Conference Champions Only
Conference.Team...........BCS...Rec...SOS...AP..Sagarin
ACC........Florida State...14....9-5....3...21....11
Big XII....Oklahoma.........7...12-2...26....5.....4
Big East...Miami Florida....1...12-1...37....2.....2
Big Ten....Ohio State.......2...13-0...30....1.....3 *
C-USA......TCU.............NR...10-2..105...23....49 **
MAC........Marshall........NR...11-2..113...24....53
MWC........Colorado State..NR...10-4...64...NR....40
Pac 10.....Washington St....6...11-2...16...10....12 ***
SEC........Georgia..........3...13-1...24....3.....6
Sun Belt...North Texas.....NR....8-5...76...NR....63
WAC........Boise State.....NR...12-1..112...15....18
* Ohio State and Iowa (11-2 BCS 5) tied for the 2002 Big Ten Crown. Ohio State received the conference auto bid while Iowa was awarded an at large selection (The Rose Bowl against USC (which was played in Miami's "Orange Bowl")
)
** TCU tied with Cincinnati (7-7 BCS NR) for the C-USA title. TCU credited here for better overall record.
*** Washington State tied with USC (11-2 BCS 4) for the Pac 10 crown and was awarded the BCS auto bid.
The Brackets (Used the Big Ten basketball Tournament bracket as the model for an 11 team tournament) as before, seeds preceed the team name, actual BCS ranks in parens:
8 Marshall (NR) v. 9 TCU (NR) winner to play 1 Miami Florida (1)
7 Boise State (NR) v. 10 Colorado State (NR) winner to play 2 Ohio State (2)
6 Florida State (14) v. 11 North Texas (NR) winner to play 3 Georgia (3)
4 Washington State (6) v. 5 Oklahoma (7) winner to play winner of Miami Florida v. 8/9 game winner.
Well, at least we saw one of these games. While "on paper" it's the most impressive match (a consistent theme for the 4 v. 5 game) we know that Oklahoma beat Washington State in the 2003 Rose Bowl 34-14. The remaining games, like the previous years, do not scream "must see" even if the Marshall TCU game is relatively evenly matched, and we mustn't forget Florida State of 2002 was working without a real QB which gives North Texas at least a sniff of an upset, even if unlikely.
Second round games of Marshall or TCU v. Miami look like a pre-season "Gimme" win for the Hurricanes and not a playoff match while Ohio State has to play either Boise State or Colorado State to continue their undefeated season. As bad a rap as Ohio State 2002 gets for it's sluggish offense, I'm confident Ohio State beats either. Assuming North Texas fails to beat Florida State, we know Georgia will because they actually did, 26 - 13 in the 2003 Sugar. After dispatching Marshall or TCU, Miami takes on OU (selected here because they actually won on the field as against Washington State) while Ohio State takes on the Bulldogs.
I don't know about you, but I'm not sure Ohio State had to play Georgia in 2002 to earn a title in as much as they beat Miami who was riding a 34 game win streak at the time. After 12 games, didn't the BCS get the top two teams right? Well, if you're an Ohio State fan, of course it did. But, maybe not. If you're the Sagarin poll, USC should have been there (as eventual Sagarin number 1) despite not being their conference's BCS automatic bid. If you're a Bulldog fan, no, it should have been BCS #3 Georgia, who believed they were playing some of the best football at the end of 2002 (ie, was "hot") A playoff would have given this "hot" team the chance, I suppose, but lets not forget this same Bulldog squad lost to 8-5 Florida 20-13 while the Buckeyes had beaten everyone they faced, including BCS # 6 Washington State. Georgia's top win, meanwhile came against 10-3 Alabama (BCS NR), though in fairness, Bama did finish AP number 11 - right behind #10 AP Washington State.
Six Plus Two System
Conference.Team...........BCS...Rec...SOS...AP..Sagarin
ACC........Florida State...14....9-5....3...21....11
Big XII....Oklahoma.........7...12-2...26....5.....4
Big East...Miami Florida....1...12-1...37....2.....2
Big Ten....Ohio State.......2...13-0...30....1.....3
Pac 10.....Washington St....6...11-2...16...10....12
SEC........Georgia..........3...13-1...24....3.....6
Pac 10.....USC..............4...11-2....1....4.....1 At Large 1
Big Ten....Iowa.............5...11-2...46....8.....8 At Large 2
Trev Alberts and Jeff Sagarin are happy as Iowa and USC get their chance!
Pairings:
8 Florida State (14) v. 1 Miami Florida (1)
7 Oklahoma (7) v. 2 Ohio State (2)
6 Washington State (6) v. 3 Georgia (3)
5 Iowa (5) v. 4 USC (4)
Florida State v. Miami is a rematch. Despite Florida State's 9-5 record the Miami game played on October 12, 2002 was a tight one with the Canes pulling out a 28-27 victory. Perhaps a rematch was warranted, though their records indicate quite the contrary. Likewise, we did actually get to see what Iowa v. USC would look like, and USC rolled 38-17. Also, it should be noted, if Washington State beat Georgia, the Washington Ohio State game that would result would be a rematch - Ohio State 25 Washington State 7. Likewise, if somehow USC and Washington State managed to make the Finals, that too would have been a rematch - Washington State 30 USC 27.
Thus, as it happens, the six plus two system does nothing to aid the mid major, and provides several opportunities to see games we already saw. True some of these rematches were not assured, but the potential for rematches must be considered when thinking about a system and its particular benefit or failing. Touching quickly on the money issue, once again the mid major is completely left out and the Big 10 and Pac 10 enjoy "extra" pay days.
BCS Top 8
Conference.Team...........BCS...Rec...SOS...AP..Sagarin
Big East...Miami Florida....1...12-1...37....2.....2
Big Ten....Ohio State.......2...13-0...30....1.....3
SEC........Georgia..........3...13-1...24....3.....6
Pac 10.....USC..............4...11-2....1....4.....1
Big Ten....Iowa.............5...11-2...46....8.....8
Pac 10.....Washington St....6...11-2...16...10....12
Big XII....Oklahoma.........7...12-2...26....5.....4
Big XII....Kansas State.....8...11-2...55....7.....5
Bubble Teams: 9 Notre Dame (10-3), 10 Texas (11-2), 11 Michigan (10-3), 12 Penn State (9-4)
If 2001 was "everything that's wrong with the BCS" most people agree it was "Correct" in 2002. While we can argue about USC, Iowa and Georgia the plain fact is Ohio State and Miami were the only two undefeateds going in and they played an epic contest before the title was awarded. Considering the game that resulted, in some writer's mind the best game of all time, our backs are against the wall to find a better playoff game than what we actually saw.
As with the 6+2 above, there is still plenty of potential for rematches depending on how things turned out, the only difference being instead of playing #14 Florida State in a rematch, Miami gets Big XII also ran Kansas State in the first round. Kansas State could also potentially face USC, who they beat earlier in the year 27-20.
Let's be attentive as well to the Bubble teams. Notre Dame played the #14 toughest schedule in 2002, while Kansas State played one rated 55th. The BCS had them neck and neck at 8 and 9 going in to the Bowls (KSU would beat Arizona State in the Holdiay Bowl while ND lost to NC State in the Gator) and Domer nation would have, no doubt, been in an uproar at being snubbed. Texas lost to Oklahoma and was upset by Texas Tech, but played well enough otherwise to finish 6 in the AP and 7 in Sagarin's poll. If USC could be the National Champion with 2 losses (See Sagarin's poll) why shouldn't Texas also get a shot? Michigan lost to Ohio State Iowa and Notre Dame, 3 "excusable" losses considering the quality of opponent (BCS #2, #5 and #9). Why don't they "deserve" a look too? (A good counter argument is that Michigan got blown out by Iowa 34-9, though they did play within 2 points of ND (23-25) and 5 of Ohio State (9-14)) So much for ending the potential controversy. In 2002, there was very little controversy, while a playoff would have created plenty.
I would also be remiss in failing to note, we still have no room for the mid major. In fact, no mid major was in the BCS top 15. Boise State (15), TCU (23) and Marshall (24) garnered AP votes, but the computers held these schools with less regard. Sagrain shows Boise being rated 18th (Not out of line with the humans) but TCU comes in 49th and Marshall 53rd. Again, 2002 is perhaps not the best season to trumpet Sagrarin's rating in as much as his champion was USC (likewise, his 1998 Champion was Ohio State, even though they too failed to qualify for the BCS Title game and ended the season with 1 more loss than Tennessee's zero.) But, as indicated in the methodology section, his ranking aren't listed here as evidence of the truth of the matter asserted. Instead, they are intended only as a guide as to how the computers tended to regard teams.
As with the previous year's "BCS Top 8" formula games, there is some excitement to be had here, but I'm not sure it's particularly warranted in 2002 since the only two teams with unblemished records went toe to toe and a champion was determined. What more would Miami or Ohio State had to have proven in 2002? Would beating USC or Georgia or Iowa made Ohio State's 2002 title "more" legitimate? How about if luck had it such that Miami was upset in the early rounds and the Buckeyes never even had to face them at all? Buckeye fans wouldn't get to boast about ending a 34 game win steak, wouldn't have seen a 2 OT thriller and maybe would have even ended up on the losing end of a game themselves. Eh, if that had happened then we'd have been none the wiser to what actually DID happen on that January day. The point I'm circling around is this - a playoff isn't always going to be better, just because of its nature as a system. That said, it's not without a hint of irony that in a year where the BCS is regarded as having "worked" it came when the BCS didn't really have to work at all. Picking two undefeateds out of all college football team's isn't rocket science, after all (Iowa, Georgia, and USC notwithstanding, of course). In any case, we'll chalk one up for the BCS in 2002.
Link to Methodology
Link to 1998 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 1999 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2000 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2001 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2002 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2003 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2004 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2005 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2006 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2007 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2008 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to Conclusion
http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/...arding-playoff-possibilities.html#post1383197
Conference.Team...........BCS...Rec...SOS...AP..Sagarin
ACC........Florida State...14....9-5....3...21....11
Big XII....Oklahoma.........7...12-2...26....5.....4
Big East...Miami Florida....1...12-1...37....2.....2
Big Ten....Ohio State.......2...13-0...30....1.....3 *
C-USA......TCU.............NR...10-2..105...23....49 **
MAC........Marshall........NR...11-2..113...24....53
MWC........Colorado State..NR...10-4...64...NR....40
Pac 10.....Washington St....6...11-2...16...10....12 ***
SEC........Georgia..........3...13-1...24....3.....6
Sun Belt...North Texas.....NR....8-5...76...NR....63
WAC........Boise State.....NR...12-1..112...15....18
* Ohio State and Iowa (11-2 BCS 5) tied for the 2002 Big Ten Crown. Ohio State received the conference auto bid while Iowa was awarded an at large selection (The Rose Bowl against USC (which was played in Miami's "Orange Bowl")
)** TCU tied with Cincinnati (7-7 BCS NR) for the C-USA title. TCU credited here for better overall record.
*** Washington State tied with USC (11-2 BCS 4) for the Pac 10 crown and was awarded the BCS auto bid.
The Brackets (Used the Big Ten basketball Tournament bracket as the model for an 11 team tournament) as before, seeds preceed the team name, actual BCS ranks in parens:
8 Marshall (NR) v. 9 TCU (NR) winner to play 1 Miami Florida (1)
7 Boise State (NR) v. 10 Colorado State (NR) winner to play 2 Ohio State (2)
6 Florida State (14) v. 11 North Texas (NR) winner to play 3 Georgia (3)
4 Washington State (6) v. 5 Oklahoma (7) winner to play winner of Miami Florida v. 8/9 game winner.
Well, at least we saw one of these games. While "on paper" it's the most impressive match (a consistent theme for the 4 v. 5 game) we know that Oklahoma beat Washington State in the 2003 Rose Bowl 34-14. The remaining games, like the previous years, do not scream "must see" even if the Marshall TCU game is relatively evenly matched, and we mustn't forget Florida State of 2002 was working without a real QB which gives North Texas at least a sniff of an upset, even if unlikely.
Second round games of Marshall or TCU v. Miami look like a pre-season "Gimme" win for the Hurricanes and not a playoff match while Ohio State has to play either Boise State or Colorado State to continue their undefeated season. As bad a rap as Ohio State 2002 gets for it's sluggish offense, I'm confident Ohio State beats either. Assuming North Texas fails to beat Florida State, we know Georgia will because they actually did, 26 - 13 in the 2003 Sugar. After dispatching Marshall or TCU, Miami takes on OU (selected here because they actually won on the field as against Washington State) while Ohio State takes on the Bulldogs.
I don't know about you, but I'm not sure Ohio State had to play Georgia in 2002 to earn a title in as much as they beat Miami who was riding a 34 game win streak at the time. After 12 games, didn't the BCS get the top two teams right? Well, if you're an Ohio State fan, of course it did. But, maybe not. If you're the Sagarin poll, USC should have been there (as eventual Sagarin number 1) despite not being their conference's BCS automatic bid. If you're a Bulldog fan, no, it should have been BCS #3 Georgia, who believed they were playing some of the best football at the end of 2002 (ie, was "hot") A playoff would have given this "hot" team the chance, I suppose, but lets not forget this same Bulldog squad lost to 8-5 Florida 20-13 while the Buckeyes had beaten everyone they faced, including BCS # 6 Washington State. Georgia's top win, meanwhile came against 10-3 Alabama (BCS NR), though in fairness, Bama did finish AP number 11 - right behind #10 AP Washington State.
Six Plus Two System
Conference.Team...........BCS...Rec...SOS...AP..Sagarin
ACC........Florida State...14....9-5....3...21....11
Big XII....Oklahoma.........7...12-2...26....5.....4
Big East...Miami Florida....1...12-1...37....2.....2
Big Ten....Ohio State.......2...13-0...30....1.....3
Pac 10.....Washington St....6...11-2...16...10....12
SEC........Georgia..........3...13-1...24....3.....6
Pac 10.....USC..............4...11-2....1....4.....1 At Large 1
Big Ten....Iowa.............5...11-2...46....8.....8 At Large 2
Trev Alberts and Jeff Sagarin are happy as Iowa and USC get their chance!
Pairings:
8 Florida State (14) v. 1 Miami Florida (1)
7 Oklahoma (7) v. 2 Ohio State (2)
6 Washington State (6) v. 3 Georgia (3)
5 Iowa (5) v. 4 USC (4)
Florida State v. Miami is a rematch. Despite Florida State's 9-5 record the Miami game played on October 12, 2002 was a tight one with the Canes pulling out a 28-27 victory. Perhaps a rematch was warranted, though their records indicate quite the contrary. Likewise, we did actually get to see what Iowa v. USC would look like, and USC rolled 38-17. Also, it should be noted, if Washington State beat Georgia, the Washington Ohio State game that would result would be a rematch - Ohio State 25 Washington State 7. Likewise, if somehow USC and Washington State managed to make the Finals, that too would have been a rematch - Washington State 30 USC 27.
Thus, as it happens, the six plus two system does nothing to aid the mid major, and provides several opportunities to see games we already saw. True some of these rematches were not assured, but the potential for rematches must be considered when thinking about a system and its particular benefit or failing. Touching quickly on the money issue, once again the mid major is completely left out and the Big 10 and Pac 10 enjoy "extra" pay days.
BCS Top 8
Conference.Team...........BCS...Rec...SOS...AP..Sagarin
Big East...Miami Florida....1...12-1...37....2.....2
Big Ten....Ohio State.......2...13-0...30....1.....3
SEC........Georgia..........3...13-1...24....3.....6
Pac 10.....USC..............4...11-2....1....4.....1
Big Ten....Iowa.............5...11-2...46....8.....8
Pac 10.....Washington St....6...11-2...16...10....12
Big XII....Oklahoma.........7...12-2...26....5.....4
Big XII....Kansas State.....8...11-2...55....7.....5
Bubble Teams: 9 Notre Dame (10-3), 10 Texas (11-2), 11 Michigan (10-3), 12 Penn State (9-4)
If 2001 was "everything that's wrong with the BCS" most people agree it was "Correct" in 2002. While we can argue about USC, Iowa and Georgia the plain fact is Ohio State and Miami were the only two undefeateds going in and they played an epic contest before the title was awarded. Considering the game that resulted, in some writer's mind the best game of all time, our backs are against the wall to find a better playoff game than what we actually saw.
As with the 6+2 above, there is still plenty of potential for rematches depending on how things turned out, the only difference being instead of playing #14 Florida State in a rematch, Miami gets Big XII also ran Kansas State in the first round. Kansas State could also potentially face USC, who they beat earlier in the year 27-20.
Let's be attentive as well to the Bubble teams. Notre Dame played the #14 toughest schedule in 2002, while Kansas State played one rated 55th. The BCS had them neck and neck at 8 and 9 going in to the Bowls (KSU would beat Arizona State in the Holdiay Bowl while ND lost to NC State in the Gator) and Domer nation would have, no doubt, been in an uproar at being snubbed. Texas lost to Oklahoma and was upset by Texas Tech, but played well enough otherwise to finish 6 in the AP and 7 in Sagarin's poll. If USC could be the National Champion with 2 losses (See Sagarin's poll) why shouldn't Texas also get a shot? Michigan lost to Ohio State Iowa and Notre Dame, 3 "excusable" losses considering the quality of opponent (BCS #2, #5 and #9). Why don't they "deserve" a look too? (A good counter argument is that Michigan got blown out by Iowa 34-9, though they did play within 2 points of ND (23-25) and 5 of Ohio State (9-14)) So much for ending the potential controversy. In 2002, there was very little controversy, while a playoff would have created plenty.
I would also be remiss in failing to note, we still have no room for the mid major. In fact, no mid major was in the BCS top 15. Boise State (15), TCU (23) and Marshall (24) garnered AP votes, but the computers held these schools with less regard. Sagrain shows Boise being rated 18th (Not out of line with the humans) but TCU comes in 49th and Marshall 53rd. Again, 2002 is perhaps not the best season to trumpet Sagrarin's rating in as much as his champion was USC (likewise, his 1998 Champion was Ohio State, even though they too failed to qualify for the BCS Title game and ended the season with 1 more loss than Tennessee's zero.) But, as indicated in the methodology section, his ranking aren't listed here as evidence of the truth of the matter asserted. Instead, they are intended only as a guide as to how the computers tended to regard teams.
As with the previous year's "BCS Top 8" formula games, there is some excitement to be had here, but I'm not sure it's particularly warranted in 2002 since the only two teams with unblemished records went toe to toe and a champion was determined. What more would Miami or Ohio State had to have proven in 2002? Would beating USC or Georgia or Iowa made Ohio State's 2002 title "more" legitimate? How about if luck had it such that Miami was upset in the early rounds and the Buckeyes never even had to face them at all? Buckeye fans wouldn't get to boast about ending a 34 game win steak, wouldn't have seen a 2 OT thriller and maybe would have even ended up on the losing end of a game themselves. Eh, if that had happened then we'd have been none the wiser to what actually DID happen on that January day. The point I'm circling around is this - a playoff isn't always going to be better, just because of its nature as a system. That said, it's not without a hint of irony that in a year where the BCS is regarded as having "worked" it came when the BCS didn't really have to work at all. Picking two undefeateds out of all college football team's isn't rocket science, after all (Iowa, Georgia, and USC notwithstanding, of course). In any case, we'll chalk one up for the BCS in 2002.
Link to Methodology
Link to 1998 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 1999 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2000 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2001 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2002 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2003 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2004 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2005 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2006 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2007 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to 2008 Playoff Hypotheticals and discussion
Link to Conclusion
http://www.buckeyeplanet.com/forum/...arding-playoff-possibilities.html#post1383197
Last edited: