The W
Views: 100925240
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
27.11.14 2125
The W - Football - BCS v3.0 -- "This time, we got it right! We think." (Page 2)
This thread has 4 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.74
Pages: Prev 1 2
(1702 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (33 total)
JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 24 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#21 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.04
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
    Any one of the teams in the top 25 or 30 has a very good chance at beating the top team in the country. So it's OK to fuck them over as long as numbers 1, 2 and 3 are happy?


"Fuck over"? Like they're not ALREADY fucked over?

Miami (Ohio) was 12-1 and the #15 ranked team in the country, winning 12 straight games after an opening week loss to Iowa, including blowout wins AT Northwestern and Colorado State, who were both bowl teams.

Their reward for their fine season? A friggin' GMAC Bowl match-up against 9-3 Louisville. Whoop-ee. Easy Miami win, 49-28.

Under my playoff system, they would've been seeded 11th (per their BCS ranking) and played at Texas (seeded 6th). Do I think they WOULD have won? No. Do I think they COULD have? Quite possibly. Do I think Texas would've wanted a second-round match-up against Miami? Not if they could help it, which they could have by being better than 10-2.

Do I think a team like Miami (Ohio) deserves a ligitmate shot to win the national title? Heck, yes. Do they have it now? No way.




“To get ass, you’ve got to bring ass." -- Roy Jones Jr.

"Your input has been noted.
I hope you don't take it personally if I disregard it."
-- Guru Zim

"Speak English or face admin retribution." -- CRZ
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 108 days
Last activity: 108 days
#22 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42
But what's the difference if your seeding them according to computers, which is the way I understood your prorposal there? I don't understand how you choose the nine at-large teams there, and no matter what your proposal is, it will leave the same controversy I already described. If 20 teams deserve a shot, why not 25? It's all about how far down you're willing to go before you decide you're not leaving out teams that deserve to get in.

In the Miami of Ohio case: this team was NOT a national championship caliber squad. They were certainly among the best of the non-BCS teams, though, and if you are going to have a playoff, they would have to be included. However ,the chances of them winning would be slim to none, so I think it's better for them to go win the GMAC Bowl than to become a first round footnote for losing to a team that then lost to a team that lost in the national championship game. That said, they would have been one of the (far more than 20) teams that would have had a legitimate gripe had they been left out of the hypothetical field of 20 playoff team's last season.

All of this is secondary to what bothers me most, though: NCAA = NFL Lite.
JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 24 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#23 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.04
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
    But what's the difference if your seeding them according to computers, which is the way I understood your prorposal there? I don't understand how you choose the nine at-large teams there, and no matter what your proposal is, it will leave the same controversy I already described. If 20 teams deserve a shot, why not 25? It's all about how far down you're willing to go before you decide you're not leaving out teams that deserve to get in.


I WOULD use the BCS rankings for seeding and choosing the at-large teams, but I used the Sagarin rankings in that post because they were handy. (They were also terribly flawed, as they were the post-bowl game rankings.) If you're 8-3 or even a borderline 9-2 team, I don't see how you could lodge a legitimate complaint about being left out. We don't hear about the bubble teams still griping after the tournament starts, anyway.


    In the Miami of Ohio case: this team was NOT a national championship caliber squad. They were certainly among the best of the non-BCS teams, though, and if you are going to have a playoff, they would have to be included. However ,the chances of them winning would be slim to none, so I think it's better for them to go win the GMAC Bowl than to become a first round footnote for losing to a team that then lost to a team that lost in the national championship game. That said, they would have been one of the (far more than 20) teams that would have had a legitimate gripe had they been left out of the hypothetical field of 20 playoff team's last season.

    All of this is secondary to what bothers me most, though: NCAA = NFL Lite.


Would it have been better for Nevada, surely not a national championship-caliber team, to have been excluded from the NCAA basketball tournament, instead of getting the chance to play and defeat Michigan State and Gonzaga?

Also, if you can name the five teams that suffered the biggest injustice by not being invited to the NCAA tournament without looking it up, I salute you, because I consider myself a pretty big sports fan and I surely can't name one team that's ever been screwed by omission by the tournament commitee.



“To get ass, you’ve got to bring ass." -- Roy Jones Jr.

"Your input has been noted.
I hope you don't take it personally if I disregard it."
-- Guru Zim

"Speak English or face admin retribution." -- CRZ
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 108 days
Last activity: 108 days
#24 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42
The NCAA basketball tournament invites 65 teams. No team has any right to complain about being judged the 66th best team instead of the 65th. Those teams aren't going anywhere anyway.

And for Nevada, the alternative to going to the NCAA Tournament was *do nothing*. Or, I suppose, go to the NIT. You can decide which is more productive. (I'll never, ever use a smiley again, I swear).

In football, there is an alternative that people would not only watch, as I'm guessing more people watch even the most meaningless of bowl games than do the NIT, but also that gives the teams a chance to not be remembered as a team that got destroyed in the first round. For every Nevada in basketball, there's 10 teams or so each year that do exactly what they are predicted to do: get destroyed in the first round. Now these teams are obviously good, that's why they're in the tournament to begin with. But who remembers them? Don't you think they would like the opportunity to end the seaosn on a note that would at least be memorable and exciting for their own fans and athletes instead of embarassing and haunting?

(edited by TheBucsFan on 20.7.04 1916)
JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 24 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#25 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.04
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
    The NCAA basketball tournament invites 65 teams. No team has any right to complain about being judged the 66th best team instead of the 65th. Those teams aren't going anywhere anyway.


65 out of 320 basketball teams = 20.3%
20 out of 117 football teams = 17.1%

It's a difference, but a MUCH smaller on that just "20 vs. 65" at face value.


    In football, there is an alternative that people would not only watch, as I'm guessing more people watch even the most meaningless of bowl games than do the NIT, but also that gives the teams a chance to not be remembered as a team that got destroyed in the first round.


Quick: Off the top of your head, name ONE team that got killed in it's first-round matchup. Who'd UConn beat? I can't tell you wihtout looking it up.


    For every Nevada in basketball, there's 10 teams or so each year that do exactly what they are predicted to do: get destroyed in the first round. Now these teams are obviously good, that's why they're in the tournament to begin with. But who remembers them? Don't you think they would like the opportunity to end the seaosn on a note that would at least be memorable and exciting for their own fans and athletes instead of embarassing and haunting?


If I saw the winner of the, say, MEAC or SWAC EVER just trudge off the court because they had just won their conference tournament and were off to be first-round roadkill for Duke, then I'd see your point. The fact is I was in a hotel somewhere and I caught the end of Vermont's conference championship victory, and ALL the Vermont players were like, "WE'RE GOIN' TO THE BIG DANCE!!!" So, you tell me if they'd rather have a chance to play the Southland Conference champion in a one-time, meaningless-to-the-championship game ( a basketball version of the GMAC Bowl, if you will) or if they'd rather have a chance (no matter how small) to knock off a Kentucky, or Duke, or Kansas.



“To get ass, you’ve got to bring ass." -- Roy Jones Jr.

"Your input has been noted.
I hope you don't take it personally if I disregard it."
-- Guru Zim

"Speak English or face admin retribution." -- CRZ
TheCow
Landjager








Since: 3.1.02
From: Knoxville, TN

Since last post: 2485 days
Last activity: 2485 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#26 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.00
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
    I think playoffs would be a terrible thing for college football. I think we should just start either ignoring the AP Poll champion or the Coach's Poll champions, or find some other way to only have one national champion that does not involve playoffs.

    Playoffs would not eliminate the controversy, it would merely shift it to another area. A field of 64 teams for a football playoff would be too big, as it would take way too long and would likely mean a much shorter regular season. And a field of 8, 16 or 32 teams just means there's an uproar by teams judged to be numbers 9, 17 or 33, respectively.


Well, the only problem with that is how do you determine which poll is ignored? It's not like there's some preset superiority ranking - and either way, you risk pissing off a major contingent of people. I'd be in favor of pissing both of them off and doing it another way entirely, but I can't see how you could pick one correctly. Alternate every year?

As for a playoff, I like JayJay's system - and if you think the season would go too long, remember that there's about a 3 to 4 week break between the conference championships and the BCS bowls; you could fit a playoff in there on the weekends and leave the rest of the bowl games during the week. Ultimately, I figure that out of either 8, 12, 16, 20, etc. teams, some will get bounced. The teams that are good enough to make the final four teams won't have any questions of if they belong, right? The teams that don't belong get bounced - and 9, 13, 17, etc. (along with the losing teams) can prove next year that they belonged. Does it suck for them - well, yeah, but that's motivation.

Oh, and Lurk, I don't have a problem with your method of using bowls as playoff locations - actually, I like it. I know I've thought of a system along those lines beforehand, even if I might not have posted it here.
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 108 days
Last activity: 108 days
#27 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42
And another issue:

One team, we'll say Florida State, loses four games but gets into the playoff anyway via a conference championship (which is very possible, esp. if you go back to the ACC of a few years ago when FSU had no competition in the conference). Another team, say, Ohio State, goes undefeated. FSU, obviously a weak team that only got in because it plays in a weak conference, gets hot and lucky at just the right time and gets to the championship game of this playoff, where it beats still-unbeaten OSU. Now you have a four-loss national champion. Not to mention, the AP would likely not vote for a four-loss team to take its championship, splitting the national title yet again. No problem solved.
TheCow
Landjager








Since: 3.1.02
From: Knoxville, TN

Since last post: 2485 days
Last activity: 2485 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#28 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.00
Good point. However, as I posted earlier, I'm more concerned with a system that's going to work on average. While that may happen one year, the odds that it happens, say, 4 or 5 times (20-25%) in 20 years isn't terribly high. (Think of the number of times a seed lower than 4 has won the NCAA basketball championship over the last 20 years; that's what I'm talking about.) The BCS had lucked out that the "other" team hadn't won (the controversial, "how'd they get there?" team) - and that didn't even happen this year, granted.

My point is, more often than not, with a playoff system, nobody questions "How'd that team get there?" when they reach the championship game. That doesn't happen with the BCS.
JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 24 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#29 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.04
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
    Not to mention, the AP would likely not vote for a four-loss team to take its championship, splitting the national title yet again. No problem solved.


Well, UConn certainly didn't have a sperior record in the regular season to St. Joseph's or Stanford, yet NOBODY questions the validity of UConn's national championship. Why? Becuase they played for it and won it on the field. That's all I want from the football side of things.

And they have a postseason basketball poll, but its hardly relevant because the champion has been decided. Surely if some dipshit had the temerity to say St. Joseph's should be the champs after UConn won the tounament, they'd be taken VERY seriosly. Uh-huh.



“To get ass, you’ve got to bring ass." -- Roy Jones Jr.

"Your input has been noted.
I hope you don't take it personally if I disregard it."
-- Guru Zim

"Speak English or face admin retribution." -- CRZ
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 108 days
Last activity: 108 days
#30 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.42
But see, in basketball there is only one recognized national champion. In football, there are two. I thought I already pointed that out.
The Lurk
Cotechino








Since: 7.6.04

Since last post: 3773 days
Last activity: 3773 days
#31 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.46
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan
    But see, in basketball there is only one recognized national champion. In football, there are two. I thought I already pointed that out.


Which is precisely the point...to remedy that problem we need a playoff system.

Let's take last year as an example. If you are trying to tell me that OU, USC and LSU are in the same championship playoff and LSU comes out on top, whether it's beating USC in the finals or if USC loses in the semis or something, that there would STILL be people saying USC was the champion?? That there would still be a split title?

If that's what you're saying, we'll just have to disagree cause I think you are WAY off base on that one.

No system is going to be perfect. But at least with a playoff you get a clear-cut champ that no one argues about. If the Carolina Panthers had won the bowl last year no one would have argued that they weren't the champions. Were they the "best" team? Probably not. Were they the champs? Yes.

(edited by The Lurk on 21.7.04 0650)


You got to cry without weeping

Talk without speaking

Scream without raising your voice
Corajudo
Frankfurter








Since: 7.11.02
From: Dallas, TX

Since last post: 142 days
Last activity: 13 days
#32 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.84
    Originally posted by pieman
    But what about those classes these student-athletes will miss? How would they ever make up all that classroom time? How would they graduate on time? Oh goodness, we couldn't have that. What's that you say? All the other collegiate sports have playoffs? Oh.

Although pieman is being sarcastic, he brings up a good point about the hypocrisy of missing classes and the 'importance' of educating student athletes. I teach at a university and the football players miss the least amount of class by far. They schedule their classes around the practice schedule and games are almost always on Saturday, so they miss hardly any class. The only time they miss classes (at least for football reasons!) is when a road game is a long way away.

My students who are on the track team, tennis team, golf team and swimming team all miss far more class time than football players. Moreover, the athletes in the less popular sports often have NCAA tournaments or regional tournaments that conflict with finals or preparation for finals.
bash91
Merguez








Since: 2.1.02
From: Plain Dealing, LA

Since last post: 834 days
Last activity: 7 hours
#33 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.60
Absolutely true. When I was teaching at Indiana, the football coach was disciplined for scheduling early morning practices that forced the players to miss 8:30 classes. (Granted, that was IU, where I strongly suspect that the only reason they still have a football team is because of Big 10 requirements, but the principle remains.) On the other hand, several of my soccer student/athletes literally missed weeks of classes at a time because they were on west coast road trips.

Tim



People who say they don't "play politics" merely play politics badly. -- David Drake
Pages: Prev 1 2
Thread rated: 5.74
Pages: Prev 1 2
Thread ahead: Coach questions call, Ref shoots him
Next thread: Eddie Robinson has ALzheimers
Previous thread: George, Titans sever ties
(1702 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The thing is, the first week of the season they interviewed some guy from the NFL (sorry, I don't remember his name) and he said that all NFL players will have the option of keeping the number on their helmets.
Related threads: A 5th BCS Bowl is on the way ... - The BCS Worst Nightmare! - I'll Give the BCS This Much Credit, It makes the Last Week of the Season Mean Something - More...
The W - Football - BCS v3.0 -- "This time, we got it right! We think." (Page 2)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.131 seconds.