Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: BCS "broken"

  1. #1
    Addict
    Points: 95,066, Level: 96
    Level completed: 1%, Points required for next Level: 1,984
    Overall activity: 34.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    cyclones500's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    8,876
    Points
    95,066
    Level
    96
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 172
    Given: 420

    BCS "broken"

    Could be a good read ... but a reference below caught my eye before I kept reading.

    This Week's College Football Rankings: Proof That the BCS Is Broken - Jake Simpson - Entertainment - The Atlantic

    The rapid-fire string of upsets over the weekend was mind-boggling. First, No. 2 Oklahoma State had its undefeated season dashed at the hands of lowly Iowa State, a 27.5-point underdog heading into the game.


    Maybe the writer is referring to the program in general? Or the point spread? It's still an unnecessary adjective. OSU lost to a team that's now bowl eligible. It's not like ISU entered the game 2-8 or something.

    Could have just said "unranked Iowa State"

    Now, back to the article ..



  2. #2
    Addict
    Points: 74,578, Level: 84
    Level completed: 84%, Points required for next Level: 272
    Overall activity: 40.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Bigman38's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Council Bluffs, IA
    Posts
    5,114
    Points
    74,578
    Level
    84
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 218
    Given: 310

    Re: BCS "broken"

    Saying it's broken implies that it ever worked in the first place. It's not a system designed to find the best college football team, it is a system designed to put money in people's pockets.


    "But letís see if the Cyclones can give everyone a nice big ****burger to eat. Opportunity awaits." -Brent Blum

    "I am the one who knocks" -Walter White

  3. #3
    Legend
    Points: 161,356, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 61.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    HFCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    10,734
    Points
    161,356
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 626
    Given: 498

    Re: BCS "broken"

    The BCS is great at determining the top two teams. Combining biased voter polls and and average of computer models is very fair.

    A two team playoff from among 120 teams is the part that is completely stupid. Especially when 22 of the teams are playing radically more difficult schedules than about 50 others, then another 50 or so are playing even easier schedules than that.

    Either have a real 4-8 team playoff or go back to the system where the two game playoffs are the champion of 18-24 teams (two conference champs).

    I'm fine with either way. Not fine at all with a two game playoff where one team is the "national" champ. Rose Bowl Champ, great. National Champion? BS, not without at least a two round playoff.

    Whenever we have a real playoff instead of a two team playoff, I'd prefer keeping the BCS ranking system to having a selection committee. I love that 1/3 of the BCS realizes that Michigan and Notre Dame aren't any more special than Iowa State or South Florida. The NCAA selection committee, coaches polls and AP poles don't. I'd prefer 1/2 computers or 2/3 computers but I'll take 1/3 because it's better than all biased human selection/polls.


    Last edited by HFCS; 11-21-2011 at 05:45 PM.

  4. #4
    Addict
    Points: 95,066, Level: 96
    Level completed: 1%, Points required for next Level: 1,984
    Overall activity: 34.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    cyclones500's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    8,876
    Points
    95,066
    Level
    96
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 172
    Given: 420

    Re: BCS "broken"

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigman38 View Post
    Saying it's broken implies that it ever worked in the first place. It's not a system designed to find the best college football team, it is a system designed to put money in people's pockets.
    It could probably still do both, but it was poorly devised at the outset and adjusted each time an unexpected wrinkle sent things haywire.

    People think having the SEC rematch possibility is bad, although I'm still OK with that if it's truly the top two teams. But it's where the conference title games aren't taken into consideration. I heard today that the SEC West winner could possibly play its way out of the BCS title game if it won the division but lost in the conference championship game. (If I'm understanding it right).

    I don't even mind the BCS intrigue throughout the season. I think the title game usually involves the most worthy teams. But in principle, it's a system that works only because it "usually works."

    Should have just added a plus-1, or developed a true playoff.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • Football
  • Iowa State vs. North Dakota State
  • August 30, 2014
  • 11:00 AM