The W
Views: 97799114
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
30.7.07 0004
The 7 - Football - I hate the Big 12 and the BCS
This thread has 1 referral leading to it
Register and log in to post!
(487 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (11 total)
CajunMan
Boudin blanc
No longer registered
Level: 95

Posts: 1020/2483
EXP: 8383499
For next: 285139

Since: 2.1.02
From: Give me a Title shot!

Since last post: 1014 days
Last activity: 151 days
#1 Posted on 6.12.04 1510.33
Reposted on: 6.12.11 1510.37
Does the Big 12 run the BCS? Nebraska loses it's Conference title game but some how gets in the big game a couple of years ago. Oklahoma loses it's conference title game but some how gets in the title game. This year not only does Oklahoma find it's way back to the BCS title game with a weak schedule but Texas gets their way almost after choking to Kansas. Cal got screwed and Auburn fell victim to a very cr@ppy system run by Big 12 nerds. Talk about glass ceiling.

The only solution is a playoff system to end the controversy year after year. Face it the BCS is fixed.

Promote this thread!
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 4373/4700
EXP: 21377357
For next: 459305

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1184 days
Last activity: 981 days
#2 Posted on 6.12.04 1542.33
Reposted on: 6.12.11 1542.57
Uh, Oklahoma is # 2 and Texas # 4 in the BCS. Given the fact that the human polls are 2/3 of the forumla, this was pretty much a given.

Incidentally, I think Utah has a bigger beef than Cal because Utah is undefeated with a good non-conference schedule.
Roy.
Pepperoni
Level: 63

Posts: 600/1040
EXP: 2069430
For next: 27733

Since: 25.2.04
From: Keystone State

Since last post: 2272 days
Last activity: 741 days
#3 Posted on 6.12.04 1555.02
Reposted on: 6.12.11 1556.56
You could say that the Big 12 runs the BCS, as the head of the Big 12 is also the head of the BCS. Up until 2 years ago, the SEC head Roy Kramer ran the BCS (and was basically the founder of the whole BCS). Were you complaining about the BCS bias then?

Look, it's a (multi) computer system, and unless somebody's put some weird variable into the equation, I'm pretty sure that it's not biased. Doesn't ESPN and other outlets have their own computers that use the same formulas? They've all projected the same rankings (basically). You can say that the system sucks, but it's not biased. Texas and Oklahoma are good teams. As Grimis said, look at the human polls. You can maybe argue bias there (I never understood how no matter how bad ND and PSU were, they always got votes the first few weeks of the season the past few years), but not a computer system. Unless the BCS computers have developed emotions, in which case, God help us all.
Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator
Level: 130

Posts: 2459/5186
EXP: 25305744
For next: 424902

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 23 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
#4 Posted on 6.12.04 1625.10
Reposted on: 6.12.11 1625.30
Let us compare non-conf games (overall, conf, non-conf)

Oklahoma beat:
Bowling Green (8-3, 6-2, 2-1); MAC was (10-33) in non-conf
Houston (3-8, 3-5, 0-3); CUSA was (14-21) in non-conf
Oregon (5-6, 4-4, 1-2); Pac-10 was (19-11) in non-conf

Oklahoma's non-conf teams were a combined 16-17, and 3-6 in non-conf games

Texas beat:
North Texas (7-4, 7-0, 0-4); Sun Belt was (9-27) in non-conf
Arkansas (5-6, 3-5, 2-1); SEC was (25-12) in non-conf
Rice (3-8, 2-6, 1-2); WAC was (17-17 in non-conf)

Texas' non-conf teams were a combined 15-18, and 3-7 in non-conf games; their only loss was to Oklahoma

Cal beat:
Air Force (5-6, 3-4, 2-2); MWC was (16-16) in non-conf
New Mexico State (5-6, 4-3, 1-3); Sun Belt was (9-27) in non-conf
Southern Miss (6-5, 5-3, 1-2); CUSA was (14-21) in non-conf

Cal's non-conf teams were a combined 16-17, and 4-7 in non-conf games; their only loss to USC

Auburn beat:
LA-Monroe (5-6, 4-3, 1-3); Sun Belt was (9-27) in non-conf
The Citadel (Div I-AA)
LA Tech (6-6, 5-3, 1-3); WAC was (17-17) in non-conf

Auburn's non-conf teams were a combined 11-12, and 2-6 in non-conf games

If one compares the quality of non-conf wins, Auburn and Cal are the odd teams out.

dunkndollaz
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 1405/2543
EXP: 8688574
For next: 300245

Since: 3.1.02
From: Northern NJ

Since last post: 17 hours
Last activity: 9 hours
#5 Posted on 6.12.04 1857.22
Reposted on: 6.12.11 1858.06
Cal & Texas both faced one bowl bound non-conference team this season and coincidentally, Southern Miss and North Texas face off next week in the New Orleans Bowl - why not let the winner of that game determine who goes to the Rose Bowl ? It makes about as much sense as the BcS does.....
BigVitoMark
Lap cheong
Level: 76

Posts: 1338/1509
EXP: 3875838
For next: 130241

Since: 10.8.02
From: Queen's University, Canada

Since last post: 3292 days
Last activity: 3202 days
ICQ:  
#6 Posted on 7.12.04 1920.33
Reposted on: 7.12.11 1920.34
Is the BCS rigged? No, I don't think so. There's a good case to be made that the coaches poll is biased, though, and as a factor in determining the BCS rankings I suppose there is a link. If you have some Big XII coaches (this I heard on the radio, I can not find a print source to reference) voting Cal out of the top eight, allegedly to help the conference get the payoff from Texas getting into the BCS, there is a problem. Hard to pin that on the BCS itself, though, since the computer can only play with the info it is given.

I don't care to hear a whole lot of crying about Cal, though. As long as you've got Auburn, a team that went unbeaten through the SEC and not having a shot at a national championship, everyone else's bellyaching can take a number and wait in line.
Whitebacon
Boudin blanc
Level: 94

Posts: 1650/2467
EXP: 8293679
For next: 63009

Since: 12.1.02
From: Fresno, CA

Since last post: 2 hours
Last activity: 3 min.
AIM:  
ICQ:  
#7 Posted on 7.12.04 1926.34
Reposted on: 7.12.11 1929.04
My problem with Cal not being in the Rose Bowl has little to do with the BCS, it's the fact that the game isn't going to be Pac-10 vs Big Ten like it should be.
Net Hack Slasher
Banger
Level: 100

Posts: 2772/2805
EXP: 10061817
For next: 292615

Since: 6.1.02
From: Outer reaches of your mind

Since last post: 3504 days
Last activity: 1924 days
#8 Posted on 11.12.04 0410.11
Reposted on: 11.12.11 0411.02
Why can't they just have the traditional bowl games and then have ranked 1 and 2 teams play in one added game in the end of all the bowl games... Heck it would make the other top Bowl games have more importance as there's multiple games could effect who will play in the championship game.
ges7184
Lap cheong
Level: 76

Posts: 1092/1493
EXP: 3906775
For next: 99304

Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 86 days
Last activity: 9 days
#9 Posted on 11.12.04 1004.14
Reposted on: 11.12.11 1005.04
    Originally posted by Zeruel
    Let us compare non-conf games (overall, conf, non-conf)

    Oklahoma beat:
    Bowling Green (8-3, 6-2, 2-1); MAC was (10-33) in non-conf
    Houston (3-8, 3-5, 0-3); CUSA was (14-21) in non-conf
    Oregon (5-6, 4-4, 1-2); Pac-10 was (19-11) in non-conf

    Oklahoma's non-conf teams were a combined 16-17, and 3-6 in non-conf games

    Texas beat:
    North Texas (7-4, 7-0, 0-4); Sun Belt was (9-27) in non-conf
    Arkansas (5-6, 3-5, 2-1); SEC was (25-12) in non-conf
    Rice (3-8, 2-6, 1-2); WAC was (17-17 in non-conf)

    Texas' non-conf teams were a combined 15-18, and 3-7 in non-conf games; their only loss was to Oklahoma

    Cal beat:
    Air Force (5-6, 3-4, 2-2); MWC was (16-16) in non-conf
    New Mexico State (5-6, 4-3, 1-3); Sun Belt was (9-27) in non-conf
    Southern Miss (6-5, 5-3, 1-2); CUSA was (14-21) in non-conf

    Cal's non-conf teams were a combined 16-17, and 4-7 in non-conf games; their only loss to USC

    Auburn beat:
    LA-Monroe (5-6, 4-3, 1-3); Sun Belt was (9-27) in non-conf
    The Citadel (Div I-AA)
    LA Tech (6-6, 5-3, 1-3); WAC was (17-17) in non-conf

    Auburn's non-conf teams were a combined 11-12, and 2-6 in non-conf games

    If one compares the quality of non-conf wins, Auburn and Cal are the odd teams out.




Actually, when you take a look at these numbers, you can make the case that California should have won out over Texas, if you look at non-conf. alone.

Looking at overall records of non-conf opponents, Cal's had a winning pct. of .485, while Texas was only .455. Then looking at those teams own conference records, Cal's had a winning pct. of .545, while Texas's was only .522. Now looking at those teams own non-conference records, Cal's had a winning pct. of .364, while Texas's was only .300.

The only category in which Texas's non-conference opponents come out ahead of California's is those opponent's conference's overall non-conf record. In this case, it's only .379 for Cal's opponent's conf's non-conf. record, while Texas was .477.

Still, taken as a whole, and strictly by the numbers for non-conf. foes, I think this makes a better case for California than it does Texas.
Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator
Level: 130

Posts: 2468/5186
EXP: 25305744
For next: 424902

Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 23 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
#10 Posted on 11.12.04 1111.58
Reposted on: 11.12.11 1112.01
Confrence records are moot becuase the SOS of the conference will always be .500.

Non-conf is the way to go.
Quezzy
Knackwurst
Level: 106

Posts: 1694/3243
EXP: 12508147
For next: 163837

Since: 6.1.02
From: The Moon

Since last post: 23 hours
Last activity: 6 min.
AIM:  
#11 Posted on 12.12.04 1653.31
Reposted on: 12.12.11 1659.03
I don't believe you can judge everything by numbers. Sure Auburn had a weak non-conference schedule but they played the best conference schedule by a much wider margin. They played 3 teams that finished 9 - 2, played one of them again in the SEC Championship, beat a rival Alabama and Arkansas who ARE better than 6 - 5 and 5 - 6 teams as their record would suggest. If either of those teams plays in another conference those are two more 8 win teams. Plus Auburn just looked impressive. They played easy non-conference games but beat them badly like they should, and they beat teams badly that they shouldn't have too. They completely destroyed both Tennessee and Georgia, the two best teams in their conference while Oklahoma had trouble with both OK State and Texas A&M. Plus Oklahoma's "Conference Championship game" was a joke.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE
Thread ahead: Dolphins talking to Saban (again)
Next thread: 2004 Heisman Award
Previous thread: New Seahawks hat!
(487 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Related threads: NCAA Div I-A Week 14 BCS Bowl Projections - NCAA Div I-A Week 13 BCS Bowl Projections - NCAA Div I-A Week 12 BCS Bowl Projections - More...
The 7 - Football - I hate the Big 12 and the BCSRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.167 seconds.