BCS needs to go away

[akira3d]

So, this week USC drops to number two behind Texas. I realize it's a bit premature to vent, but I really think this system needs to go away.

At least USC remains number one in the AP poll...

 

[NSXLuvr]

I agree. Mainly because they were saying that Texas might be ranked 2nd in AP but might end up being 4th or 5th in BCS

GO TEXAS!!! :biggrin:

 

[SoCalDude]

Agreed but I just happy my team is up to #6 :biggrin: :biggrin:

BCS 10-24-05

 

[4AU4LIFE]

I hate the BCS and everything it represents. Kinda strange how so many people are against it yet nobody has done anything to change it.
I guess when a couple of the big name schools get screwed out of a national championship (like us ) then some heads will roll and some type of playoff system will be devised and implemented.

 

[liftshard]

Huh? BCS is a computer ranking system. Why shouldn't USC have dropped to #2? They barely survived while Texas has had a stronger performance in its season.

The AP and UPI polls were as BS as you are saying the BCS is. They have routinely denied good schools a shot at any kind of championship, and kept higher ranked teams higher ranked so long as they didn't lose. Any team that lost early in the season had a chance to climb back to #1, but a team that lost a late game was doomed. This was not sound or sane.

I like computer rankings. Let the analysts determine all the factors and crunch the numbers. A top 4 playoff would be fine, too...but, then everyone'll yell when the #4 team wins it all at has like 2 losses or something.

 

[FuryNSX]

So, this week USC drops to number two behind Texas. I realize it's a bit premature to vent, but I really think this system needs to go away.

At least USC remains number one in the AP poll...

Eric,

Aww, you only say that now since USC isn't "number 1".

At the very least, USC, by being number two, still has the chance to play in the BCS "Championship". VT, UGA, and any other unbeatens ranked three or lower don't even have a say. Just think how Auburn felt last year. Or how VA Tech has been feeling all year long.

-Randy

 

[4AU4LIFE]

Eric,

Aww, you only say that now since USC isn't "number 1".

At the very least, USC, by being number two, still has the chance to play in the BCS "Championship". VT, UGA, and any other unbeatens ranked three or lower don't even have a say. Just think how Auburn felt last year. Or how VA Tech has been feeling all year long.

-Randy

yeah, we felt sick to our stomachs. Can't forget about Alabama and UCLA are in mix of unbeatens also.

Liftshard,
The reason I feel USC should remain #1 is because they have won 28 games in a row. Until they lose, regardless of what the schedule throws at them, they should stay there. IMO

 

[akira3d]

Actually, I've been complaining since the year before our split National Championship...but used the excuse of dropping from number one to start complaining again.

Barely survived? Aside from a couple close calls, we've been dominating our opponents. Plus, come-from-behind victories are nothing to sneeze at.

And when I last checked, it was a 29 game win streak.

Anyone want to start the Heisman debate? I'm pulling for Reggie Bush this year, but figure that Matt Leinart and Vince Young certainly still have a shot at it.

 

[4AU4LIFE]

And when I last checked, it was a 29 game win streak.

You're right. I kept thinking of the streak prior to last weekends game.

 

[FuryNSX]

yeah, we felt sick to our stomachs. Can't forget about Alabama and UCLA are in mix of unbeatens also.
IMO

I purposely left out UCLA, since I doubt they'll finish the season unbeaten. And I feel the same way about Alabama, considering how they finish with LSU, Auburn, AND the SEC Championship.

(Then again, I have the strangest feeling that UCLA vs. USC may offer everyone a big surpise this year. Hey, SoCalDude and ss_md, what do you think? How about some sort of bet between you and akira3d? )

 

[FuryNSX]

Actually, I've been complaining since the year before our split National Championship...but used the excuse of dropping from number one to start complaining again.

It would be interesting to see where USC 2003/4 would have ended up using today's formula.

 

[Understudy]

The reason I feel USC should remain #1 is because they have won 28 games in a row. Until they lose, regardless of what the schedule throws at them, they should stay there. IMO

IMO this statistic (while a great accomplishment for the school/teams) is completely meaningless when applied to rankings. The past success (or failure for that matter) of a previous team shouldn't be applied to the rankings of the team for the current season. This applies to pretty much any team sport, but college sports in particular tend to change personnel dramatically from season to season. Again, winning streaks speak very well for the program, recruiting, and the players/coaches that have contributed to each win, but aren't really relevant when determing rankings IMO.

The BCS is far from a perfect system, but it is slightly better than the system used previously. Even a four team playoff would still have some difficulties in determing which four should make it in some years. There will always be controversy in college football regarding rankings and there is too much money involved with bowl games and for the schools to allow for an easy change to a playoff system anyway.

 

[NSXFreak00]

HOOK 'EM HORNS!!!!!!!!!

 

[SoCalDude]

(Then again, I have the strangest feeling that UCLA vs. USC may offer everyone a big surpise this year. Hey, SoCalDude and ss_md, what do you think? How about some sort of bet between you and akira3d? )

As much as I pull for my beloved gutty little Bruins, I'm also realistic enough to know that the Cardinal and Gold should win this game. But, you can never be sure in a rivalry game.

What kind of wager did you have in mind? Maybe the loser can polish the winners wheels :smile:

 

[liftshard]

Liftshard,
The reason I feel USC should remain #1 is because they have won 28 games in a row. Until they lose, regardless of what the schedule throws at them, they should stay there. IMO

Huh? So, suppose USC plays nothing but crap schools forever. Should they be #1 just because they haven't lost?

The strength of schedule, how and where you win IS what defines the best team.

By OBJECTIVE criteria, USC is no longer the #1 ranked program.

 

[akira3d]

Looking at the rest of the season, USC does have a tougher schedule than Texas (three ranked opponents remaining versus none) and should finish out number 1 even if both teams win out. Of course, this assumes that the reamining opponents don't start sucking and lose the bulk of their remaining games.

UCLA cannot finish the season undefeated, so they're out of the running! I'm REALLY hoping that I get tickets to the USC / UCLA game this year. I expect both teams to come in undefeated...which would make for a very memorable game.

Randy, I don't believe in gambling.

 

[4AU4LIFE]

Huh? So, suppose USC plays nothing but crap schools forever. Should they be #1 just because they haven't lost?

The strength of schedule, how and where you win IS what defines the best team.

You just have a 'different' way of looking at it. Has USC had a crappy schedule the past few years? How about the Orange bowl last year, or do you remember that? How about ND this year, forget that game too? I don't see then giving themselves cake walk games forever, that is kind dumb to even suggest that.
I don't think just because Texas played a tougher team this week that they should move ahead.
Obviously you will feel different I'm sure.

 

[ss_md]

What's the spread??? - JK. Not really a gambler either. It's gonna be on heck of a game.

As far as the BCS - the system is flawed and needs to be revised. SC may be undefeated for 29 games and a win is a win, but maybe it's how they won. Considering they struggled against Arizona and ND, not real domination.

 

[LeftLane]

Barely survived? Aside from a couple close calls, we've been dominating our opponents. Plus, come-from-behind victories are nothing to sneeze at.

What you meant to say was "aside from an illegal push from Reggie Bush that got Matt Leinart into the end zone against the Golden Domers", didn't you? :wink:

Computers don't lie, and they don't have a bias. Unfortunately for Texas, last year's campaigning by Mack Brown to get into the Rose Bowl (which they obviously deserved over Cal, who got spanked by Texas Tech) could work against them with human voters this year, but the computer doesn't care.

Also - why is it that some conferences have to play a championship game and some don't? Isn't it inherently unfair to those who must play (and win) an extra game against the best in their conference?

Hook 'Em! \v/

 

[FuryNSX]

Also - why is it that some conferences have to play a championship game and some don't? Isn't it inherently unfair to those who must play (and win) an extra game against the best in their conference?

More teams = Conference Championship Game = More $$$$$$$ for conference. (i.e. ACC)

The PAC-10 feels no need to expand.



I would agree that, yes, from a certain perspective, it is inherently unfair. However, you play the schedule that is in front of you. If you (in a general sense) don't like it, do a Kansas State and schedule patsies in September to make it easier. That strategy has proven to create a champion.

 

[FuryNSX]

As far as the BCS - the system is flawed and needs to be revised. SC may be undefeated for 29 games and a win is a win, but maybe it's how they won. Considering they struggled against Arizona and ND, not real domination.

I may be mistaken, but I believe none of the 6 computer polls factor in margin of victory this year. The only way point differential or team struggles may come in to play would be in any bias shown by the two human polls that are factored into final BCS points.

 

[akira3d]

In 2003, didn't Oklahoma lose their conference title game by 28 points and still get to play in the BCS Championship Game?

The Bush Push was another feather in his Heisman cap. Illegal? Or heads up?

Texas is 1st in the BCS, but 2nd in the Harris, Coaches, and AP polls.
USC is 2nd in the BCS, but 1st in the Harris, Coaches, and AP polls.

Gotta love computers.

 

[rickysals]

I personally don't care if they won 29 straight games.

This season is all that matters..

lets say my NFL team (Pittsburgh) goes 8-8 this year. BUT they went 15-1 last year... that's 23-9. Last year the Bengals go 8-8 (i think?) and maybe this year they go 12-4. 20-12 for 2 years.

Based on your logic, because in the longrun the Steelers have been better, they should get into the playoffs over the Bengals.

I feel the best way for the BCS to be used is to establish the top 8 teams. Not just 2. Strength of schedule should absolutely matter... it does in high-school football in Ohio I know because my 6-4 senior football team got into the playoffs from playing a hard schedule and beat the #1 team in the playoffs later on.

After the top 8 teams are established, or even 4... have a 2 or 3 game playoff. if it's too many games, cut one game out of the regular season. Make 12/13 game seasons, and at the end, lets let the teams decide who gets the nat'l championship, not biased people who vote based on 3 years of history. This season matters. Last year is over.

my $0.02

 

[FuryNSX]

The Bush Push was another feather in his Heisman cap. Illegal? Or heads up?
.

It ain't illegal if there ain't no flag.

 

[ss_md]

I may be mistaken, but I believe none of the 6 computer polls factor in margin of victory this year. The only way point differential or team struggles may come in to play would be in any bias shown by the two human polls that are factored into final BCS points.

Computer data is entered by humans . . .

So, regardless of the way a computer program is designed the human factor is there.