Quote :

"So you really think anyone worth playing is going to put Hawaii on the schedule? Hell no."

except florida, wisconsin, and usc

who all have games scheduled with hawaii

12/5/2007 5:10:39 AM

Quote :

"If you don't start the season playing for one of the handful of teams that the polls said were contenders before there was even a kickoff, you will not play for the title. Period."

quite a few teams who didn't start the season ranked had a chance this year.

12/5/2007 10:04:14 AM

^no they didnt

Were LSU and Ohio State preseason top 25? are they the two teams playing for the title?

12/5/2007 10:11:46 AM

12/5/2007 10:20:26 AM

why dont you name one team that has EVER played in the national title game who wasnt preseason top 25

12/5/2007 10:21:57 AM

Mizzou could have played for the title if they had beat Oklahoma, and I'm pretty sure they were not ranked preseason. That right there proves you wrong. They very likely would have gotten in over OSU while both of them had one loss and OSU started the season ranked much higher.

12/5/2007 10:29:59 AM

oh is Missouri playing in the title game this year? I could've sworn it was LSU and Ohio State

(fwiw Missouri was 26 preseason)

[Edited on December 5, 2007 at 10:31 AM. Reason : .]

12/5/2007 10:30:44 AM

tho i agree the system now sucks, other teams DID have the opportuniy this year. Kansas wasnt even in 'also receiving votes' and had a good shot

12/5/2007 10:39:44 AM

You are drinking Jim June Jones's koolaid if you actually believe Hawaii couldn't have scheduled better OOC teams than they did this year.

12/5/2007 10:41:59 AM

^^^ I doubt it has actually happened, but just this year it almost did. You made the claim that preseason ranked teams are given preferential treatment and while I agree that this is probably true most of the time the example I gave proves that it is not always true.

It also needs to be stated that in general teams that were ranked outside the top 25 preseason don't have enough wins at the end of the season to be in the discussion for "best" team in the country

[Edited on December 5, 2007 at 10:42 AM. Reason : .]

[Edited on December 5, 2007 at 10:42 AM. Reason : .]

[Edited on December 5, 2007 at 10:44 AM. Reason : no more edits]

12/5/2007 10:42:07 AM

Quote :

"[quote]If you don't start the season playing for one of the handful of teams that the polls said were contenders before there was even a kickoff, you will not play for the title. Period."

Exactly

Quote :

" quite a few teams who didn't start the season ranked had a chance this year."

this is b.c to the BCS leaders disgust Mizzou was better on paper and playing better then
tOSU toward the end. They had to pick them or everyone would have known the system is out of whack.
After the loss at the end of the season, however, they had the perfect opportunity to put
their FAV tOSU back in the national title game even though they did not prove themselves
anymore then the other big contenders.[/quote]

I like how the out spoken champion of the BCS system simonn advocate on its greatness eventhough he self reportedly doesn't really watch sports and the only team he roots for is NCSU. This must give him plenty of credentials to comment on the NCAA setup.

12/5/2007 11:20:18 AM

quit with the fucking conspiracy theories, its just college football

12/5/2007 11:25:59 AM

Geaux Tigers

12/5/2007 11:33:47 AM

seriously. I prove someone wrong and the argument against what I said is a conspiracy theory, very convincing. I don't like the BCS, but I'm not crazy enough to believe that it was created for the express purpose of sneaking OSU into the championship game. Again, I really really dislike the BCS.

12/5/2007 11:34:42 AM

fwiw ddf, it is theoretically possible for a team not in the preseason top 25 to play in the championship game...i'll admit that...i'll just say its highly highly highly highly highly unlikely...I did think Mizzou would beat Oklahoma last weekend (i'm an idiot) but I never thought Kansas was legit

here is my point presented differently:

2004 NCAA Preseason AP College Football Poll

AP Top 25
1. USC (48) 0-0 1,603
2. Oklahoma (11) 0-0 1,529
3. Georgia (5) 0-0 1,480
4. LSU (1) 0-0 1,446
5. Florida State 0-0 1,291
6. Miami 0-0 1,287
7. Texas 0-0 1,236
8. Michigan 0-0 1,223
9. Ohio State 0-0 1,005
10. West Virginia 0-0 937
11. Florida 0-0 836
12. Kansas State 0-0 763
13. California 0-0 744
14. Tennessee 0-0 658
15. Clemson 0-0 638
16. Virginia 0-0 627
17. Auburn 0-0 540

2004 NCAA Week 15 AP College Football Poll (last poll before bowl selections)

AP Top 25
1. USC (44) 12-0 1,599
2. Oklahoma (14) 12-0 1,556
3. Auburn (7) 12-0 1,525

the fact that Auburn ran the table in the SEC and didnt even get a chance to play for a title is ridiculous...i've mentioned this time and time again but it always makes sense

12/5/2007 11:49:10 AM

BCS doesn't need to be eliminated completely, it just needs to reward the better teams somehow

Something like an 8 team playoff would be hard to implement with the current bowl system so firmly in place, and even then, you'd still get complaints about who the 7th and 8th teams in are, so there will always be controversy.

12/5/2007 12:48:22 PM

i dont think it would be that hard to implement...the other 30 meaningless bowls would still exist...kind of like the NIT tourney...but instead of the top 8 or 10 teams going to the top 4 or 5 bowl games, they would simply play in a tourney...and who cares if the 7th and 8th teams are complaining...if they wouldve won their conference they wouldnt need to complain...there couldnt be any more controversy than there is right now

12/5/2007 12:50:11 PM

^yep, even with as bad as the rankings are, i think its a safe assumption to say that the best team in the country usually would be ranked somewhere in the top 8 at the end of the season 99% of the time. You have to make a cut somewhere, and frankly they cant have much too complain about because that #7/#8/#9 team would have had 0 chance at a title shot before and now depending on how the rankings fall they have some shot.

I still think 12 teams top 4 getting buys would be great. but it will probably never happen.

[Edited on December 5, 2007 at 12:54 PM. Reason : ]

12/5/2007 12:54:01 PM

^^^ gee, thx for coming in here and not reading the initial post. Good work, buddy.

And also, "reward the better teams"? What the fuck does that mean?

12/5/2007 6:44:40 PM

^ to be fair, the first post is a LOT of [words]

Quote :

"I like how the out spoken champion of the BCS system simonn advocate on its greatness eventhough he self reportedly doesn't really watch sports and the only team he roots for is NCSU. This must give him plenty of credentials to comment on the NCAA setup."

i watch college football and college basketball all the time. NCSU is the only team i root for, that is correct. why would i root for anyone else? i go to nc state.

12/5/2007 7:12:39 PM

I guess I'll throw in my two cents. *warning, words*

I think the problem with the BCS is the human aspect. While OSU fell into the championship game, LSU was pushed into it.

Throw out the Coaches and Harris Polls. They can be there just like the AP Poll, but have no bearing on the rankings.

Stop tinkering with the BCS formula. The bigwigs constantly tweaked the formula by taking things out -- which only put more power in the hands of the people who vote for the Top 25.

If the BCS was simply a computer formula, and all the proper parameters were included in the calculation, I would have no problem with it spitting out two teams for the championship.

There would be no more unreasonable conference bias. If one conference was stronger than the other, it would be based on a team's ranking within the BCS to make up the SOS. If the whole conference beats each other up and settles in mediocrity, then the whole conference will pay. If the SOS is that high for a certain team, then it should erase any disadvantages that might come from having another loss in conference play.

Fix the quality wins aspect to reward teams who beat other high quality teams.

Cap the margin of victory at 28 to keep teams from trying to run up the score any more than they have to.

I know V Tech was first in the computers, but the BCS didn't take into account the margin of victory. The bonus that LSU would have gotten from having a quality win over V Tech would have put LSU #1. Margin of victory would have also put V Tech down a couple notches. Quality wins would have put Oklahoma higher up than it was, and etc etc...

I would have no problem if the NCAA simply picked the conference winners plus the next best teams in the RPI to determine the teams who might play in the NCAA tourney. The problem is that there is simply too many games and too many teams, and that wouldn't be feasible. For the most part, however, the teams ranked high in the RPI are the ones that get in, and there are only maybe 4-6 spots that are open for the "bubble teams".

When the two teams get spit out by the computer, it should be easy to understand how they ended up being the two teams that were selected. I'm sure there will still be a load of complaints as to how their team got the number they did. The numbers won't lie and be biased like the media. It will pick the two best teams, based on the teams they faced, and the way they won. A one loss USC team who won by an average of 21 will get in over the one loss Texas team that squeaked by 5 different times.

12/5/2007 9:12:00 PM

Put all 119 team's names on ping pong balls and have a lottery. The two teams picked play for the national championship.

Or have a playoff.

Either would be better that the BCS.

12/5/2007 9:51:02 PM

I would just off if a cliff if BBall was the was Football was

every year would be the same couple teams

UNC, DUKE, UCONN, FL, UCLA

12/5/2007 10:02:52 PM