# NCAA Football : 2008 BCS Rankings



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

The first official BCS rankings have been released for the 2008 season.
Texas tops the list,followed by #2 Alabama,#3 Penn State and #4 Oklahoma.
You can view complete list of 25 teams at the following link.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/polls?poll=4&week=8


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I can't disagree with the top 3, based on my observations thus far... but I wonder how some of the one-loss teams are still ahead of some of the undefeated teams at this stage. Most particularly, Oklahoma St seems more justified to me of being #4 at this point given how things are shaking out but at least they still have a shot at a big jump if they beat Texas (although Texas has looked sharp 2 weeks straight now that I've seen).

Interesting too how USC and Ohio St could easily end up 1-2 again if other things shake out like they possibly could and I'd hate to see that given that their losses were not pretty ones.

I know we'd still have arguments (basketball always argues over teams left out of a 64 team pool) but I'd feel a whole lot better with even an 8 team playoff scenario. We have too many weird possibilities where 1 loss teams can trump a 0 loss even from a good conference (remember when Auburn was left out)... or scenarios where a 1-loss team who lost early is given a jump over a 1-loss team who loses late. (Ex, If Penn St runs the table and everyone else has at least 1 loss by then, USC is the most likely #2 even though their loss to Oregon was horrible vs a team like Alabama that could have 1 loss but still be SEC champ).


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

Interesting how Northwestern is 22nd, even though they got crushed by Michigan State 2 weeks ago (37 - 20). I guess that pounding MSU received from OSU this weekend really hurt. Wonder if they would have made it closer if they would have been in the top 25. Their only 2 loses were to teams that were ranked.


----------



## davring (Jan 13, 2007)

It's only halfway through the season and I would expect to see some more one loss teams in the top 10 in the next week or two. Things will change quickly.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

I just hope my Horns take it week by week with their brutal schedule.

Go Horns & Gators.


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

The latest BCS rankings shows no change in the top 4.
Penn State,with their win over Ohio State,is gaining some ground on Alabama for the #3 spot though.
1.Texas
2.Alabama
3.Penn State
4.Oklahoma
Latest rankings are at the following link.

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/8723488/Penn-State-gains-on-Alabama-in-BCS-standings


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

WooHoo, 21.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Still some strangeness to me. Not saying it will happen, but Texas Tech could give Texas a run for their money... "what if" Texas Tech wins and then they run the table? That'd make them #1 in my book, although Alabama running the table would be impressive as well.

I'm either thinking a whole bunch of teams are going to lose soon and we'll have a 1-loss mess scenario to deal with OR we'll end up with 3 undefeateds and someone gets left out of the mix which would be a hard sell this year given who those could be (Texas, Penn St, Alabama).

If an ACC team was up there (yeah, right) I'd root for them... but otherwise I'm rooting for an insane mess that leaves coaches and schools feeling sick to their stomachs over being left out so that maybe maybe we can get more momentum towards a playoff and not leaving it up to the popularity contest.

IF those top 3 finish undefeated... and then we have some hot 1-loss teams like USC and Texas Tech or OK St or Oklahoma... tell me those wouldn't be incredible playoff matchups that would sell out and command high TV ratings.


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

Here is another link for the standings.This one is "straight from the horse's mouth",so to say. 

http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfootball/

The link above makes no mention of it,but its is tied into the FOX Sports website.
Standings are listed on the bottom right corner of that page.
It also lists the upcoming BCS Bowl Schedule,as follows:

Rose Bowl : January 1,2009 in Pasadena,CA
Orange Bowl : January 1,2009 in Miami,FL
Sugar Bowl : January 2,2009 in New Orleans,LA
Fiesta Bowl : January 5,2009 in Glendale,AZ
BCS National Championship : January 8,2009 in Miami,FL


----------



## dshu82 (Jul 6, 2007)

Miami, here we come, and right in my backyard! Not sure if Texas or Alabama will make the rest of the way undefeated. One may, but not both.


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

We should see a new #1 seed in the rankings when they are released later today.

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/gameTrax?gameId=200811010086


----------



## rkr0923 (Sep 14, 2006)

Texas Tech should be #1


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

ill say:

1. bama
2. psu
3. okl
4. tex tech
5. tex


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

No, I peg tech higher than that. They should be #1.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

techs gonna lose saturday so it doesnt really matter.


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

The AP and USA Today have released their updated rankings today,with Alabama holding the #1 seed in both of their polls.
It appears the BCS folks are holding out on us for some reason. :sure: 
They usually release their rankings to the public by 6PM ET on Sundays.


----------



## davring (Jan 13, 2007)

The last couple of weeks they have been holding off to have it anounced at 8:00 PM on the Fox RSN's.
EST


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

dont they release the bcs on the 7:30 "ot show" on fox now.


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

1. Alabama
2. Texas Tech
3. Penn State
4. Texas

http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfootball/


----------



## davring (Jan 13, 2007)

And 

5. Florida


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

The latest rankings see Texas and Florida moving up once again.
1. Alabama
2. Texas Tech
3. Texas
4. Florida

http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfootball/


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Penn State really, and unfortunately, did their part to help the BCS out of a possible mess with 3 major conference undefeateds. Still have some non-major undefeateds and the always-wish-for-playoff... but at least no one would scream foul if Texas Tech and Alabama run their remaining schedule and played each other for the championship.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

still could be a mess if there are 0 undefeated & like 6 teams with 1 loss.

i want florida to beat alabama & oklahoma to beat tex tech....that will make it screwy.


----------



## jodyguercio (Aug 16, 2007)

There needs to be a playoff in college football.........


----------



## cweave02 (Oct 12, 2007)

jodyguercio said:


> There needs to be a playoff in college football.........


There is one in the old I-AA, or non BCS schools. James Madison beat W&M in the semi-finals 2 years ago. Maybe with the "financial crisis" hitting all of the sponsors, they will consider it. Right now (and never) the BCS crap is not working!


----------



## reds1963 (Aug 29, 2007)

we just have to get the HORNS back in the big game .....


----------



## reds1963 (Aug 29, 2007)

but really , the bcs sux big time ..and the 32 or 34 bowls this years are going to be hurting for quality teams .,....ugly bowl season coming at us i am afraid


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

1 Alabama .979 
2 Texas Tech .970 
*3 Texas .891 *
*4 Florida .876 *
*5 Oklahoma .839 * 
6 USC .787 
7 Utah .764 
8 Penn State .696 
9 Boise State .656 
10 Ohio State .615

so if:
-* texas* wins out.
-* florida* beats alabama.
- *oklahoma* beats texas tech.

who plays in bcs champ game ?


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

Here is a link listing the top 25 in the BCS rankings,from FOX Sports.

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/poll?poll=BCS


----------



## reds1963 (Aug 29, 2007)

dcowboy7 said:


> 1 Alabama .979
> 2 Texas Tech .970
> *3 Texas .891 *
> *4 Florida .876 *
> ...


horns and gators


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

reds1963 said:


> horns and gators


but oklahoma beat texas.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

dcowboy7 said:


> but oklahoma beat texas.


And this is why it is a mess without a playoff... Until we actually get a playoff that at least has a couple of rounds in it (like the other divisions of college football), this will continue to be a mess except in a year where we have only 2 undefeated (or 1 loss) and lots of 2-3 loss teams everywhere else.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

rkr0923 said:


> Texas Tech should be #1


good 1. :lol:


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Now we are about to have a mess...

Oklahome beat Texas Tech for their only loss.
Texas beat Oklahome for their only loss.
Texas Tech beat Texas for their only loss.

According to what I've read, Oklahoma wins in a 3-way tiebreak scenario and would play Missouri for their conference title. I'm not sure what the other 2-way tiebreak scenarios would mean to the overall, but bottom line is a potential big mess if all three of these teams end with just the 1 loss.

Meanwhile 1-loss Florida will play Alabama in the SEC title. IF Alabama wins, that will be helpful... but if Florida wins? More mess!

Meanwhile, USC still just has 1-loss BUT isn't in control of their own conference since Oregon St can win the Pac-10 if they win out but would not be ranked as high as USC.

Even 2-loss Ohio St is back in the top 10.

Part of me hopes for Alabama to lose to Florida, and continue to have Utah and Boise St win out and go undefeated just to solidify the most mess possible.


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

The latest rankings are out now.
1. Alabama
2. Texas
3. Oklahoma
4. Florida
The top 15 rankings are at the following link.

http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfootball/

You can view the complete listings at the following link.

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/poll?poll=BCS


----------



## reds1963 (Aug 29, 2007)

dcowboy7 said:


> but oklahoma beat texas.


dont think sooners beat the horns this year


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

reds1963 said:


> dont think sooners beat the horns this year


oh they did....then its easy....florida & texas if they both win out.


----------



## reds1963 (Aug 29, 2007)

dcowboy7 said:


> oh they did....then its easy....florida & texas if they both win out.


huh ...i think i remember the red river game last month and Texas winning ..
u lost me DC....lol

to bad they will not them play again for the big 12 championship ....


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

dcowboy7 said:


> but oklahoma beat texas.


Texas beat Oklahoma in Dallas,TX on October 11.
Final score was 45-35.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=282850201


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

dcowboy7 said:


> oh they did....then its easy....florida & texas if they both win out.


It's not that easy.

If Texas, Oklahoma, and Texas Tech all win out... they will all have the same record and a round robin of one loss to one of the other two in the 3-way tie.

Oklahoma looks like the winner of that 3-way tie scenario based upon other tie-breaks... but no one will truly be happy in that scenario.

Any 2-way tie would use head-to-head... but even that creates problems because if 1-loss Florida can be in the title game with a horrible early season loss, why can't another team be in with a much better loss?


----------



## kikkenit2 (Oct 26, 2006)

HDMe said:


> It's not that easy.
> 
> If Texas, Oklahoma, and Texas Tech all win out... they will all have the same record and a round robin of one loss to one of the other two in the 3-way tie.
> 
> ...


The Big 12 3 way tiebreaker is the bcs rankings. Right now Texas is 2 and Oklahoma is a very close 3. That could reverse after this saturday as oklahoma has a much higher rated opponent in oklahoma state. But if oklahoma passes texas and loses to missouri in the league championship game then texas would probably move back into #2 and play Alabama in the national championship game. Still lots to be decided in college football this year.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

kikkenit2 said:


> The Big 12 3 way tiebreaker is the bcs rankings. Right now Texas is 2 and Oklahoma is a very close 3. That could reverse after this saturday as oklahoma has a much higher rated opponent in oklahoma state. But if oklahoma passes texas and loses to missouri in the league championship game then texas would probably move back into #2 and play Alabama in the national championship game. Still lots to be decided in college football this year.


Agreed, still more left to determine... but that's the goofy thing. Still a possible scenario where Texas doesn't play in the Big 12 title game, but could still be #2 with only 1 loss if Oklahoma stumbles to Missouri (and that isn't 100% out of the question).

'Course OK St could help a little if they beat Oklahoma this weekend... unless Texas and Texas Tech also lose to keep the 3-way scenario in play.

It's just a big mess... and I know people scream every year in basketball when their "bubble" team is left out of the team of 64... but imagine what would happen if they just had the top 2 teams play one game for the tourney? People would go nuts.

I still can't imagine how the folks who make money wouldn't make even more money with a playoff system in place. Those lower tier bowl games that are taking 6-5 or 7-4 teams each year would be a lot more attractive if they were part of a playoff.

Even better... We have that "must win 6 games against bowl subdivision teams" which means wins against a lower division do not count... so why do they even allow scheduling such games in the first place? The loss would be bad and the win doesn't help.

And to continue my rant... people like to argue the strength of schedule angle... but everyone can't play everyone with only 12 regular season games... so inevitably there will be teams every year who didn't play as tough a schedule as others. Look at the Big 12 even... a conference having a great year... but one side is REALLY loaded while the other side has Missouri. The ACC is really having a down year but will get an automatic birth in one of the bigger bowls but I'm not sure any ACC team could beat Utah or Boise St right now and those teams won't even get a sniff.


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

The latest rankings are out.
1. Alabama
2. Oklahoma
3. Texas
4. Florida

The BCS gave Oklahoma the Big 12 South tiebreaker,pushing them up to the No. 2 seed in the latest rankings.

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/8872328/BCS-gives-Oklahoma-nod-over-Texas,-Texas-Tech


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

As expected...

and since I still don't have a horse in the race to root for...

I'm hoping for:

Florida to win over Alabama in the SEC title game in a close game, perhaps even multiple overtimes needed to decide.
Oklahoma to lose to Missouri in the Big12 title game in a blowout.
USC to lose their final game in a blowout.

That should sufficiently muddy the waters a bit for the final poll!


----------



## flexoffset (Jul 16, 2007)

Yep. This is a mess. The BCS has potential to leave loose ends.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

Well, it is not right being that Texas beat OU but, Missouri can't beat Texas, Texas Tech, or OU so I expect to see OU in the national championship game.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

We really need a playoff system, this crap where sometimes a team that is playing in the national championship has not played in 45 days or so is dumb. They need to come up with something better.


----------



## I WANT MORE (Oct 3, 2006)

I don't have a dog in the fight either. OK, I lied. If I were a Texas fan I would be pissed. There really wasn't a fair way to settle this 3 way tie. Had they given it to Texas then OU would have a legitimate gripe. Playoffs anyone?


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Personally, I can't see how the Big 12 allows some outside agent to be their tiebreaker like this. If you want writers to vote on it, at leas have the Big 12 writers do a seperate vote on it.


----------



## jodyguercio (Aug 16, 2007)

I WANT MORE said:


> I don't have a dog in the fight either. OK, I lied. If I were a Texas fan I would be pissed. There really wasn't a fair way to settle this 3 way tie. Had they given it to Texas then OU would have a legitimate gripe. Playoffs anyone?


Playoffs most definitely, but being an A&M fan (we deserved the a$$ whoopin' we got btw) which then makes me a Big 12 fan I don't get how OU can be ranked ahead of Texas. Texas beat OU plain and simple. It should work like it does in the NFL, if two team in the same division are tied at the end of the season, head to head record decides the tie. Texas beat OU, they get to go the Big 12 title game.


----------



## reds1963 (Aug 29, 2007)

I WANT MORE said:


> I don't have a dog in the fight either. OK, I lied. If I were a Texas fan I would be pissed. There really wasn't a fair way to settle this 3 way tie. Had they given it to Texas then OU would have a legitimate gripe. Playoffs anyone?


being a horn fan , it really does tick one off ..
they need to find a better answer then what we have now for sure ...not to mention the big 12 mess , these leagues and championship games are a joke most of the time it seems ....

big 12 should have in place something better then this ......


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

I WANT MORE said:


> I don't have a dog in the fight either. OK, I lied. If I were a Texas fan I would be pissed. There really wasn't a fair way to settle this 3 way tie. Had they given it to Texas then OU would have a legitimate gripe. Playoffs anyone?


Not really being as how the horns beat them straight up. Just because OU beat TT in outstanding fashion does not Change the fact that the horns beat OU head to head. But, what is done is done.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

jodyguercio said:


> Playoffs most definitely, but being an A&M fan (we deserved the a$$ whoopin' we got btw) which then makes me a Big 12 fan I don't get how OU can be ranked ahead of Texas. Texas beat OU plain and simple. It should work like it does in the NFL, if two team in the same division are tied at the end of the season, head to head record decides the tie. Texas beat OU, they get to go the Big 12 title game.


You are forgetting this is a 3-way tie, not just a 2-way tie. Texas, Oklahoma, and Texas Tech are all tied and each has a 1-1 record against the other two... so they can't use head-to-head to break the tie.

It is odd that they would go to BCS rankings to break that tie... but I understand why they might be financially motivated to do that.

I haven't looked in a while to see how the 3-way ties in the NFL are broken. I forget what comes after head-to-head. It might be conference/division record? But that would be the same for these schools too... so then it might be record against other conferences or maybe point spread or something after that.

In any event, this amounts to not much more than a coin flip deciding who is "best" when on the field there was no clear winner in that category. Texas beat Oklahoma, Oklahoma beat Texas Tech, Texas Tech beat Texas. No fair way to break out of that mess without a playoff.

That said... I'm not sure if we had an 8 team playoff that they would actually invite 3 teams from the same conference to fill those spots... so we still might have some controversy even with a playoff in this scenario.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

HDMe said:


> That said... I'm not sure if we had an 8 team playoff that they would actually invite 3 teams from the same conference to fill those spots... so we still might have some controversy even with a playoff in this scenario.


SO true, no matter what they do, someone will always be on the outside looking in. Look at the Division I basketball tournament, how much discussion is there every year about so and so that did not get in and there are 30 at large spots with no conference tie in in addition to the 35 conference champ spots.


----------



## hookemfins (Jul 3, 2007)

The Big 10, ACC and SEC use a tiebreaker system of eliminating the lowest seeded BCS team then head to head for the two remaining teams. In that case Texas gets the nod over OU.

Here is the tie breaking system used in the NFL:

http://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

8 team playoff does not work, it would have to be a 16 team playoff to take care of this problem.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

jclewter79 said:


> 8 team playoff does not work, it would have to be a 16 team playoff to take care of this problem.


Yep... That'd be the only way out of this year's mess... but then 16 teams for a playoff would mean 4 rounds to get to a champion... and with only a 12 game regular season, playing another 4 games to get to a champion seems extreme.

If I had my 'druthers I think I might go for extending the regular season a bit, say to 14 games and then go with the 8 team playoff (3 rounds). I also think I would institute a policy that does not allow scheduling games against non-BCS division teams. Since those wins won't count towards bowl elligibility anyway, force teams to schedule within the BCS division.

After that, I wish we could also stop having pre-season polls. The BCS at least waits a while... Each year we get a team like Michigan or Notre Dame voted into the ranks pre-season based on their history and then they play their way out of it... but this also means a Boise St or Utah starts outside looking in. Clemson started top 10 this year and went south in a hurry too.

I still want a playoff... but there are some things that could be done with the current "system" to help have a better poll at least.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

In Texas, all high school teams play either 15 or 16 games to get to state champion status. In the NFL teams play 19 games to become champion. There is no reason that guys at this level cannot play a season that long. Also, it would end this junk about some teams going a month and a half between the last regular season game and the national champ game. I would love to see an extended bowl season that meant something.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

HDMe said:


> Yep... That'd be the only way out of this year's mess... but then 16 teams for a playoff would mean 4 rounds to get to a champion... and with only a 12 game regular season, playing another 4 games to get to a champion seems extreme.
> 
> If I had my 'druthers I think I might go for extending the regular season a bit, say to 14 games and then go with the 8 team playoff (3 rounds). I also think I would institute a policy that does not allow scheduling games against non-BCS division teams. Since those wins won't count towards bowl elligibility anyway, force teams to schedule within the BCS division.
> 
> ...


Several problems with that. One, the NCAA has to pretend that they care about the Student Athelete. If they upped the season to 17 potential games, that would pretty much kill any illusion that they care.

Secondly, the small schools make much of their money coming to the big stadiums to get pummelled. If you cut that out, it would cause a serious hardship to many of them, plus there are some in-state rivaries that would be affected.

Not that I have any better answers, but there are lots of problems to be solved to do anythgin other than what we have.

Personally, I think they should just go back to having all the BCS games close to New Years and have one additional game to have 1 and 2 play each other after the 4 BCS games. One bowl will have to be promoted to BCS status (THe Cotton seems the best to me) to keep 10 teams in and then have the NC game at the same site as one of the BCS games. Very similar to now, just with one added BCS game in the first week. IT is close enough to what is currently going on that it has a chance to keep everyone happy and is a baby step to a playoff.


----------



## cweave02 (Oct 12, 2007)

In the old 1-AA, there is a playoff system, which started last weekend. Alas, my beloved Tribe is not in it because there were too many CAA teams in the mix - Just like the ACC and SEC. Alabama and Florida have to play one more game against each other, knocking one of them out of contention. They can still have their bowls, but why not start this next week and let it be a true "Bowl Championship Series" and not the mess they have now?

IMHO, as it stands right now, Texas and Alabama should be going for the big trophy - but what do I know.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

I would love to see a Playoff between Florida, Alabama, Texas & Oklahoma!!!

I guess I'll come close to it with the SEC Championship Game!!!


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Lee L said:


> Several problems with that. One, the NCAA has to pretend that they care about the Student Athelete. If they upped the season to 17 potential games, that would pretty much kill any illusion that they care.


Actually, they already did that themselves years ago when they started having ESPN Thursday night football games... then other games on Tuesday and Friday as well for college teams.

Also, as others have noted... the non-BCS divisions (formerly 1-AA and so forth) have had playoffs for years and those schools do not rake in the cash for sports like the BCS division does... so those athletes are really student athletes... and somehow they manage to balance things and get their education + have a playoff.

Even further... College basketball plays multiple games per week, and has a big end-of-season tournament that takes place near exam time! The NCAA in those cases clearly opts for tournament over "education" because of the money...

The main reason why there is only 1 football game per week is about athlete health. Rest assured IF they thought they could handle 2 games per week and not break down physically, universities would be scheduling those games!



Lee L said:


> Secondly, the small schools make much of their money coming to the big stadiums to get pummelled. If you cut that out, it would cause a serious hardship to many of them, plus there are some in-state rivaries that would be affected.


I didn't say "small schools"... I said schools not in the BCS subdivision. Why did Michigan schedule App St for example? Sure, App St won that game last season... but Michigan winning it wouldn't have counted at all towards bowl elligibility. Michigan only scheduled that for a supposed easy win that backfired. LSU trampled App St this year, but again why even have that game on the schedule.

Note, Michigan backed out of playing Hawaii to put App St on the schedule because they were afraid Hawaii might win... All last season people said Hawaii's record was unproven because of their schedule. IF Michigan had stuck to their BCS commitment and not tried to pad their schedule Hawaii might have won that game and it would have looked better for all involved.

Tiger Woods doesn't go play in amateur tournaments to pad his pockets... Why do BCS division schools pad their schedules with lower tier wins that don't even count by rule?



Lee L said:


> Not that I have any better answers, but there are lots of problems to be solved to do anythgin other than what we have.


I'm with you there. I have some thoughts, but no 100% guarantee of a solution either. Personally I wish we had a better ranking system and that would help... then I'd like to see a playoff of maybe 8 teams. Still lots of room for error, but right now we end up with a lot of popularity contest voting that helps ensure some of the same schools are always at or near the top year after year.


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

From ESPN:
The Big 12 commissioner says the conference will "reassess" the divisional championship tiebreaker.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3739466


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

after the guy cut his hand off with the defective chainsaw the company said they would reasses the design.

gee thanks alot said the one handed guy.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

Here's what I say, let the BCS rank them as they always have, at the end of the season, take the top 16 teams and have a month long playoff season. The should be enough to encompass all tiebreakers, and teams with crappy schedules that go undefeated. The student athlete can handel it, as I have mentioned many high school kids have managed to play a 16 game season and still get their studies done. Make these the big bowl games and then play any other crappy bowl games whenever you want to. Also, number 16 plays number one and so on.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

But what about the poor number 17 team? 

Actually, for football, I think 8 teams would be more than adequate if they did go to a playoff.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Lee L said:


> But what about the poor number 17 team?
> 
> Actually, for football, I think 8 teams would be more than adequate if they did go to a playoff.


I think 8 would be fine... but a compromise could be to take a 10 or 12 team field and give first round byes to the highest rated teams as a reward for having a good season.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

Lee L said:


> But what about the poor number 17 team?
> 
> Actually, for football, I think 8 teams would be more than adequate if they did go to a playoff.


Poor #17 

The BCS is good enough to show us that 17 is never gonna beat number 1. Only reason is that I say top 16 is because that way you fit in all the whiners that go undfeated and don't get to go to the show due to schedule weakness. Seema like enough teams to quite all the complainers.


----------



## jclewter79 (Jan 8, 2008)

HDMe said:


> I think 8 would be fine... but a compromise could be to take a 10 or 12 team field and give first round byes to the highest rated teams as a reward for having a good season.


This would work good too, Top 10 is a nice round number.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

I agree, no way numb er16 could ever beet number 1, thats why I think 8 is adequate. I do think it would be funny to see the whiners who play no one all year get blow out by 40 by a real team from the SEC or Big 12 so I will go with your idea of 16.


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

FOX will announce the BCS matchups this Sunday,following their NFL doubleheader.
A little more info at the following link.

http://msn.foxsports.com/story/1659545#whatsHot2

Scroll down that page a bit,and look for the College Football section.


----------



## ThunderRoad (May 13, 2006)

This is long....but here's my idea for playoffs:

Regular season starts on Labor Day weekend, and ends the weekend before Thanksgiving. That's 12 weeks to get 11 games in; allowing every team to have a bye week. 

You leave the human element out as much as possible, except for what happens on the football field. There are dozens of computer rankers out there, in addition to the 6 used for the BCS. And as far as that goes, the 6 currently used for the BCS could be used, since they rank all of the Division I-A. And you take each of the schools and remove 2 outliers for each school (the highest ranking and the lowest ranking). Average the remaining 4 computer rankings for a school. The lowest 16 schools by average go to the playoffs.

You take the schools ranked 1 through 4 and put them in 4 different regions....do the same for 5 through 8, 9 through 12, and 13 through 16. Obviously schools would then be seeded 1 through 4 in each of the regionals. Then, Thanksgiving weekend, #4 in each region plays at #1, #3 plays at #2. For television purposes, at 1p.m. Eastern you'd have games on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2....at 4:30p.m. Eastern, again a game on all 3 networks, and then at 8p.m. ABC & ESPN each have a game. 

After this round you would obviously have 8 teams losing. You take those 8 teams and put them in a pool.....and the 4 non-BCS New Year's Day games could select teams from that pool, and those 4 bowls could rotate from year-to-year on the order of selecting. Maybe the first year the Capital One selects 1st, and then Cotton selects 2nd, followed by the Gator, and the Outback gets the remaining 2 teams. Maybe they put in a stipulation that teams from the same conference can't play each other in those bowls.

Then, the next weekend, you have the regional championship round, or quarterfinals. Obviously, there would be 4 losing teams....so you put those 4 teams into a pool and hold them for the next weekend. That next weekend would then be the semi-finals. The champions of the 2 eastern regions would play, and the champions of the 2 western regions would play. You would revert back to the original rankings to determine the home teams for those games. Obviously, from this weekend, you'd have 2 losing teams. You'd then put those 2 losing teams into the pool of the 4 teams that lost in the quarterfinal round, for a total of 6 teams.

The 4 current BCS bowls would continue to rotate the national title game, where the 2 semi-final winners would play. The 3 BCS bowls that aren't hosting the national title game would select teams from that pool of 6. And rotate that from year to year on which bowl gets to select first, like they currently do. Maybe they could continue the tie-in protector. Meaning, if there's a Big 10 team and a Pac-10 team in that pool of 6, and the Rose Bowl isn't hosting the title game, they'd have first right to that Big 10 team and Pac 10 team.....same thing in regards to the Sugar with the SEC, Orange with the ACC and Fiesta with the Big 12. And like they currently do, if a BCS bowl loses a tied-in conference school to the national title game, they get to move up in the selecting order to choose one team as compensation.

Then the other bowl games could still exist by selecting teams not in the playoffs, similar to what the NIT does for their post-season tournament in college basketball.


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

Final BCS rankings are out.
1. Oklahoma
2. Florida
3. Texas
4. Alabama

Oklahoma and Florida will play the BCS Championship Game on Jan. 8,2009 in Miami,FL.

http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfootball/


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Couple of interesting things...

IF Florida wins, and Texas wins their respective games... I could see a split title with the BCS trophy going to Florida, and the votes in the AP poll going to Texas.

I could actually see this still happening even if Oklahoma wins, especially if that game is close but Texas wins in a blowout.

Similarly... Utah has a nice chance to open some eyes if they beat Alabama and remain undefeated. That win should, even in the crazy biased voting, lift them to at least #3 (since they are #6 now and would be beating #4 in the bowl game).

Still lots of potential to leave an unanswered mess this year.

That said... I have to admit that Florida vs Oklahoma should be a heck of a game to watch.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

I predict a brutal killing of Utah by Alabama. I just don;t think they can hang.

Kind of amazing that Florida and Oklahoma have never played.


----------



## sdk009 (Jan 19, 2007)

Why does the Big East champion get an automatic bid into the big money bowls. There is no doubt that the Mountain West is a better football conference, and according to the Sagarin ratings, the MWC has three teams ranked ahead of any team in the Big East. 
Until there is a playoff, such injustices will continue to expose the hypocrisies of College Football.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

sdk009 said:


> Why does the Big East champion get an automatic bid into the big money bowls. There is no doubt that the Mountain West is a better football conference, and according to the Sagarin ratings, the MWC has three teams ranked ahead of any team in the Big East.
> Until there is a playoff, such injustices will continue to expose the hypocrisies of College Football.


To be fair, at the time the BCS was formed the ACC wasn't much better... Actually, at the time the BCS formed... the ACC had only Florida St as a real national power, and the Big East had Miami, Boston College and Virginia Tech. So arguably, the Big East was actually more of a football presence at the time than was the ACC.

But then change happened... and those three schools left the Big East for the ACC... and while the current strength of the ACC isn't reflective of it... that really left the Big East down on the football side of things in terms of power schools. Still, the ink was already dry on the BCS agreement and they were locked in.

All that said, I agree... some years those "small conferences" seem to have the same average strength as some of the bigger conferences if you really dig down and look objectively.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

They are a founding BCS member. The 6 main BCS conferences all get preferentiual treatment. Even worse is the back door that Notre Dame gets.

Some of the small conferences do have stronger power ratings, but ther ehave een several cases where a small conference undefeated team beat their chest about how they were given poor treatment in rankings only to be crushed when they played a team from one of th etop conferences, which hurts all teh teams that come after them. Like I said, I expect Utah Alabama to be no different.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Lee L said:


> Some of the small conferences do have stronger power ratings, but ther ehave een several cases where a small conference undefeated team beat their chest about how they were given poor treatment in rankings only to be crushed when they played a team from one of th etop conferences, which hurts all teh teams that come after them. Like I said, I expect Utah Alabama to be no different.


And yet... The last two years we were subjected to watching Ohio St in the title game get demolished (first by Florida, then last year by LSU)... and yet Ohio St is getting a better bowl this year at 11-2 than Boise St at 12-0...

So clearly the doing-poorly-in-a-bowl scenario isn't equally applied to the larger conferences as it is to the smaller ones... otherwise Ohio St would have been penalized this year and subjected to one of the lower tier bowls.

While I don't deny Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, and a few others look impressive this year... I haven't actually been able to see Utah this year, and only a couple of times Boise St. Meanwhile Notre Dame stunk it up just about every week with their national NBC contract.

I could even buy the flawed BCS system IF the voters applied all things equally. Unfortunately, lots of teams start out in the top 10 before they play a game and stay there as a result.

Even beyond that there is weirdness within the larger schools too... consider that Alabama got its early leapfrog into the top 10 by beating Clemson and Georgia who were pre-season top ten teams. But we saw how that played out the rest of the season... so IF we knew then what we know now, would Alabama have ever gotten to the #1 position in the first place?

And how does Ole Miss beating Florida not count as heavily as Oregon St beating USC does? I'm not a USC fan, but the discrepancy in the voting between Florida and USC is odd considering the rest of their schedule/record... seems like they are more closely matched than the voters voted.

I also have a hard time with Texas and Oklahoma being in a dead heat while Texas Tech is left several places behind. IF Texas and Oklahoma are #1/1A in a lot of people's minds then why isn't Texas Tech #2? They have a round-robin with each having defeated the other for their only loss... so whereever I ranked one team, I'd have to put the other 2 right there with them. So I don't understand the voting gap that leaves Texas Tech so far behind the other two.

There's just so much that isn't based upon on-the-field that ends up going into the voting... that I don't feel comfortable with the choices made at the end of the year. I'm in Raleigh, and I root for NC State... but I have a hard time justifying their going to a bowl game this year with a 6-6 record just like I have a hard time with Notre Dame doing the same.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

I agree, teh preseason rankings are an issue. If you are not ranked top 10 or 15preseason, you practically can't get to a good game because you can never rise high enough in the polls. This applies to the elite teams as much as anyone. IT would be best to hold the polls until week 3 or so, then let the BCS start kicking in at around week 7.

Also, teh conferences having seperate divisions causes many problems. Think of the SEC East, with Tennessee, Florida and Georigia. All 3 of those schools think they should contend every year, but only one of them can even have a chance to play for the SEC championship, much less the NC. Same goes for the SEC West with Alabama, Auburn and LSU. THen look at the Big 12. Texas Oklahoma and Texas Tech all had to go to some wacky tiebreak to see who got to put the beat down on Missouri. I heard no one give Missouri a chance against any of thoise teams.

Then, how about the fact that some conferences have championships and some do not. Should Alabama be ranked lower than a team that did not play last week, simply because they had to play the numbe r1 or 2 team in teh country in the SEC championship. Conversely, the extra practice time and game time those teams get could really help them come bowl time against a team with no conference game. 

Until the conferences have their best 2 teams play each other for their own Championship and all do it on an even playing field, it hardly seems like we can have a fair chance at a National Championship.


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

- kill the conf champ games.
- top 12 teams qualify for playoffs using bcs rankings.
- 1 thru 4 get a bye.

- week 1: 5 plays 12, 6 plays 11, 7 plays 10, 8 plays 9.
- week 2: 8 teams left: highest rank plays lowest rank, etc.
- week 3: 4 teams left: highest rank plays lowest rank, etc.
- week 4: 2 teams left play for championship.

- 1 thru 4 get bye so insentive to finish high.
- 12 teams so no one gets left out that has a legitimate argument.


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

From ESPN:
Utah's Attorney General is investigating the BCS for a "possible violation of federal antitrust laws".

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3814472


----------



## cweave02 (Oct 12, 2007)

Steve615 said:


> From ESPN:
> Utah's Attorney General is investigating the BCS for a "possible violation of federal antitrust laws".
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3814472


I LOVE IT! After the NCAA badgered and decreed that W&M had to lose our feathers on our logo because it was "racist" (fifteen years after we had to quit being the Indians and became just "the Tribe"), the Utes get to keep theirs. It is time someone took care of these bullies.


----------

