College Football - The Bowls!

[Drake Tungsten]

Selection committee is a bad, bad, bad idea.

I thought the whole point of the BCS was to acknowledge the fact that human polls are sometimes wrong.

Agreed. USC was only first in the polls because they lost the earliest. I thought we had decided that judging teams on that basis was silly, so why go running back to the human polls? The computers judge without a bias towards teams who lost early, which is a good thing in my book.

[Drake Tungsten]

They are going to have the same problem every time there are more than 2 teams with the same record. You could concievably have 3 unbeatens. Or 5 teams with a single loss. It is going to be a problem any time that happens (if you want a clear victor, you need a playoff structure.)

But if you are going to stay with the bowls...and you are going to have the BCS attempting to get champions, then the current system makes sense. It makes sure that bowls don't have teams locked up so they can't compete. And it gets the two teams with best schedule (and same record) to the table.

All that crap about losing early or late or who you lost to or if it was in a conf championship is silly in my book. Strenght of schedule is a HUGE factor.

But net, net...I would be just as happy not to have a playoff and not to have BCS. Just go back to the old days of bowl games. That is what the PAC10 wants.

Good post.

[TCO]

I agree. Surprised even myself. thought I was only a troll now.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by MRT144
just add one more game after all the bowl games...

Actually will be discussed.

Not a bad solution eithier. Let the BCS get rid of the computers, add more relevance to strength of schedule, and weight late losses heavier than early losses (Teams do get better and the champion should be a peaking team). You should be able to get the best 4 teams to two of the BCS bowls. 1 vs 4 and 2 vs. 3. Then a College Superbowl to decide the trophy. This system should eliminate the split championship. It would be very unusual to imagine BCS # 5 as the AP champ.

[TCO]

you are totally jixing it. it will happen now.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by TCO
you are totally jixing it. it will happen now.

probably!

[TCO]

fool. Should know better than to mess with the gods. I can see you setting up the last BCS system...

[Imran Siddiqui]

USC was only first in the polls because they lost the earliest. I thought we had decided that judging teams on that basis was silly

Why? As stated by many people, teams should get better as the season goes on. Therefore a team that lost early and improved as the season continued should be ranked higher than a team that lost late when they were at their peak.

[Drake Tungsten]

Therefore a team that lost early and improved as the season continued should be ranked higher than a team that lost late when they were at their peak.

Why? College football rewards excellence over the course of the entire season, not getting hot at the end. This isn't the NFL, as I've tried to explain to you many times.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Why? College football rewards excellence over the course of the entire season, not getting hot at the end. This isn't the NFL, as I've tried to explain to you many times.

Rewarding excellence???? then why did they let a team that finished second in their conference go to a national championship game.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Therefore a team that lost early and improved as the season continued should be ranked higher than a team that lost late when they were at their peak.

Why? College football rewards excellence over the course of the entire season, not getting hot at the end. This isn't the NFL, as I've tried to explain to you many times.

True, but when all other things are equal the early loss should count for ;ess than the late loss. It only makes sense that a team that is 1 loss and dominating the stretch run would be a better choice than a 1 loss that just crashed in its last game.

[Ming]

Yeah... the most important game of the season for them, and they rolled over and played dead.... that's real excellence for you... In the Midwest, we call that a major league choke

[Drake Tungsten]

Rewarding excellence???? then why did they let a team that finished second in their conference go to a national championship game.

Oklahoma only finished second in the Big 12 because of the championship game, a playoff. That playoff made Oklahoma's great regular season irrelevant and allowed a team that simply got hot at the end of the season to win a title they didn't deserve based on their regular season performance. Just a small taste of what a playoff system would do to college football as a whole...

[Drake Tungsten]

True, but when all other things are equal the early loss should count for ;ess than the late loss. It only makes sense that a team that is 1 loss and dominating the stretch run would be a better choice than a 1 loss that just crashed in its last game.

Not necessarily. This year, that might make sense, but what about other years? What if a team loses a star player to injury towards the end of the season, drops a game, but get the player back in time for the bowls? Do you really think that they are less deserving than the other team, just because they lost later?

[Ming]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Oklahoma only finished second in the Big 12 because of the championship game, a playoff. That playoff made Oklahoma's great regular season irrelevant and allowed a team that simply got hot at the end of the season to win a title they didn't deserve based on their regular season performance.

Yeah... they finished second because they lost their most important game of the season to date. And then you say the winner didn't deserve to win a title, yet they did what they had to do... which was to win the game on the field.

If conferences are going to have these tournaments, the games do count. You just can't wish they didn't happen, or ignore the results. The facts are simple... Oklahoma choked and finished SECOND in their own conference. They weren't even champions of their own conference... you want to reward this kind of "excellence".... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA

Frankly, I would rather reward teams that can at least win their own conference... I don't think that's asking too much of a "National Champion"