# BCS BS



## Guest (Nov 9, 2002)

I can't believe this computer ranking crap. Miami may not be as good as last year's team, however, when you're defending champs teams are going to really come after you and this team keeps on winning. The way they won against FSU tells me this team is a team of destiny. IMO they're #1 until somebody beats them. This team may get screwed twice by the BCS BS. The first time was when the computers picked FSU to play OU when Miami beat FSU. It's time to get rid of these computers and put the fun back into bowl selection.

Go Miami!


----------



## John Corn (Mar 21, 2002)

umm it doesnt really matter because if all 3 teams stay undefeated Miami would be #2 because they have Pittsburgh (1 loss) and Virginia Tech (1 loss to Pittsburgh) and Tennessee (who carries some weight no matter how bad they are) Ohio St has Michigan, Illinois, and Purdue-Michigan will help. Oklahoma has beaten Alabama, Texas(who cares if they choke the record is what matters) Iowa St., Colorado, a good South Florida team. I think Baylor, Tulsa, UTEP, and Missouri are good/just as better as Florida A&M, UCONN,Temple, Rutgers, and maybe Syracuse. Of course I hate the BCS too,(like no other sport goes has players missing many days) but we have to live with it and by the end of the season it will be figured out like always(or not)


----------



## invaliduser88 (Apr 23, 2002)

Hey Rage. A&M Beat OU! You owe us Aggies a beer! :goodjob:


----------



## Roger (Aug 7, 2002)

Do you prefer a Foster's or a Bud? You were lucky to beat Pittsburgh.


----------



## John Corn (Mar 21, 2002)

I think the BCS is a good thing because it takes into account both computer rankings and the polls. Notre Dame, for example, as the one-loss team with the toughest schedule and most victories over ranked teams, is unfairly ranked behind a 2-loss USC team, and has a poll average of 8. Their really strong schedule puts them at #4 in strength of schedule, and at just over 4 in computer average. They could be a bit overranked according to the computers. But the combined BCS rating of 6 seems very fair; the BCS prevents either the computers or the writers' opinions from having too much sway. With that said.......How about just having a Playoff?. 

Bcs - 11/18/02 
The following are the Bowl Championship Series college football ratings: (Through games of November 16) 

01 Miami 
02 Ohio State 
03 Washington St 
04 Oklahoma
05 Georgia 
06 Notre Dame 
07 Iowa 
08 Southern Cal 
09 Michigan 
10 Texas 
11 Kansas St 
12 Florida St 
13 Colorado 
14 Florida 
15 Penn St 


I'm reminded of my post last week (not here) that it would be a complete toss-up between Miami and Ohio State ... couldn't be any closer.


----------



## Martyva (Apr 23, 2002)

being from the west, i would place Notre Dame with their impressive win over Navy at about 48


----------



## EricG (Mar 28, 2002)

How did Miami move UP to No. 1 (Displacing the Buckeyes)? They didn't even PLAY last weekend !!


----------



## Augie #70 (Apr 24, 2002)

Ohio State beating the Illini isn't good for your ranking.

The best way to determine the nat'l champ would be a playoff - when I played in college, we had the playoff's to look forward to. They do it in every division but D1, so it can be done. You could even include the bowls in the playoff if you wanted to do so.


----------



## gopherscot (Mar 25, 2002)

Being a huge Iowa Hawkeye fan (and yes I was at the Metrodome watching the fans carry out the goal posts) .. the Buckeyes need to start playing better. They have had countless close games and seem to be getter worse as the season goes by. Even though with a win the Buckeyes will tie Iowa .. I am still hoping the Bucks win against Michigan. I hate Michigan (loved our 34-7 win at Ann Arbor) and really want a Big10 team in the national championship game. Hey Bucks ... get your act together and beat Michigan!!

P.S. You can be really fortunate you don't play Iowa this year as the Hawks are getting better with every game. As Glen Mason said "They are clearly the best team in the Big 10"!:goodjob:


----------



## Roger (Aug 7, 2002)

John C:

"How about just having a Playoff?"

NO! It won't work. Do you mean after the bowl games or a playoff system?


----------



## markh (Mar 24, 2002)

Gopherscot, could you please explain your avatar if you're a big Iowa fan?
How can Miami be a team of destiny if it takes a missed field goal to win over FSU. A real team of destiny wouldn't be in the position to lose on a last second field goal.
Ohio State has to be the least impressive undefeated team I've ever seen. That said, they do keep winning. Took care of my Badgers pretty handily. Iowa and Ohio State would be a great game.
If teams like Miami and Florida played in the Big 10, they wouldn't go undefeated so often. The Big 10 season beats teams up EVERY week. Even the lower teams (like Wisconsin this year) are big physical teams that pound on opponents. Something that Miami etc. are unfamiliar with.

A playoff could incorporate the bowls as they are now. They could take the top 4 teams and match 1 & 4 and 2 & 3. Winner plays in whatever they want to call the championship game.

BTW John, great sig you have now. Congrats to the Buckeyes


----------



## Martyva (Apr 23, 2002)

Keep in mind i'm not a fan of the Florida schools. If Miami and Florida were in the big Ten the new league would be called the Big Three and the Little Ten


----------



## markh (Mar 24, 2002)

Well they also said Penn State would win the Big Ten every year after they joined. 

I'm wondering which of the current Big 10 you would include in the top 3.


----------



## Martyva (Apr 23, 2002)

Florida State


----------



## Roger (Aug 7, 2002)

"Well they also said Penn State would win the Big Ten every year after they joined."

Well the scholarship reductions put that theory to rest.


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

That and they stopped recruiting. :shrug:


----------



## Roger (Aug 7, 2002)

Why I'm against the playoff in college football:

Where's it going to be played?
In the NFL they are played in NFL cities and this won't be the case in college football.

The bowl games are good because you take a week off work and go to it, period!
I sure in the hell can't take multiple weeks off from work let alone being able to afford to go to multiple playoff games.

The people who want a playoff in college football are nitwit couch potatoes who don't move their ass off the couch and/or sports writers who are paid to cover this crap.

Even if there is a final four after the bowls... what am I to do? Spend my vacation time and money going to the bowl game then getting "screwed" out of the championship game (by not having the time off and/or money to go); or not going to the bowl game and the bowls lose out because I don't spend my money there and then my team loses the bowl game, thus nobody gets my money at all.

A playoff in college football is as dumb as the E* DTV merger!


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

Well we won't have to worry about a playoff system. I'm still bitter I have to share the Rose Bowl every couple years with the rest of the country. It meant so much more when the Pac-10/Big-10 fought for it every year.


----------



## markh (Mar 24, 2002)

Too bad the championship game isn't the Rose Bowl this year, at least one team would be from the Big 10. 

Something I've been hearing lately is that Iowa might get screwed out of the Rose Bowl because the BCS bowls get to choose an alternate team if the conference champ (Ohio State in this case) goes to the championship game. Mostly they've been mentioning Notre Dame being in the Rose Bowl instead. That can't be too likely after USC kicked their butt, can it?

Roger, the limit on scholarships was in effect long before Penn State joined the Big 10. It's just tougher than Joe Pa thought playing a conference game every week.


----------



## Augie #70 (Apr 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Roger _
> *Why I'm against the playoff in college football:
> 
> The people who want a playoff in college football are nitwit couch potatoes who don't move their ass off the couch and/or sports writers who are paid to cover this crap.
> ...


Let the players decide, not a bunch of morons. It has been planned out that using the bowls a playoff can system could be used. IMO a playoff system is gonna come, the only question is how soon. :righton:


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

They use playoffs in every other level of college football and it works. Why would a playoff at this level be dumb?


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

Its very difficult to play two football games a week. A playoff might work, but I could be for more than the top 4 teams IMO. I like the bowls, gives us something to talk about.


----------



## Augie #70 (Apr 24, 2002)

James, in every other division, they play 1 game per week, starting with 32 teams. If you limit it to the top 4 teams then you will not have the real champion. Let the players decide on the field.


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

The argument that it CAN'T work is ridiculous. It works now at every other level. Now maybe you prefer the status quo. And there might be advantages to it but a playoff coudl be established.


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

So wait, you guys want to tack on 4 games to the end of the season? You think college kids can play that many games? Also how long would they last? What about companies such as Nokia and Frito-Lay which have invested millions of dollars in their bowls.

Stop it with the "let the players decide it on the field". They already do that. 

So ASU which played 13 games this year could have to play 17 games? How on earth could you expect kids to play that many games? Remember these guys are supposed to be student athletes and should be in school taking finals in December, not playing in a tourney. But OK, you start the tourney after the new year. Have to skip the superbowl weekend and you end up in February. 

It works in other divisions because there are now bowl games as there are in Division I. So for this plan to work you have to incorporate the bowls. That means teams have to play on the road 4 strait games. That means the universities have to pay for their team to travel all over the country. Lets say ASU is ranked 32nd. They travel to a bowl to play Miami. Then they travel to another bowl to play Iowa, then another to play Oklahoma and then finally to Tempe (at least this year) to play OSU. Not to say winning those games would be possible, but ASU would have to pay to take the team to Florida, Texas, California or some other Sunbelt state to play those games, financially impossible anymore. Such a plan would bankrupt the schools IMO.

Now of course I'd like to see a playoff system, but how do you pay for it. :shrug:


----------



## Geronimo (Mar 23, 2002)

No we want to arrange the bowls into an organized playoff system. No disscussed 2 games a week or adding games.


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

Augie said he wanted to add 4 games. Impossible IMO. As long as you don't add games, a playoff system would work. But then again why would any of the powers want to change it. :shrug:


----------



## Augie #70 (Apr 24, 2002)

> _Originally posted by James_F _
> *Now of course I'd like to see a playoff system, but how do you pay for it. :shrug: *


I'm not sure what the revenue that college football but I'm sure that it would be more than enough to cover costs.
I read an article in Sport magazine ages ago that put in a playoff system using the bowls - I think they used 16 teams and the major bowls would rotate the championship game. Every x years the rose bowl would be for the Nat'l Champ. The minor bowls would host the opening rounds; the mid level bowls could host the middle rounds and so on. 
And as to your comment that it is decided on the field, tell that to the teams that have finished undefeated and not won the Champ. Trophy. When we played, the last team to win was the champ - no question. The best team doesn't always win - which is the beauty of it all.
My favorite time of the year is the NCAA BBall tournament - I suspect I would enjoy the football bowls more if the outcome mattered somewhat - do or die. And not to mention the additional Pools you could lose money in trying to guess the winners.
And I think that they would have to limit the regular season games so that as James indicates, there is no way that they should be playing 17 games in a season.
Can it work, of course it can, will it work? It all depends on the almighty dollar - if they can figure out a way to make more money using a playoff then we will have one


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

Schools just don't have the money, but if they can get the bowls to play then I'm for it....


----------



## gopherscot (Mar 25, 2002)

markh:

My Golden Gopher avatar is because I am a Minnesota gopher graduate. For the last 23 years I have lived in Iowa 40 miles from Iowa City. I have two children that are current Hawkeyes and everthing in our area bleeds black and gold. Still love the Gophers ... but the Hawkeyes really grow on you!

James ... the college kids are student=athletes first:lol: :lol: 

My suggestion: 8 top teams will result in 3 games with a national championship game on January 1. Other teams can play in minor bowls and please reduce schedule to a max of 11 games... with the first playoff game in December on neutral site. that way 2 teams will play a maximum of 14 games.... and done on January 1 and then they can resume their role of being student-athletes!!


----------



## James_F (Apr 23, 2002)

Oh I'm not naive, but the NCAA always refers to them as Student-Athletes, not football players.


----------



## Roger (Aug 7, 2002)

"Roger, the limit on scholarships was in effect long before Penn State joined the Big 10. It's just tougher than Joe Pa thought playing a conference game every week."

No. PSU joined the Big 10 years before they joined it if you know what I mean. It took years to integrate into it. 

The scholarships were cut for "women's sports"and other CRAP. These college skanks (women) are always crying about being equal and I agree with them 100%! I believe they should be equal as the men and bring in 50% of the revenue. If they cant, then get rid of their crap "sports" and tell them to shut up once and for all. Why should football teams be punished because women's sports suck and can't come even close to breaking even?

I say screw them. If you want to be equal then bring in equal revenue. If not, buy a few more drugs and booze and lez out and leave the men alone.


----------



## markh (Mar 24, 2002)

Gopherscot, that explains it, I was confused because Iowa and Minnesota have a big rivalry, much like Wisconsin and both those schools. Congrats to your Hawkeyes, hope they get to go to the Rose Bowl. 

Roger, I thought you were talking about back in the old days when a school could give unlimited scholarships. Nebraska's 3rd team could win another conference championship back at that time. Not sure what you mean about Penn St joining the Big 10 years before they did.


----------

