The W
Views: 99037826
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
19.9.14 1056
The W - Football - I hate the Big 12 and the BCS
This thread has 16 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.49
Pages: 1
(1532 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (11 total)
CajunMan
Boudin blanc
No longer registered








Since: 2.1.02
From: Give me a Title shot!

Since last post: 1065 days
Last activity: 202 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.00
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.





I'm CajunMan and I approve this message.
Promote this thread!
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1235 days
Last activity: 1032 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
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.





It is ironic that a Republican President has an Administration that is more inclusive and more diverse than a so-called liberal-media-elite network.= Tavis Smiley on the diversity of the Bush Cabinet vis--vis NPR
Roy.
Pepperoni








Since: 25.2.04
From: Keystone State

Since last post: 2323 days
Last activity: 793 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.42
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








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

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 21 hours
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.05
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.






The Catastrophic Annihilation War Room
And now, for a limited time only, THE BAND IS OUT ON THE FIELD!!!"

dunkndollaz
Banger








Since: 3.1.02
From: Northern NJ

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 28 min.
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.94
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.....



Folk singers are always liberal pansies, but not me.....I sing for my fellow conservatives...care to hear "Shoot the Hippie out of the Redwood Tree" ?
BigVitoMark
Lap cheong








Since: 10.8.02
From: Queen's University, Canada

Since last post: 3344 days
Last activity: 3253 days
ICQ:  
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.65
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.



Screw Ricky
Whitebacon
Boudin blanc








Since: 12.1.02
From: Fresno, CA

Since last post: 33 days
Last activity: 16 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.04
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








Since: 6.1.02
From: Outer reaches of your mind

Since last post: 3555 days
Last activity: 1975 days
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 9.00
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.



smark/net attack wienerville advisory holds at ORANGE alert - High (JBL is STILL WWE champion and now smarks arch enemy HHH is the World Champion. Major red threat, but the undercard seems okay. The alert holds... for now)- 9/19
ges7184
Lap cheong








Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 12 hours
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.17
    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.



The Bored are already here. Idle hands are the devil's workshop. And no... we won't kill dolphins. But koalas are fair game.
Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator








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

Since last post: 5 days
Last activity: 21 hours
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.05
Confrence records are moot becuase the SOS of the conference will always be .500.

Non-conf is the way to go.





The Catastrophic Annihilation War Room
And now, for a limited time only, THE BAND IS OUT ON THE FIELD!!!"

Quezzy
Knackwurst








Since: 6.1.02
From: The Moon

Since last post: 21 hours
Last activity: 21 hours
AIM:  
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.65
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.



Lance's Response:

THAT IS AWESOME!
Thread rated: 5.49
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: Dolphins talking to Saban (again)
Next thread: 2004 Heisman Award
Previous thread: New Seahawks hat!
(1532 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Yup ... this was definitely the best night of football since, oh probably Sunday the 2nd's games. Three really good open, clean games. I feel so sorry for Nigeria. A ton of talent, they play an open attacking game, but they are done for the tourney.
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 W - Football - I hate the Big 12 and the BCSRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.123 seconds.