The Problem With the BCS - Page 2

MidwayMonster31 · 09-08-2010, 01:41 PM

The biggest problem I have with the coaches poll is that there are way too many agendas. Conferences make more money by having 2 BCS teams instead of 1. There is more reason for the Vanderbilts, Iowa States, Indianas and Washington States of the world to vote higher for their conferences. Coaches have better things to do than to decide who's better between 24 and 25.
As far as the computers go, it's the only way to really use an objective ranking, so I don't have much of a problem with it.
I also don't like preseason rankings. It gives teams a completely unnecessary inside track based on how they did the year before. This applies to Boise State this year. The biggest example of this was 2004-2005 when USC and Oklahoma held on to #1 and #2 the entire year. Auburn never had a chance that year. Another one was 2006, the only reason Notre Dame got into the BCS was because they were #2 to start the year.
I would prefer an 8 team playoff. The first round can be home field, the semifinals and NC can be on a neutral site.

BeerBaron · 09-08-2010, 01:48 PM

Assuming a playoff system isn't going to happen, here are a few things I'd do to try and fix the current system.

1.) No coaches poll, no media poll, no computers. Assemble a committee like they do for the NCAA Basketball tournament, have them analyze as thoroughly as possible all of the weekends' games, and then rank the teams appropriately.

2.) No rankings until at least 1/3 of the way into the season...preferably even halfway through the season.

3.) Teams are no longer allowed to play 1-AA teams. All opponents must be 1-A schools.

4.) At least one game a year will be an out of conference game determined by the previous years results. Now, what do I mean? Think of the NFL....you play your division 6 games, one other division in your conference 2 home/2 away, then one division from the other conference 2 home/2 away. That leaves 2 games that you play against the teams who placed in their division where you placed in yours the previous season. So, for the NCAA, what I'd do is have the conferences rotate which other conference they play, and have the top 6 teams in each from the previous year play the team that placed in the same spot in the other conference. For example, one year it could be Big 10 vs. Pac 10. The team who won the Big 10 will play a neutral field game vs. the team who won the Pac 10. The 2nd places would also do the same...and so forth. It can end after the top 6 or so to make up for the conferences not all having the same amount of teams. This way, every team will face at least one reasonable opponent of relatively equal talent level every year out of their conference.

5.) Ya know what? **** it.....teams are no longer in charge of making their own schedules period. Have it handled by a scheduling committee like pro sports do.

6.) Once Boise is in the Mountain West, that conference gets an automatic bid.

Just a few ideas that I think would ease it up....

JRTPlaya21 · 09-08-2010, 03:59 PM

Bravo my friend! Bravo.

JHL6719 · 09-08-2010, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diabsoule

I agree that the preseason poll should be eliminated and would go so far as to eliminate a coaches poll. The coaches of all of these teams have so much more on their plates than to sit down and rank teams without showing some kind of bias for their own.

Saban voted Ohio St. #1 with his preseason coaches vote...

keylime_5 · 09-08-2010, 07:08 PM

if they did a playoff and the conference champs got an automatic spot, then the only thing left to human voters would be the at-large teams and if they seeded teams. The conference champs I assume would get seeds and they could do a draw like the world cup does to take away the human component in the matchups. That would have less human voting factor than the BCS ever would. That said I am not that big a fan of having a playoff in college football.

keylime_5 · 09-08-2010, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JHL6719

Saban voted Ohio St. #1 with his preseason coaches vote...

indeed. and I think Tressel voted alabama #1 with his. Coaches don't want the bullseye on their back of a #1 ranking.

BeerBaron · 09-08-2010, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keylime_5

if they did a playoff and the conference champs got an automatic spot, then the only thing left to human voters would be the at-large teams and if they seeded teams. The conference champs I assume would get seeds and they could do a draw like the world cup does to take away the human component in the matchups. That would have less human voting factor than the BCS ever would. That said I am not that big a fan of having a playoff in college football.

Please make your 10000th post explaining this one.

P-L · 09-09-2010, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JHL6719

Saban voted Ohio St. #1 with his preseason coaches vote...

Alright, now let's see who he votes for the week before bowl selection.

keylime_5 · 09-09-2010, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeerBaron

Please make your 10000th post explaining this one.

it hurts the importance of the regular season and takes away from the longstanding tradition of the big bowls. I don't like hurting that anymore than I like hurting the importance/tradition of the OSU/UM rivalry by adding an uneccesary conference championship game to the Big Ten. I wouldn't be totally against a playoff, but I don't like how it fits into college football compared to basketball or pro football, etc.

BuddyCHRIST · 09-09-2010, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keylime_5

it hurts the importance of the regular season and takes away from the longstanding tradition of the big bowls. I don't like hurting that anymore than I like hurting the importance/tradition of the OSU/UM rivalry by adding an uneccesary conference championship game to the Big Ten. I wouldn't be totally against a playoff, but I don't like how it fits into college football compared to basketball or pro football, etc.

I use to have this view, but the BCS is watering down college football by making scheduling decent OOC games unnecessary. Now this is a bad weekend to mention this, but more and more teams won't be playing these tough OOC games. UF doesn't even think about doing it, all you have to do is survive an easy schedule and be ranked high in the preseason. To me, it does way more to hurt the integrity of CFB than a playoff would.

I also don't think it would water down regular season games at all, I mean you would still be looking at the top 8 probably having 2 losses at the most. Its not like the NFL where they can get in at 9-7. Not to mention rivalries will always be huge in CFB, no playoff will diminish that.

BeerBaron · 09-09-2010, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keylime_5

it hurts the importance of the regular season and takes away from the longstanding tradition of the big bowls. I don't like hurting that anymore than I like hurting the importance/tradition of the OSU/UM rivalry by adding an uneccesary conference championship game to the Big Ten. I wouldn't be totally against a playoff, but I don't like how it fits into college football compared to basketball or pro football, etc.

Why do the playoffs not hurt the importance of the regular season in oh....every other sport anywhere ever? You still have to actually play well enough to make the playoffs, and in college football, with an 8 team playoff, any more than 1 loss could mean you missing the playoffs entirely. You're still going to need to play very well all season long.

JHL6719 · 09-09-2010, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-L

Alright, now let's see who he votes for the week before bowl selection.

Well obviously he should vote for the SmurfTurf SpudStuds....

After all, they'll be undefeated...

LizardState · 09-09-2010, 01:04 PM

8-team playoff makes the most sense. It retains the post-New Yrs. big bowl system intact & evenly distributes the bowl $.

Currently more & more teams finish undefeated from scheduling cupcakes or total conference domination by a single team, whatever. And currently in the game of musical chairs, some undefeated team gets screwed, like Auburn a few yrs. ago.

The elite programs & conferences have too much clout as special interests now, that's why a Boise St. has the chance of a snowball in hell of finishing #1 if there are 2 or more other undefeated teams.

P-L · 09-09-2010, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keylime_5

it hurts the importance of the regular season and takes away from the longstanding tradition of the big bowls. I don't like hurting that anymore than I like hurting the importance/tradition of the OSU/UM rivalry by adding an uneccesary conference championship game to the Big Ten. I wouldn't be totally against a playoff, but I don't like how it fits into college football compared to basketball or pro football, etc.

The regular season isn't that important when a team can win every single game and still not get the chance to compete for the title.

keylime_5 · 09-09-2010, 03:27 PM

it's more important than if a team can lose 5 games and still have a chance to compete for a title.

villagewarrior · 09-09-2010, 03:43 PM

Division I college basketball has a playoff. Division I-AA, II, III and the NAIA have a playoff. Each of the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, and MLS have a playoff. Every sport except for NCAA Division I football has a playoff. Instituting a playoff would solve every problem. The BCS would be eliminated, the institutions would make buku cash, and actual champions would be crowned having fought for it on the field.

The hubbub about the players being "students first" (which is a farce by the way, as evidenced by the conference expansion talk) is ridiculous. Student-athletes in every other level of collegiate athletics are able to handle a playoff and class at the same time.

BeerBaron · 09-09-2010, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by villagewarrior

Division I college basketball has a playoff. Division I-AA, II, III and the NAIA have a playoff. Each of the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, and MLS have a playoff. Every sport except for NCAA Division I football has a playoff. Instituting a playoff would solve every problem. The BCS would be eliminated, the institutions would make buku cash, and actual champions would be crowned having fought for it on the field.

The hubbub about the players being "students first" (which is a farce by the way, as evidenced by the conference expansion talk) is ridiculous. Student-athletes in every other level of collegiate athletics are able to handle a playoff and class at the same time.

You sum this up well. +rep sir.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf) · 09-09-2010, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keylime_5

it's more important than if a team can lose 5 games and still have a chance to compete for a title.

5 loss teams won't be in the top 8.

P-L · 09-09-2010, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keylime_5

it's more important than if a team can lose 5 games and still have a chance to compete for a title.

How would a 7-5 make it high enough in the polls to get spot in an eight team playoff?

keylime_5 · 09-09-2010, 04:20 PM

the ACC champion automatic qualifier has been a 4 loss team in two different occassions since they expanded to 12 teams. It's not impossible that a team can lose 4 or 5 games and win the conference......and if you get a spot in the playoffs you have a chance to win a NC.

P-L · 09-09-2010, 04:26 PM

Well you'd have to do without automatic bid if the playoff was eight teams or less. Giving all six conference champions a spot in an eight-team playoff almost defeats the purpose.

keylime_5 · 09-09-2010, 04:46 PM

I cant see any way in hell that a conference champ of the big six won't automatically make a playoff spot if they went to a playoff system. 6 conference champs and 2 at larges if they only did 8 teams.

BeerBaron · 09-09-2010, 07:28 PM

The conferences as we know them probably won't last much longer anyway. There is no way the Big East should have an automatic bid, and the ACC will probably go that way too unless something drastic happens since the Pac-10 and SEC will all be getting stronger the next couple seasons, and the Big 10 is going to remain relevant because of their history and influence. Plus you have Boise going to the MTW which should strengthen them up enough to deserve an automatic bid.

villagewarrior · 09-09-2010, 07:43 PM

I say take the top 16. 4 week playoff. They could still get it done by the time the college season is completed now, and in all likelihood sooner.

keylime_5 · 09-09-2010, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeerBaron

Why do the playoffs not hurt the importance of the regular season in oh....every other sport anywhere ever? You still have to actually play well enough to make the playoffs, and in college football, with an 8 team playoff, any more than 1 loss could mean you missing the playoffs entirely. You're still going to need to play very well all season long.

the regular season of every other sport isn't as good as it is in college football b/c you basically have to go unbeaten to win a title....and if you don't make it to the title game then playing in a game like the Rose Bowl is not a bad consolation. Winning the Rose Bowl is freakin' awesome.

I'm not against a playoff, it would be awesome to have a CFB playoffs and an undisputed champ.....I just think it will suck to kiss the tradition of bowl games good bye. If they had a playoff the bowls would be completely watered down and unimportant, no way around that at all. The Rose Bowl for instance would be just a venue for a playoff game (not the actual rose bowl game anymore) and the whole 80+ year tradition of going to the Rose Bowl to end your year would be gone.

Now since they already have a BCS Championship game that isn't really a bowl, just a championship game between #1 and #2 in a rotating venue, having a plus one after the bowls are done wouldn't be so bad in terms of keeping the tradition and having less dispute about the champ.