Spiff Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 If winning your conference is so important why have ranking throughout the year? Those that complain that OU didn't win their conference, are you saying they should be ranked behind every conference winner? For example Miami won the MAC, are they a better team than OU? Would you also argue that it should be impossible for the two best teams in the nation to be from the same conference? No other sport requires you to win your last regular season game to be in the playoffs. The Bowls are the playoffs in NCAA football. OU is clearly one of the top two teams this season. Yes but no other sport is like college football, in that every week is crucial; if you lose you drop, if you win you move up. That's how it is, and has always been. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Yes but no other sport is like college football, in that every week is crucial; if you lose you drop, if you win you move up. That's how it is, and has always been. Using that logic losing to a team rated 100 in the US in week 9 isn't as bad as losing to a top 3 team the last week? How far you drop is based on a lot of things. If OU dropped this game in week one we wouldn't be having this discussion. Who you lose to is also important. I dislike comparing "quality of loss" as much as I dislike defending OU. I see a bunch of 1 loss teams. If I had a ballot for the top two teams this season I would select USC and OU over the course of the entire season. The two hottest teams right now are USC and LSU. But the game should be sleected based on the entire season not the last 1 or 2 weeks. Regardless, these are subjective rankings. Either subjective by the checkmarks made by writers and coaches or subjective based on programmers determination of how different factors should be handled. One thought on playoffs. If we have a 4 or 8 team playoff the contriversy will still rage just who should be #4,5 or who should be #8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bones Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Sorry if this is long but I felt it needed to be said. The truth is that the team's that win championships aren't always the teams that do the best over the course of a season, it's the teams that are hot at the end of the season. Look at Syracuse last year in basketball. If they had to pick two teams to play in a national championship it would have been Arizona and Kentucky, neither of which made it. Look at the Marlins this year. They started off terribly and ended with the best record the last 4 or 5 months of the season and won it all. If college football could have a playoff it would be much more exciting and profitable. And don't try to tell me that the regular season games would then lose their exciteness or value. If only 4 or 8 teams were in a playoff the games would mean just as much. There could even be a way to do it without controversy. Take the 6 big conference winners and then the 2 highest ranked teams that didn't win their conference. Honestly, who wants to play Kansas State right now, or Michigan? No one. They both won their conference after struggling early on. Kansas State even has the injury of their star quarterback to blame for their losses. So I guess I'm what I'm saying is how can a team that doesn't win their conference just be selected to play in a "championship" game over a team that won their conference and is the consensus #1 in both polls. If the regular season is like the playoffs of college football, as I hear many people argue, how can a team that loses their previous game be in the championship?! I'm a big ten fan and as much as I would like to cheer for Michigan to win I might just find myself cheering for USC in the Rose Bowl so there would be a split national championship. f*** the BCS!!! It has done nothing but make the college football championship a joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 The BCS replaced a worse system. USC would be locked into playing the Big Ten Champion in the Rose Bowl which, except by a miracle, would never have the top 2 teams in the nation. The BCS needs to be tweeked. The best rule I can think of is if the Coaches and Writers both agree on the #1 and #2 then they play, regardless of the computer rankings. Oklahoma was down for 6 minutes the entire season leading up to the Kansas Game. The computers didn't regard losing to Kansas as bad as losing to Cal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 I'm a big ten fan and as much as I would like to cheer for Michigan to win I might just find myself cheering for USC in the Rose Bowl so there would be a split national championship. f*** the BCS!!! It has done nothing but make the college football championship a joke. sit down and have a nice refreshing beverage - Big 10 fans cheer on Big 10 schools - or else they are not Big 1o fans. And trust me, USC is not winning its bowl game so the whole argument is moot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 sit down and have a nice refreshing beverage - Big 10 fans cheer on Big 10 schools - or else they are not Big 1o fans. And trust me, USC is not winning its bowl game so the whole argument is moot. I agree, when and if Mich. beats USC, there will be no argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bones Posted December 8, 2003 Share Posted December 8, 2003 Yeah, I'll definitely be cheering for Michigan but I'm not so sure of a win. They are playing in USC's backyard basically. It will just be less painful if USC wins this year. I would laugh my ass off at the BCS and a split national champion. I think the Big Ten has some tough games this year. It sucks they always have to go down south and out west to play teams from those areas. They should make them come to Detroit or Cleveland and see how well they play then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 I am so sick of hearing how WRONG'd USC is for not being invited to the Sugar Bowl. Exactly what they HELL did this team accomplish? 1 F'g win against a RANKED (16th) opponent. The reason why the BCS has OSU vs LSU is because it's smart enough to know the difference between a weak-arse schedule & a tough one. There is no question that LSU deserves to be there. All this controversy goes to show is that the men & women who make up the AP & UPI polls are weak-minded. They choose to vote style over substance. The 7 computers choose substance. To be honest, it wasn't really as close as many of you & them think. LSU was robbed of a -0.4 deduction for beating Georgia twice. There is a stupid rule in place where if a team beats another team twice, they lose the quality win deduction. This rule is completely ignorant of the ranking of that other team. At the time LSU played Georgia the first time, it was scored as a quality win. They shouldn't lose that deduction for beating them again. Georgia dropped from 5th ranked to 11th ranked after the loss. Here's what strength of schedule really amounts to. Look & see how weak USC's schedule was : http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/teams/lli LSU : 4 ranked opp : 11, 17, 16, 11 OSU : 3 ranked opp : 5, 21, 8 USC : 1 ranked opp : 15 UoM : 4 ranked opp : 13, 24, 12, 7 UoT : 4 ranked opp : 8,3,22,21 If you look beyond the rankings & consider perhaps W-L record of opponents USC's schedule doesn't just look weak but rather pathetic. No matter how you measure it USC is where it should be : playing in the Rose Bowl for winning the PAC-10 conference. Arguably the weakest conference of the big 6 this year. No more, no less. I applaud the BCS for not catering any more than they do to an obvious West Coast bias in the polls. They got it right, & if truth is to be served with justice then Michigan will prove that fact in the Rose Bowl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bones Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 I'm not sure but I don't think that the players made the schedule. They just went out and did what they needed to do, except for 1 game just like OU and LSU. It is not the players fault that they are in one of the weakest conferences this year and they didn't have any real tough non-conference opponents. I do not see how anyone can say that the BCS got it right. How is it possible to get it right when there are three teams with one loss. All of whom deserve a shot at the championship. Then take in the fact that the #1 ranked team in both polls isn't in the championship. Yeah, that sounds about right to me. The only way the BCS can come close to getting it right is if there are two teams that, luckily, end up with a better record than everyone else in the nation, like what happened last year. And still to say that those are the only two teams that can compete for the national championship is a joke. There needs to be a playoff, even if it is just a 4-team playoff, to give more teams a chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 3, 2004 Share Posted January 3, 2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greasywheels121 Posted January 3, 2004 Share Posted January 3, 2004 LMAO ...I found another comic in our paper this morning concering sports....Let me see if I can find it...I'll post it in off the radar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.