• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Texas...Your new number one in the BCS..

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
High Lonesome said:
I think that most texas fans and boards are of the opinion that the gap between #2 and #3 is large enough to make up for the sos. any honest horn fan will say that usc will jump back over texas sometime in the next 1-3 weeks. Vtech fans on the other hand are convinced that they will jump texas. Should be interesting. The bottom line is that if more than 2 teams go undefeated then someone will get screwed. I just hope that its not us
Click to expand...

You need Georgia and Bama to both lose. Then what VaTech makes up in the computers shouldn't offest Texas's lead in the human polls, since Texas should then be no worse than 3rd in most of the computers.

If the win at tOSU is what makes the difference in remaining #2 in the BCS, that's a good thing for college football. Hopefully, when other AD's and coaches see that, more games between top teams will get scheduled in the future.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeyeskickbuttocks said:
No, if 4 teams go undfeated then the BCS settles the difference between those 4 schools and does precisely what it was designed to do. I don't like the BCS any better than anyone else, but it's not because of the teams it ends up "picking" it's becuase its a stupid way to determine a champion altogether.
Click to expand...
I don't see how it settles the difference between those 4 schools. If USC, Texas, Alabama and Va Tech are undefeated at the end of the year, and play in 2 bowl games....you end the season with 2 undefeated teams who won a major conference and beat an undefeated team in their bowl game. Am I crazy or would that bring the BCS to its end?
 
Upvote 0
Findlay - I don't disagree that people would get their shorts in a bunch. And I think most people would probably call for the end of the BCS.

My position is, the system is designed to settle the difference between otherwise similar teams. That's just the way it's done, and frankly it works. I don't think that means one team should play and another should not - I'm for a 4 or 8 team playoff - but when USC got slighted in 03, I didn't care. They should have played a tougher schedule then (Thus advancing the idea you can't load up on cup cakes (whether intentional or not)) In 04, Auburn shouldn't have played such a weak OOC if they wanted a chance to be there in Janaury. I think Auburn would have beat OU. So what? The computers and such deterined that OU had a tougher road to hoe. And thus, the system did EXACTLY what's it supposed to have done.

Again, it's a stupid idea in the first place, that's the problem.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeyeskickbuttocks said:
Findlay - I don't disagree that people would get their shorts in a bunch. And I think most people would probably call for the end of the BCS.

My position is, the system is designed to settle the difference between otherwise similar teams. That's just the way it's done, and frankly it works. I don't think that means one team should play and another should not - I'm for a 4 or 8 team playoff - but when USC got slighted in 03, I didn't care. They should have played a tougher schedule then (Thus advancing the idea you can't load up on cup cakes (whether intentional or not)) In 04, Auburn shouldn't have played such a weak OOC if they wanted a chance to be there in Janaury. I think Auburn would have beat OU. So what? The computers and such deterined that OU had a tougher road to hoe. And thus, the system did EXACTLY what's it supposed to have done.
Again, it's a stupid idea in the first place, that's the problem.
Click to expand...
ahhh, now I see the light. I agree that the system is shitty. I just hope it creates a train wreck this year so it can go away. When's the contract up. Anyone?
 
Upvote 0
FindlayBucks said:
ahhh, now I see the light. I agree that the system is shitty. I just hope it creates a train wreck this year so it can go away. When's the contract up. Anyone?
Click to expand...

ok, lets say the contract is up tomorrow. as the college football world will never ever ever never have a playoff so that is out of hte question. name a better way of settling things. do we go back to the bowls which match static conferences with no conscept of national ranking? noway on earth that would be better than the bcs currently. you would be going from argueing that 3 and maybe 4 didn't get their shot even though they might have been just as deserving to 1 and 2 didn't even play eachother let alone 3 and 4 and so on.

i agree that the bcs isn't the best answer. id love to see a playoff system. problem is there will never be one. which leaves us stuck with the lesser of two evils. :(

just an fyi, if there were no bcs and we were relying on the bowls tOSU would not have won a nc in 02. chances are we wouldn't have even gotten a split nc. iowa would have represented the big 10, the bucks would have ended up in some backwater bobs bowl, and miami (fl) would have beat whoever they were playing in a big name bowl securing them the nc with little to no naysaying anywhere other than ohio. *shrug* just food for thought...
 
Upvote 0
martinss01 said:
just an fyi, if there were no bcs and we were relying on the bowls tOSU would not have won a nc in 02. chances are we wouldn't have even gotten a split nc. iowa would have represented the big 10, the bucks would have ended up in some backwater bobs bowl, and miami (fl) would have beat whoever they were playing in a big name bowl securing them the nc with little to no naysaying anywhere other than ohio. *shrug* just food for thought...
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. OSU would've gone to the Rose Bowl and faced USC, while Miami would've played Oklahoma in the Fiesta. It would've still been possible for OSU to play for the title or a split. Remember, there is a long, long line of teams and their head coaches complaining about getting the BCS shaft, and the front of the line begins with John Cooper and the 1998 squad. Without the BCS, Ohio State would have had a shot at a share of the title then too.

All of us knew this system stunk way back in November of 1998. Funny that nobody involved with the SEC or ACC complained that the system stunk back then, huh?
 
Upvote 0
Keep the same bowl system.
Use the 4 BCS bowls as the first round of the playoff. 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7 etc.
No Notre Dame exceptions, the top 8 BCS teams qualify.
I'm not sure where the next set of games should be played, but the championship could be like the Super Bowl.
I agree that a true "March Madness" type playoff will never happen, but I don't think we need that many teams.
 
Upvote 0
BB73 said:
If the win at tOSU is what makes the difference in remaining #2 in the BCS, that's a good thing for college football. Hopefully, when other AD's and coaches see that, more games between top teams will get scheduled in the future.
Click to expand...

Well said. Enough with the Texas Tech way of scheduling. It doesn't say much for the BCS that they were #7 going into last week.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top