The BCS is broken. It has always been broken.
It’s always been broken, but what is happening to Boise right now is a travesty. If they don’t come out this week having jumped up majorly, and, especially, ahead of the Ducks, it will officially kill whatever tenuous interest I have in college football. It’s absolutely a joke, and will continue to be a joke until a playoff system is in place. The smaller schools are just too good nowadays for any ranking based system to be even remotely close to fair in choosing a champion.
The mistake a lot of you are making, is assuming that if team x beats team y early in the season, it means that team x is the better team through the entire season.
I suspect that if BSU and Oregon met again this season, Oregon would cream them.
By the way, I hate the Ducks. But all this crying about Boise St. just seems sad to me.
You’d have a point of Boise had lost to anyone, or heck, even looked bad against anyone, but they haven’t. They’re undefeated and have kicked the crap out of pretty much everyone they’ve played…including beating a very good Oregon team. There is absolutely no reason that they should be disqualified from the national championship discussion just because they play in the WAC.
You’re blaming ABC for when the Universities scheduled their games? This makes tons of sense. :rolleyes:
Actually, it does. I’m not familiar with the particulars of this game, but game start time is often determined by what network (if any) chooses to broadcast the game.
I agree that the BCS is a joke, but your argument doesn’t work. In fact, Boise State is already ranked too high (the coaches have them ahead of undefeated Iowa and Cincinnati).
Sure, Boise State should be ahead of Oregon. They beat them. But Boise State did not beat Iowa, TCU, Cincinnati, or LSU, and all of those teams have vastly more difficult schedules than Boise State. The WAC is not comparable to a major or good mid-major conference. Boise State really only plays 1 or at most 2 games a year.
So just because Oregon has vastly improved since week one and is currently better than these teams, you put Boise State ahead of Iowa, TCU, Cincinnati, and LSU, none of whom Boise State beat?
thank you
I blame ABC for forcing Mich/Ill down my throat. 1-3 vs 0-4 in the Big 10 (Big Fricking Deal) Conference.
Penn St vs Northwestern was a better matchup on paper.
You’re missing the point. It turned out to be an excellent game. Or are you more concerned with the hype beforehand?
And I couldn’t care less. I agree that Cincinnati and Iowa should be in the discussion as well (and likely ahead of Boise) if they win out their seasons. I think it’s ridiculous that people are trying to nudge Cinci out of the race too. Sports talk shows saying “so, if Cinci’s undefeated, vs. a one loss Alabama…who do you put in the national title game?” Um…is this even a question?
My whole disgust with the BCS, and why I just can’t get into college football is that 90% of the Division I FBS teams are eliminated from national championship contention before a single down is played. Frankly, I think that’s disgraceful. Boise State is the rallying cry for this because they’re a non-BCS conference, and they’re obviously a very good program, with big wins against the big boys, most notably, of course, their defeat of Oklahoma a few years back, and the fact that their brethren, Utah, spanked the snot out of Alabama last year, but still…they obviously can’t be considered because they have a weak schedule. Well, of course their schedule will be relatively weak…they play in the WAC. My whole frustration is that if the WAC is not good enough to merit national championship discussion, regardless of what any team from there does, like beat top ranked teams and blow out 80% of their games, then why are they even considered a Division I conference?
To me, college football will continue to be a joke until there’s a 16 team tournament with an autobid for every conference…yes, even the MAC and the WAC…and at larges to fill out the bracket. I MIGHT be able to swallow an 8 team tourny with the 6 BCS conferences getting autobids, with 2 at large bids, but even that is rather prone to screwing the little guy.
Like every other sport (and every other division in college football except the big boys)…if you go undefeated, you win the national title…because with a tournament, only one team in the whole country could go undefeated each year. Sure, most of the time, the SEC or Big XII champ will crush the MAC champ in the tournament, but for those times when truly, the best team in the country is from a smaller conference, they can still win it all and not get screwed. If you want to call yourself a national champion, EVERY team in the division has to have the ability to win it each year…if not, then it’s a ‘champion of the top 40 programs’.
I don’t care if it turned out to be an excellent ( a debatable point I might add). No one cared about the game. The Houston/So Miss was a great game, but I didn’t care about that game either.
I would have much rather watched a double header of Oregon/USC and Tex/Ok St
I can go to the HS playoffs in my area if I want to see “great” games that I don’t care about.
You’re off base. The reason 90% of college teams are eliminated from some National Championship is because there are 120 teams in FBS. The entire media created obsession with some silly fictional “National Champ” has created an unsolvable puzzle. In the days when Conference titles were king and bowl games were rewards things were better and more logical. There will never be a tolerable solution so long as people worry so much about pick 1 team of 120. No matter the system that’s set up it will always be a joke when you have unreasonable goals.
Not much of a fan then.
I agree wholeheartedly. The BCS is a joke and the whole “National Champion” obsession is stupid. There will never be a satisfactory answer to a “National Champion” in college football. Even a playoffs of some kind would not solve the problem because there will always be lots of qualified, well-respected teams that get left out, whether because of prejudice, randomness, or what have you.
“National Champion” is a chimera.
Also, winning a single game is never adequate proof concerning which team is “better.”
I beg your pardon, I am a heck of CFB fan. I didn’t want the Ill/Mich game force down my throat as a Network game much like I wouldn;t want the Penn/Brown game forced down my throat. FWIW, many people might think the 14 7 win by Penn was a great game…but who cares.
IMO, ABC has a responsibility of showing relevant games on their national coverage. ILL/MICH was not a relevant game and I didn’t want it to be the focal point of my late afternoon football coverage when there were other relevant games.
A doubleheader that I proposed in another thread would have been much better lineup. and I don’t know how anyone could deny that.
How is this unreasonable. 16 team playoff, each conference gets an autobid…5 at large bids.
Get left out of the at large? Tough crap, win your conference. They implement that, and every year, you’ll get a true champion. And every year, every team will have a shot at the beginning of the season. And every year, there will still be excitement in the game even if your team loses once (or, God forbid, twice), rather than now, where your season can essentially be over after two games. And no, the champion doesn’t necessarily mean the ‘best team.’ That’s what makes sports great. NCAA football is obsessed with having only the ‘best team’ win it all, which is a joke, because it’s opinion. Sometimes teams get hot and win it all, even though they may not be the best overall team…but they were the best when it mattered. That’s what makes sports exciting! Look at the NFL…way more exciting (unless you’re a pats fan) to have the Giants pull out the victory in the Super Bowl two years ago than if they just said “Ok, Pats, you were 16-0…here’s your lombardi.” I don’t understand how it’s unreasonable to do it for 120 FBS teams, but the NCAA sure makes it work for the 347 division I basketball teams.
The only reason the national champ is fictional is because it’s 2/3 VOTED on…it’s not decided on the field. I don’t understand how every other sport and every other division in NCAA football can make this work, but somehow, the FBS can’t do it.
Because of the polls, people are obsessed about which team is “the best.” As long as the BCS is tied to polls, it will be largely a sham.
To my knowledge, a solid majority of university presidents and athletic directors of Division I schools oppose playoffs for NCAA Div. I football. Has that changed, at all?
Yeah, let’s do what a bunch of revenue-sucking sports do. That makes good sense.
I agree with Juan. A 16 team tourney makes sense to me. Win your conference, get a bid with enough at larges to fill it out. As it is, if you’re in the WAC, MAC, Mountain West, or Sun Belt, you have absolutely no chance to play for the title even if you go 12-0. Many teams are eliminated from the title by one loss, some teams require losing twice to be removed from contention. Depending on the year, a 2 loss team will make it in front of a no-loss no-name team. Seed the 16 teams, play the first round on campus sites, then use neutral sites for the the quarters, semis, and finals. Let the old bowls live on, calling in teams 17-48 or so.
Special congratulations to the state of Michigan. Not only did all five division I schools (Michigan, Michigan State, Central Michigan, Western Michigan, and Eastern Michigan) lose this weekend, so did the Lions.
Yeah, College Basketball, real revenue sucker there. :rolleyes: