Ye Olde BCS Rant

[gear02]

So this year the BCS got it right. #1 USC v. #2 Texas. Lots of people are saying it works.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2247858

Well, give me a break. These are the ONLY TWO UNDEFEATED TEAMS in I-A football. A blind monkey with a rash could have picked this game.

[ialsohaveadream]

I don't see why we have to drag the monkey's rash into this...

But yeah, #1 is playing #2 (and I'm not talking bathroom code here people, because #1 wins that every time), which is what the BCS was set up for.

[raimin]

bcs was set up to choose the #1 and #2 teams. not the rest of the bowls. The only thing good about it, was since the bcs was started, any team ranked #1 or #2 that played in pac or big 10 will be in the national championship game.

[attgig]

I heard one complaint about the bcs this year on sports radio. They're breaking the tradition of all the bowl games on new years. instead it's a couple days later so they can get money.

the complaint is that they're being two faced. they say they have to keep bowl games and not do playoffs cuz of tradition but they're willing to move the days around when it makes them more money.

[MikeD]

Paging VTGreg...paging VTGreg...

:poke:

[cheapie]

i think they're also moving them because the nfl is on new year's day as well.

[bachviet]

College football could be on everyday of the week except Sunday thus BCS games are not on Jan 1 this year. :D

[IrishSS]

I for one am a proponent of a playoff system, but in lieu of that, I'd just like to see the top 8 teams in the BCS bowls. While I think ND deserved to be in one this year, I also think Oregon did as well. Enough of the automatic conference berths. FSU has no business being in a BCS game and I don't really think WVU does either. Cal getting left out last year is another good example.

It's an easy fix. As much as I hate it, the BCS is in place until at least 2008. Keep the formulas and just take the top 8 teams. The national title games gets #1 and #2 obviously, then the other bowls select the remaining 6 based on priority from year to year. I hate dispersing with the tradition of bowls such as the Rose Bowl Pac10/Big 12 affiliations, but maybe something to that effect could be worked in.

[VTGreg]

So this year the BCS got it right. #1 USC v. #2 Texas. Lots of people are saying it works.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2247858

Well, give me a break. These are the ONLY TWO UNDEFEATED TEAMS in I-A football. A blind monkey with a rash could have picked this game.

Ummm... without the BCS USC would be playing Penn St in the Rose Bowl and Texas would be playing either ND or Ohio St in the Fiesta Bowl. Besides, the only way the BCS doesn't work is if there are 3 undefeated teams. It's worked every year since its inception except for last year.

[IrishSS]

Besides, the only way the BCS doesn't work is if there are 3 undefeated teams. It's worked every year since its inception except for last year.
Sorry, I call BS on this argument. The BCS was created to match up the top two teams, not the undefeated teams. Teams like TCU, Utah, etc etc who go undefeated generally don't deserve to go the title game based solely on the fact that their competition was weak...

What about when Oregon was 10-1 (11-1 was it?) and got snubbed by the title game. They were ranked #2 in both polls, most everybody who had any sort of knowledge or vested interest in college football knew they were the second best team in the nation and they still got shafted by the BCS. The computer rankings have to go or be dramatically overhauled.

[ialsohaveadream]

Ummm... without the BCS USC would be playing Penn St in the Rose Bowl and Texas would be playing either ND or Ohio St in the Fiesta Bowl. Besides, the only way the BCS doesn't work is if there are 3 undefeated teams. It's worked every year since its inception except for last year.
...if you count that UM-Nebraska title game as a time when the BCS "worked".

[VTGreg]

Sorry, I call BS on this argument. The BCS was created to match up the top two teams, not the undefeated teams. Teams like TCU, Utah, etc etc who go undefeated generally don't deserve to go the title game based solely on the fact that their competition was weak...

What about when Oregon was 10-1 (11-1 was it?) and got snubbed by the title game. They were ranked #2 in both polls, most everybody who had any sort of knowledge or vested interest in college football knew they were the second best team in the nation and they still got shafted by the BCS. The computer rankings have to go or be dramatically overhauled.

Perhaps the problem was that Oregon shouldn't have been ranked #2 in the nation. The problem with the BCS is the human polls not the computer polls. The computer polls are inherently biased. The only reason Oklahoma and USC played last year was because they were ranked higher than Auburn at the beginning of the season. The human polls weight when a team loses more than who they lose to or how they lose.

Look at ND and UCLA this year as an example of how foolish the human polls can be. ND, a team with a loss at home against a 5-6 Michigan St team, is ranked higher than 10-1 Oregon and a UCLA team that just lost 66-19 and lost to a 3-8 Arizona team 52-14 is ranked #17 in the country.

Who the second best team is, is always subjective when there are more than two major undefeated teams and should not just be left up to the polls to determine.

[IrishSS]

Perhaps the problem was that Oregon shouldn't have been ranked #2 in the nation. The problem with the BCS is the human polls not the computer polls. The computer polls are inherently biased. The only reason Oklahoma and USC played last year was because they were ranked higher than Auburn at the beginning of the season. The human polls weight when a team loses more than who they lose to or how they lose.

Look at ND and UCLA this year as an example of how foolish the human polls can be. ND, a team with a loss at home against a 5-6 Michigan St team, is ranked higher than 10-1 Oregon and a UCLA team that just lost 66-19 and lost to a 3-8 Arizona team 52-14 is ranked #17 in the country.

Who the second best team is, is always subjective when there are more than two major undefeated teams and should not just be left up to the polls to determine.

I'm going to make this argument once... I knew it would come sooner or later. Everybody complains about ND's loss to MSU. Does anybody look back to when that game was played? MSU was one of the hottest teams in the country, scoring something like 45 points a game. They were 2-0, crushing their previous opponents left and right. They had a talented offense and defense with plenty of returning starters and seniors.

Notre Dame fell behind by 28 points early in the third quarter. They held MSU scoreless, tied it up and took it to OT. It was a great college football game regardless of the outcome. So what if MSU lost 6 of their last 8 after that? It was AFTER that game.

ND arguably played the nation's consenus #1 team all year to a standstill for 39 minutes. If not for a heisman quality play from Leinart on 4th and 9, the Irish are probably playing Texas for the National Championship. Before the season played out, ND looked like it had the hardest schedule in college. Michigan is good year in and year out, Purdue has been good as of late, MSU is always a tough game, Tenessee was ranked #3 to start the season (what a joke...) etc etc etc. How can ND be held responsible for other teams having a down year?

Who did Oregon play this year? USC? They lost, horrifically. Fresno State? Yeah, they won, but FSU isn't all they were cracked up to be just like Tenessee and other teams... Oregon didn't even have to play UCLA this year. Come on, Montana (I-AA???) and Houston??? Give me a break.

I'm all for Oregon getting into the BCS, but don't tell me they are a better team than Notre Dame this season.

As for the polls, I generally hate then all together, both human and computer. The human polls arent based week to week... they're a ongoing ranking based on what you did this week and previous weeks. I say don't start ranking teams until week 5 or 6 of the season. This weeds out the teams that start in the top 10, lose a game and fall 5-10 spots, then win a few more, climb back up, etc etc. These teams generally stay ahead of teams that start the season unranked, yet manage to go 10-1 or whatever. Teams like Michigan, Florida State, Tenessee, and yes, even Notre Dame of years past even all benefit from this. It's ridiculous.

[attgig]

there's always going to be controversy in college sports. just too many schools. not enough games. it's gotta be left up to humans (or computers) to help figure out what the outcome is going to be. even in basketball, when the brackets are set up, there's still controversy. its not going to end with a playoff system in football. people are going to start complaining about why this team is #8 and this team isn't. or should each major conference get representation. it's going to be never ending....and something that we just need to live with.

[IrishSS]

Great argument why the polls are forever biased...


NEW YORK (AP) -- Texas coach Mack Brown has been calling Southern California the No. 1 team all season and it wasn't just talk.
Brown voted USC first in the final USA Today coaches' poll -- and so did his brother.


The ballots were made public Monday, a first for the coaches' poll, which is used by the Bowl Championship Series in its standings formula.


The BCS had urged the coaches to remove the secrecy in their poll after the 2004 season, when Texas made a late surge in the polls to earn a Rose Bowl bid over California.


The coaches decided to release only their final ballots, which were printed in Monday's editions of USA Today.


"I think it proves what we thought it would all along, which is that the coaches who vote in the USA Today coaches' poll are thoughtful and committed to the balloting process," Grant Teaff, executive director of the American Football Coaches Association, said Monday through spokesman Todd Bell.


The Harris Interactive poll, which was introduced this season to replace The Associated Press Top 25 in the BCS formula, also released its final ballots. The Harris panel is comprised of former college football players, coaches and administrators, plus some media members.


The AP media poll has always had transparency in its voting.
Brown had his Texas team No. 2, behind USC. The Trojans and Longhorns will play for the national title in the Rose Bowl on Jan. 4.


UAB coach Watson Brown also had the Trojans first and his younger brother's team second.


USC coach Pete Carroll is not on the 62-member voting panel. Twenty coaches voted for their own teams, with none straying too far from the consensus.


Among the notables, Rutgers coach Greg Schiano gave the Scarlet Knights (7-4) their only vote, putting them 25th on his ballot.
Notre Dame coach Charlie Weis had his team fourth, two spots ahead of Oregon (10-1). The Fighting Irish (9-2) were ranked No. 6.


Oregon coach Mike Bellotti put the Ducks fourth and Notre Dame ninth. Oregon finished No. 5 in the final regular season poll, but Notre Dame earned a bid to the BCS and Oregon did not.


Texas received seven first-place votes to USC's 55.


Three of the seven coaches who voted for the Big 12 champions were from conference rivals -- Colorado's Gary Barnett, whose team has lost twice to the Longhorns this season by a combined scored of 112-20, Oklahoma State's Mike Gundy and Iowa State's Dan McCarney.


The others who had Texas on top were San Jose State's Dick Tomey, who was defensive coordinator at Texas last season, TCU's Gary Patterson and Florida State coach Bobby Bowden.


Penn State was No. 3 on all but two ballots. Texas A&M coach Dennis Franchione had Notre Dame third and the Nittany Lions fourth. Arkansas coach Houston Nutt had Auburn third, just ahead of Penn State.
Auburn was No. 7 in the poll. Tigers coach Tommy Tuberville had his team fourth.


Other votes that went against the norm were:
• SMU coach Phil Bennett had Oregon 15th.
• Ohio coach Frank Solich placed LSU fifth, 10 spots ahead of Georgia, which beat the Tigers 34-14 in the Southeastern Conference championship Saturday.
• South Carolina coach Steve Spurrier had Notre Dame 14th, his own team 21st, and in-state rival Clemson 24th. The Tigers beat Spurrier's Gamecocks 13-9 to close out the regular season.

[guiseppewv]

I think the thing that was not mentioned in the article above is that coaches will vote teams that they play higher than they should be voted b/c it improves their strength of schedule.

[guiseppewv]

Notre Dame fell behind by 28 points early in the third quarter. They held MSU scoreless, tied it up and took it to OT. It was a great college football game regardless of the outcome. So what if MSU lost 6 of their last 8 after that? It was AFTER that game.

ND arguably played the nation's consenus #1 team all year to a standstill for 39 minutes. If not for a heisman quality play from Leinart on 4th and 9, the Irish are probably playing Texas for the National Championship. Before the season played out, ND looked like it had the hardest schedule in college. Michigan is good year in and year out, Purdue has been good as of late, MSU is always a tough game, Tenessee was ranked #3 to start the season (what a joke...) etc etc etc. How can ND be held responsible for other teams having a down year?


Yes, ND is held responsible, as is every college FB team, for how their opponents perform. If you play a team like the Spartans who were overrated and lose 6 games then your strength of schedule goes down. That is the way it is and rightly so. It isn't like ND is being singled out on this one.

It does suck when team A beats team B, then team A loses a star player and lays a goose egg for the rest of the season but unfortunately things will never be 100% fair.



As for the polls, I generally hate then all together, both human and computer. The human polls arent based week to week... they're a ongoing ranking based on what you did this week and previous weeks. I say don't start ranking teams until week 5 or 6 of the season. This weeds out the teams that start in the top 10, lose a game and fall 5-10 spots, then win a few more, climb back up, etc etc. These teams generally stay ahead of teams that start the season unranked, yet manage to go 10-1 or whatever. Teams like Michigan, Florida State, Tenessee, and yes, even Notre Dame of years past even all benefit from this. It's ridiculous.

I agree with this - the teams who are ranked early in the season, even if they were way overrated, have an easier time throughout the season.


Last point - I do agree with those of you who are anti-BCS. I think the BCS should be done away with, I think there should be a playoff, and I think anyone who takes part in voting in any poll that affects the rankings should have their votes made public every time.

[guiseppewv]

I for one am a proponent of a playoff system, but in lieu of that, I'd just like to see the top 8 teams in the BCS bowls. While I think ND deserved to be in one this year, I also think Oregon did as well. Enough of the automatic conference berths. FSU has no business being in a BCS game and I don't really think WVU does either. Cal getting left out last year is another good example.


If you say WVU doesn't belong in a BCS bowl how about your Irish?

ND Schedule:
Pittsburgh 5-6
Michigan 7-4
Michigan State 5-6
Washington 2-9
Purdue 5-6
USC 12-0
Brigham Young 6-5
Tennessee 5-6
Navy 7-4
Syracuse 1-10
Stanford 5-6

Besides UofM who did they beat that was tough? Navy? They only beat 2 teams with a winning record.

WVU's schedule:
Louisville 9-2
Rutgers 7-4
South Florida 6-5
Pittsburgh 5-6
Connecticut 5-6
Cincinnati 4-7
Syracuse 1-10
mARYLAND 5-6
VIRGINIA TECH 10-2
WOFFORD 6-5
ECU 5-6

Now I'm not saying that WVU is any more or less worthy than ND but if you are going to say ND is a BCS worthy team then you have to say the same about WVU. They both have one quality win (Lousiville for WVU and Michigan for ND) and the rest of their schedules look pretty easy.

[IrishSS]

If you say WVU doesn't belong in a BCS bowl how about your Irish?

ND Schedule:
Pittsburgh 5-6
Michigan 7-4
Michigan State 5-6
Washington 2-9
Purdue 5-6
USC 12-0
Brigham Young 6-5
Tennessee 5-6
Navy 7-4
Syracuse 1-10
Stanford 5-6

Besides UofM who did they beat that was tough? Navy? They only beat 2 teams with a winning record.

WVU's schedule:
Louisville 9-2
Rutgers 7-4
South Florida 6-5
Pittsburgh 5-6
Connecticut 5-6
Cincinnati 4-7
Syracuse 1-10
mARYLAND 5-6
VIRGINIA TECH 10-2
WOFFORD 6-5
ECU 5-6

Now I'm not saying that WVU is any more or less worthy than ND but if you are going to say ND is a BCS worthy team then you have to say the same about WVU. They both have one quality win (Lousiville for WVU and Michigan for ND) and the rest of their schedules look pretty easy.
Easy... ND is #6 in the BCS poll, WVU is #11. ND is 5 and 6 in the AP, Haris and Coaches polls while WVU is 11 and 12. WVU only got in because they got the automatic bid out of a weak conference. Conference bids have to go.

Plus, as its frequently stated... it's all about the $$$. ND will always draw more traveling fans than probably any other team in the nation.

[guiseppewv]

ND is overrated. That is the bottom line. Who have they beaten to deserve a top 5 ranking in any poll? WVU beat Lousiville and Louisville is higher ranked than any opponent that ND beat. Almost beating USC doesn't count. An L is an L. ND got beat by MSU, a team that is 5-6.

You can say what you want about ND being the best or one of the best or whatever as far as being a traveling team but that means nothing when it comes to deserving a BCS bowl.

[IrishSS]

Not to argue... but theres 61 coaches, 80 some AP voters, how ever many Harris voters, and the 8 computer polls that all think differently than you. And a majority of them are more qualified to give their opinion than you or me...

[ialsohaveadream]

ND is overrated. That is the bottom line. Who have they beaten to deserve a top 5 ranking in any poll?
ND is always overrated. The problem is that there's some old-school AP voters who always hope for a return of the glory days of ND football, and they take any opportunity to vote them higher than they should be.

Irish does make a good point, though. Bowls are happy to get ND because they do have fans that will travel.

[brainsmile]

well they qualify because they won 9 games ... good rule :)

[IrishSS]

well they qualify because they won 9 games ... good rule :)

And the fact that they were in the BCS top 12... can't get just one to make it in. This is ND's easy in in line with the automatic conference berths...

For the record, even being an ND fan, I don't like the rule. I think the best 8, or in this case top ranked, teams should get in, period.

[VTGreg]

Not to argue... but theres 61 coaches, 80 some AP voters, how ever many Harris voters, and the 8 computer polls that all think differently than you. And a majority of them are more qualified to give their opinion than you or me...

Actually the computer polls have WVU ranked 9th and ND tied for 10th.

Also, Fresno St was ranked #16 after only losing at Oregon by a FG and at USC by a TD while ND lost to Michigan St and USC at home and was ranked #6 and #7 in the polls. I guess that victory over a mediocre Michigan team was really worth a lot to the pollsters. The coaches, ap voters and harris poll voters all get influenced by the media hype.