The BCS Sucks Vent Thread

[HuskyCaucasian]

BCS Standings

Updated: December 7, 2008, 12:23 PM ET

 

1. Alabama... 12-1

2. Oklahoma... 12-1

3. Texas... 11-1

4. Florida... 12-1

5. USC... 11-1

6. Utah... 12-0

7. Texas Tech... 11-1

8. Penn State... 11-1

9. Boise State... 12-0

10. Ohio State... 10-2

 

So, Florida beats, Alabama.... Texas beats Oklahoma... both get ranked below the teams they beat. There are 2 undefeated teams not in the top 5. USC, Penn state, and Texas Tech had great seasons with only only loss.

 

Playoffs or bust. This year is a COMPLETE disgrace.

[bmags]

hahaha alabama. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

 

but, i must say even after watching that disgrace last night, i still think Texas is better.

[WhiteSoxfan1986]

Are you sure this is right? I thought they weren't supposed to be released until tonight?

[Brian]

Utah vs. Boise State for National Title!

[danman31]

Relax. The Harris Poll isn't even out.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Are you sure this is right? I thought they weren't supposed to be released until tonight?

the "official" games are picked tonight. But the title is 1v2 and the site says it was updated this afternoon.

[ZoomSlowik]

I'm pretty sure the "update" was the records on the page. All of those BCS ranks are exactly the same as the numbers from last week.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Relax. The Harris Poll isn't even out.

so, did fox just update only the records? seems misleading.

[HuskyCaucasian]

I'm pretty sure the "update" was the records on the page. All of those BCS ranks are exactly the same as the numbers from last week.

ohhhhhhh ok. Well, then I stand corrected.... and feel like a dope.

[whitesoxfan99]

I'm pretty sure the "update" was the records on the page. All of those BCS ranks are exactly the same as the numbers from last week.

 

They updated the coaches poll as well but apparently not the points from it.

Edited December 7, 2008 by whitesoxfan99

[HuskyCaucasian]

This playoff system makes the most sense (based on last weeks rankings):

 

#1 Alabama vs. #8 Penn State (Sugar Bowl game on Jan. 2)

#2 Oklahoma vs. #7 Texas Tech (Cotton Bowl game on Jan. 2)

#3 Texas vs. #6 Utah (Capital One Bowl game on Jan. 1)

#4 Florida vs. #5 USC (Rose Bowl game on Jan. 1)

 

This would be followed by:

#1 vs. #8 winner vs. #4 vs. #5 winner (Orange Bowl game on Jan. 10; 9 days later than actual schedule)

#2 vs. #7 winner vs, #3 vs. #6 winner (Fiesta Bowl game on Jan. 10; 5 days later than actual schedule)

 

Championship Game (Dolphin Stadium on Jan. 18; week later than actual schedule)

[whitesoxfan99]

This playoff system makes the most sense (based on last weeks rankings):

 

#1 Alabama vs. #8 Penn State (Sugar Bowl game on Jan. 2)

#2 Oklahoma vs. #7 Texas Tech (Cotton Bowl game on Jan. 2)

#3 Texas vs. #6 Utah (Capital One Bowl game on Jan. 1)

#4 Florida vs. #5 USC (Rose Bowl game on Jan. 1)

 

This would be followed by:

#1 vs. #8 winner vs. #4 vs. #5 winner (Orange Bowl game on Jan. 10; 9 days later than actual schedule)

#2 vs. #7 winner vs, #3 vs. #6 winner (Fiesta Bowl game on Jan. 10; 5 days later than actual schedule)

 

Championship Game (Dolphin Stadium on Jan. 18; week later than actual schedule)

 

I can't see anyway the major conferences (ACC, Big 10, SEC, Big 12, Pac 10) would agree to a playoff without being guaranteed one entry.

[HuskyCaucasian]

I can't see anyway the major conferences (ACC, Big 10, SEC, Big 12, Pac 10) would agree to a playoff without being guaranteed one entry.

oh of course they wont. DOnest make it right.

[bmags]

I can't see anyway the major conferences (ACC, Big 10, SEC, Big 12, Pac 10) would agree to a playoff without being guaranteed one entry.

 

Maybe they should just make sure their conferences don't suck.

[RockRaines]

This playoff system makes the most sense (based on last weeks rankings):

 

#1 Alabama vs. #8 Penn State (Sugar Bowl game on Jan. 2)

#2 Oklahoma vs. #7 Texas Tech (Cotton Bowl game on Jan. 2)

#3 Texas vs. #6 Utah (Capital One Bowl game on Jan. 1)

#4 Florida vs. #5 USC (Rose Bowl game on Jan. 1)

 

This would be followed by:

#1 vs. #8 winner vs. #4 vs. #5 winner (Orange Bowl game on Jan. 10; 9 days later than actual schedule)

#2 vs. #7 winner vs, #3 vs. #6 winner (Fiesta Bowl game on Jan. 10; 5 days later than actual schedule)

 

Championship Game (Dolphin Stadium on Jan. 18; week later than actual schedule)

Utah has no business being in the top 8 IMO. Regardless of their record, they just arent good enough.

[Milkman delivers]

Boise State never gets any love.

[Palehosefan]

I'll get my little b****ing out of the way.

 

Texas Tech, 11-1 with wins over #3 Texas, #14 Oklahoma State, Kansas, Nebraska, etc and the only loss being @ the number 1 team in the nation. So it leads to being ranked 7th in the BCS.

 

 

[RockRaines]

I'll get my little b****ing out of the way.

 

Texas Tech, 11-1 with wins over #3 Texas, #14 Oklahoma State, Kansas, Nebraska, etc and the only loss being @ the number 1 team in the nation. So it leads to being ranked 7th in the BCS.

Its pretty stupid.

[BearSox]

I personally hate the idea of a playoff, as I think the bowl games are great. However, there should be a plus one system. My plan would be:

 

Keep the BCS as is for the most part. Use BCS standings and conference champs to determine who goes to the major BCS bowls: Rose, Orange, Sugar, and Fiesta. I'd also add one other major BCS bowl to be played on New Years day or the week of, and there would be no conference tie-ins but rather both teams would be at large. These 10 teams will automatically jump up to the top 10 (use the BCS to determine the order) in the Polls. After the 5 major bowl games are played, you would take the remaining 5 teams, and whoever gets ranked no. 1 and no. 2 would play in the National Championship game which would take place in about 10 days or so from when the last major BCS bowl was played. Also, I would eliminate the rule where you can only have at most 2 teams from a conference in the BCS, but that 3rd team could only be put into the new bowl I created. Play the best teams! Oh yeah, I'd make the Big East a permanent tie-in for the Oragne bowl, so it would be the ACC champ vs. the Big East champ every year. So, if it was up to me, and this was put in this year, it would look something like:

 

The Rose Bowl - Big Ten no. 1 vs. Pac 10 no. 1 - Penn St. vs. USC

^No controversy here.

 

The Fiesta Bowl - Big 12 no. 1 vs. At Large - Oklahoma vs. Texas

^This would settle the argument between Oklahoma or Texas. I think both teams are so good, and the previous game was so close, it wouldn't be fair to go with the head to head to choose who is "better." If they used this system, they could schedule an epic rematch for which team would likely go to the NC.

 

The Sugar Bowl - SEC no. 1 vs. At Large - Florida vs. Ohio St.

^There is a rematch between Oklahoma and Texas, but it wouldn't be the same with Florida and Alabama. Not only would they be playing each other in two consecutive games, but there wasn't as much controversy or confusion like the Big 12 because of the 3-way tie. And screw Utah.

 

The Orange Bowl - ACC no. 1 vs. Big East no. 1 - Virginia Tech vs. Cincinnati

^No controversy here.

 

The New Bowl That Doesn't Have a Name Yet - At Large vs. At Large - Alabama vs. Texas Tech

^Alabama gets put here because of what I said earlier about why a rematch vs. Florida would be bad, and Texas Tech gets put here because they would be the 3rd team from the Big 12 conference here. And, like I said before, screw Utah. They're a good team, but the only 2 teams they'd have a shot against on this list is Virginia Tech and Cincinnati.

 

The BCS Top 10 would look like this (basically, the 10 teams in these Bowls jump ahead of any team not in these Bowls ranked ahead of them):

 

01. Oklahoma

02. Florida

03. Texas

04. Alabama

05. USC

06. Texas Tech

07. Penn St.

08. Ohio St.

09. Cincinnati

10. Virginia Tech

----------I'll throw in the next couple of teams just to make it a bit clearer

11. Utah

12. Boise St.

13. TCU

14. Oklahoma St.

15. Georgia Tech

...and so on.

 

Okay, lets just say the winners of the 5 main BCS bowls are USC, Texas, Florida, Cincinnati, and Texas Tech. You would take these 5 remaining teams and rank them. Lets say they get ranked like:

 

1. Florida

2. Texas

3. USC

4. Texas Tech

5. Cincinnati

 

So, the NC would then be Florida vs. Texas. Of course this system still isn't perfect, but I think it'd be a whole lot better and add some more excitement.

 

Thoughts?

[HuskyCaucasian]

Utah has no business being in the top 8 IMO. Regardless of their record, they just arent good enough.

The BCS says they are worthy and the BCS is god, so clearly they deserve it.

[IlliniKrush]

I can't see anyway the major conferences (ACC, Big 10, SEC, Big 12, Pac 10) would agree to a playoff without being guaranteed one entry.

If we somehow end up with an 8 team playoff (I prefer a 4) and it's 6 BCS conferences plus 2 at large (which in theory go to the 'smaller' schools anyways), the setup is a complete waste and does more harm than good.

[whitesoxbrian]

I'm with palehosefn here. I can not believe TT didn't get a BCS game. Unreal.

[whitesoxfan99]

If we somehow end up with an 8 team playoff (I prefer a 4) and it's 6 BCS conferences plus 2 at large (which in theory go to the 'smaller' schools anyways), the setup is a complete waste and does more harm than good.

 

The other 2 spots would go to the highest remaining ranked teams in the BCS standings. No automatic bids for the smaller schools. This year we would have USC, Cincy, Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Penn St. and Virgina Tech. Now it isn't perfect, but it sure as hell would be better than the current system for determining a champion.

[IlliniKrush]

The other 2 spots would go to the highest remaining ranked teams in the BCS standings. No automatic bids for the smaller schools. This year we would have USC, Cincy, Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Penn St. and Virgina Tech. Now it isn't perfect, but it sure as hell would be better than the current system for determining a champion.

So you'd have an 8 team playoff, but Utah and/or Boise St aren't in?

 

I didn't say automatic bids, I said in theory. If they are undefeated, you can't get them into an 8 team playoff? Now, I will say I don't think they always deserve a shot, but you can't have an 8 team playoff and always exclude an undefeated team from a smaller conference.

 

It should go BCS top 8 and that's that. This year Utah's in, VTech at 19, absolutely not. A team with 4 losses should not be in an 8 team playoff. They should not even have the chance at a title. Major flaw in that system.

 

Having Cincy in over Boise St. is questionable as well.

 

This is why a standard BCS conferences +2 is not a good system at all.

 

And that thought gets me back to how much a playoff could suck, and why the regular season is so awesome and meaningful.

[whitesoxfan99]

So you'd have an 8 team playoff, but Utah and/or Boise St aren't in?

 

I didn't say automatic bids, I said in theory. If they are undefeated, you can't get them into an 8 team playoff? Now, I will say I don't think they always deserve a shot, but you can't have an 8 team playoff and always exclude an undefeated team from a smaller conference.

 

It should go BCS top 8 and that's that. This year Utah's in, VTech at 19, absolutely not. A team with 4 losses should not be in an 8 team playoff. They should not even have the chance at a title. Major flaw in that system.

 

Having Cincy in over Boise St. is questionable as well.

 

This is why a standard BCS conferences +2 is not a good system at all.

 

And that thought gets me back to how much a playoff could suck, and why the regular season is so awesome and meaningful.

 

I would obviously be fine with the top 8 from the BCS as would all football fans. There is just no way the major conferences would agree to that and I would prefer the system I proposed to the current system.