Bcs Keeps Tinkering

#1
orange+white=heaven

orange+white=heaven

VN GURU
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
30,513
Likes
2
#1
As the BCmess...er..BCS continues tinkering with their formula[see link], I'm curious to know if anyone thinks there is any possible formula that will get the job of crowning a true national champion done?
It's not my intention to start another "we need a playoff" thread here. I'm interested in constructive ideas for fixing a system we are clearly stuck with for some time to come.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/foo...-meetings_x.htm
 
#2
#2
Revealing at least the final ballots of the regular season remains an issue. Weiberg has said since the end of last year that the BCS could make that a requirement, not only for a possible new poll but for the coaches' rankings.

Grant Teaff, who heads the American Football Coaches Association, gave the strongest public statement yet that his group could be willing to part with tradition and make coaches' final ballots public if required by the BCS.

"Our coaches are willing to do whatever it takes to make this process the best it can possibly be," he said after meeting with the commissioners and athletics directors who oversee the BCS. "If it's releasing the (ballots) ... then we will do what we believe is best for the game, what's best for the BCS."

He acknowledged that some uncomfortable coaches might decline to vote under such a stipulation, but insisted it would be "a small percentage, at best. ... And it really makes no difference. Zero. We've got 119 coaches, and we'll have 61 or 62" on the panel.
Click to expand...

:good:
 
#3
#3
remove preseason rankings from the system that's what screwed AU out of a shot ...too much ground to make up... I know that there will always be preseason rankings but don't start calculating until game 4 or 5 so teams can be better evaluated
 
#4
#4
For the BCS to do that, it would have to entirely independent of any other poll system, which might work... Seperate itself from any other entity, and hold off from ranking teams until 4 weeks in.
 
#5
#5
why? by week 4 or 5 the polls have adjusted themselves then the BCS formulas can start calculating
 
#6
#6
Originally posted by milohimself@Apr 26, 2005 9:13 AM
For the BCS to do that, it would have to entirely independent of any other poll system, which might work... Seperate itself from any other entity, and hold off from ranking teams until 4 weeks in.
Click to expand...

Complete independence from other polls, and a later start[which I think the BCS already does]seem like solid and logical steps. This problem still remains though. What to do when you get to the end of the season and have two quality, undefeated teams vying for one remaining spot in a national title game? Will the public be satisfied with the one that is slightly higher ranked getting the slot? All evidence of the past indicates, no. I am hopeful that time, and some measure of success, will lead this poll to a place where the public trusts its final outcome. Hopeful, but not optimistic....
 
#7
#7
start later with BCS at the end of the season by then the polls have pretty much settled out, and strength of schedule could really be more accurrately evaluated by then which should count more and teams that loose their conference championship should not have shot at top tier bowl, and I know the 10 team conf don't play them but they could why does having only 10 teams preclude a CCG(stupid rule)
 
#8
#8
PLAYOFF!!!!!!!!!!!
 
#10
#10
The BCS has become a farce. Anything no matter what that does not use Strength of Schedule to determine a National Champion is a farce and as useless as the paper or trophy its written on. The last 3 Conferences that have been in charge of the BCS have done everything in their power to make it irrevalent.
 
#11
#11
Remember that the BCS was created to 'try' and get the best matchup at the end of the regular season..... without creating a playoff. Previously, it was almost impossible to get a 1 vs 2 matchup. In my opinion the BCS has achieved exactly was its designers wanted. They knew that every once in a while, there would still be a split poll (AP) and controversy over who the participants would be.... but still thought it would be better than the existing system at the time.

Not only has the BCS stirred up controversy, its increased interest nationwide and also Televi$ion revenue for college football.

The BCS is the first stepping stone on the way to a true playoff. Currently, the BCS is a 1-game playoff. Eventually, the traditionalists will cave a little and the BCS will be expanded to a "Final Four" format. Once that happens, it will only take time to expand the playoffs, maybe to 8 and then 16 teams.... just like basketball has expanded over time to 32 then 64 (and now 65).

I'm not trying to defend the BCS, because I wanted a playoff all along.... but it has been all that was expected by the BCS designers.
 
#12
#12
I like that fact that it takes 12 teams to get a title game, because the conferences that have 12 had to expand to 12 and therefore divide the league money up 12 ways instead of 10. It wouldn't be right to give the smaller leagues the big pay day without forcing them to expand.
 
#13
#13
As for a playoff, how about 8 teams, with the first round played at the sites of the top 4 teams, played a week after the conference finals. The 4 losers could go to 2 BCS games. The 4 winners play in the other 2 BCS games, with the 5th BCS game hosting the final. The other bowls stay the same. That would cause the lower 2 BCS games to look like a football NIT, but what do the non-title-game bowls look like now???
 
#15
#15
Originally posted by U-T@Apr 26, 2005 12:09 PM
PLAYOFF!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

Will never happen the universities presidents love that bowl money :good:
 
#16
#16
Originally posted by GAVol@Apr 26, 2005 9:31 PM
I think the next thing we'll see is a BCS + 1 format.
Click to expand...

Exactly that is what we will next see! Like this year would have been USC vs Utah and Oklahoma vs Auburn....The winners would have played the following week. I say plus one only if there are more then two undefeated teams :twocents:
 
#17
#17
bcs was made to keep the "split championship" out of the picture.

now with the AP out. there may be a split every year.


hmmmm.. that really sucks man.


i say loud and proud.....PLAYOFF. stupid rich jerks
 
#18
#18
Let's get one thing straight, Auburn got screwed because they played teams like the Citadel, not the preseason rankings. And I really do not think that making coaches votes know is really going to affect it one way or the other. The only purpose for that is for media writers to have something to start controversy over.
 
#19
#19
Originally posted by Volstorm@Apr 26, 2005 10:19 PM
Let's get one thing straight, Auburn got screwed because they played teams like the Citadel, not the preseason rankings. And I really do not think that making coaches votes know is really going to affect it one way or the other. The only purpose for that is for media writers to have something to start controversy over.
Click to expand...

so oklahoma deserved to be there because they beat bowling green and houston. :dlol:

every big school plays push overs man
 
#21
#21
Bowling Green and Houston are infinitley better than Citadel. It's one thing to play a crappy D-IA team; A lot of top programs do it. But to play a crappy D-IAA team is a whole nother deal...
 
#22
#22
Originally posted by Volstorm@Apr 26, 2005 10:35 PM
Bowling Green and Houston are better than Citadel.
Click to expand...

yes i agree

but these schedules alot of times are made a couple years in advance.


auburn should never have played the citadel....but they handed us our butts twice.


and to me that is spectacular.

can remember the last time a team beat us like that twice in one season.

probably never happened.

the media wanted usc-oklahoma so bad they couldnt stand it.

it should of happened the year before but usc got screwed.

so which team will get screwed this year. hope its not us.
 
#23
#23
For a team to get screwed like that again, there will need to be three different undefeated teams from three major conferences. What is the likelihood of that happening again? 2004 was a one-in-a-million season in terms of the number of undefeated teams.
 
#25
#25
Originally posted by checkerboard_charly@Apr 26, 2005 10:55 PM
it happened in 2003 milo.


back to back years is not one in a million.
Click to expand...

USC lost to Cal in OT

LSU got beat by FLA

It is really rare.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top