.... Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 Let's see the BCS try to wriggle out of this mess. I love Michigan, but this isn't a bad way to go. Screw the BCS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatnipOligarchy Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 good deal, i was watching this game at espnzone earlier, michigan fans werent happy, but they were all in agreement that they would be able to stomach a loss if it meant the end of the BCS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.... Posted January 2, 2004 Author Share Posted January 2, 2004 good deal, i was watching this game at espnzone earlier, michigan fans werent happy, but they were all in agreement that they would be able to stomach a loss if it meant the end of the BCS Yeah, I am sorry to see them lose, but if it means the end of the BCS...then I'm all for it. win or lose, being in the Rose Bowl is not a bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatnipOligarchy Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 (edited) yeah michigan will still end up in the top 6 or so in the country, they had a good season and did us all a great service today Edited January 2, 2004 by CatnipOligarthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksoul Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 I just don't understand why everyone hates the BCS so much. This year proved the shortcomings of human polls and why the BCS is needed. Human polls = starting rank, number of lossed and when the loss occured. You could lose to Cal (an unranked team?) and as long as it is in the beginning of the year your golden, but if you loose to a ranked team at the end of the year your SOL and no other games seem to count. I feel a playoff is the best if least pratical system it should use BCS set ranks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMac Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 As a Canadian I would like to say the BCS confuses the hell out of me. You yanks find a way to confuse the hell out of everything. Just do a playoffs. You end with a winner no questions asked. Drop the BCS it's crazy and very few people that are not americans understand it. Kill it NOW and go the playoff route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksoul Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 As a Canadian I would like to say the BCS confuses the hell out of me. You yanks find a way to confuse the hell out of everything. Just do a playoffs. You end with a winner no questions asked. Drop the BCS it's crazy and very few people that are not americans understand it. Kill it NOW and go the playoff route. BCS is really not that confusing if you accept the computer scores and don't try to figure them out. BCS would be needed even in a playoff senario because there are hundreds of teams that don't play similar schedules and they need to be ranked to determine who makes the playoff. A playoff would take a long time and we need to remember this is college football, they don't want it to go into the spring semester (although i do). Lastly the main reason is that the bowl system is a huge money maker (can't really do and the nokia playoff game) and is to established kill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 its okay though for a team to be in the BCS title game without even winning their own conference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMac Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 BCS is really not that confusing if you accept the computer scores and don't try to figure them out. BCS would be needed even in a playoff senario because there are hundreds of teams that don't play similar schedules and they need to be ranked to determine who makes the playoff. A playoff would take a long time and we need to remember this is college football, they don't want it to go into the spring semester (although i do). Lastly the main reason is that the bowl system is a huge money maker (can't really do and the nokia playoff game) and is to established kill. But that's the thing. As a sports guy I don't want to take the computers word for it. I want to know how it's calculated because I should be able to clearly identify the top team without taking someone elses word for it. I understand the money maker but I'm a fan and I care about the game not the $. Finally all I hear on sports talkshows and what not is people ragging on the BCS. Everyone hates it. If this is right then why don't they do what's right for the sport and start the playoff format. One game and your out like the NCAA basketball tourney. It may run a little longer but come on for the justice of the sport this needs to be fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksoul Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 its okay though for a team to be in the BCS title game without even winning their own conference? they lost one game (like LSU/USC), because it is not a playoff all games are and should be equal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksoul Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 But that's the thing. As a sports guy I don't want to take the computers word for it. I want to know how it's calculated because I should be able to clearly identify the top team without taking someone elses word for it. I understand the money maker but I'm a fan and I care about the game not the $. Finally all I hear on sports talkshows and what not is people ragging on the BCS. Everyone hates it. If this is right then why don't they do what's right for the sport and start the playoff format. One game and your out like the NCAA basketball tourney. It may run a little longer but come on for the justice of the sport this needs to be fixed. you can look up the foruma for every computer score, but they are scientific often run by university profs. When was the last time you clearly identified the top team in a major NCAA sport, i would venture never. You prolly took the pollsters word for it do you even know who votes for the polls and how they make their decisions? if you are interested you can look up the computer formular (they are based on numbers not favorates). We can't get rid of the tradition of bowl games, period. You can't compare football to basketball because one game is played a week so a playoff would take the a month or more and there is just not time for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 one solution to this whole mess would be to take the top 8 BCS ranked teams and have a playoff utilizing the current 4 BCS bowls with an additional two games to be played somewhere else *shrugs* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayepecks Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 Personally, I think if Oklahoma wins they should still be national champions (which they will be, if they do win). I mean, it was their last game and they beat some pretty good (ranked) teams along the way. But USC should have been in that game, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.... Posted January 2, 2004 Author Share Posted January 2, 2004 BCS is really not that confusing if you accept the computer scores and don't try to figure them out. BCS would be needed even in a playoff senario because there are hundreds of teams that don't play similar schedules and they need to be ranked to determine who makes the playoff. A playoff would take a long time and we need to remember this is college football, they don't want it to go into the spring semester (although i do). Lastly the main reason is that the bowl system is a huge money maker (can't really do and the nokia playoff game) and is to established kill. The real problem is that the computer system is changed EVERY YEAR. If it's perfect, it shouldn't need to be changed. It's rediculous because twice in the last 20 years of the pre-BCS system had dual national champs. Since the BCS has been in play, the 4 out of the last 5 years have been questioned one way or another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMac Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 you can look up the foruma for every computer score, but they are scientific often run by university profs. When was the last time you clearly identified the top team in a major NCAA sport, i would venture never. You prolly took the pollsters word for it do you even know who votes for the polls and how they make their decisions? if you are interested you can look up the computer formular (they are based on numbers not favorates). We can't get rid of the tradition of bowl games, period. You can't compare football to basketball because one game is played a week so a playoff would take the a month or more and there is just not time for that. I realise that the issue of time is a significant factor because of one game per week. In that sense it would be difficult. But what about a NFL style setup. Use the BCS system to pick the top say 16 teams then throw them in a playoff setup. That way you would have a clear and decisive winner. As for the best team in the NCAA basketball tourneys, I am a traditionist. To be the team you must beat the team. Thus the best team is always the team that goes undefeated throughout the tournament. Don't give me the easy bracket crap. Anyone can win any game. If one team never loses throughout the entire tournament then they are the best team. For that year atleast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayepecks Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 Since the BCS has been in play, the 4 out of the last 5 years have been questioned one way or another. Please tell me you're not blaming last year's officiating on the BCS. I don't like the BCS, but they didn't mess that one up :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.... Posted January 2, 2004 Author Share Posted January 2, 2004 Please tell me you're not blaming last year's officiating on the BCS. I don't like the BCS, but they didn't mess that one up :laugh: I'm in no way even including officiating in my comments. It's pure computer crap that screws up the system. Officiating is it's own beast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMac Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 I'm in no way even including officiating in my comments. It's pure computer crap that screws up the system. Officiating is it's own beast. Exactly. There are many variables in sports including officiating, computers don't need to be one of them. Let the games decide whose the best team not a computer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cork1958 Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 Another typical loss for Michigan in a big game. Wonder how much USC or the Rose Bowl committee pid them to to do that? Probably not much because as I said, another typical losss!! Sure does mess thing up now. Personally, I think Oklahoma is the better team and should be champs. Umm, also, that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatnipOligarchy Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 The NCAA has made the argument that the BCS has got more people talking about college football than ever before. I'll give them that much, college football hasnt ever received this much attention as long as i can remember, but is this the kind of attention they really want? all you have to do is turn on AM radio and find sports talk and you are bound to hear someone calling in bashing the BCS. How anyone could be so blind baffles me. I always thought the college football schedule was 11 games. hardly any teams play only 11 games anymore. they often play 12 and 13. My suggestion is to start the season a week or two earlier and start the playoff the week after the conference championship games. 16 teams - single elimination. Winner take all. The cities with stadiums can bid on the playoff games just as they do in NCAA basketball tournament. The teams that would normally have a bowl game could form another tournament similar to the NIT or they could just play their regular bowl games. There would of course be the 17th and 18th teams that would feel like they got the shaft by being held out of the tournament, but shafting the 17th best team is a lot better than shafting the undisputed #1, as was the case this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMac Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 My suggestion is to start the season a week or two earlier and start the playoff the week after the conference championship games. 16 teams - single elimination. Winner take all. The cities with stadiums can bid on the playoff games just as they do in NCAA basketball tournament. The teams that would normally have a bowl game could form another tournament similar to the NIT or they could just play their regular bowl games. There would of course be the 17th and 18th teams that would feel like they got the shaft by being held out of the tournament, but shafting the 17th best team is a lot better than shafting the undisputed #1, as was the case this year. Wow I guess great minds do think alike. :o :D Well said Catnip. (Y) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksoul Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 i agree with you visionary but people want to get rid of BCS Scoringand that solution would keep BCS scoring. Basketball teams can play many games in a week where football teams play one, a 16 team playoff would take atleast 4 weeks and that would be into the spring semester which they don't want to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksoul Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 Exactly. There are many variables in sports including officiating, computers don't need to be one of them. Let the games decide whose the best team not a computer. I disagree, the computers are scientific, they don't add random undefined variables as people who vote on polls do. Ohh my friend coaches USC maybe they should be higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nowimnothing Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 OK, i read through this thread, and figured its time to throw my two cents in here (ok, it'll prolly be more like a buck) The #1 problem with the current situation is not the BCS. Its that people think that the human polls (coaches and writers) count for anything. They don't anymore. The BCS was setup to determine a national champion, and a formula was established. This formula used the human polls, computer polls, losses, etc as PARTS of determining the national champion. If people could forget about the days when the human polls meant something, then this wouldn't be an issue because people would accept that the ONLY #1 team in the country is OU. And that's the way it is. The human polls are PART of determining the #1 team, and the #1 team is OU. Period. Now, alot of you have been complaining about the computer polls. This really irks me. The human polls are the biggest piece of garbage to ever affect collegiate sports. How many times have we heard that coaches have their assistants doing their voting for them because they don't have time? How many times have we heard writers admit that they didn't actually see X play Y, but they heard X won, so they voted for them? The human polls are completely arbitrary at best. Darksoul put it well when he said earlier that human polls go like this... [Where you start] + [How many losses] + [how late in the season your losses were] = [Where you finish]. That's complete crap that that would be how you determine your national champion. On the other hand, the computers don't care when you lose. The computers care about who you lost to (i.e. how good they were) and who you beat. Strength of schedule matters VERY little to human polls. Perfect example of this: Virginia Tech was ranked #3 in the AP poll on Week 10. They started out the season #9. They proceeded to beat Central Florida, [The state of Virginia's powerhouse football team] James Madison University, a lackluster Texas A&M, UConn, Rutgers and Syracuse. Thats a really impressive resume for a #3 team isn't it? So why were they there? Because they started #9 (an arbitrary guess at the beginning of the season) and they managed to go 6-0 against a bunch of creampuffs. Go take a look at that formula back there - where you start and how many losses you have are two of the main parts of that formula. So what happened to VT after that? They lost to West Virginia (first ranked team they played - ranked at the end of the season i mean), beat Miami (ok, that was good), and beat Temple (woah, shouldnt' that game have been at the beginning of their schedule so they could get their ranking up really high?) and lost to Pittsburgh (unranked), Boston College (!!!), Virginia (unranked) and California (!!!). Strength of schedule meant NOTHING to the pollsters. They just voted for VT cuz, well, Michael Vick went to VT and they were good once. That CAN NOT HAPPEN in a computer scenario. Strength of schedule is something that matters to these computers, and it matters in determining the national champion. I can't think of a single reason why i would trust a human poll over a computer poll. The human polls are arbitrary, and have little rhyme or reason to them aside from the formula mentioned above. WIth the computers, you know why a team is ranked where it is. Hell, with alot of the polls you can even go to their website and change the outcome of games to see what would have happened if, say, FSU had beaten Miami this year in the regular season. It hurts my head to much to try and venture a guess at what the human polls would have done in that case. As far as i'm concerned, a playoff system is no better than the BCS. I don't feel the same was as the poster above who said he felt that the team that went undefeated through a tournament deserved to be the national champion no matter what. In my opinion, one game (i.e. one loss in a tournament) does not make or break a season. The entire season determines who is the best team in the country. And a playoff system falls WAY short of determining a national champion when taking into consideration the whole season. The problem is that everyone is so used to the playoff system and just accepts that a playoff determines the best team. It doesn't. It determines the team that won the tournament. If that's what you're going for, then ok. But if you're looking for the best team in the country, the playoff/tournament idea won't get you there. I guess this is long enough... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayepecks Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 I'm in no way even including officiating in my comments. It's pure computer crap that screws up the system. Officiating is it's own beast. Alrighty, just making sure :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts