Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Gee, thanks BCS


detlef
 Share

Recommended Posts

What a freaking joke. Now, I'm not saying that anyone has a iron-clad argument over either LSU or OSU. Certainly not OSU based on the fact that they're the only one-loss team to win a BCS conference. LSU, whatever. They "were never bested in regulation". That said, there's also absolutely no way you can argue that we certainly have the best two teams in the country playing. That, however, is what the BCS apologists claim is their only duty to the fans.

 

Why do they say that? To explain away the rest of the crappy match-ups this format also gives us. And crappy they are.

 

WVU v OU is, I think the only non NC BCS game that seems remotely intriguing. GA v Hawaii? please. USC v Ill? Va Tech v Kansas? Now, who knows. Maybe Hawaii, Ill, and Kansas all win those games. That doesn't prove me wrong, that just bails out a crappy system. They've already failed me because I have absolutely no interest in watching those games. In other years, I might have anyway. This year? I've got to say it has a whole lot to do with how nice a day it is outside. I'm not passing up 50 degrees and sunny for GA vs Hawaii, that's for damned sure.

 

So we scrap the traditional bowl match ups. We ignore the reality that basically every team title in all of organized sports is settled with a play-off. For what?

 

To bring us a NC game that you can't convince anyone with any certainty includes the top two teams and Georgia vs Hawaii in the Sugar Bowl. Well that's just great.

 

Knowing how much fun it would be to watch the 8-12 best teams battle it out for the crown and willingly trading that for this crap is very, very irritating. I mean, nobody freaking plays each other!!!! If there is any major sport that is harder to evaluate teams respective to one another, it's D-1 college football, yet that's the only one where the only two teams that have a chance at the title are determined by arbitrary votes and computers. That's the freaking irony!!!

 

I mean, in hoops, top teams play a number of highly ranked teams OC. Going into March, you actually have a decent body of evidence to support who's good relative to who. For instance, every one of the arguments we have here about football come down to relative strength of the conference. Any one from the Big 10 want to argue that the ACC isn't better than you in hoops? They just beat you 8-3, end of story. Of course, despite this fact, they still have a tourney.

 

Whatever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Feel your pain. Playoff would be nice.

 

The bowl matchups look anything but exciting. However even without the BCS not sure how many good bowl games you would have had anyway. Don't forget the Rose Bowl was locked into Pac 10 and Big 10 while the Suger was locked into SEC, Orange Big 8, Cotton SWC. The problem this year is you have a couple of no name teams like Hawaii and Kansas stepping onto the scene along with several non traditional power teams. If you reverted back to the old system what bowl matchups do you really think you would have gotten.

 

LSU vs ??? Sugar

 

Oklahoma vs. ??? Orange

 

Texas vs. ??? Cotton

 

USC vs. Ohio State Rose Bowl

 

My guess is that the Sugar would have gone for Georgia, Orange Virginia Tech, Cotton Notre Dame (just kiddin) they always did like the Irish

 

Also keep in mind they didn't have as many bowl games back then either so their wasn't any reason to have automatic bowl tie ins as they do now. If the BCS wasn't here those tie ins still would be and the number of bowl games would not necessarily be less.

 

The one positive the BCS brings is at least the shot to bring the us a NC game when in the past there would have been no way a Big 10 or Pac 10 champion could have played against any other team on New Years Day. In short, we would have never had USC vs. Texas or Ohio State vs. Florida. In all likelyhood we would have been wondering what if,

Edited by Rockerbraves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In short, we would have never had USC vs. Texas or Ohio State vs. Florida. In all likelyhood we would have been wondering what if,

 

You just mentioned 2 of the 2 or 3 years that it has worked out. In almost every other case, and by that I mean outside of their lucky 'no-brainer' years, I side a lot more with detlef here. IF we can't have a friggin 8-team playoff, why not go back to the old way? Hmm, I smell money, as usual. There are plenty of playoff plans that involve one extra week at most, due to starting earlier, so don't bring the tired old 'they need to be in school' crap, when we know its all about the money.

 

And I have to admit our hommies here - the Rose committee - are the worst. Picking Illinois over about 6-7 teams ranked higher just to get a big10 team is ridiculous. But it goes to show how much they prefer the old way too - Buckeyes vs. USC would've been awesome.

 

Oh well, go Trojans, blow that line (-14) away. Please.......

Edited by Coffeeman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just mentioned 2 of the 2 or 3 years that it has worked out. In almost every other case, and by that I mean outside of their lucky 'no-brainer' years, I side a lot more with detlef here. IF we can't have a friggin 8-team playoff, why not go back to the old way? Hmm, I smell money, as usual. There are plenty of playoff plans that involve one extra week at most, due to starting earlier, so don't bring the tired old 'they need to be in school' crap, when we know its all about the money.

 

And I have to admit our hommies here - the Rose committee - are the worst. Picking Illinois over about 6-7 teams ranked higher just to get a big10 team is ridiculous. But it goes to show how much they prefer the old way too - Buckeyes vs. USC would've been awesome.

 

Oh well, go Trojans, blow that line (-14) away. Please.......

Admittedly I didn't do much research on previous BCS matchups that involved Big 10 and Pac 10 teams, but off the top of my head again Ohio State vs. Miami would not have happen either. Look a playoff would be nice, but what I'm saying is the old way wouldn't have given us that many better bowl matchups.

 

Do the execise and see what bowl matchups you could come up with this year. I would be curious to see. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BCS always has been a joke, more so this year. There never has been a true D-1 champion because of it. This year SCREAMS for a playoff format.

 

I absolutely hate the fact that OSU was out of the NC and the got to sit on their hands and DO NOTHING while other teams played in conference championships. Back dooring your way into the NC in this manner sucks.

 

I refuse to watch any D-1 college football (regualr season or bowl games) because the system is such a joke (other than my alma mater). And the number of bowl games is ludicrous as well ... saturation was reached long ago making most of the games meaningless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do the execise and see what bowl matchups you could come up with this year. I would be curious to see. :D

I wish I had the time like you, Rocker. But I don't. For what its worth, I think the 2 teams in the NC this year have the best arguements of those that lobbied for it, working with the flawed system we have.

 

Ironically, the guys who have voted against making it a requirement to be your conference champ/co-champ are the ones who hurt the playoff idea and have opened the door for a 2-loss team to play in the NC. That is, the most logical playoff systems I've seen would make that a requirement, and that is what a playoff is like anyway - you win the conf. championship as the first game or step in the playoffs. If you lose that one big, (ahem Oklahoma) you do not get a pass into the game anyway. Michigan last year and GA this year would've never been complaining.

 

I said it before, but eventually I'd like to see 8 conferences total with 12 teams each, 6 per division, all with a CC game. You would play all 5 teams in your division, + 3-4 from the other division + 2-3 non-conf. games. All are equal 'BCS conferences', and the 8 winners play in the 4 BCS games around Xmas, with a couple weeks for playoffs after that. All the other bowl games still get played wihin reason - that is, another 20 bowls for the other top 40 teams for a total of 24 bowl games plus 3 playoff games = 27 total.

 

Do we really need 120 Div1A teams, or would the resulting 96 be enough? I'd say it would, and push those bottom 24 teams down to 2A. I think parity would get better, not worse. Alternatively, or at least in the meantime, just take your 4 BCS bowl winners in the current system and play them off in 3 extra games.

 

But that's just me, and I could be wrong.....

Edited by Coffeeman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You wouldn't even have to tweak it as much as coffeeman says, create more games and more money by doing the following.

 

Change nothing about the conferences. If you've got 12, have a title game, if not, doesn't matter. However, conferences without championship games must schedule the last games of the season the same week as the conference title games.

 

Conference champs have automatic bids. The rest is filled out by at-large bids to fill out an 8 team play-off. You can even use the same voting/computer format to set it. You can also have requirements that one needs to have played x number of teams ranked in the final BCS top 30 within the last x years. Basically, come up with a formula that doesn't penalize a team for luck of the draw because their conference just happened to be down that year or the OC games were against teams that just happened to suck. However, if a team like BSU, Utah, or Hawaii wants a taste, they'd better go after some big time programs OC. Most BCS schools would not be affected by this much because their conference schedule alone would likely come close to, if not satisfying this requirement.

 

Now, the week right after the conference title games, you have the quarter finals hosted by the top 4 seeds. There would still be some grumbling from the 5th and 6th ranked teams that they should have gotten the home game but that's much better than the 3rd team being left out of any chance at all of the NC. There's not a chance in hell that every one of those games isn't a sellout and the TV package would be huge.

 

Then you designate two of the traditional big bowls as the semis and two as consolation games for the losers. Right now, 4 of them are basically consolation games anyway. Since half the teams involved were playing home games the first time around, you're not asking everyone to moblize a bunch of times to see games. That leaves one plus one game. Attendance, like that of The SB wouldn't matter. That game is not about fans of the schools as much as it is about corporate big-wigs.

 

This system requires 8 teams in the entire nation to play 1 more game each and 2 teams to play 2 more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do know that the Big 10 has threaten to walk out if a playoff comes into being?

No, but it doesn't surprise me. Calling themselves the Big10 with 11 teams, not having all the teams play each other (like the Pac10,) etc. The commish there just gets the biggest douchebag award, out of all the other commish douchebags...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO joke, and the fans suffer from their incompetence.

 

We need a BCS buster to come in and blow this fraud system away.

 

Screw the computers, screw the coaches poll. Both are slanted, and neither are trusted.

 

 

Its my opinion those who watch the most college football should be deciding things.

 

Id like a committee of 25 who do nothing but write or broadcast college football do the rankings.

 

 

Screw the bowls, that is just about money. And quite frankly I dont care about the monetary aspect of things, But If college football wants the fraud of the bowls, then let them have it, but use the BCS bowls to determine the 8 team playoff.

 

Top 6 conference winners and 2 at large teams, which should be GA and Hawaii, that almost every one agree on,

 

1 plays 8

2 plays 7

3 plays 6

4 plays 5

 

 

And the Sugar Bowl shouldnt be a BCS bowl, it should be the Cotton bowl, which will be at the new Cowboys stadium in 2009.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest crime in the BCS selection is Mizzou getting screwed. How this happened I do not know. They whipped Kansas and Kansas gets to go to a BCS game and Mizzou get the Cotton Crapper.

 

see my last post in the other top thread. It might make you feel better, in that we can unite vs. one enemy....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The biggest crime in the BCS selection is Mizzou getting screwed. How this happened I do not know. They whipped Kansas and Kansas gets to go to a BCS game and Mizzou get the Cotton Crapper.

Happens all the time with the loser of the SEC Championship game. We understand the risk and rewards associated with a championship game.

 

Big 12 isn't use to it because of the Oklahoma fiasco back in 2003.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the day as it were...

 

Rose - #7 USC vs #1 Ohio St

Orange - #4 Oklahoma vs #3 Virginia Tech (no ACC tie in)

Sugar - #2 LSU vs #5 Georgia

Fiesta - #6 Missouri vs #9 West Virginia (no tie in at all for this bowl)

Cotton - #8 Kansas vs #11 Arizona State (used to be SWC but no longer exists)

 

Hawaii would have been nowhere to be found but you can plug them in there if you like. You could throw Florida in there somewhere too if you thought it looked good. I actually thought OU vs FLA but I didn't want to snub a higher ranked team. I would love to see that game.

 

I didn't put a hugh amount of thought into that line-up but I'm pretty sure there was a time when that would've worked out.

 

Doesn't give us a clear champion but we're not getting one this year anyway.

 

 

Oh and by the way, the Sugar was logical because of the tie-in to the SEC. The Cotton lost their connection when the SWC folded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO joke, and the fans suffer from their incompetence.

 

We need a BCS buster to come in and blow this fraud system away.

 

Screw the computers, screw the coaches poll. Both are slanted, and neither are trusted.

Its my opinion those who watch the most college football should be deciding things.

 

Id like a committee of 25 who do nothing but write or broadcast college football do the rankings.

Screw the bowls, that is just about money. And quite frankly I dont care about the monetary aspect of things, But If college football wants the fraud of the bowls, then let them have it, but use the BCS bowls to determine the 8 team playoff.

 

Top 6 conference winners and 2 at large teams, which should be GA and Hawaii, that almost every one agree on,

 

1 plays 8

2 plays 7

3 plays 6

4 plays 5

And the Sugar Bowl shouldnt be a BCS bowl, it should be the Cotton bowl, which will be at the new Cowboys stadium in 2009.

Not me. I think you either need to play in a major conference or schedule stronger OOC. How many teams would be undefeated if they played Hawaii's schedule. A team shouldn't be penalized for the luck of the draw if they have 4 or so teams that have been ranked highly recently but just happened to stink that year, but you need to at least play someone that typically competes on the national stage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sugar Bowl shouldnt be ahead of Cotton Bowl on pecking order. Was a huge mistake when they took the Sugar over the Cotton in the first place.

Its that simple. Has nothing to so with location, its the bowl itself.

I don't understand your reasoning. Why?

 

The Sugar has been around since 1934, Cotton 1937..

 

Sugar gets the SEC Champ...

 

Cotton gets the Big 12 #2 team...

 

 

Just because a new stadium is being built they should get the BCS... :D

 

I think what will happen in the future, cities will bid on the BCS Championship game..

Edited by neilfish2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the day as it were...

 

Rose - #7 USC vs #1 Ohio St

Orange - #4 Oklahoma vs #3 Virginia Tech (no ACC tie in)

Sugar - #2 LSU vs #5 Georgia

Fiesta - #6 Missouri vs #9 West Virginia (no tie in at all for this bowl)

Cotton - #8 Kansas vs #11 Arizona State (used to be SWC but no longer exists)

 

Hawaii would have been nowhere to be found but you can plug them in there if you like. You could throw Florida in there somewhere too if you thought it looked good. I actually thought OU vs FLA but I didn't want to snub a higher ranked team. I would love to see that game.

 

I didn't put a hugh amount of thought into that line-up but I'm pretty sure there was a time when that would've worked out.

 

Doesn't give us a clear champion but we're not getting one this year anyway.

Oh and by the way, the Sugar was logical because of the tie-in to the SEC. The Cotton lost their connection when the SWC folded.

As you can see the bowl schedule using the old formula isn't that much better, plus I could almost guarantee the Big 10 would have more than one team and you don't get the matchup of #1 vs. #2 :D

 

The biggest problem you have today is that fans find it hard to get fired up about up and coming teams like Missouri, Kansas, Hawaii, S. Florida, Rutgers and even teams like West Virginia, Virginia Tech so in all likelyhood in the old system those type teams would be replaced by the bigger TV draws (aka Texas, Florida, Michigan, Tennessee etc) even though those lesser known teams earned it.

 

Old Method

 

Rose - #7 USC vs #1 Ohio St

Orange - #4 Oklahoma vs #3 Virginia Tech (no ACC tie in)

Sugar - #2 LSU vs #5 Georgia

Fiesta - #6 Missouri (#13 Illinois) vs #9 West Virginia (no tie in at all for this bowl)

Cotton - #8 Kansas (#19 Texas) vs #11 Arizona State (used to be SWC but no longer exists)

 

Versus BCS

 

Rose #7 USC vs. #13 Illinois

Orange #3 Virginia Tech vs #8 Kansas

Sugar #6 Georgia vs. #10 Hawaii

Fiesta #4 Oklahoma vs. #9 West Virginia

BCS NC #1 Ohio State vs. #2 LSU

Edited by Rockerbraves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you can see the bowl schedule using the old formula isn't that much better, plus I could almost guarantee the Big 10 would have more than one team and you don't get the matchup of #1 vs. #2 :D

 

The biggest problem you have today is that fans find it hard to get fired up about up and coming teams like Missouri, Kansas, Hawaii, S. Florida, Rutgers and even teams like West Virginia, Virginia Tech so in all likelyhood in the old system those type teams would be replaced by the bigger TV draws (aka Texas, Florida, Michigan, Tennessee etc) even though those lesser known teams earned it.

 

Old Method

 

Rose - #7 USC vs #1 Ohio St

Orange - #4 Oklahoma vs #3 Virginia Tech (no ACC tie in)

Sugar - #2 LSU vs #5 Georgia

Fiesta - #6 Missouri (#13 Illinois) vs #9 West Virginia (no tie in at all for this bowl)

Cotton - #8 Kansas (#13 Illinois) vs #11 Arizona State (used to be SWC but no longer exists)

 

Versus BCS

 

Rose #7 USC vs. #13 Illinois

Orange #3 Virginia Tech vs #8 Kansas

Sugar #6 Georgia vs. #10 Hawaii

Fiesta #4 Oklahoma vs. #9 West Virginia

BCS NC #1 Ohio State vs. #2 LSU

First of all, other than LSU and Ohio St fans, who cares about the supposed #1 vs #2 game this year. It isn't clear enough to get excited about. I prefer the "Old Method" in this comparison if only for the fact that there are at least two potentially really good games in USC/OSU and LSU/GA that woulld be hugh TV draws. Hell, do what you have suggested and throw in a bigger draw or two and you also have maybe OU/FLA. I'd tune in to watch that before any of the games that are actually going to take place this year. I just plugged in the higher ranked teams by default. I also really like the possible Mizzou/WVU match-up. What an offensive show that would be. And no way, Big 10 or not, Illinois gets picked by a bowl in that part of the country over either Mizzou or KU this year. The Fiesta and Cotton love the Big 12. That's their bread and butter.

 

By the way, you do realize that given the amount of trash you have spewed about OSU and the Big 10 this year that LSU, at least from your perspective, is now in a no win situation. Didn't know if you'd thought about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, other than LSU and Ohio St fans, who cares about the supposed #1 vs #2 game this year. It isn't clear enough to get excited about. I prefer the "Old Method" in this comparison if only for the fact that there are at least two potentially really good games in USC/OSU and LSU/GA that woulld be hugh TV draws. Hell, do what you have suggested and throw in a bigger draw or two and you also have maybe OU/FLA. I'd tune in to watch that before any of the games that are actually going to take place this year. I just plugged in the higher ranked teams by default. I also really like the possible Mizzou/WVU match-up. What an offensive show that would be. And no way, Big 10 or not, Illinois gets picked by a bowl in that part of the country over either Mizzou or KU this year. The Fiesta and Cotton love the Big 12. That's their bread and butter.

 

By the way, you do realize that given the amount of trash you have spewed about OSU and the Big 10 this year that LSU, at least from your perspective, is now in a no win situation. Didn't know if you'd thought about that.

If I recall you are relatively young so I can't expect you to know how corrupt the old system was prior to the BCS. Arn't you the South Florida fan?

 

If you are then you of all people should appreciate the BCS. At least this way your team has a shot for the NC and a BCS bowl.

Edited by Rockerbraves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you can see the bowl schedule using the old formula isn't that much better, plus I could almost guarantee the Big 10 would have more than one team and you don't get the matchup of #1 vs. #2 :D

 

 

We still didnt, which is why this football season is now a joke, as great as it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand your reasoning. Why?

 

The Sugar has been around since 1934, Cotton 1937..

 

Sugar gets the SEC Champ...

 

Cotton gets the Big 12 #2 team...

Just because a new stadium is being built they should get the BCS... :D

 

I think what will happen in the future, cities will bid on the BCS Championship game..

 

 

Cotton should have got the Big 12 #1 team, not Fiesta. Old Big 8 went to Orange Bowl. So that tradition died with the new conference.

 

But Sugar Bowl is in a terrible place. Terrible accomodations for fans, more of a NFL environment than college football. Just has always been the worst game of the day, and that turf, has always looked awful.

 

No Bowl game should be played in a dome. None. College football shouldnt be played in a dome, its that simple. I cant think of any real team that plays in a dome, then to have to play a bowl game in one, is terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information