Woody1968;1609211; said:
How can you possibly know that? That is a clearly baseless statement.
It has base. Ohio State's SOS is about the same as Texas's right now according to the computers. Ohio State's past few years in the BCS would probably keep them out. If all things were equal, people would likely look at last season Fiesta Bowl. If Ohio State were 12-0 right now, they would be ranked #4, make no doubt about it! So here in lies the problem with they system.
Woody1968;1609237; said:
Like Auburn in 2004, Texas didn't play anyone this year. Texas has a victory over exactly ONE ranked opponent, Oklahoma State. Nebraska is ranked, but will probably drop from the rankings if Texas beats them.
Is that completely Texas' fault? Big 12 was down this year, but Texas wasn't. They are good, and have just been able to sleepwalk through their schedule and still win their games. They didn't have a big non-con game this year, but it's hard to schedule big games anyway, because they are scheduled years in advance. If Ohio State got shut out this year, which they would have, then what more could they have done? SOS doesn't mean as much to voters as much as the eye test, and even more the name in front of the team and the conference they are in.
How do I know it means the difference between home field advantage or not? If Cinci loses to Pitt, all of a sudden they're not #5? Ok... so maybe they fall below Boise State, but they're only a 1 loss team and Oregon is 7 with 2 losses. How does Cinci lose home field in your scenario?
They'd likely drop further than that, in my opinion. But even if they don't, then they go from likely being #4, to being #7 or #6, which means a home game in the second round, plus a tougher first game. It would mean something...I doubt they would rest their starters. Actually, I am sure they wouldn't.
Cry me a river. TCU won all their games. So did Boise State. I might be impressed with that if all schedules were equal. But, I'm not impressed with it because both TCU and Boise benefit from significantly easier schedules than any BCS team under consideration. Texas, Alabama and Florida have all won all their games, against stiffer competition. 2 of those schools will get a chance to play for the title (assuming Texas doesn't fail in the Big XII championship game). This is as it should be. Why? Because beating a schedule rated 49th in the nation is far more impressive than beating the 91st rated schedule and the 84th rated schedule.
I guess so, but what more could Cincinnati, TCU, and Boise do? SOS means jack shit. Take the 100 players from Florida and take the 100 players from TCU and switch the teams completely. So now Tebow plays for TCU and goes undefeated, and the TCU players play for Florida now and go undefeated. Florida would go to the NCG. But we'd never know who was the better team. With this argument, there is no reason that these mid-major schools should even play football. Why play? You have no chance of going to the NCG. But good season, here is ur Orange Bowl. Have fun! Whoo hooo! And again, what if Ohio State or USC would have gone undefeated this year? Their season had nothing to do with Florida or Texas. Who gets left out then? And why? The real question is. How do we know that TCU isn't the best team in the country? Just because they played crappier crap teams than Florida did? They do have 2 wins against the top 25...that's as many as Florida and Texas combined.
And why wouldn't we encourage this? After all, if you go undefeated and get left out this tells you you need to schedule better games than you have. If Auburn had played and beaten a decent also ran, like, say Purdue, in 2004 instead of beating on the Citadel, maybe they get a shot at the 04 title instead of USC or OU. But, Auburn took the easy way out. And it cost them. Well, fuck them.
Okay, so if Auburn had, then who do you leave out? OU or USC? They didn't play crap schedules? What more could the mid-majors do than leave their conference and go independent? Scheduling is a two way street. I'm pretty sure Boise and TCU would gladly schedule Florida and Texas for a home and home, but Florida and Texas won't do it. So how can you get pissed at TCU? Look at Florida and Texas's OOC schedule. It's crap!!! They only have a good SOS cuz of their conference games, that has nothing to do with scheduling.
You say you want a great slate of games. And yet, you argue for the precise contrary. You seem to think that having a "great" slate of games in 2 or 3 successive weeks is somehow more interesting than great games scattered throughout the 12 weeks of college football. I don't buy it.
The games throughout the 12 weeks are still great. You still need to win. People still thought we had a chance at the NCG after our loss to USC (little did they know that we had no shot, even if we won). If you are so worried about the regular season not mattering, then make it an 8 team playoff. Lose 1, maybe you are still in, lose 2, and you are probably out. Right now as it stands, only 2 2 loss teams would make it. So...you'd still want to win all your games. Especially with the home field thing. You don't seem to think the home field advantage would matter. I think it would be huge, for fans and players. Even TV viewers, because it's cool to see different college stadiums and atmospheres. And imagine the Shoe or the swamp if it were hosting a game between to two teams for a chance to get to a "final four". Wow!!! But it seems you don't agree. And that's fine. Agree to disagree about the impact of home field. I think more than a 4 team playoff without home team advantage would ruin the game. You need home field advantage.
I don't give a shit about fair. If Ohio State wants to be in the picture, then they'd better schedule a schedule more impressive than 60th in the land - at least they'd better do so when 2 other teams beat up on harder schedules. Tough shit, OSU. What's good for 2004 Auburn is good enough for you. Rather than watching OSU throttle New Mexico State, I could have seen OSU throw down with someone better. If the Buckeyes get "burned" by a weak schedule, perhaps we won't be paying 65 bucks to go watch OSU play YSU.
Again, you want "great games" and you endorse a system that save them all for the end - and on the assumption that they'll be great, in fact. I call bullshit.
Again, what more could OSU do than schedule USC? It's a two way street. They can't schedule every good team every year. They don't even know who they are going to be. If you are going to just blame it on scheduling then that's shitty to the players and fans, who have nothing to do with the schedule. Why should I be fucked as a fan because Ohio State didn't schedule a tougher schedule this year. Who knew we should have scheduled Cincinnati instead of USC??? And again, I also believe that the sagarin SOS is bullshit. Because if you play the #70 team instead of the #99 team, you get a higher SOS. Who gives a crap, you are going to beat both teams. If your schedule is playing #3, #7, #10, #12, #98, #99, #101, and #102...your SOS would be lower than playing, #44, #46, #50, #55, #58, #60, #61, #62. Which one is more impressive??? I think the first one. Computer SOS is bogus.
I do agree somewhat that it's dumb to play New Mexico State, but these smaller schools enjoy playing the big schools, so it does have it's purpose. But I do like the Toledo game, I like playing state schools. It's good for the state. It just so happened it wasn't Cincy, it was Toledo. And playing Navy was very awesome, and Navy was a good team this year. And playing USC, well you can't try and schedule better than that.
You try and make scheduling sound so easy. It's not. And it really is a completely different argument. Scheduling sucks in this current system. It rewards Florida and Texas for scheduling nobodies. This current system tells a BCS conference team to schedule crap teams, and then all you have to do is win ur conference and play one tough game in the NCG and you win the NC. At least with a playoff, you could schedule crap games if you want, but you still have to win 4 games against the best teams in the country...and you still have to deal with your conference too.
I don't think scheduling could get any worse. A playoff system would at the worst keep it the same, and just add better games at the end.
It is what it is. I can't help that Florida, Texas and Bama have been more impressive in winning against their schedules than your hypothetical Ohio State might have been against its 60th rated schedule. Maybe OSU should have played the likes of a West Virginia instead of Toledo.
You talk about who "deserves" what. Bull shit. You earn your shot at the title. You earn it by being the best team or the second best team. You don't get to load up on sisters of the poor and qualify for some playoff. You know who "deserves" a shot at the 2009 NC? Florida, Alabama and/or Texas. No one else. Those three teams have done the best against the hardest, and it's not really that close.
Loading up on the sisters of the poor?
Texas 59 Louisiana-Monroe 20
Texas 41 Wyoming 10
Texas 64 UTEP 7
Texas 35 UCF 3
Florida 62 Charleston Southern 3
Florida 56 Troy 6
Florida 62 FIU 3
Florida 37 Florida State 10 (Only scheduled because Florida is forced to with this rivalry)
Alabama 34 Virginia Tech 24 (Good job Alabama, you scheduled a decent team, but just 1)
Alabama 40 FIU 14
Alabama 53 North Texas 7
Alabama 45 Chattanooga 0
None of these OCC schedules are better than Ohio State's. NONE! I'd argue that Ohio State's is better than all of them. So how can you say Ohio State should have done more if they wanted to go to the NCG. I don't see it. They did the same, if not better, than these 3 schools. They always do.
Let's look at some of the mid major's occ games:
Cincinnati 70 SE Missouri State 3
Cincinnati 28 Oregon State 18
Cincinnati 28 Fresno State 20
Cincinnati 37 Miami (OH) 13 (Force rivalry game)
Cincinnati 49 Illinois 36
So one top 25 game, and another game against the Big Ten. More than any of the top 3 schools did.
TCU 30 Virginia 14
TCU 56 Texas State 21
TCU 14 Clemson 10
TCU 39 SMU 14
Not too impressive. Two ACC schools. The other two are in state rivals. Not great, but better than what Texas or Florida scheduled.
Boise State 19 Oregon 8
Boise State 48 Miami OH 0
Boise State 49 Bowling Green 14
Boise State 34 UC Davis 16
Not impressive either. But it has one thing nobody else has, and that's a victory over a top 10 team.
Who are these teams supposed to schedule more than they did? The big boys won't play them. But you are giving Texas, Florida, and Alabama credit for their tough schedules. It's only cuz they are in the SEC and Big 12. Invite Boise State and TCU into the Big 12 and Cincy in the SEC...and i'm sure they would gladly accept.
As far as your argument about Ohio State's schedule. Maybe the computers don't like it, but I don't see it. Ohio State's schedule is tougher than Texas'. But I'm telling you right now, Ohio State would not have gone to the NCG over Texas...and it wouldn't be fair. Even though I know you don't care about fair. Maybe a playoff wouldn't be 100% fair...but it would be a hell of a lot closer to it.
TCU... Boise State... Cincinnati... they've all had fine seasons. I'm not taking anything away from them. But, they're not as impressive as Florida, Alabama or Texas. Give Florida, Bama or Texas TCU Boise or Cincy's schedules and they still go undefeated. Give TCU, Boise or Cincy one of Florida, Bama or Texas' schedule and I doubt it.
I think TCU would have gone undefeated with either schedule. I think Cincy and Boise could have gone undefeated in Texas's.
As I noted above, you come from the angle that all schedules are equal. As if CFB was the NFL, or MLB or the NHL. They simply are not. TCU and Boise play 8 or 9 games against teams which the "big boys" schedule as "gimme" wins. The Big Boys get 3 of those games, maybe 4. TCU and Boise get 8 or 9... hell, this year they got as many as 11 "gimmes" and you want them in the dance? And you want to talk about "fair?"
Bull fucking shit.
The thing that I have a problem with here is that when you look above, when it comes to what a team is able to do with their schedule, the big boys schedule almost as much crap as possible. So if you don't think it's fair to allow a mid-major in because of the conference they play in. Then I guess we should just kick the mid-major's out of the D1a. Kick the Big East out too. And the Big Ten. Because that's the only reason that fictional 12-0 Ohio State, or Cincy, or Boise, or TCU shouldn't go to the NCG according to you. Their schedule, and it's all based on their conference schedule, not OCC. Cuz their OCC is as good if not better than Florida, Texas, and Alabama's.
buckiprof;1609272; said:
I love the bowls and bowl season. But, I am a college football junkie. Like BKB, I will not go out of my way to watch Duke v. NC in college basketball during the regular season, but I will watch a late Saturday night game between Idaho and New Mexico State in football because I love college football.
I believe that how things were when I was a kid were better in some respects than how they are today. Four major bowls on New Years Day and that was it.
But times change.
I do know that if OSU were sitting at 12-0 right now, they would be at best ranked #3, but I would bet Pete Rose we would be sitting at #4 behind Texas. I also believe that given that scenario, the vast majority of Buckeye Nation would be bitching and screaming for a playoff....myself included.
Yet I love the bowls. Part of the allure of college football is the pageantry. Bowls not only reward a good-great season, but takes the pageantry to another level. I would hate to see that lost.
So what if the BCS formula was used to determine the top 16 teams and the first round of the playoffs were in mid-December with the higher seed being the home team.
After those 8 games there would be 8 teams left. Why not use the Rose, Orange, Sugar, and Fiesta Bowls to host, on January 1, the quarterfinals? One caveat though. The remaining 8 teams still keep their original seeding. The highest seed plays the lowest seed, where the highest seed gets to pick which bowl game they go to, then the second highest gets to pick which bowl (and play the second lowest seed), etc.
Semifinals following week at a neutral site (may not be neutral depending on who is in it, but nothing is perfect right?) and championship game following week at a neutral site.
This year, I do not have strong feelings either way. I reserve the right to have strong feelings if on 12/01/10 OSU is sitting at 12-0 and on the outside looking in at the NCG
.
Your system is pretty close to what I am saying. I playoff system can work with the bowls, not destroy them. That way you keep the bowl games and all that they mean. I don't see how they would lose any meaning, a lot of them have little meaning right now. Plus, if all the BCS bowls were part of a "elite 8" portion of a championship tournament, then there wouldn't be an empty seat in the house. But as it is now, some BCS bowls struggle to sell out.
I like your idea. Best about it is the home field advantage is still used.
I've typed a lot. I'm sure there are typos. If there are, fucking figure it out.:osu:
