No Wolverines to frustrate me this week, just my own mediocre picks. Can't get the close ones to fall my way.However, we're all still stuck with the monstrosity that is the BCS. Now while I agree that we need a new system (perhaps some form of playoff) in college football, but I don't think this year will produce enough controversy to bring about much change.
The Texas/Oklahoma debate seems to be drawing the most attention at this point, but I blame the Big 12 conference more than the BCS in this instance. If only they used the BCS standings to eliminate the lowest ranked team in the three-way tie and decide the other two by head-to-head like other conferences, then the situation might seem less arbitrary.
Instead, the BCS apologists can say, "Texas safety, Blake Gideon, should have caught that ball that slipped through his arms near the end of the Texas Tech game."
We get real controversy if Texas wins out in the Big 12, Florida takes care of business against Ole Miss, USC doesn't stumble in Corvalis (again) and Penn St. runs the table in a struggling Big 10 conference. Now that would be an interesting scenario for the BCS to sort out, especially with Utah, Boise St. and possibly Ball St. all going undefeated.
And that's the problem with the BCS, it's set up to work only if there are two undefeated teams from BCS conferences. Any other scenario and there's going to be controversy. The system expects you to have a perfect season in order to have a legitimate case for the national championship. But if more than two teams are able to do what's expected of them by the BCS, the system can't handle it. So the best thing the commissioners can do is hope that enough teams lose.
There's nothing "pure" about a bunch of rich guys sitting back, getting richer, and playing the odds with the greatest collegiate sport in the country.
Ok, so I'm not going to talk about playoffs (playoffs?!). But the BCS system as it is could still be much better than its current state and at least reduce the annual controversy.
If the currect system is supposed to act like a playoff in the regular season, then it needs to provide a better gauntlet in which teams can prove themselves. I say the BCS should have at least two more ground rules to encourage every FBS team to play a somewhat difficult schedule. That way calculating strength of schedules is a little less theoretical and subjective.
First: Any FBS school who schedules an FCS school is automatically disqualified from national championship consideration. If "Every week can change the season" then make "every week" count. Eliminate the Div 1-AA "pre-season" and "bye weeks" from FBS competition. And if you really want to inflate your schedule with cream puffs, there are plenty of teams in non-BCS conferences to pick on. The bottom line, no one wants a national champion who played an easy non-conference schedule. At least this way gives potential BCS busters more opportunities for quality wins in their schedule (and weeds out pretenders).
Which brings me to the second rule: In order for non-BCS schools to be considered for a BCS bowl, they need to schedule and beat at least three BCS teams during the regular season. If teams like Hawaii had to actually prove themselves before going to a BCS bowl, they m
ight be spared the national humiliation of getting spanked by teams like Georgia who actually deserve to be there. And hey, it's possible that a non-BCS team could get three or four quality wins against top BCS teams, run the table and go to a national championship.East Carolina didn't quite finish the way they wanted, but you have to take your hat off to them for scheduling four BCS teams in their non-conference schedule. Early in the season, it was certainly possible for the Pirates to have that perfect season and imagine if West Virginia and Virginia Tech had both won the Big East and ACC titles?!
That's it, just two simple rules would make college football much better than it is. I'd like to see what the sports writers on their playoff soap boxes would say to that.
Standings:
| This Week | W | L | (Overall) | GB |
| A True Blue Husker | 18 | 6 | (212-94) | 0 |
| Dr. L | 17 | 7 | (204-102) | 8 |
| The Rev | 17 | 7 | (204-102) | 8 |
| Chief Justice | 18 | 6 | (203-103) | 9 |
| The Guvna | 16 | 8 | (203-103) | 9 |
| O-knee-der | 18 | 6 | (200-106) | 12 |
| Kenny Pickett | 15 | 9 | (199-107) | 13 |
Schedule:
Wednesday, December 3
7:00 PM ET Middle Tenn. St. at Louisiana-Lafayette
Thursday, December 4
7:30 PM ET Louisville at Rutgers
Friday, December 5
8:00 PM ET #12 Ball St. vs. Buffalo*
Saturday, December 6
12:00 PM ET #23 Pittsburgh at Connecticut
12:00 PM ET E. Carolina at Tulsa
12:00 PM ET Navy vs. Army*
1:00 PM ET #17 Boston College vs. #25 Virginia Tech*
4:00 PM ET #1 Alabama vs. #4 Florida*
4:30 PM ET #5 USC at UCLA
7:00 PM ET Arkansas St. at Troy
8:00 PM ET #20 Missouri vs. #2 Oklahoma*
8:00 PM ET Arizona St. at Arizona
8:00 PM ET S. Florida at W. Virginia
11:30 PM ET #13 Cincinnati at Hawaii
*game played at a neutral location
7 comments:
My thoughts on the BCS are such: This year, I have no complaints. Personally, I would put Utah in the national title game because they play in a respectable conference with two other ranked teams and a third in Air Force that is solid and they beat two BCS schools, one of whom nearly won their conference. (Furthermore, I think the Mountain West and WAC should merge their best teams and become a 7th BCS conference...Utah, BYU, Air Force, TCU, Boise, Fresno...sounds better than the Big East to me)
As for the BCS long term, if you go back to the length and breadth of my college football watching history (late 80's) only once have there been more than two unbeaten teams at the end of the bowl season, and the bowl season is part of the season. Teams like Washington, Penn State, and Michigan had to split championships or get no championships because they played in conferences that refused to send their champion to a bowl other than the Rose. That is fine, but don't complain when tough-as-nails QBs politic and share a title with you (jab, jab, Mark!) Auburn in 04 got hosed. They should have shared the title, and that would have been a lot better than getting their clock cleaned by USC in a "plus one" system. And by the way, how would that "plus one" system have worked after 2005, when USC and Texas waged one of the greatest national championship games ever. Um, Texas, you have to go play Penn State now. Not fair. Penn State lost, UT didn't.
The beauty of college football is that you have to go undefeated. No other sport asks that. You can win a title with a loss, or like LSU last year with two, but you can't be sure you'll get the chance. In that respect, every game is a playoff because if you lose, you may lose your chance to win it all. Games on Sept 6 are as important as Oct 6, Nov 6, Dec 6 or Jan 6, and that is what makes college football better than, say the NFL where you can lose 6 times and still win it all. Individual games in September and October and November are meaningless. Who cares if 3-1 Dallas loses to 3-1 New York? It's just one game. But if 2-0 USC loses to Oregon State...
I realize I am in the minority and most people want a playoff, and I realize an 8-team playoff would not totally destroy the regular season (although it would ruin bowls and the history and tradition of them, part of what makes college football grand), but I don't see the need. I agree with Todd Blackledge that if two teams both finish undefeated and have to share a national title, it is not the end of the world. You can't tell me that Nebraska wasn't the best team in 1997, just like I can't tell you Michigan wasn't. If they had played, one of us would have been very sad, and still would be to this day. And please don't tell me this is like grade school soccer where everybody gets a trophy. No one is giving Ellinois or Missouri a trophy for 1997 (or likely ever).
While I have the floor, I would also like to discuss the issue of a tie. As fun as 6 OTs can be, ties add a wonderful complexion to the standings and to games. Do you play for the win or for the tie? USC in 1995 went for a tie against Washington and won the Rose Bowl because of it. Dr. Tom Osborne could have won a national title with a tie, but believed one had to win the game to win the title. Honorable even in defeat, what a man! This is totally off topic, but I think a fine discussion.
I leave you with this. Half the time, the team needing to win the Big XII Championship Game to play for the national title has lost to teams far worse than Missouri. 5 of 10. It may all "work out" yet.
Mark, I agree about not scheduling IAA teams and forcing the flies in the ointment to play BCS schools. Very good points. Perhaps the worst thing that ever happened to college football was when Boise beat OU. It's like the queer wearing tinfoil on his head and sitting on his roof all day blabbing about intelligent life on Pluto. He sees one Stealh jet overhead and suddenly feels vindicated for life. Thank goodness for teams like Georgia who shoot down the stealh and rub tinfoil's nose in it.
I have a few thoughts on this week I would like to randomly share. First, don't be surprised if Alabama plays Florida very close or even beats them. Florida is very impressive, but if Percy is out, and with two d-linemen out, they are not at full force. They are still lethal with Tebow and all that speed on a carpet, but Alabama is tough, physical, can control the clock, and has an experienced signal-caller themselves. And they have answered every question so far. I expect and hope for a really good game.
I am hoping for bad weather in Kansas City, as if OU scores more than 40 points (please) they will break the '95 Huskers (modern era) record for most points per game in a season. Never mind that Nebraska whipped 3 top-10 teams (OU may not have beaten a single one, after the bowl seasoN) or that they hung 62 on Florida in a bowl (let's see OU do that) or that they played defense. Still the greatest team in modern football history, and remember this, OU has to pass the ball to be dynamic. We could have announced each play with a placard and still run over the defense.
I hear Pete Carroll is willing to forfeit a timeout each half so that USC can wear home jerseys at UCLA, like the teams used to do back in the day of O.J. "the guy with the mustace and cracking voice called me a butcher" Simpson and co. It would look neat, but what a slap in the face to your opponent. Why not spot the Bruins a few points. By the way, USC has outscored UCLA in the last two games in Pasadena by a combined 1 point. Hmm. Mightn't sweater vest west have something in store for the Trojans again?
Is anyone still reading this?
Remember the great Army-Navy games of the nineties when all the games came down to the final minute. Missed 19 yard field goals, 4th-and-24 conversions by option teams, and the ever-present singing of the alma maters. "That gets you right where you live, sir."
Please don't anyone pick Buffalo, Army, Missouri, UCLA, and Hawaii just to try to make up ground. That is dirty pool, and considering December college football, will probably work.
I'm not a BCS fan. It's an ill-fated attempt to rectify the previous problem of the best teams not playing each other in a bowl. Previously, that left the decision to sportswriters (with regional biases) and coaches who don't watch the other teams play on Saturday afternoon except the team across the field and the one on tape for the next week.
Every year I root for BCS disaster, cause it won't get fixed if it's not considered broken.
Penn State really messed things up this year. Now everyone thinks that a Big 12 winner vs. SEC winner solves it all (except Texas). There are still some wrinkles that may occur, but probably they probably won't happen.
Here's where I disagree that the SEC method using the BCS ranking to throw out the lowest team in a 3-way tie is better than the way the Big 12 does it.
Take the TX, Tech, OU controversy. It was OU that thrashed Tech into oblivion and made it a two team BCS race. C'mon, why penalize OU for their efforts? If Tech was still a contender, TX victory over OU would mean less. A three way tie just makes the rock, paper, scissors hard to ignore. If rock totally crushes the scissors so that it can't cut the paper, you can't then make it a two item contest and say that paper (which can't be cut by smashed scissors), covers rock, period.
I'm not a Bob Stoops fan, nor an OU fan. But the rules went down to the 5th tie breaker, set up in advance. TX lost. At least it didn't come down to a series of coin flips.
All the whining and lobbying over the past week makes me puke. Thank God for computers that are programmed ahead of time to reduce the bias. The idiots in the press and the coaches that flipped their rankings (and the 2 coaches that voted OU #1 to increase the impact of their vote) are the gutless wonders that get influenced by Mack Brown, or airplanes with messages behind them, or try to manipute the system because anyone could see the computers were going to give OU a bump when they beat a ranked team (OK St). Since the human voters is all that could be swayed, the efforts were directed at them. Lobbying, whining, pleading, etc. Is this anyway to run a football championship?
What is also a problem, is that teams that still have games left (post thanksgiving games, or conference championships) get more media coverage to make their case than teams who aren't on display. Take the shameless sell job Gary Danielson did on behalf of Florida last year in the SEC championship game (and an ex-Big Ten quarterback, too). I understood the case for Florida, but it was overstated. And Lloyd Carr and the Wolverines had no influence since they weren't playing and Lloyd was probably home watching the game, not being the spectacle.
I'd like to use the bowl games as a seeding competition for the top 4teams. Rotate the key games (1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3) among the top 4 bowls, say Rose and Fiesta this year, Orange and Sugar next year. Caveat. You must win your conference to qualify. Fill the off year bowls with other top teams as per usual. The winners of the key bowls (played just after New Year's for emphasis) get to the National Championship game a week or so later. If you don't win your conference or can't get in the top 4, too bad. I could give on the conference championship to give TX a chance in a year this this one, maybe at least be co-champs or co-division champs and still be at least #4.
This would not diminish the regular season at all. You gotta win to get there.
Doctor L
Dr L: I don't really have a problem with your format, except for the years when there are is a clear cut #1 and #2. Then the system works perfectly and an extra game seems unfair. I'll admit, that is rare.
What if we tossed out the BCS and came up with a single poll, filled with guys who pull a Rece, Mark, and Lou and watch twenty games a day on a ton of TVs. You could have 101 voters to avoid bias. I realize nothing is going to be perfect, but neither are Wildcard games between 8-8 and 10-6 teams. Bottom line, I just love college football the way it is...or rather the way it was in 1993.
Are there bonus points if anyone knows the nickname of ULL?
Husker,
If there was a clear cut #1 and #2, they should win over the 3 and 4 seeds in a Primo Bowl game. Then bring it on for the NC game.
Doctor L
Louisiana's Ragin' Cajuns is the trademarked nickname of the athletic teams of The University of Louisiana at Lafayette. UL Lafayette, at that time known as the University of Southwestern Louisiana, was the first to adopt the nickname Ragin' Cajuns, using it initially in the 1960s to refer to its football team.
Doctor L
I knew one of the Louisianas was the Rajun Cajuns, but wasn't sure which one.
My good friend Kirk is a proponent of the "plus 1" model, and while I still prefer no playoff, I have to admit I could live with such a deal.
I am sad to hear that Coach Tubberville is out at Auburn. The story says he resigned, but I wonder if that is true. 9 good season, including one that was perfect, and after one bad year, he's out. Sad. I always liked the guy because he would roll the dice, seemed friendly with the media, and was a good coach.
In happier news, The House of Spears will be returning to Lincoln next season. How do you DO!
Post a Comment