Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 12/7/2003 1:54:23 PM EDT
This is it. Say good by to this farce.

OU lost outright and by a large margine, LSU's performance against UGA was lackluster. USC has been selected #1 by both human polls but will not play in what is supposed to be in the national championship game.

Instead they will play #4 Michigan in the Rose Bowl.

USC and LSU are both confrence champs, OU is not.

Expect the Pac 10 and Rose Bowl to pull out of the BCS next year.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 2:07:05 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 2:08:23 PM EDT
Fuck that, that is just plain politics if you ask me.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 2:08:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/7/2003 2:09:31 PM EDT by The_Macallan]
USC was over-ranked. They play in the wimpiest conference in the nation. [peep]
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 2:13:12 PM EDT
This is exactly what the BCS was designed to do, help to prevent an overrated team with a weak schedule from competing in the championship game. It did what it was designed to do. That's why the formula has quality win points and strength of schedule points. Do you really think USC can play with either LSU or OU?z
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 2:16:05 PM EDT
Playoffs!
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 2:16:20 PM EDT
But it allowed a team to play for the title who didn't even win their conference. That is BS. OU shouldn't be there.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 2:16:53 PM EDT
LSU should be ranked #1.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 3:20:30 PM EDT
"LSU's performance against UGA was lackluster" What game did you watch?
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 3:34:40 PM EDT
Originally Posted By zoom: This is exactly what the BCS was designed to do, help to prevent an overrated team with a weak schedule from competing in the championship game. It did what it was designed to do. That's why the formula has quality win points and strength of schedule points. Do you really think USC can play with either LSU or OU?z
View Quote
I bet you might have been one to say the same before K-State drubbed OU 35-7 last night, huh??
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 4:00:48 PM EDT
The BCS is a joke !! I hope they can it and go to a playoff system next year.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 4:08:27 PM EDT
Originally Posted By frisco: But it allowed a team to play for the title who didn't even win their conference. That is BS. OU shouldn't be there.
View Quote
But USC didn't even play in a conference championship game cause there is not one ! Does not matter if OU beats LSU 63-0 cause if USC beats Michigan 10-9, USC will be the national champions. 5sub
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 4:12:45 PM EDT
Geeze, college football would have a 9 month season if there were playoffs involved....
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 4:19:13 PM EDT
WHOOOO CARES!
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 4:22:42 PM EDT
Originally Posted By TheFNG: WHOOOO CARES!
View Quote
Obviously we do.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 4:34:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By zoom: This is exactly what the BCS was designed to do, help to prevent an overrated team with a weak schedule from competing in the championship game. It did what it was designed to do. That's why the formula has quality win points and strength of schedule points. Do you really think USC can play with either LSU or OU?z
View Quote
The computer system did NOT do what it was supposed to do because it could not and USC is NOT overrated. Do you actually believe as you assert with your words above that YOU know better than the majority of college coaches and sports writers? The humans selected the number one team. The computers failed. What could not be programmed into the "system" was exactly what happened this year...the "human element". There are actually two issues at stake here: One is that despite traditionally having the hardest schedule in the nation by a wide margin, USC's schedule for the computers wasn't that good. Not because they didn't try...they scheduled top opponents, but five of their usually hard-assed opponents fell on their swords badly and finished the season with poor records. The other part is that despite the late-season collapse by some teams, most notably OU, the computers failed to take certain factors into their calculations. The head of the BCS admitted his system is flawed today on ESPN...but he said there wasn't much that could be done. Only so many variables can be programmed in...and in this case, clearly it wasn't enough. As to whether or not USC deserves to be in the Sugar Bowl? Only time will tell. I think so...and apparently so do the coaches and writers. OU certainly does not...not after last night. Bottom line: The BCS is dead. After today, no coach at a major contending university is going to risk his team getting hosed like USC is. The BCS has been a joke right from the start. Only a playoff will finally settle this. I'm old enough to remember this crap from decades ago when it was just the coaches and the writers making the call. Apparently nothing has changed. I don't know if USC could beat either OU or LSU...or even Michigan...but I know one thing. If they whup the Maize and Blue (especially badly) they are the champs...regardless of what OU and LSU do. The coaches and writers got it right...the machines did NOT. FWIW, I'm not a big USC fan...nor LSU, OU, or any other team. I just am against something so fucked up happening. Playoff. Why not...the college boyz are the NFL minors anyway?
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 4:48:54 PM EDT
Originally Posted By zoom: Do you really think USC can play with either LSU or OU?
View Quote
If you watched the games, then you'd say yes. National Championship contenders don't get blown out in big games at the end of the season regardless of the opponent. If anything, one should be asking "Do you really think OU [at this point of the season] can play with either USC or LSU?" All fan polls say LSU vs. USC. Almost all sports analysts say atleast USC. Basically, hearts and minds everywhere are overwhelmingly dropping OU out of the picture. And if USC wins out, anyone who can give an opinion (i.e. the AP poll) will have USC #1.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 4:49:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/7/2003 4:50:17 PM EDT by ArmdLbrl]
I agree with everything you have said except this:
Playoff. Why not...the college boyz are the NFL minors anyway?
View Quote
There are 117 Divsion 1 College football programs. Only by excluding most of them could a playoff system work. Who is going to volunteer to terminate themselves? The teams that would be excluded, would soon not exist. Even if a new division system were created and given their own championships, the money and the best recruits would all gravitate to the top division, and so would the TV coverage. The schools would not be able to support the funding of these teams and they would just eliminate football. College cannot extend the football season much past 14 games. In baseball, basket ball, hockey teams can play 40-50 games a year and have room for a playoff of 4 rounds.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 5:03:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/7/2003 5:53:03 PM EDT by nightstalker]
LSU 31 Auburn 7 USC 23 Auburn 0 LSU 59 Arizona 13 USC 45 Arizona 0 That's a statistical dead heat although some AZ players naturally said LSU was better than USC because they are conference rivals. There's little sympathy for teams that lose late in the season and the human polls show that. USC and LSU lost close games to big rivals, Cal and [s]Mississippi.[/s] Florida OU lost big to a good team, K-State. Effectively there will be co-champions if LSU and USC win their bowl games and that's the way I think it will happen.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 5:06:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/7/2003 5:07:33 PM EDT by ShadowOne]
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: There are 117 Divsion 1 College football programs. Only by excluding most of them could a playoff system work. Who is going to volunteer to terminate themselves?
View Quote
Essentially what's happening this year is equivalent to a final four. The top 4 are consensus in both human polls. No controversy here. I propose the BCS should only be used as a contingency plan -- to settle tie breakers in determining the top 4 teams This leaves a 1 game playoff. Just start the bowl season one week earlier. #1 USC vs. #4 UM #2 LSU vs. #3 OU Winners play for it all.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 5:07:13 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: I agree with everything you have said except this:
Playoff. Why not...the college boyz are the NFL minors anyway?
View Quote
There are 117 Divsion 1 College football programs. Only by excluding most of them could a playoff system work. Who is going to volunteer to terminate themselves? The teams that would be excluded, would soon not exist. Even if a new division system were created and given their own championships, the money and the best recruits would all gravitate to the top division, and so would the TV coverage. The schools would not be able to support the funding of these teams and they would just eliminate football. College cannot extend the football season much past 14 games. In baseball, basket ball, hockey teams can play 40-50 games a year and have room for a playoff of 4 rounds.
View Quote
Yup...you're probably right. I hadn't thought of the money and draft consequences. I failed to say that I would do the playoffs like the NFL in that only the conference champs and possible a few wildcards would be permitted to play for all the marbles. In that case, we'd need only a few more weeks to decide. Anyway...its a moot point because it won't happen and unless we ditch the BCS, this farce will happen again...maybe not next year, and maybe not for several years...but it will happen.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 5:44:57 PM EDT
Originally Posted By nightstalker: USC and LSU lost close games to big rivals, Cal and Mississippi. OU lost big to a good team, K-State.
View Quote
LSU lost to Florida, NOT Mississippi.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 5:49:29 PM EDT
Why is it that college sports have to have such an absurd championship system??? I mean, what's wrong with wins vs losses, and NFL style sudden death playoffs? Same for the others... If it works for the pros, it should work for school stuff...
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 7:25:03 PM EDT
Originally Posted By LWilde: One is that despite traditionally having the hardest schedule in the nation by a wide margin,
View Quote
[:O] Stay away from the orange mushrooms. [):)]
Originally Posted By LWilde: I don't know if USC could beat either OU or LSU...or even [b]Michigan[/b]...
View Quote
I guess we'll see.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 8:40:09 PM EDT
Originally Posted By BigAL: LSU lost to Florida, NOT Mississippi.
View Quote
oh but they almost lost that one too, sorry but a #3 ranked team should beat a #15 ranked team by more than 3 points.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 8:59:18 PM EDT
What happens when the Maize and Blue stomps on USC? Who becomes number one? The BCS computers will have a meltdown.
Link Posted: 12/7/2003 10:35:23 PM EDT
First of all, I don't know nuthin' about football, especially college football. However, I do enjoy baseball, and from time to time a last-ranked team (Devil Rays?) will cream a first-ranked team. How, I dunno, but it happens. Just because you're "#1" doesn't mean you play #1 every time on the field.
Link Posted: 12/8/2003 12:04:32 AM EDT
The BCS is supposed to help the keep teams with easy schedules that blow out all of the weak teams they play from being over rated in the polls. In theory I believe in that but this is crazy, USC is not BYU winning a national championship when they played 2nd tier teams all year. A computer that is programmed in a way that allows Oklahoma to get creamed on the last day of the season is not programmed correctly. If Oklahoma would have played well and lost a close game I wouldn't punish them allot for losing to a strong team but they got killed. The only way to go is a 8 team playoff system where the BCS ranked #1 plays #8, #2 plays #7, #3 plays #6 and the #4 plays #5. I'm sure the 9-12 teams may still bitch but when you are that far down you oviosly don't have the best team in the country. They could call the different games by their bowl names depending on who has the national championship game. I'm sure the reason they don't is because nobody wants to chance losing any of the crazy money they are making. As far as the length of the season, they could be playing the first playoff games the next 2 weeks and still play a national championship game. A real one. I can't see anyone other then a Oklahoma fan feeling that USC didn't get screwed being ranked #1 in all major polls.
Link Posted: 12/8/2003 1:43:04 AM EDT
It's all meaningless squabble anyway. Theoretical "greatness" that depends on strength of schedule nonsense. A weak schedule lets you win, but it also keeps you healthy and lets you run a wide open game plan, which works well when you play a big opponent. Remember that "weak" pac-10 often beats Big-10 teams in bowl games, and this season we see tiny little MAC teams like Northern Illinois and Bowling Green beat top 10 teams handily. Let's face it, any team can beat any team on a given day. Until they eliminate the out of conference nonsense games and include a bracketed playoff system, it's all wasted air even arguing about it. There, I said it.
Link Posted: 12/8/2003 4:12:54 AM EDT
The top four teams should play a semi-final and the winners play for the championship. This way, the season isn't prolonged at all and atleast the true contenders get their shot. If your team is 5th, tough shit.
Link Posted: 12/8/2003 5:26:10 AM EDT
Originally Posted By jimmyjoebob:
Originally Posted By BigAL: LSU lost to Florida, NOT Mississippi.
View Quote
oh but they almost lost that one too, sorry but a #3 ranked team should beat a #15 ranked team by more than 3 points.
View Quote
And a #1 team should not lose to a #15 team by 28 points....
Link Posted: 12/8/2003 5:57:00 AM EDT
LSU rushing at halftime, 100+ yards. GA rushing at halftime, -8 yards. Of course I AM LOOKING FOR TICKETS!! If you come across anyway, PLEASE, I will buy them!!
Link Posted: 12/8/2003 6:07:45 AM EDT
Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
Originally Posted By LWilde: One is that despite traditionally having the hardest schedule in the nation by a wide margin,
View Quote
[:O] Stay away from the orange mushrooms. [):)]
Originally Posted By LWilde: I don't know if USC could beat either OU or LSU...or even [b]Michigan[/b]...
View Quote
I guess we'll see.
View Quote
It's not the 'shrooms. Its the USC opponents that collapsed this year. Football schedules are made years in advance. High quality teams like USC try their best to maintain a tough schedule of contenders so that if THEY do well, as USC did this year, they can be in the running for the NC. Nobody wants a repeat of the stupid year that BYU went undefeated and won the marbles because they played patsies all year while the real contenders knocked each other off. A quick look at USC's schedule will show that they did in fact schedule a first tier group of opponents years ago for this season. When this schedule was created, many of the teams that failed to perform well this year were in fact at the top of their game and contending for number one. UCLA doing down the shitter? The Irish too? Auburn UCLA Stanford Notre Dame (What the hell happened to the Fighting Irish?) BYU Arizona Arizona State Oregon State Washington State Washington Hawaii California (Total team brain fart on that day!) Anyway, the above isn't a bad list IF you consider when they agreed to play USC this year. Now...some are not so hot. Bottom line...USC remains number one on the polls, the computers are deeply flawed and this makes everybody feel really bad. Even my OU friends are saying they don't deserve to be playing in the championship game. A close game...sure...but that ass-kicking? No way. This farce leaves a sour taste in everybody's mouth. The system must go away. Playoff...the only way to go.
Link Posted: 12/8/2003 6:15:15 AM EDT
USC and LSU would make a great game.
Link Posted: 12/8/2003 8:00:54 AM EDT
I agree with some of the guys here on playoff system. It's the only way to be fair. BTW, since when colleges worry what best for their student-athlete, and the extra games anyway? It's all about the fricking $$$$. There should be just one winner to f**k the prom queen (national championship trophy), NOT 4 or 5.
Link Posted: 12/8/2003 8:22:07 AM EDT
Doesn't matter. This year Miami is not involved in the big game. I think a 3 game playoff would be best. Top 8.
Link Posted: 12/8/2003 7:39:26 PM EDT
the computers are deeply flawed
View Quote
Why blame computers when it's a formula that a group of humans came-up with? You sound like one of the mindless reporters that blames a "computer" rather than the committee that voted for the formula. A group designed the formula and another group voted to use it. USC would have tied OU if they had had the same strength of schedule. They would have been ahead of LSU if they had beaten a good team (#8 or better). The points were close between all three of them. That doesn't mean the formula is completely wrong. It just needs small adjustments. The formula changes I think that need to be done is that you should get quality win points for beating an top 25 team. There are a lot of good teams that are ranked just out of the top 10. Also, the strength of schedule points are too large. Tennessee was given four times as many points for strength of schedule as OU. Do you really think UT didn't play good competition? The system punishes them too much for having a slightly easier schedule.z
Link Posted: 12/8/2003 8:17:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By zoom:
the computers are deeply flawed
View Quote
Why blame computers when it's a formula that a group of humans came-up with? You sound like one of the mindless reporters that blames a "computer" rather than the committee that voted for the formula. A group designed the formula and another group voted to use it. USC would have tied OU if they had had the same strength of schedule. They would have been ahead of LSU if they had beaten a good team (#8 or better). The points were close between all three of them. That doesn't mean the formula is completely wrong. It just needs small adjustments. The formula changes I think that need to be done is that you should get quality win points for beating an top 25 team. There are a lot of good teams that are ranked just out of the top 10. Also, the strength of schedule points are too large. Tennessee was given four times as many points for strength of schedule as OU. Do you really think UT didn't play good competition? The system punishes them too much for having a slightly easier schedule.z
View Quote
I beleve he meant that the software was what was screwed up, not the computer hardware. And it is, its deliberatly biased against confrences like the Pac-10 that have parity and have close competiton. Its far harder to go undefeated or even with one loss, in the Pac-10 than in the ACC, SEC, or Big 12 that have only a couple or three teams that perennaily anhialate their confrences and are always in their confrence championship games. And now most of them have divisions WITHIN the confrence that means that they have to play confrence teams only 5 or 6 confrence games a year. Pac-10 teams can only play 4 out of confrence teams a year. Thus Pac-10 teams get hurt, the likelyhood of getting through the confence schedule with only one loss is so low it is very unlikely to have more than two Pac-10 teams in the top 25 during the regular season, and since confrence play takes over most of the schedule that means they are ALLWAYS going to play fewer ranked opponents- that does NOT in any way mean that the teams are of inferior caliber, just the opposite in fact. If you need confirmation of this check out the number of players drafted each year into the NFL out of the Pac-10. And a Pac-10 team has significantly fewer number of dates available to schedual additional top-25 teams from outside their confrence.
Link Posted: 12/8/2003 9:09:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/8/2003 9:13:08 PM EDT by Sunset04]
SEC is gotta be the toughest conference. How many SEC teams were in the top 10 at some point this season? Arkansas, Tennesee, LSU, Georgia, Florida, Ole Miss came close. Did I miss any? So how many PAC-10 teams made it in the top 25? two?
Link Posted: 12/8/2003 9:44:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/8/2003 9:52:40 PM EDT by Jason280]
PAC-10 has more parity?? Mediocrity in your teams does not equal parity! The SEC is far and away the toughest conference in the country. How can you say it isn't when they currently have five teams in the top-18, with three in the top-11? There is no bias against the PAC-10, so stop bitching and moaning baout USC not being in the title game. The PAC-10 is a weak conference, no matter what you think. The fact of the matter is we have three one-loss teams. Short of a playoff system, someone was going to be screwed. How can you determine who gets screwed and who doesn't? Look at the facts here. OU lost to the #8 team in the AP poll and lSU to the #17 team. Who did USC lose to? Unranked (and barely above .500) Cal. Regardles of when OU lost, at least they lost to a ranked opponent. Is OU better than USC? Hard to say. They aren't playing each other, so it doesn't matter. However, if USC had taken care of business in the regular season and won all their games, then there wouldn't be a debate. But they didn't, just as LSU and OU. So, who do you leave out in the current system? The weak conferenced PAC-10 school, USC.
Top Top