The BCS is out...

[Mark C]

Originally Posted by zmancbr

Well then I will say it...Hawaii's schedule is no where near strong enough to get in the top 10. There are just some teams that will never make it there until they play stronger teams and prove themselves. I mean they did well in the WAC but put a team like Texas or Ohio state in there and see what happens.

The Big East isn't exactly a powerhouse conference, but that's not holding WVU back. Ohio State didn't exactly have a tough schedule this year either, and they still found a way to lose to an unranked team.

This year the BCS favors teams with weak schedules. Period. Except Hawaii because they're not a big-name team. If 9-3 Florida deserves a higher ranking than 11-0 Hawaii because their schedule was harder, why is OSU ahead of Kansas? At least Kansas's loss was to current #1 Mizzou rather than an unranked upset.

Here're my beefs with the BCS:

1) The calendar is too important. A loss in November is much more significant than a loss in September. I haven't ever heard anyone even attempt to justify this.
2) Strength of schedule is not adequately accounted for. In some cases solid teams are held back by weak schedules (Hawaii), and in other cases great teams are held back by impossible schedules (LSU), while others still are propelled forward by weak schedules (OSU). There's no consistency, no reason for holding Hawaii back so far, but leave OSU at the top.
3) Favoritism and reputation are too significant. Everyone knows OSU's name, everyone knows their conference is USUALLY a tough one. This year it's not. Neither was the ACC. The voters seem to rely too much on previous years when making their picks. Pay attention to what's going on now, not what school was big 3 yrs ago.
4) Money. It's been discussed here already, the BCS isn't about finding the best football team in the country, it's about finding the biggest TV market for the corporate sponsors. To even call it a 'national championship' is a joke. Especially this year.
5) The polls. Obviously the poll participants are idiots. This year they'd have been better off throwing darts at the wall. Pre-season and early-season polls are worthless because they're based entirely on past history and favoritism (see #3).

I'm done. Man I hate this system. I feel like ranting about the ACC championship and Orange bowl both being held in Florida, despite 75% of the conference residing north of Georgia... but I'll save that for another post

[zmancbr]

Originally Posted by Mark C

The Big East isn't exactly a powerhouse conference, but that's not holding WVU back. Ohio State didn't exactly have a tough schedule this year either, and they still found a way to lose to an unranked team.

Not true, WV's only loss is to South Florida which is still ranked #21 and was #18 when they lost to them. Besides this, they played 4 ranked teams this season. Hawaii only played one ranked team and didn't beat them definitively which helps a lot.

Originally Posted by Mark C

This year the BCS favors teams with weak schedules. Period. Except Hawaii because they're not a big-name team. If 9-3 Florida deserves a higher ranking than 11-0 Hawaii because their schedule was harder, why is OSU ahead of Kansas? At least Kansas's loss was to current #1 Mizzou rather than an unranked upset.

I agree with you here 100%. The only thing I would say here is that OSU had a lot better margins of victory in every game they did win. Which is probably why they are ranked higher. But I do agree that Kansas had some pretty amazing victories and I would rather see Kansas higher!

Originally Posted by Mark C

1) The calendar is too important. A loss in November is much more significant than a loss in September. I haven't ever heard anyone even attempt to justify this.

I agree here 1000%. I do not like how if you lose your first game in september but make it back to #1 you will stay there. But if you lose in week 12 you will never make it back to #1 unless everyone else loses first. I don't like this structure at all.

Originally Posted by Mark C

2) Strength of schedule is not adequately accounted for. In some cases solid teams are held back by weak schedules (Hawaii), and in other cases great teams are held back by impossible schedules (LSU), while others still are propelled forward by weak schedules (OSU). There's no consistency, no reason for holding Hawaii back so far, but leave OSU at the top.

True but I would never in any poll this season put Hawaii above OSU. The bottom line for me is that schools get a choice who they play in their out of conference games, if they choose UNLV instead of someone like CAL, then that's life. A perfect example is CSU playing CAL this season and almost beating them. In a winning season that would have done wonders for CSU moving up in the polls.

Originally Posted by Mark C

3) Favoritism and reputation are too significant. Everyone knows OSU's name, everyone knows their conference is USUALLY a tough one. This year it's not. Neither was the ACC. The voters seem to rely too much on previous years when making their picks. Pay attention to what's going on now, not what school was big 3 yrs ago.

While I do agree here, I still think the that the Big East and ACC are tougher this year than the WAC.

Originally Posted by Mark C

4) Money. It's been discussed here already, the BCS isn't about finding the best football team in the country, it's about finding the biggest TV market for the corporate sponsors. To even call it a 'national championship' is a joke. Especially this year.

This is very true. I would have a very hard time disagreeing with anything said here. There will always be a market and big money on the line which is why teams like Hawaii will probably never make the top 10 nor go to a top 5 bowl game.

Originally Posted by Mark C

5) The polls. Obviously the poll participants are idiots. This year they'd have been better off throwing darts at the wall. Pre-season and early-season polls are worthless because they're based entirely on past history and favoritism (see #3).

I couldn't agree more here! This is very true. Look at the pre-season polls and see how many teams are still in the top 10. I believe half of them are gone out of the top 10, but then again it is just pre-season. The regular season polls I do have a problem with and that is how there seems to be a bias toward the big name teams.

Well that is my 2 Hope you enjoyed the read and bottom line is the system will probably never be perfect but at least that means we can always complain about it .

[Puffin Fresh]

Two things about the points above. I agree it doesn't seem fair that a late loss is worse than an early one. The ONLY agrument for that thought is that teams are supposed to mature and get better as the season goes on. It's a weak argument at that, but just throwing it out there for arguments sake.

Now, about Hawaii. Supposedly, they don't have much control over who they play. They have stated that they've tried to play OSU, USC and others but have been turned down because they are a good team in a bad conference and losing to them would hurt a BCS conference team too much. I will say this about Hawaii. That isn't fair.

BTW, Go Tigers! (That's right, it's spelled "G" "O" in the show me state!).

[ragin' cajun]

All I can is that LSU should still be #1. 2 losses, both in triple overtime so what. But thats not gonna happen. So Mizzou better win it all.

[Alpedhuez55]

Originally Posted by Mark C

2) Strength of schedule is not adequately accounted for. In some cases solid teams are held back by weak schedules (Hawaii), and in other cases great teams are held back by impossible schedules (LSU), while others still are propelled forward by weak schedules (OSU). There's no consistency, no reason for holding Hawaii back so far, but leave OSU at the top.

But LSU lost two games to teams that ended unranked, OSU only Lost one...if LSU is really that great, then why did they lose two games against unranked teams? How did their schedule hold them back? Poor Coaching and looking past Kentucky & Arkansas held them back. You beat the good teams on your schedule Same holds true for USC.

I really think the SEC being such a strong conference is a Myth. This is a pretty good breakdown of inter conference play:

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...rdpress/?p=204

This year I think the ACC won the more of the inter conference against the SEC. But the SEC is still considered so much better. There are a few evenly matched teams that have good games against each other.

[vintagejc]

I think the BCS is flawed like most and this years it's more evident. There are so many equally matched teams, who can really say for sure who is #1 and #2.

I am not a fan of saying an undefeated team is better than a 2 loss team based on record alone. Florida is a really good team, with 3 losses. I am a Nole so I'll probably be bashed, but teams like Florida and VT are really great. There are so many great/good teams out there, nothing short of a 16 team playoff would be fair and that's too much to ask from kids trying to keep their health year in and year out.

[Mbraud4]

The way LSU has been playing, they dont deserve to be in the NC game....

On another note, sorry Buckeye fans but IMO OSU would get crushed by a suprising amount of 2 and 3 loss teams IMHO. Schedule was really weak this year and the conference in general was weak. Im sure in 2 years things will be back to normal in Ohio but as for this year, I think it was a mix of a slightly above average team with a below average schedule. But in no way is that program in the dumps or will it be anytime soon.

[jdbwolverines]

Originally Posted by Alpedhuez55

I really think the SEC being such a strong conference is a Myth. This is a pretty good breakdown of inter conference play:

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...rdpress/?p=204

Woohoo, the anti-SEC movement continues to gain momentum. Don't get me wrong, the SEC is a great conference and and often the first or second best conference every year. They are not however so head and shoulders above the rest that any midrange or better SEC team could dominate any other team out there. On a Michigan board I read, an there was a group of SEC fans on there that seriously thought that a Big Ten all-star would have a hard time beating a Auburn/Tennessee caliber SEC team. I have never seen 1 game do so much to elevate a conference while simultaneously lowering a conference as the Florida-OSU game last year. Teams have bad games. Ohio State's bad game of the year just happened to come during its most important and hyped game of the year. Everybody else happens to forget that the Big Ten had a winning record against SEC in bowls last year. I guess we'll see in about a month.

[jdbwolverines]

Originally Posted by Mark C

The Big East isn't exactly a powerhouse conference, but that's not holding WVU back. Ohio State didn't exactly have a tough schedule this year either, and they still found a way to lose to an unranked team.

This year the BCS favors teams with weak schedules. Period. Except Hawaii because they're not a big-name team. If 9-3 Florida deserves a higher ranking than 11-0 Hawaii because their schedule was harder, why is OSU ahead of Kansas? At least Kansas's loss was to current #1 Mizzou rather than an unranked upset.

Here're my beefs with the BCS:

1) The calendar is too important. A loss in November is much more significant than a loss in September. I haven't ever heard anyone even attempt to justify this.
2) Strength of schedule is not adequately accounted for. In some cases solid teams are held back by weak schedules (Hawaii), and in other cases great teams are held back by impossible schedules (LSU), while others still are propelled forward by weak schedules (OSU). There's no consistency, no reason for holding Hawaii back so far, but leave OSU at the top.
3) Favoritism and reputation are too significant. Everyone knows OSU's name, everyone knows their conference is USUALLY a tough one. This year it's not. Neither was the ACC. The voters seem to rely too much on previous years when making their picks. Pay attention to what's going on now, not what school was big 3 yrs ago.
4) Money. It's been discussed here already, the BCS isn't about finding the best football team in the country, it's about finding the biggest TV market for the corporate sponsors. To even call it a 'national championship' is a joke. Especially this year.
5) The polls. Obviously the poll participants are idiots. This year they'd have been better off throwing darts at the wall. Pre-season and early-season polls are worthless because they're based entirely on past history and favoritism (see #3).

I'm done. Man I hate this system. I feel like ranting about the ACC championship and Orange bowl both being held in Florida, despite 75% of the conference residing north of Georgia... but I'll save that for another post

While I agree pretty much 100% with everything you list here. I would say the majority of these problems were around pre-BCS too. The poll system in college football is broken and has been for a while. The BCS has just a great job of of taking that flaw and magnifying it 1000%. It also forces voters into picking the winner of a single game, where as pre-BCS they had more leeway at the end of the season to decide who is probably the real National Champion. I think that adding the computers to the NC picture also helped college football too, because it helps counteract some of the current problems with the poll system. Without the BCS, computer rankings would probably never become into the college football picture.

All of the problems with the BCS and the current poll system would be nearly eliminated using a playoff system. Take into account poll rank, computer rank, and confrence champions into creating your tournament field like the way it is done in college basketball with polls, rpi, and confrence championships. Then let them play it out. Does it ensure the best team is crowned as the NC, no (although neither does the current system) but it provides results that no one can complain about. If you didn't get it done when you were suppose to, tough luck. If you can step it up and win, you deserve to called the champion.

[Genevapics]

Originally Posted by jdbwolverines

... I have never seen 1 game do so much to elevate a conference while simultaneously lowering a conference as the Florida-OSU game last year...

First, the BIG10 is a good conference. Here is their problem: There is a perception, right or wrong, that the BIG10 is nothing more than 3 yards and a cloud of dust. My feeling is that this is absolutely correct. IMO, the only innovative team in that conference is Purdue. They pass the ball better than anyone in the BIG10... again, IMO.

You mention that the BIG10 beat 2 SEC teams in their bowl games last year. That's nice, but what happened in the Fiesta and Rose Bowls? Both OSU and UM got exposed for what they were; smash mouth football teams that once they get behind, cannot throw the ball to get back into the game. And the speed difference was quite evident.

I am not trying to bash the BIG10 as I believe they are a good conference, but until the folks there in the midwest figure out a way to throw the ball and increase their overall team speed, they will continue to struggle.

[Genevapics]

Originally Posted by Greerzilla

... Now, about Hawaii. Supposedly, they don't have much control over who they play. They have stated that they've tried to play OSU, USC and others but have been turned down because they are a good team in a bad conference and losing to them would hurt a BCS conference team too much. I will say this about Hawaii. That isn't fair...

I will assume that USC is Southern Cal and not South Carolina (no offense Cock fans). Southern Cal played Hawaii in a home & home series in 2003 & 2005. In 2003: HI 32 @ SC 61. In 2005: SC 63 @ HI 17. (SOURCE: http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div....php?year=2000 & http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div....php?year=2005)

Not sure whether Hawaii came calling this season or last, but we have played them recently, nevertheless. Hawaii is a good team and deserves any accolades that they receive.

[jdbwolverines]

Originally Posted by Genevapics

First, the BIG10 is a good conference. Here is their problem: There is a perception, right or wrong, that the BIG10 is nothing more than 3 yards and a cloud of dust. My feeling is that this is absolutely correct. IMO, the only innovative team in that conference is Purdue. They pass the ball better than anyone in the BIG10... again, IMO.

You mention that the BIG10 beat 2 SEC teams in their bowl games last year. That's nice, but what happened in the Fiesta and Rose Bowls? Both OSU and UM got exposed for what they were; smash mouth football teams that once they get behind, cannot throw the ball to get back into the game. And the speed difference was quite evident.

I am not trying to bash the BIG10 as I believe they are a good conference, but until the folks there in the midwest figure out a way to throw the ball and increase their overall team speed, they will continue to struggle.

I agree with on this. What gets me the most too is that most the teams are more than capable of opening up the offenses much more, but the coordinators and HCs play call way to conservatively. Michigan year in and year out has some of the best quarterbacks and receiver combos in the country, yet they only pass in 3rd and long type situations. While we've never had mobile type QBs, they are very accurate and can air it out with the best of them. I hope Michigan's (new HC whoever that may be) will finally open up the playbook and put a little fire in the offense. I'm glad to see teams like Purdue, Illinois and even Michigan St start to become more and more loose with their offensive gameplans.

[BigDawgFan]

Originally Posted by jdbwolverines

I'm glad to see teams like Purdue, Illinois and even Michigan St start to become more and more loose with their offensive gameplans.

Could make the Big 10 a little more interesting if you guys keep getting SEC coaches up there.

[Alpedhuez55]

Originally Posted by jdbwolverines

Woohoo, the anti-SEC movement continues to gain momentum. Don't get me wrong, the SEC is a great conference and and often the first or second best conference every year. They are not however so head and shoulders above the rest that any midrange or better SEC team could dominate any other team out there.

Yes, that pretty much sums up my feelings. It is probably the best conference out there, but not by a lot. The Pac 10 has some great teams too.

And with all the TV coverage out there, good recruits are not sticking with only big name Programs. Between the ESPNs, VS, Fox Sports, and the Networks, you can go to a school like Boise State and have 5 or 6 games that are nationally televised. So the talent pool is going to be better spread out. That means more parity.

[Puffin Fresh]

Originally Posted by Genevapics

I will assume that USC is Southern Cal and not South Carolina (no offense Cock fans). Southern Cal played Hawaii in a home & home series in 2003 & 2005. In 2003: HI 32 @ SC 61. In 2005: SC 63 @ HI 17. (SOURCE: http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div....php?year=2000 & http://cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div....php?year=2005)

Not sure whether Hawaii came calling this season or last, but we have played them recently, nevertheless. Hawaii is a good team and deserves any accolades that they receive.

I could have sworn he said USC, but I could have mis-quoted him, as this was on TV, so there was nothing to read.