PDA

View Full Version : Illegitimate BCS process holds game hostage



NEPAsteeler
11-30-2011, 07:04 PM
The BCS formula is an exercise in nonsense.

It always has been; itís just more obvious this season, when there is a heated debate over the second-best team, the one that would meet LSU for the title.

Alabama, Oklahoma State, Virginia Tech and others are making their pitches, pointing out this strength and that argument to get a crack at the Tigers. The campaigns will only pick up this weekend.

Understand this, though: No matter what it says, the BCS is not a system designed to choose a championship matchup. It is merely a tool to stave off the inevitable playoff bowl directors fear will cut into their millions in tax-free profits, a casino-style distraction to placate the masses.

It is what it is, and until it collapses (even a four-teamer is a major, positive step), college football is stuck.

That said, if the BCS somehow survives in its current incarnation, the formula to determine 1-2 must be scrapped.

more: http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-wetzel_football_hostage_illegitimate_bcs_112911

st33lersguy
11-30-2011, 07:50 PM
A flawed moronic system resulting in a ton of mistakes and legitimate title contenders being snubbed

NEPAsteeler
11-30-2011, 08:11 PM
If they want to keep the bowl system so badly, why not create something where there's a playoff system but each game of the playoffs is still referred to as a bowl? Not sure if this would work but that's my theory.

BigNastyDefense
12-01-2011, 02:41 AM
I really can't stand the BCS. I think there should be a playoff. I would rather have a playoff rather than a bunch of meaningless bowls between 6-6 teams. And the BCS could still be in place, using it as a ranking system.

Big Ten, ACC, SEC, Big East, Big 12, and Pac 12 Champions get automatic bids into the tournament. Then, going by BCS ranking, the top six teams that didn't win their respective BCS conference get in, including any mid-majors in those rankings. They are then seeded by their BCS rankings. So if say Boise State is ranked #3, they get the #3 seed even though say Cincinnati won the Big East they were ranked for example #14. This way a Boise doesn't get screwed with a crap seed because they don't play in a BCS conference.

I think that would be the fairest way to do it and still include the BCS. It makes the BCS rankings relevant, so it doesn't really take away from the regular season, but gives us a playoff which is what most people want.

I do not want to see an Alabama-LSU rematch. That game was boring and sloppy. I love defense and I love defensive slobber knockers that end 13-10, but that game's low score was because both offenses were sloppy and just bad more so than two great defenses.

tube517
12-01-2011, 12:10 PM
I really can't stand the BCS. I think there should be a playoff. I would rather have a playoff rather than a bunch of meaningless bowls between 6-6 teams. And the BCS could still be in place, using it as a ranking system.

Big Ten, ACC, SEC, Big East, Big 12, and Pac 12 Champions get automatic bids into the tournament. Then, going by BCS ranking, the top six teams that didn't win their respective BCS conference get in, including any mid-majors in those rankings. They are then seeded by their BCS rankings. So if say Boise State is ranked #3, they get the #3 seed even though say Cincinnati won the Big East they were ranked for example #14. This way a Boise doesn't get screwed with a crap seed because they don't play in a BCS conference.

I think that would be the fairest way to do it and still include the BCS. It makes the BCS rankings relevant, so it doesn't really take away from the regular season, but gives us a playoff which is what most people want.

I do not want to see an Alabama-LSU rematch. That game was boring and sloppy. I love defense and I love defensive slobber knockers that end 13-10, but that game's low score was because both offenses were sloppy and just bad more so than two great defenses.

You mean you dont like the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl? :chuckle:

Godfather
12-01-2011, 08:39 PM
The gumps had their opportunity. They lost.

Okie Lite has a far superior resume--more wins against ranked teams, their loss was OT on the road instead of OT at home, and they're a conference champion instead of a division runner-up (assuming they win Bedlam). Even the computers recognize that fact--they'll jump to #2 after this weekend.

But a bunch of assclowns who don't know anything about football are voting brand names so they end up 4/5/6 on a lot of ballots.

Hindes204
12-01-2011, 09:08 PM
Im hoping for an LSU loss to Georgia, thatll really throw things out of whack

7SteelGal43
12-01-2011, 09:24 PM
The BCS is a pile of [expletive deleted]. There is no fairness in it for one thing and it's quite arbitrary. I for one would like to see a playoff system. I mean look how much time between the end of the regular season and the beginning of the bowl games, not to mention until the actual championship game. They could very easily have a playoff/tourney type thing like college hoops.

[this has been Judy's 2 cents worth. Feel free to form your own opinion] :nerd:

st33lersguy
12-04-2011, 02:32 AM
44-10 against top 10 opponent vs sat on their asses because they didn't win a division, Oklahoma State definitely deserves to play for the title over Alabama. It would be a crime if Oklahoma State was shunned

st33lersguy
12-04-2011, 08:35 PM
BullS*** Corruption popularity contest LSU vs Bama. The good news is that I just saved up 3 hours of my life

steeldevil
12-04-2011, 08:44 PM
LSU and Alabama are the best 2 teams in the country.

But yes there needs to be a playoff.

XxKnightxX
12-05-2011, 03:51 PM
I lost all faith in College football, VT gets in ahead of Boise and Kansas State, fucking bullshit, and I dont want to see Nick Sabans pompous ass in the sidelines again.

tube517
12-05-2011, 04:22 PM
I lost all faith in College football, VT gets in ahead of Boise and Kansas State, fucking bullshit, and I dont want to see Nick Sabans pompous ass in the sidelines again.

I agree and I'm a VT alum. What a crock of monkey crap. The Hokies DO NOT deserve a BCS bid at all. They lost twice to Clemson. The whole process is a sham.

Godfather
12-05-2011, 07:51 PM
Playoff fans are a little closer to getting their wish. B(C)S apologists will never again be able to argue that a playoff would make the regular season meaningless, because the "Game of the Century" has been reduced to a glorified exhibition. Even worse, the loser got rewarded with a bye.

Can you imagine if the NFL playoffs were run by the B(C)S? The Packers would have to play the Niners in the first round while the NFC East champ waited for the winner.

43Hitman
12-05-2011, 08:40 PM
I agree and I'm a VT alum. What a crock of monkey crap. The Hokies DO NOT deserve a BCS bid at all. They lost twice to Clemson. The whole process is a sham.

Big Hawkeye fan here, but live in Va, so I root for the Hokies since they have no bearing on the Big Ten. I agree that its complete BS that VT gets a better bowl than Clemson, Boise, and Kansas State. Goodell is ruining the NFL and the BCS is ruining college ball. What a shame.

steelreserve
12-05-2011, 11:56 PM
Can you imagine if the NFL playoffs were run by the B(C)S? The Packers would have to play the Niners in the first round while the NFC East champ waited for the winner.

No, you got it completely wrong. If the B*S ran the NFL playoffs, the 49ers wouldn't get in at all because they had a weak schedule and don't have as strong a fan base or tradition. Then they'd skip straight to a Packers-Patriots Super Bowl. For the next 10 years. Maybe they'd let the Cowboys in once in a while.

That's how it works when the entire system is based on favoritism and hype. Sucks that there's no legitimate national championship this year.

suitanim
12-06-2011, 10:31 AM
I have so many gripes here:
A) No conference championship, no national championship. Think about that...it's retarded for a team to NOT win it's own conference title, but to still be national champs. Sorry, Bama...
B) What the fuck is West Virginia doing in the BCS? Seriously, the AQ formula sucks.
C) What the fucks is VT doing in the BCS? I'd rather see one loss Boise, who at least plays exciting football, in then VT
D) Back to the 1/2 repeat. Why was the SEC so against it when it happened to UM/OSU a few years ago, and now they are so for it? I'd rather see OKState. Their offense versus LSU's defense is the better match-up. Bama/LSU is about as exciting as soccer.

Scrap it all, 8 game playoff using existing bowls. Do it NOW!

86WARD
12-06-2011, 12:07 PM
I have so many gripes here:
A) No conference championship, no national championship. Think about that...it's retarded for a team to NOT win it's own conference title, but to still be national champs. Sorry, Bama...
B) What the fuck is West Virginia doing in the BCS? Seriously, the AQ formula sucks.
C) What the fucks is VT doing in the BCS? I'd rather see one loss Boise, who at least plays exciting football, in then VT
D) Back to the 1/2 repeat. Why was the SEC so against it when it happened to UM/OSU a few years ago, and now they are so for it? I'd rather see OKState. Their offense versus LSU's defense is the better match-up. Bama/LSU is about as exciting as soccer.

Scrap it all, 8 game playoff using existing bowls. Do it NOW!

Good post suit!

Dino 6 Rings
12-06-2011, 01:17 PM
OK State got robbed, that is all.

steelreserve
12-06-2011, 02:35 PM
I have so many gripes here:
A) No conference championship, no national championship. Think about that...it's retarded for a team to NOT win it's own conference title, but to still be national champs. Sorry, Bama...
B) What the fuck is West Virginia doing in the BCS? Seriously, the AQ formula sucks.
C) What the fucks is VT doing in the BCS? I'd rather see one loss Boise, who at least plays exciting football, in then VT
D) Back to the 1/2 repeat. Why was the SEC so against it when it happened to UM/OSU a few years ago, and now they are so for it? I'd rather see OKState. Their offense versus LSU's defense is the better match-up. Bama/LSU is about as exciting as soccer.

add to that E) How do you know these teams are "clearly" 1-2 in the nation, or that the SEC is "clearly" better than other conferences, if you don't have them play the best teams from other conferences? All they've played is each other, and LSU has taken on a couple of LAST YEAR'S conference champions that turned out to be less good this year. The end of the season is when you KNOW who the best teams from the different conferences are, and having them play each other is the only way to find out who's really the best. You just play each other again, it proves nothing.

This is exactly what everyone understood when there was all the talk of the idiot OSU-Michigan rematch, and look how that turned out. Also back several years, when most of the Big 12 had gone to crap and whoever won the Texas-Oklahoma game was pretty much guaranteed of getting cakewalked into the national title picture with a 12-0 or 11-1 record, you saw the same thing happen a lot. Saying that you know for certain that one conference is better than all the rest is just reacting to hype. "OH BUT LSU WOULD KILL STANFORD." WTF, you're basing the national title game on the same standard as two guys arguing in a bar? You have NO FUCKING CLUE until you play the game.

Honestly, the Big 12 can be legitimately just as deep as the SEC this year beyond the conference champion; maybe even the Big Ten. I do not have a hell of a lot of faith that, say, Arkansas and South Carolina are SO much better competition than Michigan State or Texas. Other than hype. I wish there were more of those kinds of matchups in the lesser bowl games, but they seem to have matched up the wrong tweener teams and it'll be fairly predictable.

WTF is Boise State doing playing Arizona State, by the way? They were a field goal away from the national title game, and now they're playing someone who's 6-6. Good job there, guys.

Dino 6 Rings
12-06-2011, 04:01 PM
LSU did beat the Pac 10 winner and Big East Winner already this season. So I give LSU lots of props.

Alabama however, beat the #4 Big 10 team, and then, Kent State, North Texas, Georgia Southern and a bunch of bottom feeders of the SEC, Including Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Miss State, Ole Miss and a very down Auburn team. Arkansas was a Good win, but then in their biggest game, they choked out at home. They do NOT Deserve to be in the National Title game with that Resume', I'm sorry, but it does not impress me when you look at their Schedule. They didn't play Georgia or South Carolina from the SEC East, Alabama's body of work is WEAK SAUCE!

Dino 6 Rings
12-06-2011, 04:19 PM
SEC Bowl match ups this season:

Miss St 6-6 vs Wake Forest 6-6 (SEC vs ACC)
Vanderbilt 6-6 vs Cincy 9-3 (SEC vs Big East)
Auburn 7-5 vs Virginia 8-4 (SEC vs ACC)
Georgia 10-3 vs Mich State 10-3 (SEC vs Big 10)
South Carolina 10-2 vs Nebraska 9-3 (SEC vs Big 12)
Arkansas 10-2 vs Kansas St 10-2 (SEC Vs Big 12)
Florida 6-6 vs Ohio St 6-6 (SEC vs Big 10)

suitanim
12-06-2011, 05:12 PM
Good last two posts...the problem I have with the SEC hasn't changed much. They usually schedule light, and they never leave the SE. A few teams have been the exception (Bama did play in PA, Georgia has been pretty good about scheduling OOC against better competition), but, in general, they play cupcakes at home, and most of the bowl games are in their backyard.

They also depend on their own mystique as being "The greatest conference ever" and also mandating that if a top ranked SEC team in one division plays a team that doesn't have a chance to play for the championship in the other, the refs are to (wink wink, nudge nudge) make sure "The right team wins". That being said, in the above match-ups, I have Cinci over Vandy (and big), Auburn crushing UVA, Georgia probably handling the Spartans, Nebraska beating SC, Arkansas beating K State, and OSU beating Florida ONLY because Urban Meyer will be the Bucks de facto coach...I don't know shit about MSU and Wake, and don't care either...

steelreserve
12-06-2011, 05:15 PM
LSU did beat the Pac 10 winner and Big East Winner already this season. So I give LSU lots of props.

Alabama however, beat the #4 Big 10 team, and then, Kent State, North Texas, Georgia Southern and a bunch of bottom feeders of the SEC, Including Vanderbilt, Tennessee, Miss State, Ole Miss and a very down Auburn team. Arkansas was a Good win, but then in their biggest game, they choked out at home. They do NOT Deserve to be in the National Title game with that Resume', I'm sorry, but it does not impress me when you look at their Schedule. They didn't play Georgia or South Carolina from the SEC East, Alabama's body of work is WEAK SAUCE!

Nobody's doubting whether LSU deserves to be in the title game. They're the only undefeated team, period, and they played a respectable schedule. But was their schedule (and Bama's) SO GOOD that it makes their conference untouchable compared to everyone else? Hell no, it doesn't.

I think a big problem here is that Arkansas really isn't that good of a team; they're OK, but they beat up on chumps and get murdered by the best teams. They were in some close games against Texas A&M and Ole Miss and Vanderbilt, which really is about where they belong. They're realistically a #20-#25 team, maybe #15-#20 at best, but .... S-E-C! S-E-C! and voila, they're #3 and everyone is amazed at what a tough conference it is. Not really.

It's like ... are you going to hand it to the SEC because Vanderbilt is so much better than Cal, or Ole Miss is so much better than Penn State? You look at who's in the conference beyond the top two, and I don't really think there's a case for those kinds of arguments, at least not one that proves the SEC is so much better you don't need to even consider anyone else. It's horseshit.

One last thing - I absolutely hate how Oregon gets so much credit as being an "elite" team. They are absolutely not. They're a gimmick team whose entire offense is "OMG WHO HAS THE BALL!!!" and they'll beat you if you can't keep up with their team speed. Which means they get 6-7 "quality" wins a year because you have white linebackers trying to chase down a receiver who runs track on a play-action reverse ... then they play USC and smack into a brick wall because that type of shit doesn't work against a team that can compete athletically and knows what it's doing. Same thing happens when they play a decent non-conference opponent like LSU or Boise - or if another Pac-10 team happens to have a fast defense in any given year - and that takes them out of the national championship picture. Last year, they played a soft nonconference schedule, got LUCKY AS HELL that USC was having a down year and Stanford is so white on defense ... then got lucky again that they played another gimmick team in the national championship, or they would've been completely embarrassed. Bottom line, you can count on Oregon for about 10 wins a year, but not because they're very good.

suitanim
12-06-2011, 05:38 PM
That's a good post, too, but think about Wisci for a second. They play Oregon in the Rose Bowl. I'm thinking Oregon all the way. Wisconsin has gotten better about adding some finesse along with their overpowering brute force, but speed still kills. Look at OSU v UW for the last few seasons. OSU got a little smaller and faster on defense in 2010 to compete for a national champion (so they would hold up against a Florida, or more apropos, an Arkansas, who they beat), but when they faced Wisconsin, they found out they had gone TOO small and fast, and Wisci smashed the ball down their throats.

But Oregon is wide open on offense, and that's not a great match-up for Wisci on D. I think the Badgers will run at will against the Ducks, and UW has a great running QB who can throw a little, but this will end up (because of all that) as a score fest. That does NOT favor the Badgers. Ironically, the Buckeyes beat Wisconsin with an average team because that team was BUILT TO BEAT WISCONSIN. A good mix of speed and power.

I guess my overall point is that when teams gear up for their conference play, sometimes they miss a key aspect, which is being mindful of OOC competition. In Wisconsin's case, I think they would have had a BETTER season had they played in the SEC. They are pretty balanced, speed, finesse, and can run the ball up the middle if they have to. But they will probably lose to Oregon because they don't see that kind of complete dedication to sped and finesse ever in the big ten.

Dino 6 Rings
12-07-2011, 01:33 PM
Really good posts by both Suit A Nim and Steelreserve, we all agree that the SEC is getting way too much credit and that as a confernece over all they are pretty weak when it comes to scheduling out of conference games. When they do, they tend to get beat. Georgia got beat by Boise State, few years ago both Arkansas and Auburn signed home and homes with USC and both got smoked and punched in the face.

Why aren't they signing home and homes with Ohio State? Texas? Oklahoma? Nebraska? Pretty sure Ohio State did that, they went home and home against both Texas and USC. They don't have to do that, they did it cause they have balls. SEC Teams have no balls. They all play 8 games at home in the south and never travel worth a crap to play anyone. Biggest risk this year, wasn't LSU Playing Oregon in my opinion, it was LSU Playing AT West Virginia.

suitanim
12-07-2011, 02:20 PM
I remember a few years ago Ohio State actively pursued home and home series with all the top SEC teams. They all declined. There is a myth that OSU can't beat the SEC. In fact, they have lost a lot of bowl games, but in almost every case the SEC team was ranked higher, in many cases MUCH higher.

Point being, they will play anyone, any time, anywhere...wish the cream of the SEC had the same attitude...

steelreserve
12-07-2011, 05:11 PM
I do have a lot more respect for teams that go out of their way to schedule tough games outside of their conference. You conference is going to be whatever it is going to be, you have no control over it. But let's say a few years ago, when the Pac-10 was kind of weak and the Big 12 was kind of weak too ... I had a hell of a lot more respect for USC, which would go out and play someone like Virginia Tech or Arkansas, plus Notre Dame every year, and usually one of the better WAC or MWC teams like BYU or Fresno State. On the other hand, you had Texas and Oklahoma scheduling opponents like Northern Texas, Louisana-Lafayette, Middle Tennessee, UTEP ... basically just take it easy, run through conference and then play each other to determine the champion.

Interesting to look at it a few years later, when due to the natural ebb and flow of conferences, the Big 12 has rebounded so that it's not just Texas and OU anymore and winning it is a real accomplishment - and in the meantime, the ACC and Big East have gone to shit. But there's a big difference in how that's treated; the ACC and Big East go to shit, and people get down on them, and nobody's talking about putting their conference champion with one loss in the title discussion. When the Big 12 went to shit, it's like people hardly even noticed. SEC is the same way; I don't think people have any clue how good or bad the teams are inside that conference just because of their inherent bias. If I could put it down on paper, I'd say the pecking order for getting into the title game is like this:

SEC: Conference champion guaranteed to be in national title game if undefeated or 1 loss; Alabama, LSU, Florida possible without title and only 1 loss
Big Ten: Undefeated conference champion only; one loss acceptable if OSU or Mich. (50-50 chance), Penn State (10% chance)
Pac-12: Undefeated conference champion only; one loss acceptable if USC (80% chance)
Big 12: Undefeated conference champion only; one loss acceptable if OU or Texas (50% chance)
ACC: Only Miami, Florida State, VT allowed if undefeated
Big East: Only Pitt or WV allowed if undefeated; must be <2 undefeated teams from other conferences and USC/Alabama/OU must have more than 1 loss
All others: Not allowed

BigNastyDefense
12-09-2011, 02:48 PM
The SEC is so overrated. But you know why it isn't seen that way? ESPN has a ton of money wrapped up in the SEC Network. So they want the SEC to be considered heads & shoulders above everyone else so it's a success.

In most of the B1G country, you can get the B1G Network without having to buy a special package. I can't vouch for where I don't live, but from what I have read this is the truth. Outside of the states that have B1G schools, the network is largely unavailable or you have to order it with a sports channel package.

In SEC country, it's going to be a success. However, since the network is backed by ESPN, I am expecting this to be pushed more nationwide. If the SEC is considered on par with the other major conferences in football, then it might not have the national draw that they hope. I think it will not be a success if they market it nationwide because unless you live in SEC country or you are a fan of an SEC team, you're not going to care much.

st33lersguy
12-09-2011, 03:02 PM
SEC: Conference champion guaranteed to be in national title game if undefeated or 1 loss; Alabama, LSU, Florida possible without title and only 1 loss
Big Ten: Undefeated conference champion only; one loss acceptable if OSU or Mich. (50-50 chance), Penn State (10% chance)
Pac-12: Undefeated conference champion only; one loss acceptable if USC (80% chance)
Big 12: Undefeated conference champion only; one loss acceptable if OU or Texas (50% chance)
ACC: Only Miami, Florida State, VT allowed if undefeated
Big East: Only Pitt or WV allowed if undefeated; must be <2 undefeated teams from other conferences and USC/Alabama/OU must have more than 1 loss
All others: Not allowed

Pretty much hit the nail on the head, if you look at all teams to play in the BS national championship, they all had storied traditions except Virginia Tech 1999 and Oregon last year who was selected only to keep TCU out of the national championship. The BS favors schools with great tradition. A great example, besides this year is 2001 when 1 loss Pac-10 champ Oregon got snubbed from the BS in favor of 1-loss Nebraska who didn't even their division and got routed in their division championship.

kittenfantastico76
12-12-2011, 03:52 PM
I can't say that the BCS is 100% fair... but I will say as a Bama fan... I really have nothing to complain about... other than early in the season my husband and I wanted to see the National Championship be between OSU and Bama. I really like/admire OSU. But I also have a desire to root for all SEC teams... now that it's a head to head thing it's a bit harder and I want LSU to go down in flames.... might be a pipe dream but I hope that it happens.

Bottom line I think playoffs would make things more exciting. My favorite part of NFL season is usually the clench time at the end of the season to see who makes it to the big dance. I think that college could benefit from a similar system.

Like I said as a Bama fan, I'm alright with the outcome of National Championship choices and look forward to the party in New Orleans in January, regardless of the outcome I'll have a 190 Octane in my hand!

XxKnightxX
01-07-2012, 02:04 AM
I remember a few years ago Ohio State actively pursued home and home series with all the top SEC teams. They all declined. There is a myth that OSU can't beat the SEC. In fact, they have lost a lot of bowl games, but in almost every case the SEC team was ranked higher, in many cases MUCH higher.

Point being, they will play anyone, any time, anywhere...wish the cream of the SEC had the same attitude...

Well the SEC Likes to " Keep it in the family" if you know what I mean hahahaha.

BlacknGoldBabe
01-07-2012, 07:02 AM
Unfortunately, until money quits ruling the whole thing, it isn't going to change :sick: