then 60 some teams chosen for a national tournament. Golf and gymnastics can be exciting but really hard to figure out. Football could be so great but continues to screw it up. But as long as it makes money, who cares?

I care... I love the SEC but I'd rather see some kind of playoff in Football than see the rich white people that run the NCAA D1 get rich.... It should be about the players out there busting their @$$ every single day for most of the year not about making the rich richer while they sit around and don't do a d@mn thing.

[Satsuma Illini]

Originally Posted by CaldwellYSR

I care... I love the SEC but I'd rather see some kind of playoff in Football than see the rich white people that run the NCAA D1 get rich.... It should be about the players out there busting their @$$ every single day for most of the year not about making the rich richer while they sit around and don't do a d@mn thing.

I was being sarcastic at the end there. I've seen a few scenarios with 12 or 16 team playoffs for football. That would be so incredible. Why they don't do it just baffles the mind.

As for tennis, please get a frickin' workable, up-to-the-minute scoreboard setup. this ain't the 19th century anymore. Getting off track here. Seeing how few teams have won in the current championship system, tennis is definitely one of the toughest titles to win.

[floridatennisdude]

I agreSatsuma, football needs to wake up. Everything else in the world is a tournament at the end. Get rid of bowls already and have at least a 16 team playoff. I would prefer 32 with 2 weeks off before the championship. It's not that hard to figure out.

Season ends before thanksgiving, tourney starts first week of December and ends the second week of January. No one misses class that wasn't missing already. And the fans get exactly what they want. Tv makes millions. And everyone knows for sure who the best team was.

[CaldwellYSR]

Originally Posted by floridatennisdude

I agreSatsuma, football needs to wake up. Everything else in the world is a tournament at the end. Get rid of bowls already and have at least a 16 team playoff. I would prefer 32 with 2 weeks off before the championship. It's not that hard to figure out.

Season ends before thanksgiving, tourney starts first week of December and ends the second week of January. No one misses class that wasn't missing already. And the fans get exactly what they want. Tv makes millions. And everyone knows for sure who the best team was.

You can even keep the bowls, just have them be different games in the playoffs. Which is even more money for the rich slobs that run D1 football. BCS and playoffs can coexist and everyone is happy. It's just silly the way they do it now... like they're so much better than every other single sport and even every other division in football. That being said I'm okay with the SEC dominating every season

[Satsuma Illini]

Originally Posted by CaldwellYSR

You can even keep the bowls, just have them be different games in the playoffs. Which is even more money for the rich slobs that run D1 football. BCS and playoffs can coexist and everyone is happy. It's just silly the way they do it now... like they're so much better than every other single sport and even every other division in football. That being said I'm okay with the SEC dominating every season

For me, the national championship game is almost a exhibition. That's how
I look at it anymore. The real football is in the Big Ten. And now we have a championship game. For me, that's the only championship I'm interested in.

[floridatennisdude]

Originally Posted by CaldwellYSR

You can even keep the bowls, just have them be different games in the playoffs. Which is even more money for the rich slobs that run D1 football. BCS and playoffs can coexist and everyone is happy. It's just silly the way they do it now... like they're so much better than every other single sport and even every other division in football. That being said I'm okay with the SEC dominating every season

I'm fine with keeping the host cities involved and rotating the games around so that eventually everyone gets a big time semi final of championship. I'm an SEC fan too, but I don't think it's fair to the rest of a sport when we get to play for it every year because our conference is so strong. How do we know we are better unless we get to play it off and really prove it year after year?

Even in tennis, I would like the rounds of 64 & 32 played at a host, then the 16 & 8 played at another, then the final four be at the championship site where the singles and doubles tournaments are. I'm sure it would get more attention to tv if it were more isolated and concrete. Realistically, OU could even start the singles and doubles the day of the finals with players not represented in the championship.

[Satsuma Illini]

Originally Posted by floridatennisdude

I'm fine with keeping the host cities involved and rotating the games around so that eventually everyone gets a big time semi final of championship. I'm an SEC fan too, but I don't think it's fair to the rest of a sport when we get to play for it every year because our conference is so strong. How do we know we are better unless we get to play it off and really prove it year after year?

Even in tennis, I would like the rounds of 64 & 32 played at a host, then the 16 & 8 played at another, then the final four be at the championship site where the singles and doubles tournaments are. I'm sure it would get more attention to tv if it were more isolated and concrete. Realistically, OU could even start the singles and doubles the day of the finals with players not represented in the championship.

I'm all for that. The 16 and 8 round should be at different sites. Let the college sports fans have a chance to see college tennis at its finest in more places. No need to stay holed up in one place for two weeks.

A tennis final four would have more meaning as well.

[CaldwellYSR]

Originally Posted by floridatennisdude

I'm fine with keeping the host cities involved and rotating the games around so that eventually everyone gets a big time semi final of championship. I'm an SEC fan too, but I don't think it's fair to the rest of a sport when we get to play for it every year because our conference is so strong. How do we know we are better unless we get to play it off and really prove it year after year?

Yeah... I still think the SEC would dominate but at least it wouldn't be so controversial :P

[goran_ace]

Speaking strictly about football, no one outside of the mid-west cares about the Big 10 (12) if it's not Michigan vs. Ohio State. Sorry, that Wisconsin vs. Michigan State (who vs who???) was embarassingly bad. SEC is just too good/deep.

[floridatennisdude]

Originally Posted by goran_ace

Speaking strictly about football, no one outside of the mid-west cares about the Big 10 (12) if it's not Michigan vs. Ohio State. Sorry, that Wisconsin vs. Michigan State (who vs who???) was embarassingly bad. SEC is just too good/deep.

B1G football is an acquired taste. I don't mind it and I follow whoever is at the top of that conference. Their games are always on ESPN at noon.

And I have mad respect for Wisconsin. They put three O Linemen into the NFL 2 years ago and all three started as rookies. The interesting thing is that one of those three didn't even start at Wisc, yet was good enough to start in the pros.

[Satsuma Illini]

Originally Posted by goran_ace

Speaking strictly about football, no one outside of the mid-west cares about the Big 10 (12) if it's not Michigan vs. Ohio State. Sorry, that Wisconsin vs. Michigan State (who vs who???) was embarassingly bad. SEC is just too good/deep.

And ain't that just dandy for you. Enjoy your SEC. That national title-SEC game was embarrassingly bad too. I prefer Big Ten.

[jonnythan]

The answer is "the individual sport that relies the most on chance and luck."

Therefore the answer is golf.

There's a reason the best golfers in history lose way more tournaments than they win. This isn't really true of any other individual sport.

[Satsuma Illini]

Originally Posted by jonnythan

The answer is "the individual sport that relies the most on chance and luck."

Therefore the answer is golf.

There's a reason the best golfers in history lose way more tournaments than they win. This isn't really true of any other individual sport.

It's hard to argue with that point.

[Clemson_tennis]

Originally Posted by jonnythan

The answer is "the individual sport that relies the most on chance and luck."

Therefore the answer is golf.

There's a reason the best golfers in history lose way more tournaments than they win. This isn't really true of any other individual sport.

but it also makes it easier for an underdog to slip in and win