Why I Hate The BCS Even More Tonight

[mweb]

The system sucks. I'm hoping the fan outrage at everything this year (a lot of the BCS games suck) will finally get a small playoff. No one would complain if we had a playoff of

Stanford v LSU

Alabama v. OK State

Well I wouldn't say that.

Oregon went to Stanford less than a month ago and beat them 53-30 and they won the Pac 12, yet they'd be one spot behind Stanford in the BCS. That would be something to complain about imo.

Then if Oregon got in instead of Stanford, there would be the complaint that LSU would have to beat two teams they already beat to win the title.

[CrimsonTribe]

I would argue that every game they played ALL season is a playoff (which is what the BCS has always argued)...thus Alabama lost their playoff game to LSU and should have been eliminated. The BCS and college football has always bragged about the importance of the regular season. With this rematch, they have made the original Bama/LSU game completely meaningless.

And OSU lost its playoff game to Iowa State, Stanford lost its playoff game to Oregon, Boise lost to whoever they lost to, etc. Which brings us back to deciding the #2 team in the championship game on the merits. So then, you are basically arguing that Alabama should be automatically excluded from the discussion despite their great season because they are the only one of those teams that had to play LSU. I know most people would prefer to see a different game, but excluding Alabama because LSU was on their schedule doesn't make much sense.

I personally think Alabama is better than Oklahoma St. However, we KNOW Alabama already lost to LSU at home and thus, by what was determined on the field, is the worse team when compared to LSU. What we DON'T KNOW is if Oklahoma St could beat LSU on the field...which is why they should get a shot. Heck, who's to say Bama doesn't lose to Iowa St on the road on a Friday Night? (I don't think they would, but we don't KNOW.)

It comes down to what you think the BCS's job is. To determine the 2 best teams? Then I think it got it right. To determine the 2 most deserving teams? Then, I think it got it wrong...and that's because the BCS doesn't use logic. Either way, it's a mess.

I think they put in the two best teams and the two most deserving teams. Would I like to see how OSU stacks up against LSU or Alabama? Sure. Would I like to see Alabama pound the crap out of Boise? Yep. There's a lot of games that I'd like to see and a lot of things I'd like to know, but that's not what this is about. It's about putting #1 vs. #2 and I think they got that right.

[Hawkigizer]

Oklahoma St definitely screwed the pooch by losing to Iowa St. However, Alabama didn't take advantage of their opportunity to beat LSU and there should be some penalty for that. You keep asking why should Alabama be penalized for having LSU on their schedule? Well, that's because they lost to them. You say Alabama had to play LSU. I would say, they got to play LSU while others didn't have that chance (except for Oregon). As I said, who's to say Alabama runs the table in the Big 12? The Big 12 was a stronger conference than the SEC top to bottom this season, so shouldn't Oklahoma St be rewarded for that? (Especially considering their 11 win resume could be argued as more impressive than Bama's.)

I think the overall goal of the BCS is to reduce ambiguity in a system absent of playoffs. To me, part of that ambiguity was answered when LSU beat Alabama in Tuscaloosa. And thus, the next best contender should be given a shot...and that would be Oklahoma St.

[CrimsonTribe]

The system sucks. I'm hoping the fan outrage at everything this year (a lot of the BCS games suck) will finally get a small playoff. No one would complain if we had a playoff of

Stanford v LSU

Alabama v. OK State

The B1G, Pac-12, and Big 12 would apparently. SEC Commissioner Mike Slive proposed the idea three years ago and the only other conference that voted for it was the ACC.

The seeded plus-one would be a better start, ranking four teams into BCS bowls for championship semifinals to advance to the title game. Three years ago, only the ACC supported this proposal from SEC Commissioner Mike Slive. But Kramer's not high on that, either, and doesn't believe the Pac-12 and Big Ten would surrender the Rose Bowl to create equitable seeding.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2011/12/roy_kramers_rebellious_teenage.html

[ledzepp8]

Again, it's not false, I don't know it, and you're getting dangerously close to calling me a liar. Just because you keep repeating it doesn't make it true. Maybe you should give it a break.

You apparently didn't read what I wrote to crissfan so I'll break it down again. Staples is not saying that Alabama would have won the other conferences because they have a better record. He is saying that they would have won the other conferences because he believes they are the second best team in the nation. He is saying that to get at the over-arching point that the second best team in the nation should not be held out of the championship game because they have the misfortune of playing in the same conference as the best team in the nation. His opinion that Alabama would have won the other conferences is just used to show how illogical it would be to require a team to win its conference to play in the championship game if it is better than all of the other candidates to play the best team in the championship game.

Don't get your panties in a twist...no one is calling you a liar. You are being a little disingenuous if you think it's more about who Alabama and OK State lost to rather than when they lost to them.

If Andy Staples was trying to make the point that Alabama would have won those conferences based solely on the fact that he thinks they are the 2nd best team in the country, then he did a poor job of doing that. Because his quote implies that he thinks that just because they have a better record than those conference champs. Regardless, it's poor logic either way because they didn't play in those conferences. Does that logic work for Houston too? You never answered why you agree with him that Alabama would have won the Big 12 over OK State who has an identical record?

[JamesI]

Well I wouldn't say that.

Oregon went to Stanford less than a month ago and beat them 53-30 and they won the Pac 12, yet they'd be one spot behind Stanford in the BCS. That would be something to complain about imo.

Then if Oregon got in instead of Stanford, there would be the complaint that LSU would have to beat two teams they already beat to win the title.

I took the top 4 in the BCS (from memory, so its possible Stanford was not #4).

A 6-8 team playoff would be better, but 4 is probably easier to achieve.

[Birds of B'more]

Except that it did count. Alabama would be out of the NC game if any of the teams behind them could have beaten vastly inferior opponents. For one reason or another they all messed themselves and we're back to evaluating them against each other based on their merits and Alabama came out on top, if only slightly.

That game was just rendered completely meaningless, as if it never happened. The most hyped game of the year....perhaps the most hyped regular season game since #1 OSU vs #2 Michigan in 2006. (BTW, Michigan did not get a rematch that year, rightly so, despite a very close loss to OSU) College football is just giving us 12-0 LSU vs 11-0 Alabama. You speak as if we are having a playoff. The college football establishment tells us the regular season is a playoff. I've never seen a single-elimination playoff where you have to beat an opponent twice.

[BaltimoreTerp]

And OSU lost its playoff game to Iowa State, Stanford lost its playoff game to Oregon, Boise lost to whoever they lost to, etc. Which brings us back to deciding the #2 team in the championship game on the merits. So then, you are basically arguing that Alabama should be automatically excluded from the discussion despite their great season because they are the only one of those teams that had to play LSU. I know most people would prefer to see a different game, but excluding Alabama because LSU was on their schedule doesn't make much sense.

What are the "merits"? That a few sportswriters who don't see all the games voted for them in the AP poll? That a bunch of interns voted for them in the coaches' poll?

[Pedro Cerrano]

Just think, if OK State beat a team they were favored by 28 points against, we wouldn't be having this discussion. You can make a better case for Stanford, IMO, because they lost to a very good Oregon team -- but they didn't win their conference either, which is apparently a pox to some.

[Birds of B'more]

So then, you are basically arguing that Alabama should be automatically excluded from the discussion despite their great season because they are the only one of those teams that had to play LSU.

I'm not arguing that, college football is, in theory. I'm arguing for a playoff. An LSU-Alabama rematch would be must-see-TV in the context of a real playoff. But college football tells us the whole season is a playoff. LSU-Alabama just happened to meet each other half-way through the playoff instead of at the end. Or not, as we are now expected to believe.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Just think, if OK State beat a team they were favored by 28 points against, we wouldn't be having this discussion. You can make a better case for Stanford, IMO, because they lost to a very good Oregon team -- but they didn't win their conference either, which is apparently a pox to some.

If you can't win your conference, in a non-playoff system how can you be considered good enough to play for a national championship?

[Pedro Cerrano]

If you can't win your conference, in a non-playoff system how can you be considered good enough to play for a national championship?

Because the one team that is as good as you happens to be in your same division.

[Birds of B'more]

We need to pass out a bunch of those mind-erasers that they used in Men In Black and wipe out everyone's memory of November 5, 2011. Then maybe this will all make sense and everyone will be happy.

[Pedro Cerrano]

We need to pass out a bunch of those mind-erasers that they used in Men In Black and wipe out everyone's memory of November 5' date=' 2011. Then maybe this will all make sense and everyone will be happy.[/quote']

I was best-man in a wedding that gave out free shots at the reception on that date so I'm 1/2 way there.

BTW, does this make me the best qualified person on here to render a verdict?

[Birds of B'more]

Because the one team that is as good as you happens to be in your same division.

As far as I'm concerned Alabama can go sit with the 1980 Orioles, who despite winning 100 games didn't make the playoffs because the NYY won 101 games. Those are the breaks. Better luck next year. Unless you play college football, where you get to make and break the rules as you go along.