 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Other Stuff » Sports Talk » The college football thread
FuriousGiorge
December 07, 2008 at 05:12PM View BBCode
This is, of course, what always happens whenever someone uses the letters B C and S in that order. It's very nice, of course, but has nothing to do with the stupid AP poll and the fact that no one cares what it says.
rkinslow19
Coaches' Poll champion. That's it.
sixty-something coaches are contractually obligated to vote the winner of the BCS game as their national champ. which doesn't happen every year.
December 07, 2008 at 05:26PM View BBCode
Originally posted by FuriousGiorge
No slow, the BCS pits the #1 and #2 team in the country. The winner is declared the champion. The end.
Coaches' Poll champion. That's it.
sixty-something coaches are contractually obligated to vote the winner of the BCS game as their national champ. which doesn't happen every year.
dirtdevil
there's always going to be problems, yes. even the march madness tourney with 64 teams has some kind of controversy every year over who got snubbed. but 8 teams competing for the title is better than 2. 16 would be better than 8. i read [url=http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-playoff120208&prov=yhoo&type=lgns]this[/url] article the other day, which proposed a fairly simple solution.
December 07, 2008 at 05:40PM View BBCode
Originally posted by whiskybear
Originally posted by dirtdevil
a true playoff system would be a much better solution.
...except that an 8-team playoff (which seems to be the model that's most often floated) would still produce plenty of snubs. Even leaving out the Big East and ACC conference champions, try and pick only eight teams out of the prospective BCS field.
(I have finally come around to the idea that a playoff is the best solution, but would still come with its own share of problems.)
there's always going to be problems, yes. even the march madness tourney with 64 teams has some kind of controversy every year over who got snubbed. but 8 teams competing for the title is better than 2. 16 would be better than 8. i read [url=http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-playoff120208&prov=yhoo&type=lgns]this[/url] article the other day, which proposed a fairly simple solution.
FuriousGiorge
No, there are two polls involved in the BCS - the Coaches and the Harris. So you have two polls that are linked to the BCS title game and one poll that does whatever it wants. I mean, maybe if the AP poll picks a different champion than the BCS does, then that school will claim a co-national title, but everyone is going to sort of laugh at them and tell them to shut the hell up.
December 07, 2008 at 05:56PM View BBCode
Originally posted by rkinslow19
Originally posted by FuriousGiorge
No slow, the BCS pits the #1 and #2 team in the country. The winner is declared the champion. The end.
Coaches' Poll champion. That's it.
sixty-something coaches are contractually obligated to vote the winner of the BCS game as their national champ. which doesn't happen every year.
No, there are two polls involved in the BCS - the Coaches and the Harris. So you have two polls that are linked to the BCS title game and one poll that does whatever it wants. I mean, maybe if the AP poll picks a different champion than the BCS does, then that school will claim a co-national title, but everyone is going to sort of laugh at them and tell them to shut the hell up.
FuriousGiorge
Everybody has their own little pet "solution" and none of them means anything because it's all hypotheticals. This one talks about ignoring the bowls which is not ever, ever, ever going to happen.
December 07, 2008 at 06:00PM View BBCode
Originally posted by dirtdevil
i read [url=http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-playoff120208&prov=yhoo&type=lgns]this[/url] article the other day, which proposed a fairly simple solution.
Everybody has their own little pet "solution" and none of them means anything because it's all hypotheticals. This one talks about ignoring the bowls which is not ever, ever, ever going to happen.
rkinslow19
The Harris poll? Now I know you can't be serious. The Harris poll is a joke; it was created to fill the void after the AP jumped ship in 2005.
December 07, 2008 at 06:22PM View BBCode
Originally posted by FuriousGiorge
No, there are two polls involved in the BCS - the Coaches and the Harris. So you have two polls that are linked to the BCS title game and one poll that does whatever it wants.
The Harris poll? Now I know you can't be serious. The Harris poll is a joke; it was created to fill the void after the AP jumped ship in 2005.
FuriousGiorge
December 07, 2008 at 06:33PM View BBCode
Which it does, now, as part of the BCS formula. The formula that the AP poll took themselves out of. Seriously, if and when the AP does pick a different team as their champion than the BCS does, see how that school is treated by the media and the public when they try to claim a split national title (hint: it'll involve a lot of laughing). The AP poll is irrelevant, and the fact that you think that it's still the "gold standard" is....weird.
rkinslow19
The BCS lost all legitimacy when the AP left.
Now it's just a hollow system backed by TV money that determines the coaches' poll champion, and tries to make intriguing bowl games.
December 07, 2008 at 06:48PM View BBCode
Originally posted by FuriousGiorge
Which it does, now, as part of the BCS formula. The formula that the AP poll took themselves out of. Seriously, if and when the AP does pick a different team as their champion than the BCS does, see how that school is treated by the media and the public when they try to claim a split national title (hint: it'll involve a lot of laughing). The AP poll is irrelevant, and the fact that you think that it's still the "gold standard" is....weird.
The BCS lost all legitimacy when the AP left.
Now it's just a hollow system backed by TV money that determines the coaches' poll champion, and tries to make intriguing bowl games.
whiskybear
December 07, 2008 at 06:51PM View BBCode
The AP poll lost all legitimacy when it left the BCS. It is no longer attached to what is, for better or worse, the bowl subdivision's championship system.
barterer2002
December 07, 2008 at 07:04PM View BBCode
Since the BCS is some sort of formula that I've never figure out, I'm really kind of hoping that Texas remains above Florida making the BCS game Texas/Oklahoma. Not that I really want to screw over Florida but merely to point out how incredibly bad the BCS formula actually is. While I don't think it'll happen it is possible, albeit an unlikely one.
whiskybear
December 07, 2008 at 07:08PM View BBCode
The very best would have been an extremely competitive and close SEC Championship won by Florida, followed by a title-game rematch per the formula.
FuriousGiorge
If that's your opinion, so be it. Realize, though, that the BCS is the system we have, and whether you like it or not really makes no difference, since it is the thing that determines who wins the national championship.
December 07, 2008 at 07:10PM View BBCode
Originally posted by rkinslow19
The BCS lost all legitimacy when the AP left.
Now it's just a hollow system backed by TV money that determines the coaches' poll champion, and tries to make intriguing bowl games.
If that's your opinion, so be it. Realize, though, that the BCS is the system we have, and whether you like it or not really makes no difference, since it is the thing that determines who wins the national championship.
dirtdevil
that's all it ever was, really. i'm at a loss as to why an antiquated 'the champ is who we say it is' system that deliberately removed itself from a system designed to produce an on-field champion is any better though.
December 07, 2008 at 07:40PM View BBCode
Originally posted by rkinslow19
Now it's just a hollow system backed by TV money that determines the coaches' poll champion, and tries to make intriguing bowl games.
that's all it ever was, really. i'm at a loss as to why an antiquated 'the champ is who we say it is' system that deliberately removed itself from a system designed to produce an on-field champion is any better though.
rkinslow19
It's not the system. It's a system.
Just one of the ways of crowning a champion.
I'm fine with the BCS, but I don't pretend it's something it's not.
December 07, 2008 at 07:59PM View BBCode
Originally posted by FuriousGiorge
Originally posted by rkinslow19
The BCS lost all legitimacy when the AP left.
Now it's just a hollow system backed by TV money that determines the coaches' poll champion, and tries to make intriguing bowl games.
If that's your opinion, so be it. Realize, though, that the BCS is the system we have, and whether you like it or not really makes no difference, since it is the thing that determines who wins the national championship.
It's not the system. It's a system.
Just one of the ways of crowning a champion.
I'm fine with the BCS, but I don't pretend it's something it's not.
thatrogue
to that they belonged in the conference championship game, and thus a shot at the BCS Championship...which will never be addressed.
[Edited on 12-7-2008 by thatrogue]
December 07, 2008 at 08:21PM View BBCode
Originally posted by rkinslow19Nope...it is THE system. The AP is just a bunch of writers with an opinion that counts for nothing.
Originally posted by FuriousGiorge
Originally posted by rkinslow19
The BCS lost all legitimacy when the AP left.
Now it's just a hollow system backed by TV money that determines the coaches' poll champion, and tries to make intriguing bowl games.
If that's your opinion, so be it. Realize, though, that the BCS is the system we have, and whether you like it or not really makes no difference, since it is the thing that determines who wins the national championship.
It's not the system. It's a system.
Just one of the ways of crowning a champion.
I'm fine with the BCS, but I don't pretend it's something it's not.
Originally posted by BenneThere are still doubts. Texas, by nature of their victory over Oklahoma and idenitical record, had a legitimate claim
If there any doubts about Oklahoma deserving a title game spot, they certainly silenced those doubts tonight.
...
[Edited on 12-7-2008 by thatrogue]
whiskybear
December 08, 2008 at 01:15AM View BBCode
Texas is going to win that Fiesta Bowl date with the Buckeyes by three touchdowns.
rkinslow19
At least.
Although I'd love to see Texas get Vince Young'ed by Terrell Pryor
December 08, 2008 at 01:30AM View BBCode
Originally posted by whiskybear
Texas is going to win that Fiesta Bowl date with the Buckeyes by three touchdowns.
At least.
Although I'd love to see Texas get Vince Young'ed by Terrell Pryor
Bones2484
*That isn't recognized by the NCAA
December 08, 2008 at 04:52PM View BBCode
Originally posted by rkinslow19
Just one of the ways of crowning a champion*.
*That isn't recognized by the NCAA
tworoosters
Once Oklahoma went to the title game and won there was no way Texas was going to get ranked ahead of them.
December 08, 2008 at 05:13PM View BBCode
I'm okay with Florida vs. Oklahoma, but I do think Texas got jobbed by its' own conference.Once Oklahoma went to the title game and won there was no way Texas was going to get ranked ahead of them.
Faceman
Yes, and the Pac 10 is tits.
The Pac 10 is worse, much worse, than the Big 10. All except USC is better than the best of the Big 10.
If the Pac 10 wasn't so bad, USC could be playing for the championship.
December 08, 2008 at 06:20PM View BBCode
Originally posted by rkinslow19
Originally posted by FuriousGiorge
Penn State is kind of underrated, incidentally.
Penn State, and the rest of the Big 10, sucks.
Yes, and the Pac 10 is tits.
The Pac 10 is worse, much worse, than the Big 10. All except USC is better than the best of the Big 10.
If the Pac 10 wasn't so bad, USC could be playing for the championship.
thatrogue
December 08, 2008 at 06:28PM View BBCode
Couldn't the same be said for the Big Ten and Penn State?
Bones2484
No, not this year.
(And playing Coastal Carolina doesn't help them too much either)
December 08, 2008 at 06:46PM View BBCode
Originally posted by thatrogue
Couldn't the same be said for the Big Ten and Penn State?
No, not this year.
(And playing Coastal Carolina doesn't help them too much either)
Faceman
Well, not exactly. The Big 10 isn't good, but they aren't as bad as the Pac 10. The Big 10 has 2 very good (not great) teams, 3 good (MSU through Iowa) and a couple respectable (wisky, minny) teams before the dogshit (starting with Illinois at 72).
The Pac 10, you have 1 great team, 2 good, 1 respectable, and 6 dogshit teams.
It's kinda like choosing which sucks less, that is true. But the winner is pretty clear.
The Big 10 always gets trashed because their best team (tOSU) always gets pasted by the elite teams of the country. LSU, Florida, USC, nobody in the Big 10 can compete there. But that doesn' mean the entire Big 10 sucks because their top team can't handle road games at USC or at an SEC school for bowl games.
Here is the current RPI
http://realtimerpi.com/football/ncaaf_Men.html
Big 10 has the following, including 3 top 20, and 6 top 50:
Penn State 6
OSU 10
Mich St 20
Northwestern 21
Iowa 26
Wis 46
Minny 56
Illinois 72
Purdue 98
Pac 10: 4 in the top 34, then nobody until Arizona at 71
USC 7
Oregon 18
Oreg St 24
Cal 34
Ariz 71
Stan 89
Az State 92
UCLA (111), Wazzu (152) and Wash (165) all over 100. Michigan and Indiana are 119 and 120 as well.
December 08, 2008 at 06:48PM View BBCode
Originally posted by thatrogue
Couldn't the same be said for the Big Ten and Penn State?
Well, not exactly. The Big 10 isn't good, but they aren't as bad as the Pac 10. The Big 10 has 2 very good (not great) teams, 3 good (MSU through Iowa) and a couple respectable (wisky, minny) teams before the dogshit (starting with Illinois at 72).
The Pac 10, you have 1 great team, 2 good, 1 respectable, and 6 dogshit teams.
It's kinda like choosing which sucks less, that is true. But the winner is pretty clear.
The Big 10 always gets trashed because their best team (tOSU) always gets pasted by the elite teams of the country. LSU, Florida, USC, nobody in the Big 10 can compete there. But that doesn' mean the entire Big 10 sucks because their top team can't handle road games at USC or at an SEC school for bowl games.
Here is the current RPI
http://realtimerpi.com/football/ncaaf_Men.html
Big 10 has the following, including 3 top 20, and 6 top 50:
Penn State 6
OSU 10
Mich St 20
Northwestern 21
Iowa 26
Wis 46
Minny 56
Illinois 72
Purdue 98
Pac 10: 4 in the top 34, then nobody until Arizona at 71
USC 7
Oregon 18
Oreg St 24
Cal 34
Ariz 71
Stan 89
Az State 92
UCLA (111), Wazzu (152) and Wash (165) all over 100. Michigan and Indiana are 119 and 120 as well.
thatrogue
ETA: The Pac10 is putrid, no doubt...but the Big Ten is stinky enough to have totally eliminated Penn State after their single loss.
[Edited on 12-8-2008 by thatrogue]
December 08, 2008 at 06:50PM View BBCode
I disagree. If the Big Ten was not so bad, then a one loss Penn State would not have fallen so far out of the National Title picture. The Penn State loss was not dissimilar to the Florida loss, though they did not blow away their opponents to the same degree Oklahoma and Florida did.ETA: The Pac10 is putrid, no doubt...but the Big Ten is stinky enough to have totally eliminated Penn State after their single loss.
[Edited on 12-8-2008 by thatrogue]
Faceman
[b]I disagree. [/b] If the Big Ten was not so bad, then a one loss Penn State would not have fallen so far out of the National Title picture. The Penn State loss was not dissimilar to the Florida loss, though they did not blow away their opponents to the same degree Oklahoma and Florida did.
ETA: The Pac10 is putrid, no doubt...but the Big Ten is stinky enough to have ttally eliminated Penn State after their single loss.
[Edited on 12-8-2008 by thatrogue] [/quote]
You disagree with what? I said that the Big 10 is better than the Pac 10, with rankings to show it.
How does the fact that Penn State can't get into the championship game with 1 loss refute that? Neither USC nor PSU can get past the 1 loss. So both conferences are bad relative to the Big 12, SEC.
And FTR - Penn State lost late in the year, which hurts much worse than an early loss (see Florida) when it comes to the rankings.
December 08, 2008 at 07:03PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
[quote][i]Originally posted by thatrogue[/i]
[b]I disagree. [/b] If the Big Ten was not so bad, then a one loss Penn State would not have fallen so far out of the National Title picture. The Penn State loss was not dissimilar to the Florida loss, though they did not blow away their opponents to the same degree Oklahoma and Florida did.
ETA: The Pac10 is putrid, no doubt...but the Big Ten is stinky enough to have ttally eliminated Penn State after their single loss.
[Edited on 12-8-2008 by thatrogue] [/quote]
You disagree with what? I said that the Big 10 is better than the Pac 10, with rankings to show it.
How does the fact that Penn State can't get into the championship game with 1 loss refute that? Neither USC nor PSU can get past the 1 loss. So both conferences are bad relative to the Big 12, SEC.
And FTR - Penn State lost late in the year, which hurts much worse than an early loss (see Florida) when it comes to the rankings.