Michigan State plays Wisconsin in the premier B1G championship game. MSU won the first match-up against Wisconsin. So it’s a rematch. Michigan State and U of Michigan end the regular season with identical records yet MSU beat UofM handily. UofM had the easier schedule.
So MSU plays Wisconsin in the championship game and loses in a very competitive game where the final score was determined by a fluke play and a penalty. Yes, the final score is the final score. Yet, according to the BCS, with UofM sitting on their fat, sorry asses, that allows them to jump MSU in the rankings. How does that work? Why should playing an extra championship game, and playing it well, cause a team to tank in the rankings and allow an idle team to pass them? Both teams were ranked ahead of UM the previous week.
Again, why should a team playing in a championship game, win or lose, be penalized in the rankings?
It’s a bad system that is still better than the complete arbitrariness that came before it. Unfortunately it’s never really going to be possible to do college football without polls.
Wait, how is it not arbitrary when the human polls outweigh everything else?
What’s the OBJECTIVE standard by which Alabama is the 2nd best team in that nation and until today, Oklahoma State was behind Virginia Tech?
I didn’t say it was not arbitrary. I said the previous system was totally arbitrary and this one is a little less arbitrary. At least the computers can “watch” all the games.
This is NOT the fault of the BCS. This is the fault of the Big Ten and conference championships. The Big Ten hosts the BTCCG to gain national relevance in December which pads the stats for Heisman contenders like Ball and the resume of a possible national championship contender. If the win and stats count, so does the loss. Suck it up MSU fans and be glad the team got the opportunity. They had the chance to go to the Rose Bowl while Michigan had to sit and be an also-ran. I’m sure UofM would rather go to the Rose Bowl than the Sugar/Capital One/etc.
If Michigan State does not like the rules of the Big Ten, it is free to leave. Otherwise next time don’t lose to Notre Dame and Nebraska (teams that Michigan did beat).
Bowls, bowl payouts, recruiting, basic fairness, rewarding effort and all the other things that striving for excellence is all about. So yes, a lot of us give a shit.
I bleed as green as can be, but getting blown out by ND and Nebraska made the season a Rose Bowl or else situation. But I can honestly say that we (MSU) have it pretty good- we won’t be playing Oregon and we have a very winnable bowl against Georgia. That matchup is an attractive one and should draw a nice audience and help recruiting. Michigan, on the other hand, has a “name” bowl but it’s against Virginia Tech. I don’t see that one as nearly as attractive as the MSU-UGA match.
The biggest travesty was the Sugar bowl picking Virginia Tech (Virginia Tech?!?) over higher-rated BCS teams. The main reason, admitted to by the Sugar Bowl committee was the Virginia Tech “travels well.”
“Travels well” should NOT be a consideration. What’s the use of going through the whole BCS ranking rigamarole if a bowl is free to skip the better teams for $$? I know, I know, the BCS’ only real purpose is to match 1 and 2 and everyone else is on their own.
But it reeks that Tech, with NO quality wins (none over a final top 25-team) and gets blown out in their conference championship game gets an invite to the BCS/Sugar Bowl. There are 4 teams ahead of them not going to BCS bowls. Plus Baylor as an attractive option. Any one of them would be a better choice.
I don’t have quite the problem with the selection of Michigan, though the above holds true for them as well.
Traveling well may not make for the best matchups, but it’s great for the bowl sponsors and the local economy of the bowl city. That’s all they care about, putting fannies in the seats and money in the city.
When you get down to it, other than the title game and the Rose Bowl which is in a class by itself, the BCS bowls are no more important than any of the others. If you’ve got a decent time slot and an attractive matchup, a non-BCS game will help your recruiting just as much as a BCS game will. The only thing that differs is the payout, which only matters if your conference doesn’t split the booty equally among all members.
No one ever anywhere, any time, ever made the claim that the non-NC bowl games were ever about anything other than the cash. The yearly rending of clothing and gnashing of teeth when a system that was designed to make money goes and attempts to make that money is, frankly, hilarious. What the other BCS bowl games do is never a surprise, the outrage each year is entirely predictable, yet people react as if it was completely unexpected.
Yeah, that’s true. There are certainly some dog BCS bowl games. I haven’t watched an Orange Bowl in years, because let’s face it, who cares about a 3-loss Big East team vs. the ACC (which is HORRID) in BCS bowls?
Most years, I’d rather watch the Cotton or Capital One or other so-called second-tier bowl than the Orange. And this year, I’ll add the Sugar to that list. (I agree with you that Michigan State - Georgia will be more interesting than Michigan - Virginia Tech.)
Well, I think my post acknowledges the purpose of the BCS (match 1 and 2 and everyone else is on their own), and I’m certainly not surprised by it, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. Last year I griped about Boise and TCU being matched together. This year, it’s the Virginia Tech invite.
That’s cool. There are always injustices and more deserving teams. It’s not a perfect system, and as a football fan, it rarely gives me the more interesting matchups to watch. I’d love a different system that does so.
That’s pretty lame. So UM beat Notre Dame and Nebraska and didn’t play Wisconsin. Whoop-de-do! MSU beat Iowa, who beat UM and MSU beat UM. Oh yea, that one. There’s no reason why that one should count (in the eyes of the wolvies).
And nobody said anything about not liking the rules. It’s not the B1G that sucks, its the BCS system.
Acting like big babies is reserved for UM. Lloyd Carr took that to new levels and made it a legendary part of UM lore. (Remember when there was too much crown to the field.)
I’m a 1978 MSU grad and a lifelong Spartan. I disagree about Lloyd, I think he was a class act. He very nearly was a Spartan coach himself. The first time that Perles was trying for the MSU job, he was going to bring Lloyd along as an assistant coach. That didn’t happen when Muddy got the job (BTW, I loved Muddy and thought he was underrated). By the time Perles got it, Carr was unavailable. Carr turned out to be a great rival and a good guy, far better than that piece of shit RichRod.
To clarify, Va Tech was 11th in the BCS standings. ahead of Baylor (12th) And Michigian is 13th.
Only Kansas St and Boise got snubbed in favor of Va Tech. Arkansas and South Carolina were not eligible for the Sugar Bowl. Rules prohibit more than 2 teams from a conference in the BCS games.
I suspect that the Sugar Bowl committee would have loved to invite Arkansas (or USCe) instead of Va Tech.
But the main question is why Va Tech is being singled out? and not Michigan?