Does the BCS favor the SEC?

#1
chicago_vol

chicago_vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2010
Messages
200
Likes
0
#1
I know ill catch a lot a flak for this but I kinda want auburn to win. If they do that a mean an SEC team has won what 6 out of the last 7 NC? and 7 out of 12 since the BCS started?

I always hear people calling for a playoff but why? Since the BCS started the SEC has dominated.

I know this argument is kinda beating the dead horse but for people who want the playoff system why?

A playoff system to me would seem like an uphill battle for an SEC team. Wouldn't UT have to win have to beat about 5 ranked SEC teams in regular season, then a SECCG, then fight our way through the playoffs which Im pretty sure we would we would play at least another SEC team.

I could be wrong on all of this but am I talkin crazy here?
 
#2
#2
chicago_vol said:
I know ill catch a lot a flak for this but I kinda want auburn to win. If they do that a mean an SEC team has won what 6 out of the last 7 NC? and 7 out of 12 since the BCS started?

I always hear people calling for a playoff but why? Since the BCS started the SEC has dominated.

I know this argument is kinda beating the dead horse but for people who want the playoff system why?

A playoff system to me would seem like an uphill battle for an SEC team. Wouldn't UT have to win have to beat about 5 ranked SEC teams in regular season, then a SECCG, then fight our way through the playoffs which Im pretty sure we would we would play at least another SEC team.

I could be wrong on all of this but am I talkin crazy here?
Click to expand...

Didn't in 04. And none of those teams the SEC put in were questionable choices.
 
#3
#3
LSU with 2 losses wasn't a questionable choice? florida over USC wasn't a questionable choice?

and how does the sec winning NCs help tenn exactly?
 
#7
#7
A playoff wouldn't really hurt the SEC, either, IMO. At least not in most years. Not nearly as much as it would normally hurt a conference like the Big 10.
 
#8
#8
What people don't understand is that no matter if there is a BCS or a playoff... both will favor the SEC.
 
#9
#9
droski said:
LSU with 2 losses wasn't a questionable choice? florida over USC wasn't a questionable choice?

and how does the sec winning NCs help tenn exactly?
Click to expand...

I have have always thought that whats good for your conference is good for your team. If we contend with NC teams year in and year out that makes us look good. thats just how I see it.
 
#12
#12
droski said:
LSU with 2 losses wasn't a questionable choice? florida over USC wasn't a questionable choice?

and how does the sec winning NCs help tenn exactly?
Click to expand...

Perhaps, and no. A profound no on the latter.


And for what it's worth, a playoff would probably be beneficial to the SEC. Teams like 09 Florida and Bama would both have opportunities at the title, not being eliminated by having to play one another. That's two SEC teams in the national title game.
 
#13
#13
Bumi said:
Perhaps, and no. A profound no on the latter.


And for what it's worth, a playoff would probably be beneficial to the SEC. Teams like 09 Florida and Bama would both have opportunities at the title, not being eliminated by having to play one another. That's two SEC teams in the national title game.
Click to expand...

hmmm never really thought of it like that. Would a playoff do away with the conference championship games?
 
#15
#15
re: the OP, yes, I think the voters tend to give the SEC the benefit of the doubt, unfairly at times, considering the conference's typically weak OOC scheduling practices. Yes, the conference is difficult, but when the majority of teams in that conference play fewer powers from other conferences so little of the time, it's hard to get a true gauge, then everybody just looks at past successes and assume the true will hold same for that particular season.

There's no logic to it, and while I do believe firmly that the SEC plays the best football at the top level of college football almost year in and year out, I also admit that it's based mostly on reputation regarding absolutely nothing to the season in progress and relatively baseless assumptions.

Stuff like this is why I'm perfectly happy having computers be a part of the equation in BCS standings; a conglomeration of automated, detailed statistic-based rankings that can be considered the only true objective view of college football. Of course, the BCS needs to not tamper with how these guys create and alter their formulas, and for the love of God, get rid of Billingsley.
 
#16
#16
milohimself said:
re: the OP, yes, I think the voters tend to give the SEC the benefit of the doubt, unfairly at times, considering the conference's typically weak OOC scheduling practices. Yes, the conference is difficult, but when the majority of teams in that conference play fewer powers from other conferences so little of the time, it's hard to get a true gauge, then everybody just looks at past successes and assume the true will hold same for that particular season.

There's no logic to it, and while I do believe firmly that the SEC plays the best football at the top level of college football almost year in and year out, I also admit that it's based mostly on reputation regarding absolutely nothing to the season in progress and relatively baseless assumptions.

Stuff like this is why I'm perfectly happy having computers be a part of the equation in BCS standings; a conglomeration of automated, detailed statistic-based rankings that can be considered the only true objective view of college football. Of course, the BCS needs to not tamper with how these guys create and alter their formulas, and for the love of God, get rid of Billingsley.
Click to expand...

...And Jeff Sagarin:wacko:
 
#17
#17
All the computer polls suck because the BCS ties their hands behind their back. All of them have said they could provide far more accurate polls than the BCS allows them to provide. Any statisticians group that has cared to comment on it calls it garbage and some even go so far as to call for a boycott of professional statisticians on providing their polls to it.

Garbage in, garbage out.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#18
#18
milohimself said:
re: the OP, yes, I think the voters tend to give the SEC the benefit of the doubt, unfairly at times, considering the conference's typically weak OOC scheduling practices. Yes, the conference is difficult, but when the majority of teams in that conference play fewer powers from other conferences so little of the time, it's hard to get a true gauge, then everybody just looks at past successes and assume the true will hold same for that particular season.

There's no logic to it, and while I do believe firmly that the SEC plays the best football at the top level of college football almost year in and year out, I also admit that it's based mostly on reputation regarding absolutely nothing to the season in progress and relatively baseless assumptions.

Stuff like this is why I'm perfectly happy having computers be a part of the equation in BCS standings; a conglomeration of automated, detailed statistic-based rankings that can be considered the only true objective view of college football. Of course, the BCS needs to not tamper with how the guys create and alter their formulas, and for the love of God, get rid of Billingsley.
Click to expand...

Next to a true playoff system I agree. Computers seem to provide a good reference point. The only problem would be your previous point that the SEC major opponents are in conference. Making interconference statistical comparisons more difficult.
 
#19
#19
I think after Auburn got screwed in 04 they have shown slight favor to the SEC IMO
 
#20
#20
Yankee_Vol said:
I think after Auburn got screwed in 04 they have shown slight favor to the SEC IMO
Click to expand...

IMO all '04 showed was that voters don't necessarily favor the SEC as much as some think.

All three ran the table, and SC and Oklahoma played significantly tougher OOC teams, and that made the difference.
 
#21
#21
milohimself said:
IMO all '04 showed was that voters don't necessarily favor the SEC as much as some think.

All three ran the table, and SC and Oklahoma played significantly tougher OOC teams, and that made the difference.
Click to expand...

Not to mention sc blasted auburn 24-0 the year before on the road.

I knew several players on that sc team and they were not scared at all of auburn.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#22
#22
Yankee_Vol said:
I think after Auburn got screwed in 04 they have shown slight favor to the SEC IMO
Click to expand...

As mentioned above, the other two had a tougher OOC schedule. USC and Ok played a full D1 schedule while Aub had Citdel in the mix. Had Aub played Bowling Green as orginally scheduled, then there could be a slight credence to them getting 'screwed'. Only slightly though.

The other issue was the USC and Ok did what they were supposed to do. They started out as #1 & #2 then ran the table. They didnt do anything to knock themself out of those spots. Unfortunately, that left Aub as odd man out.

It also doesnt mean that "this is the reason we need a playoff". The only issue people talk about is how Aub got left out. What they forget is that if there was say a 4 team playoff, who is the 4th team? California would probably say them since they're #4 at 9-1 but #5 Utah at 11-0 would have an issue with that. Then theres #6 Texas who was 10-1, one better than Cal who would also object. And dont discount #11 Boise State who was 11-0. So instead of just 1 team (Auburn) being 'left out', in a 4 team playoff youre talking about 4, 5, maybe even more being left out. No matter the system, no matter the number of participants, good teams will be left out. Nothing we can do about it.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top