My dislike for college football's BCS system is shrinking

Home ▸ Archive ▸ College Sports ▸ My dislike for college football's BCS system is shrinking
W

WebFire

Go Bucks!

14,779 posts
Apr 6, 2011 7:40 AM
SportsAndLady;734030 wrote:The majority of those other 282 teams didn't get in because they didn't win their conference tourney...it had nothing to do with the regular season.

Um, false. There are only 32 conference bids. So only 32 teams out of the 346 get in because they win their conference. The rest have to have a good regular season to get in.

Obviously, there is more weight to the football regular season than basketball. But that is only because the tournament allows more teams a chance to compete for the title. And it shows year in and year out why a playoff is so great. The best team in the nation isn't always the one with the most popular name.
Apr 6, 2011 7:40am
ohiotiger33's avatar

ohiotiger33

Senior Member

1,500 posts
Apr 6, 2011 8:28 AM
There are no conference tournaments in football, so that is a moot point.

12 teams, first round seeds 8-12 play to get it down to 8. 8 biggest conf. champs allowed in plus 4 at large. So you would either have to win your conference in the reg season or have an amazing season in the regular season to make the playoff.
Apr 6, 2011 8:28am
jordo212000's avatar

jordo212000

Senior Member

10,664 posts
Apr 6, 2011 12:07 PM
SportsAndLady;734032 wrote:You think TCU would have beaten Auburn?
I think they could, and they might have actually beat Auburn... we just don't know because they never played. That's the issue with the BCS. How can we know who the "best" team is, when we don't get to see all of the "best" team's included in the tournament/playoff?
Apr 6, 2011 12:07pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Apr 6, 2011 12:26 PM
jordo212000;734392 wrote:I think they could, and they might have actually beat Auburn... we just don't know because they never played. That's the issue with the BCS. How can we know who the "best" team is, when we don't get to see all of the "best" team's included in the tournament/playoff?

I'm a lot more sure that Auburn was the best team in college football this past year than UConn being the best team in basketball.
Apr 6, 2011 12:26pm
Pick6's avatar

Pick6

A USA American

14,946 posts
Apr 6, 2011 12:31 PM
SportsAndLady;734032 wrote:You think TCU would have beaten Auburn?

that is something, unfortunately, we will never know. A lot of people didnt think they would shut down Wisconsin's running game like they did and beat them.
Apr 6, 2011 12:31pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Apr 6, 2011 12:38 PM
WebFire;734193 wrote:Um, false. There are only 32 conference bids. So only 32 teams out of the 346 get in because they win their conference. The rest have to have a good regular season to get in.

Right but what I am saying is those other 300 or so teams have a less than 1% chance of making the tournament as an at-large. They would have to go the whole season with somewhere between 3 and 7 losses. It's just not going to happen, the only thing they rely on to get to the tourney is their conference tournament.
Apr 6, 2011 12:38pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Apr 6, 2011 12:42 PM
jordo212000;734392 wrote:I think they could, and they might have actually beat Auburn... we just don't know because they never played. That's the issue with the BCS. How can we know who the "best" team is, when we don't get to see all of the "best" team's included in the tournament/playoff?
Pick6;734421 wrote:that is something, unfortunately, we will never know. A lot of people didnt think they would shut down Wisconsin's running game like they did and beat them.

There is the same issue in college basketball, too. We will never know if Virginia Tech would have made a run to the FF..I mean if VCU can do it, surely virginia tech could too? We will also never know if OSU would have beaten Kansas...or if Pitt would have beaten North Carolina...The tournament isn't as flawless as some make it.
Apr 6, 2011 12:42pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Apr 6, 2011 12:43 PM
Pick6;734421 wrote: A lot of people didnt think they would shut down Wisconsin's running game like they did

No they didn't. Wisco rushed for 226 yards. Clay and Ball both averaged over 6 ypc.

They won because they controlled the clock.
Apr 6, 2011 12:43pm
jordo212000's avatar

jordo212000

Senior Member

10,664 posts
Apr 6, 2011 12:51 PM
SportsAndLady;734441 wrote:There is the same issue in college basketball, too. We will never know if Virginia Tech would have made a run to the FF..I mean if VCU can do it, surely virginia tech could too? We will also never know if OSU would have beaten Kansas...or if Pitt would have beaten North Carolina...The tournament isn't as flawless as some make it.

The easiest answer to this is: who cares about Va Tech. Win all of your games and you will be in the National Championship. If you don't win them all, you have to rely on your OOC schedule and the selection committee. By that point, if you are on the fringe, it is nobody's fault but your own. I don't think anybody really loses sleep over a bubble team getting left off.

The same answer for Ohio State and Kansas, if you are the "best team", you should win your games. I don't care who you are playing.


In college basketball, they actually settle things on the court, which is fine and I have no problem with. My issue with the BCS is that after the season is over with, a bunch of guys who probably didn't watch all of the games are placing votes for who gets the right to play in the National Championship. TCU won all of their games yet still doesn't get to play for the National Championship?

In college basketball if you win all of your games, you will be the National Champion. That's not the case in college football. And that is my problem
Apr 6, 2011 12:51pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Apr 6, 2011 1:00 PM
jordo212000;734446 wrote:The easiest answer to this is: who cares about Va Tech. Win all of your games and you will be in the National Championship. If you don't win them all, you have to rely on your OOC schedule and the selection committee. By that point, if you are on the fringe, it is nobody's fault but your own. I don't think anybody really loses sleep over a bubble team getting left off.

The same answer for Ohio State and Kansas, if you are the "best team", you should win your games. I don't care who you are playing.

Who cares about Va Tech? Well, who cares about TCU?
jordo212000;734446 wrote: Win all of your games and you will be in the National Championship..
Well it's not realistic to tell Va Tech to win all their games..because that hasn't been done in 30+ years. But Va Tech did do enough to get into the tournament, but they were turned down by a subjective, biased committee. Yet, when TCU is turned down by an unbiased computer system, there are people up in arms! Where's the fuss about Va Tech being kept out, yet you want to fuss about TCU being kept out? It's a computer system, TCU..you want to be in the top 2 after the reg. season? Schedule tougher OOC games. That's the "easiest answer" as you say.
jordo212000;734446 wrote:In college basketball, they actually settle things on the court
As opposed to college football? Where do they settle it? Don't say by a computer..because that computer settles it via on-field performance. College basketball settles it via a 64 team tournament, single elimination...college football settles it via a 10 week season, [virtually] a single elimination.
Apr 6, 2011 1:00pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Apr 6, 2011 1:06 PM
Nice post S&L
Apr 6, 2011 1:06pm
Pick6's avatar

Pick6

A USA American

14,946 posts
Apr 6, 2011 1:33 PM
SportsAndLady;734441 wrote:There is the same issue in college basketball, too. We will never know if Virginia Tech would have made a run to the FF..I mean if VCU can do it, surely virginia tech could too? We will also never know if OSU would have beaten Kansas...or if Pitt would have beaten North Carolina...The tournament isn't as flawless as some make it.
How did Va Tech do in the NIT? Im not saying the system is perfect, because anybody can beat anybody in one game, but there is no way the BCS is better.
The good thing about the tournament is that, for example, BYU and SDSU both had great seasons. There were people on this board who thought SDSU was the best team in the nation during the regular season. Granted the fell short, they had a chance to prove it during the tournament. If this was football, we would never have known how good they were.
lhslep134;734442 wrote:No they didn't. Wisco rushed for 226 yards. Clay and Ball both averaged over 6 ypc.

They won because they controlled the clock.

Hmm, I wonder how those numbers compare to what Wisconsin did during the regular season.
Apr 6, 2011 1:33pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Apr 6, 2011 1:37 PM
Pick6;734485 wrote:How did Va Tech do in the NIT? Im not saying the system is perfect, because anybody can beat anybody in one game, but there is no way the BCS is better.

That is awful logic. Maybe Va Tech just didn't want to play in the NIT? I mean would you play hard in a meaningless tournament when you know you deserved to be in the one that does matter? Just because they lost in the NIT just mean they couldn't have made the Final Four.

I'm not saying Va Tech would have made the Final Four...I'm just saying it would be possible. I mean no one thought VCU would make the FF, and they did. So why couldn't Va Tech?

And I do think the BCS does a better job of determining the two best, most deserving national championship teams than the March Madness tournament does. Just my opinion.
Apr 6, 2011 1:37pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Apr 6, 2011 1:39 PM
Pick6;734485 wrote:
Hmm, I wonder how those numbers compare to what Wisconsin did during the regular season.

Their average was 245 so they were only held 19 yards under average which is definitely not being shut down, it just seemed that way because they didn't score 75 points like they did in their last few games.



Back to the topic, I'm not saying whether the BCS or a single elimination tournament is all around better, BUT:

There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that Auburn was more clearly the best team in college football than UConn was in basketball.
Apr 6, 2011 1:39pm
T

trep14

Senior Member

842 posts
Apr 6, 2011 1:56 PM
SportsAndLady;734456 wrote:Who cares about Va Tech? Well, who cares about TCU?



Well it's not realistic to tell Va Tech to win all their games..because that hasn't been done in 30+ years. But Va Tech did do enough to get into the tournament, but they were turned down by a subjective, biased committee. Yet, when TCU is turned down by an unbiased computer system, there are people up in arms! Where's the fuss about Va Tech being kept out, yet you want to fuss about TCU being kept out? It's a computer system, TCU..you want to be in the top 2 after the reg. season? Schedule tougher OOC games. That's the "easiest answer" as you say.



As opposed to college football? Where do they settle it? Don't say by a computer..because that computer settles it via on-field performance. College basketball settles it via a 64 team tournament, single elimination...college football settles it via a 10 week season, [virtually] a single elimination.

Va Tech and TCU were completely different scenarios. Va Tech was a heavily flawed team that was on the bubble for a reason. TCU went undefeated. They did literally everything that anyone could ask them to do and never got the opportunity to play for the title. Va Tech can't say the same. I guess that's why its a lot easier to just discount Virginia Tech being left out than it is TCU. If you can't see that there is a difference there, I'm not sure what to tell you. College football may have the more meaningful regular season but they have by far and away the most meaningless post season in any sport.
Apr 6, 2011 1:56pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Apr 6, 2011 3:22 PM
trep14;734509 wrote:Va Tech and TCU were completely different scenarios. Va Tech was a heavily flawed team that was on the bubble for a reason. TCU went undefeated. They did literally everything that anyone could ask them to do and never got the opportunity to play for the title. Va Tech can't say the same. I guess that's why its a lot easier to just discount Virginia Tech being left out than it is TCU. If you can't see that there is a difference there, I'm not sure what to tell you. College football may have the more meaningful regular season but they have by far and away the most meaningless post season in any sport.

Actually, if you can't see the difference of what I was talking about, i'm not sure what to tell you.

If you're going to argue that TCU did everything in its power (they didn't) to get to a spot to win a national championship, you have to argue that Va Tech did as well. TCU being in the BCSNC Game is the equivalent to Va Tech being in the March Madness Tournament--they both are in a position where it's up to them to prove it on the field/court to win a title. Va Tech was snubbed that chance, TCU wasn't snubbed that chance...TCU did not make it to the top 2 in the unbiased computer rankings. If they wanted to get in the top 2, schedule better OOC games. They know that's how the BCS rankings work, it's all based on who you play...did they really expect to get in the top 2, with 2 other BCS conference teams also undefeated, with their poor schedule?

By the way, it doesn't matter that college football has a meaningless postseason--at least to the BCS it doesn't matter. Their only role in college football is to choose the two national championship teams...the bowls then go off their rankings (not by the BCS' choice) to choose which two teams they want.
Apr 6, 2011 3:22pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Apr 6, 2011 3:23 PM
lhslep134;734493 wrote:There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that Auburn was more clearly the best team in college football than UConn was in basketball.

Exactly..and anyone who says differently is lying to themselves.
Apr 6, 2011 3:23pm
W

WebFire

Go Bucks!

14,779 posts
Apr 6, 2011 4:06 PM
SportsAndLady;734489 wrote:That is awful logic. Maybe Va Tech just didn't want to play in the NIT? I mean would you play hard in a meaningless tournament when you know you deserved to be in the one that does matter? Just because they lost in the NIT just mean they couldn't have made the Final Four.

I'm not saying Va Tech would have made the Final Four...I'm just saying it would be possible. I mean no one thought VCU would make the FF, and they did. So why couldn't Va Tech?

And I do think the BCS does a better job of determining the two best, most deserving national championship teams than the March Madness tournament does. Just my opinion.
So let me get this right. The BCS is better than the NCAA tourney because a team on the fringe maybe should have been the 64th team in the tournament?

Big difference between a top 5 team thinking they should get in a 2 team "playoff" and a top 70 team thinking they should get to play in a 64 (68) team tournament. No comparison in my book. In fact, your argument is almost in favor of a CFB playoff.
Apr 6, 2011 4:06pm
W

WebFire

Go Bucks!

14,779 posts
Apr 6, 2011 4:11 PM
SportsAndLady;734435 wrote:They would have to go the whole season with somewhere between 3 and 7 losses.
So tell me again how the CBB regular season means nothing?
Apr 6, 2011 4:11pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Apr 6, 2011 4:12 PM
WebFire;734641 wrote:So let me get this right. The BCS is better than the NCAA tourney because a team on the fringe maybe should have been the 64th team in the tournament?

Big difference between a top 5 team thinking they should get in a 2 team "playoff" and a top 70 team thinking they should get to play in a 64 (68) team tournament. No comparison in my book. In fact, your argument is almost in favor of a CFB playoff.

I never said the BCS is better than the MM tourney, I said it does a better job of determining the true national champion.

As for your second point, VCU was literally the last team in the 68 team tournament, and they almost won it. That right there tells you that just being in the 68 team field, means you can win a national title. That also says there really isn't a difference in a top 5 team thinking they should be in the "2 team field" and the 69th best team thinking they should be in the "68 team field" yet people want to complain about one and not the other. It makes no sense. Be consistent. Realize that in sports there are going to be teams left out of contention...it happens. don't complain about one and not the other.
Apr 6, 2011 4:12pm
W

WebFire

Go Bucks!

14,779 posts
Apr 6, 2011 4:14 PM
SportsAndLady;734593 wrote:Actually, if you can't see the difference of what I was talking about, i'm not sure what to tell you.

If you're going to argue that TCU did everything in its power (they didn't) to get to a spot to win a national championship, you have to argue that Va Tech did as well. TCU being in the BCSNC Game is the equivalent to Va Tech being in the March Madness Tournament--they both are in a position where it's up to them to prove it on the field/court to win a title. Va Tech was snubbed that chance, TCU wasn't snubbed that chance...TCU did not make it to the top 2 in the unbiased computer rankings. If they wanted to get in the top 2, schedule better OOC games. They know that's how the BCS rankings work, it's all based on who you play...did they really expect to get in the top 2, with 2 other BCS conference teams also undefeated, with their poor schedule?

By the way, it doesn't matter that college football has a meaningless postseason--at least to the BCS it doesn't matter. Their only role in college football is to choose the two national championship teams...the bowls then go off their rankings (not by the BCS' choice) to choose which two teams they want.
I still don't see how arguing about TCU and VT is the same. TCU was undefeated and ranked highly, and denied a spot in a 2 game playoff. VT was on the fringe of a 68 team tournament. Big difference.
Apr 6, 2011 4:14pm
lhslep134's avatar

lhslep134

why so serious?

9,774 posts
Apr 6, 2011 4:15 PM
WebFire;734641 wrote:So let me get this right. The BCS is better than the NCAA tourney because a team on the fringe maybe should have been the 64th team in the tournament?

Big difference between a top 5 team thinking they should get in a 2 team "playoff" and a top 70 team thinking they should get to play in a 64 (68) team tournament. No comparison in my book. In fact, your argument is almost in favor of a CFB playoff.

I don't think he was saying the BCS is better overall. He is saying the BCS is better at pairing the BEST 2 teams for the championship based on a regular season body of work, whereas a single elimination tournament rewards the best team over a 6 game stretch.

My opinion is that normally at least 1 of the 2 best teams in college basketball makes the tourney championship anyways, so it's normally a moot argument (at least in the past 10 years). However, that didn't happen this year, IMO. I wouldn't put UConn or Butler ahead of Duke, Kansas, or OSU.
Apr 6, 2011 4:15pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Apr 6, 2011 4:18 PM
WebFire;734646 wrote:So tell me again how the CBB regular season means nothing?

Because only <15% of teams achieve an at-large bid.

Because the national champions don't need a good regular season (unlike cff)

Because to win a title, you don't need to be good during the reg. season, you need to just get hot at the right time--post-regular season
Apr 6, 2011 4:18pm
SportsAndLady's avatar

SportsAndLady

Senior Member

35,632 posts
Apr 6, 2011 4:23 PM
WebFire;734654 wrote:I still don't see how arguing about TCU and VT is the same. TCU was undefeated and ranked highly, and denied a spot in a 2 game playoff. VT was on the fringe of a 68 team tournament. Big difference.

No, there is no difference. How can you not see that being in the "2 game field" in college football and being in the "68 team field" in college basketball equates to being in a position to win the national championship? That 2 game field is at least chosen by unbiased, computer rankings..whereas, the 68 team field is chosen by biased, subjective humans.

It doesn't matter if TCU was undefeated..they didn't do enough to finish in the top 2. Va Tech, however, did do enough to get in the top 68 field, yet were unjustifiably left out. That's the true criminalization, not TCU being left. Yet no one wants to complain about Va Tech because "there's no way they would have won a title regardless" Well, VCU making the Final four as the last team in proves otherwise.
Apr 6, 2011 4:23pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Apr 6, 2011 4:24 PM
SportsAndLady;734456 wrote: Well it's not realistic to tell Va Tech to win all their games..because that hasn't been done in 30+ years. But Va Tech did do enough to get into the tournament, but they were turned down by a subjective, biased committee. Yet, when TCU is turned down by an unbiased computer system, there are people up in arms! Where's the fuss about Va Tech being kept out, yet you want to fuss about TCU being kept out? It's a computer system, TCU..you want to be in the top 2 after the reg. season? Schedule tougher OOC games. That's the "easiest answer" as you say.

A couple things:

TCU can't just "schedule better opponents", its a 2-way street and many big time opponents don't want to play a tough OOC game against TCU(if they win, they are suppose too, if they lose, your team is likely out of hte BCS).

Also, VA Tech has no one to blame but themselves. Honestly, if you're not good enough to win either your regular season championship, or win the conference tournament, then you don't have anything to bitch about come tournament time. The bubble teams are a coin flip, and they are lucky they even have a shot at that. In college basketball, you control your own destiny, win all your games, and you're the National Championship. It doesn't matter if "that's not realistic", its a true statement. TCU did all they could, undefeated, and they have no shot at the title. That's unfair, I don't care if they play little sisters of the poor every game, they are a D1 school with no shot at the championship.

CFB needs a playoff, its an absolute joke that there isn't one.

Also, you keep harping on this "unbiased computer rankings" for CFB, umm, only 1/3 of the formula is computers.
Va Tech because "there's no way they would have won a title regardless" Well, VCU making the Final four as the last team in proves otherwise.
So getting to the final four proves that VCU would have won the title regardless? You're not making any sense. Maybe if VCU had won, MAYBE, you could make that conclusion, but that would be the exception, not the rule.
Apr 6, 2011 4:24pm