Posts Tagged ‘Nebraska’

I hate the BCS.  No, you don’t understand, I HATE the BCS.  I’m just going to say it, the BCS the exact opposite of everything that is right in sports.  In fact, it’s the anti-Christ of sports.  Do you realize if baseball used the BCS the world series would consist of the Tampa Bay Rays and Philadelphia Phillies?  Yea, my point being not always do the best teams in the regular season mean they are the best overall.  But we knew that right?  So what’s REALLY wrong with the BCS?  Well lets face it, that’s been done to death.  Instead lets look at the BCS’ problem with a playoff.  Believe it or not there’s actually a website that lists the “problems” with a playoff cleverly named “playoffproblem.com.”  I guess the NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, NCAA 1AA, NCAA D2, NCAA D3, MLS, UFL, Arena Football, CFL, and college basketball/baseball never saw this website because they all use a playoff.  What a bunch of idiots right?  Now what as I completely rip any and all credibility from this site and destroy it.  Ready?  Don’t blink.

The first thing you’ll see on this site is a banner which shows quotes from important people about the talk about the problem with a playoff (again the problems that no other sports league in the world encounter but that college football would).  Lets look at those quotes shall we?

The first one to come up is from Chris Petersen the Boise State coach.  Now I’m sure Boise appreciates the publicity and money but if you asked Chris after his team beat TCU last year if he would like a shot at say, OSU the Rose Bowl winner, and the winner of that takes on the winner of oh lets say Texas/Bama do you think he would have said, “No I think we’re good.”  Or would he have said, “Of course, we’d love to keep playing!”  Just something to think about.  I know Pete Carroll was adamant about a playoff and hating how his team had to stop playing when he felt they were good enough to win it all.  Would Pete not say the same thing?  For some reason I can’t picture a coach EVER saying that.  Next quote?

I saw a few quotes from Bill Hancock.  Who’s that you ask?  He is the BCS coordinator.  So basically they used a quote from a totally impartial source.  Way to go Playoff Problem.  I’m sure if I asked the McDonalds CEO what the best fast food burger is he’d say the Big Mac even though McDonalds is pretty nasty.  Weak stuff, next quote?

Another quote is from Gary Patterson the TCU coach.  His concern is on a 16 team playoff (which I’m not going to propose) and the student’s health with the extra games.  A fair concern (because like Petersen I doubt he’d want his team to stop playing had he beaten Boise last year do you?).  Well to that I say NCAA subdivision has no problem with a playoff and those players are apparently “less talented” than D1.  Can the D1 guys not take the extra games but the subdivision guys can?  Sorry Gary, don’t buy it.

Mike Riley the Oregon State coach says he likes the bowl games.  OK, nobody is saying we get rid of the bowl games, just the BCS bowl games.  Next?

There’s a few other quotes similar to the one’s listed including another Hancock quote where he basically says a playoff would create more frustrated teams than the BCS does which doesn’t make any sense to me.  But the last original quote is from Mark Richt the Georgia head coach, for now.  He basically says that college football has the most exciting regular season of any sport.  OK.  I disagree with that and I’ll explain later but lets say he’s right, lets say college does have the most exciting regular season.  Well then you also have the most boring post season.  Seriously half the bowl games, do you really watch them?  The Car Care Bowl, The Hawaii Bowl, The Emerald City Bowl, Music City Bowl, do you watch them?  I watch them only if I’m just that bored or if my team is playing in one (which almost never happens).  But those games are cool for the athletes and fans but largely people don’t care.

What about the Rose, Sugar, Orange, Fiesta bowl?  Well I do watch those and while it’s nice to see your team win the Rose Bowl what does it mean?  Honestly, it means you were the 3rd best team that year.  Lets be honest, how are the BCS bowl games NOT a competition for 3rd, 4th, 5th etc… place?  At the start of the season are you saying “I hope my team wins the national championship” or “I hope my team wins the Fiesta Bowl.”  The other BCS bowl games are nice compensation prizes but even if you have the same amount of loses as a team in the national championship game, you’re still only playing for #3.  So I ask you Mark Richt, is having the best regular season worth having the worst post season?  I say no.

Now as far as college football having the most exciting regular season, I disagree.  If anything it’s the most frustrating.  One loss and your chances at the title is over with, unless you lose earlier in the year.  Alabama, OSU, Nebraska.  Three good teams all with 1 loss.  Yet ESPN tells me Alabama has the best chance to make it to the championship game even if all three win out.  Well what kind of sense does that make?  What makes their loss better than Ohio State’s or Nebraska’s?  How come USC (2 losses) didn’t get to play OSU in the 2007 BCS game but LSU (2 losses) did?  How come unbeaten Auburn never got a chance to play for the title?  I could go on.  Do the computers really think some loses are worse than others?  OK well OSU lost to Wisconsin who’s only loss is to unbeaten Michigan State, Alabama lost to South Carolina who’s got 2 losses.  So wouldn’t that mean Alabama’s loss is “worse” yet Alabama is now ranked higher.  I thought the BCS considered “good” and “bad” loses.  Am I wrong?  Seems to me like losing to Wisconsin isn’t as bad as losing to South Carolina right?  But then Wisconsin’s winning margin was bigger than South Carolina’s, so does that matter?  Are you confused yet?  I am.  Wouldn’t it be easier to say, “to hell with all this, let’s have OSU and Alabama play?”  Guess not when you have computers to make sense of all this.  And that’s just the #8 and #10 team.  I could easily go into how Oregon should be #1 but Oklahoma is so how did the BCS determine that.  Who knows?  And playoffproblem.com has the nerve to say a playoff would cause problems.

I realize rankings right now don’t mean much and a lot of times things play themselves out but last year before the BCS games we had 5 unbeaten teams yet only 2 got to play for a championship.  How did they pick those two?  Who knows, it’s the computers so they know who’s best I guess.

Amazingly enough the main page of playoffproblem.com have the nerve to ask questions about a playoff.  Obviously I could ask the exact same questions about the BCS but that’s beside the point.  Lets go ahead and give them their answers.

Who would participate?  OK well the BCS picks 10 BCS teams (why 10?) so I’ll pick 10 teams to.  Lets make it a 10 team playoff.  I mean the BCS picks 10 BCS teams so I’m picking 10 playoff teams.  Seems fair right?  Check out the bracket.

You reward the better teams with a bye and force the other teams to play in.  Seems fair right?  I mean 16 seems too many and 8 seems to few so lets split the difference and go 10.  Again, the BCS sees fit to use 10 teams so lets use 10 teams ourselves.  Surely the BCS can’t argue against 10 teams since they also use 10 teams.

How many automatic qualifiers?  The division winners.  Again just like the BCS does.  Why is playoffproblem.com asking these questions when you could ask the exact same about their own system.  Imagine a reverse universe where we had a playoff and people wanted to install a BCS.  Now imagine a website called BCSproblems.com existed.  Wouldn’t that site be asking these same questions?  Whatever, moving on.

What would be the criteria to qualify?  Uh…. wins?

What would be the criteria for seedings?  How does the BCS seed their teams?  Why can’t we just use that.  If the season ended today Oklahoma would be the #1 seed and OSU the #10 seed.  I honestly have no clue how the BCS seeds their teams so asking playoff proponents how we would seed our teams is actually pretty laughable.  But in a BCS seeding is everything because if you’re not 1 or 2 you’re not invited to the big show.  In a playoff seeding isn’t quite as important since we still give teams 1-10 a shot at winning it all, you know, unlike the BCS.

Where would the games be played?  The home team hosts, it’s apart of the reward for being the higher seed.  Other sports use this tactic, it’s called “home field advantage.”  Google it.

When would the games be played?  How about a week after the seasons over?  I kinda hate waiting a month for the BCS games to be played but that’s just me.

If you could resolve all that would everyone be satisfied?  NO!!  By the way, they added that big angry “NO!!” not me.  But it’s not about pleasing everyone.  You’ll NEVER please everyone.  Obama could find a way to give everyone in America $10,000 on their tax return AND balance and his approval rating wouldn’t be 100%.  It’s about pleasing as many people as possible and right now the BCS doesn’t do that.  What, don’t believe me?

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1410

What is your opinion of the Bowl Championship Series, or BCS, the system that college football uses to determine its national champion – favorable or unfavorable?  43% Favorable, 45% Unfavorably.

Do you think the Bowl Championship Series should, or should not, be replaced with a playoff system as takes place in college basketball?  63% Replaced, 26% Not Replaced.

I wonder what playoffproblem.com thinks of that.  So the numbers ACTUALLY show the BCS satisfies fewer people than a playoff would.  And they have the nerve to say people would still be unsatisfied with a playoff.  And that poll was done last year before Boise State finished the season undefeated again so who knows, maybe the numbers are even more in my favor now.  Fact of the matter is you can’t please everyone but you can please the majority.  A playoff would, the BCS doesn’t.  I got the numbers to back me up, you guy just have Bill Hancock quotes.

It’s about at this point that I’m thinking I’ve made my point.  But I promised I’d destroy every BCS argument possible so I’ve got one last section of this website to discredit, the “Q & A” section.  Alright, let’s go.

The first two questions have to deal with qualifying and revenue so I’m skipping them.  Although a playoff would generate more money.  I’m sure Tostitos would like the idea of having their logo on two or three games as opposed to just one, plus more games = more money.  I mean people say it’s all about money… just saying.

Is the current BCS system successful? Yes, since its inception in 1998, the BCS has delivered a matchup between the two top teams every year.  Prior to the formation of the BCS, the number one and two teams met in bowl games eight times in 56 seasons.  In contrast, since the conferences agreed to the BCS format 12 years ago, number one has played number two every year by BCS measurements and, according to the AP poll, numbers one and two have met nine times.  The BCS is the best format ever devised to match up the nation’s top two teams while preserving the heritage and success of the bowl system.”

Well I’ll say this, the BCS is better than when we used to just crown a champion based off of, uh, however we used to.  However you only crown the #1 and #2 team in your mind.  Like I said if baseball used the BCS then the Rays would be in the world series not at home.  My point is being the best in the regular season doesn’t mean you’re the best when it matters.  Remember when the Tennessee Titans were 13-3 and had the best record in the NFL?  Bounced in the first round of the playoffs.  Remember the Dallas Mavericks having the best record in the NBA getting bounced by the 8th seed Golden State Warriors?  Remember the Arizona Cardinals making the Superbowl despite being what the #3 seed in the NFC?  How does anyone know that Florida, Boise or Ohio State couldn’t have beaten Alabama last year in a title game?  We can guess, predict and assume all we want but the fact is nobody knows for sure until the games are actually played.

Finally to debunk the biggest BCS myth of all, that the regular season is a playoff.  Ever seen a playoff where if you lose you can still make it to the end?  Me either.  And if you can, how can one, one loss team not make a title game but another can?  But you know what’s better than a regular season that’s like a playoff?  An actual playoff!  And if the regular season is like a playoff how come a team like Boise State doesn’t have to play the same teams as Oregon?  Seems to me like the regular season is more of a race where all the runners are on different paths.  Boise gets to ride a bike downhill with teams like New Mexico State and San Jose State.  Oregon has to run uphill by playing teams like Stanford, USC and Arizona.  Ever seen a playoff like that where one team has such an easy path?  Sure in March Madness some teams to play in weaker divisions than others but not to the extent of the paths that Boise and Oregon have to go through.

So will we see the BCS die one day?  Honestly I think we will.  It’s gonna take time but the new generations WANT a playoff and really the only people who want a BCS are the old school guys and one day, they wont be in power anymore and when that day comes a playoff will happen.  Besides, once a system (like mine which I feel is perfect) is proposed and presented and it’s shown how much more money can be made with a playoff it will happen.  Like it or not money controls college football and once it’s made apparent how much more money could be made with a playoff (more games, more tickets sold, more commercials, more people watching) it’s going to happen.  Personally, I’d rather see it happen because it’s the right thing to do but if people cave to their greed and go with a playoff, well then that works too.

Advertisements