PDA

View Full Version : BCS who cares


axman40
12-05-2004, 10:30 AM
I was wondering how many here would like to see the BCS go away?I enjoy College Football but I quit watching after the Div 1 season is over. I quit watching the Bowl exhibition games back in the early 80's . I would like to see a playoff system but I know it will not happen any time soon.
:bouncey:

dan7
12-05-2004, 11:08 AM
I'd like to see a playoff system, but I doubt that it will happen anytime soon.

LiveForTheGame
12-05-2004, 12:29 PM
The BCS will only change when those in charge think it doesn't work for what they want, but it does work for what they want, and they think it's the right system. It won't change for a while.

Speedy
12-05-2004, 03:50 PM
USC getting screwed last year and five undefeated teams this year ought to start throwing a monkey wrench into this BcS thing shouldn't it??

It really needs to go away. The excuse that it has people talking about college football is BS. When the focus is on something other than the game, that's not a good thing. You think people would stop talking college football if there were a playoff system?? That's bunk. College football playoffs would be as big as or bigger than March Madness.

Vinny
12-05-2004, 04:39 PM
Texas Vs Michigan in the Rose Bowl. I just heard it.

Fiddy
12-05-2004, 04:43 PM
Texas Vs Michigan in the Rose Bowl. I just heard it.Where did you hear it???

STEEL BLUE TEXANS
12-05-2004, 04:51 PM
Thank you Southern Miss.

Reddevil63
12-05-2004, 05:05 PM
Woot, A&M should get the Cotton bowl then!

Vinny
12-05-2004, 05:37 PM
Where did you hear it???Texans post game show.

OzzO
12-05-2004, 06:36 PM
They're getting it from cbs sportsline...

The Trojans and Sooners will square off in the Orange Bowl. Other BCS matchups: Sugar -- Auburn vs. Virginia Tech; Rose -- Michigan vs. Texas; Fiesta -- Utah vs. Pitt.

.. but then 610 came back and changed it to Tx/Utah in Fiesta and Mich/Pitt in Rose... so I'm not sure if it's official...

Oilers/Texans
12-05-2004, 10:13 PM
The BCS needs to go away for sure. It is the biggest joke around and it's a bad one at that. Playoffs are the only way to go, but they probably won't happen

MarleyFan
12-05-2004, 10:25 PM
BCS wanted Texas in all along. Cal got screwed!

wags
12-05-2004, 10:27 PM
BCS wanted Texas in all along.

Looks like the refs in the Kansas game got what they wanted. :jk:

Jonathan
12-05-2004, 10:30 PM
BCS wanted Texas in all along. Cal got screwed!

Of course Cal got screwed. Had Texas not made it in you could have made the exact same arguments. Had Cal substantially beaten Southern Miss it would have been a different ballgame. Until there is an 8 team playoff, some teams are just going to get screwed.

texasguy346
12-05-2004, 11:23 PM
I'd prefer to see a playoff as opposed to the BCS, but I doubt it happens anytime soon unless they can find away to get more money from a playoff than they get from the BCS.

ColdSteelBlue
12-06-2004, 01:28 AM
I think the team that got screwed was Auburn. The voters had their heads so far up USC's butt that they did not see that Auburn is the best team in the country. # 2 at the least. The BCS stinks :loser

The rankings should be
1. Auburn
2. OU
3. USC
4. UT
5. Utah
6.Cal

TheOgre
12-06-2004, 09:45 AM
Last year I thought LSU and USC should have been playing in the National Championship Game.

This year I think it should be OU and Auburn.

I haven't been happy with the process since its inception. I was disappointed in 1998 when Kansas State (to A&M in OT in the Big 12 game) and UCLA (to Miami in the "Hurricane Bowl") lost their last games or we would have had three undefeated teams (with Tennessee, who should have lost the SEC championship game to Arkansas if not for a blunder by the QB downing the ball) that year too. K-State would have been the odd team out.

They need a new system. I don't buy the argument that the students will be away from school too long. There are playoffs in the lower divisions. Basketball players miss a ton of school days during the tournament. It seems like a double standard.

They need an 8-game or 4-game playoff system.

TheOgre
12-06-2004, 09:53 AM
BTW, I sympathize with Cal. Texas got screwed last year. We were number 5 in the BCS and didn't get to go to a BCS game because K-State got an automatic bid and OU was in the National Championship Game. Since only 2 teams from a conference can go, Texas was left out. We had to go to the Holiday Bowl too. Sucks huh?

Here were some weird scenarios that I read about before the games on Saturday. I liked the one where Cal was #1 in both polls but would have to play in the Holiday Bowl. I also liked the one where Colorado beat OU but couldn't go to a BCS bowl because Texas and OU were #1 and #2 in the BCS.

http://cbs.sportsline.com/collegefootball/story/7954739

Lucky
12-06-2004, 10:11 AM
I liked the one where Cal was #1 in both polls but would have to play in the Holiday Bowl.
That wouldn't be an example of how the BCS is a problem. It would be an example of how the polls are a problem. Voting for a 1 loss Cal team over what would be a 1 loss USC team that beat Cal would be absurd.

TheOgre
12-06-2004, 10:36 AM
Voting for a 1 loss Cal team over what would be a 1 loss USC team that beat Cal would be absurd.

I don't necessarily agree. Just because I beat a team, doesn't necessarily make me better. Is it worse for Cal to lose to a 1-loss USC team early in the season or for USC to lose to a 4-loss UCLA team the last game of the season?

Lucky
12-06-2004, 11:58 AM
What's the 1st tiebreaker in the NFL in determining playoff seeds? Head to Head results.

Look, I'm not defending the BCS. It's a joke. But so are the polls. There's no such thing as a NCAA Division I-A football championship, there's no real college football champion. Until they take the conference champions and put them in a playoff, who cares?

MikeMc
12-08-2004, 10:34 AM
Last year (K-State winning B12 conf) UT did not get screwed. The system played out. KSU beat OU.....OU went to nat'l championship, UT left out. The way it should have gone was USC & LSU for 'ship...OU & KSU would still have gotten BCS Bowls, UT still out. The system worked (to some degree).

So don't be bitter if UT always gets "screwed". Here is an idea, maybe UT should play their schedule..beat the teams on it...and shut up! It seems to work for OU, USC, LSU,etc. over the years. It sucks that OU is UT's daddy!

As for the BCS. Since its inception....there have been two (three maybe this year) split NC-ships. From 1978 to 1996, there were two! Seems like the old system worked better! Automatic Bowl tie-ins, inter-conf rivalries....and a better NCAA football experience. Oh well, I'll just stick to watching C-USA's championship game (starting next year) and call it a season!

Funny thing...if you go to BCS's website, it actually has all the conferences in D-1A (and Notre Dame)..... now that is funny! Sure they include all conferences. What a freakin joke!!

Wolf
12-08-2004, 10:53 AM
if the big 12 weren't split up and no big 12 "championship" Ut would have gotten the nod given their head to head record against K-state..

If the queen had balls she'd be king. I guess

the whole thing is stupid.. the focus shouldn't be that Texas got in and Cal didn't , should be PITT got in and CAL didn't ...but I do understand the contracts and the whole this conference has to have one in the BCs also

MikeMc
12-08-2004, 11:04 AM
Well, when the BCS was formed, Miami & VaTech were in the Big East. I think the tweaking the BCS will do next is to get the Big East tie-in out. That way they have one more "At-Large" bid, that could go to a more deserving school, thus helping any other possible "non-BCS" schools. At least that is how they will spin it. Of course this year it would have gone to CAL....then most people would be happy.

In the end, it is the BCS system that people are mad at...not UT, PITT, or CAL.

But stop whinning (Mack Brown), let your coaching & play do the talk..not you.

You can Talk the Talk, but can you Walk the Walk? (not last year in Holiday Bowl vs. WAZZU!)

TheOgre
12-08-2004, 11:09 AM
What's the 1st tiebreaker in the NFL in determining playoff seeds? Head to Head results.

That is true but this isn't the NFL. How many times have the NCAA underscored that fact?

Remember a few years ago when Florida State went to the BCS Championship Game even though they lost to Miami, another 1 loss team? And Miami had lost to Oregon, another one loss team? Should Oregon have been in the championship game because they beat Miami and Miami beat Florida State? I don't think so. Head to head results are important but not omnipotent.

MikeMc
12-08-2004, 11:19 AM
ANyone ever hear of the "Slippery Rock" theory?? Small DII school that should have been the NCAA National Champ based on the team x beat team y, who beat team z....etc.

Go to their website....it is interesting.

Wolf
12-08-2004, 11:23 AM
yeah I did that theory once when I was a teenager. It was the last time I bet on a superbowl... it was when S.F beat the Dolphins and my theory was that Pittsburgh beat S.F in the regular season.. Dolphins beat Pitt in the playoffs ,so the Dolphins should be S.F. in the Super Bowl.. didn't quite workout for me :thud:

That is a dollar I never got to see again :hmmm:

Lucky
12-08-2004, 12:32 PM
Remember a few years ago when Florida State went to the BCS Championship Game even though they lost to Miami, another 1 loss team? And Miami had lost to Oregon, another one loss team?
It was Washington, not Oregon. And yeah, I remember. What you posted just proves how absurd the polls and the BCS selection process are. You're trying to find logic in an illogical college football world. We should have had a playoff series rather than guessing who should be invited.

It's either playoffs or nothing as far as I'm concerned. Here's how it should break down:

Week 1
Fiesta Bowl - USC #1 (Pac -10) vs. Pitt #8 (Big East)
Holiday Bowl - Utah #4 (Mid Major #1) vs. Michigan #5 (Big 10)
Cotton Bowl - Oklahoma #2 (Big 12) vs. Louisville #7 (Mid Major #2)
Gator Bowl - Auburn #3 (SEC) vs. Va. Tech #6 (ACC)

Week 2
Rose Bowl - Highest remaining seed vs. Lowest remaining seed
Sugar Bowl - Remaining 2 winners

Week 3
Orange Bowl - Rose Bowl Champ vs. Sugar Bowl Champ

Only conference winners should have the right to play for the national championship. Winners play winners. And the NCAA should set aside 1/4 of the playoff field to mid-major schools or independents. It's a system that's fair and would generate fan interest.

TheOgre
12-08-2004, 02:19 PM
Oh I had forgotten, Washington beat Miami. Oregon had beaten Washington and had one loss until they finished the regular season by losing to Oregon State. The BCS is a joke. We need a playoff system of some sort.

WWJD
12-08-2004, 02:24 PM
Didn't Michigan get thumped by Ohio State this year???



Actually I think Auburn should be ranked above both USC and Oklahoma. They look like a better team to me than either one of those teams.

Double Barrel
12-08-2004, 07:33 PM
Two words that mean cheese as far as college football is concerned to me:

dual championship

Just the idea is dumb. How can there be two number ones?!?

I just can't take it seriously until they get a legit playoff system for determining the champion. :loser

axman40
12-08-2004, 08:42 PM
I hear Cal fans are blaming UT for being out of the BcS. Memo to Cal fans if you had beat USC you would be ranked #3 and out of The Big Game.OU would be playing Auburn and Cal would be in the Rose Bowl playing UT.It is the BcS system that should be attacked not UT!
:listening