File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
First off, let me say that I'm a staunch supporter of a playoff system for college football. The BCS is an atrocity that continuously creates unnecessary tension about who is better because teams aren't allowed to play head-to-head. That said, it's also a system that makes A LOT of money which is why we won't see it go away. At least not any time soon.

With that out of the way, why is strength of schedule weighted so poorly in the computer rankings? Seems to me that a close loss against a GOOD team is infinitely more impressive than steamrolling a D2 school.

Perfect case in point is Ball State and LSU this year. Yes, Ball State is 9-0, but their most impressive win came at, what, Toledo? Their schedule is so easy it's absurd. They don't play a single ranked team. Not one. Yet, despite that, they're currently ranked 14th nationally.

Somehow, despite the dearth of opposing talent, they're ranked ahead of LSU. Even though LSU's three losses were to #11 Florida, #7 Georgia, and a close overtime loss to #1 Alabama. LSU is currently ranked 20th nationally. Granted, to stay ranked with three losses is a feat in and of itself, but come on.

Clearly their opponents were infinitely more difficult than Ball State's, yet that doesn't seem to be taken into account simply because Ball State is hanging a bagel on the end of their record.

Didn't Hawaii's absolute pummeling at the hands of Georgia in the Sugar Bowl last year prove that this is an issue? Yeah, Hawaii was undefeated, but itwas against teams that may as well have been D2 schools aside from Boise State.

If they insist on keeping the BCS system in place, can we at least get some proper weighting to the system to make it so we don't get shitty blowout BCS games?

tl;dr fuck the BCS
>> Anonymous
>>463646

Hurr durr conference games erp derf.
>> Anonymous
>>463587
Seen how big C-USA and the WAC are lately? Not many flights you could get in a "Best of the rest" conference could be much worse than the commute between Hawaii - Louisiana Tech or East Carolina - Texas-El Paso.
>> Bad Ronald !!PmSJLGkyQ9C
>>463623

The coaches' poll is a popularity contest, the only reason anybody would consider the BCS the same is that the formula now includes a higher weight for the polls.
>> Anonymous
>An entire league of parody
>league of parody
>parody
>> Drew Elmore
why can't they play it just like the NCAA basketball tournament? Start in November and finish it on Jan 1, play one week at a time. Get 64 teams, some that win their conference championships, and the rest are at-large. The final four would be bigger than the Super Bowl.
>> thetruth !!aGXBnMVTlN3
ITT, OP is a LSU fag
>> Anonymous
64 teams would be too many. 8 maybe 16 at the most would be feasible.
>> Anonymous
>>463722
16 is how FCS schools do it and they have a great system, and I'm not just saying that because I go to an FCS school. The season games are still extremely worthwhile, but one loss or two won't kill you if you play in a tough conference.
>> Anonymous
>>463724
>>463724
>The season games are still extremely worthwhile, but one loss or two won't kill you if you play in a tough conference.

Also true of current BCS system...
>> Anonymous
>>463727
No, because USC won't get a NC bid (and rightfully so since they're always overranked) if the BigXII and SEC champion each only one loss. They'll get a "bowl" but that's not the same.
>> Anonymous
64 would be incredible, that way no team is eliminated from the NC just by losing a fluke game and we could even see a Cindarella team (Syracuse? Baylor?) make a run.
>> Anonymous
>>The BCS is a shit system that creates controversy
>>I'm glad Penn State lost so there's no controversy anymore

I hope someone else loses so that there IS controversy. Every year that someone gets clearly hosed makes for another year of fan discontent, which puts us a year closer to a playoff system.
>> Anonymous
There's a perfect way to fix this. Make an 8 or 16-team bracket, and incorporate the BCS bowls and the top tier of other bowls (Cotton, Gator, etc.) AS those games. Rotate games in and out of the various tiers to ensure bowl parity.
>> Anonymous
as a fan of a traditionally terrible football school i love the bcs system. the only joy i ever get out of the college football season is a watching the misery the bcs causes. it's like watching a train wreck.
>> Anonymous
The BCS has outlived it's usefulness. In the days when there was a small group of perennial elites, then you usually arrived with a small nucleus of good teams at the top and determining the best couple teams wasn't too hard.

But nowadays with increasing parity and the emergence of better non-BCS schools, the top rankings are a pure mess. It's time for a new system.
>> Anonymous
>rightfully so since they're always overranked

All the big names are overranked, even your team. It makes them more money that way.
>> Anonymous
>>463862
plus Utah stomping the shit out of Pitt
>> Larry Bobcat Brown !NCNwunF5EI
Every game is a playoff, the BCS is a good system, not great, and will never ever be changed. Everyone except the college football fan benefits from it, EVERYONE.

Sponsors get to advertise
EVERYONE makes money
Coaches get paid more
Teachers/staff get a few more days off
Schools get publicity

Their isn't really anyone who doesn't benefit from it
>> Anonymous
>>463864
true dat, got urban a jobby job
>> Anonymous
>Sponsors get to advertise
>EVERYONE makes money
>Coaches get paid more
>Teachers/staff get a few more days off
>Schools get publicity

None of those things would change with a playoff and bowls for teams that didn't make it. Non-NC games already have average viewership as it is. With a playoff, you're going to have four quarterfinal and two semifinal games that will probably have combined ratings much better than the Rose/Sugar/Fiesta/Orange.
>> Larry Bobcat Brown !NCNwunF5EI
>>463891
Your forgetting that they are still kids though
so your wanting to add 2 games to there schedule? So now the coaches are gonna want more money for the extra games etc etc, idk

The bcs is here to stay forever, get use to it. It's not that bad of a system. Atleast college football doesn't have "sudden death" overtime where the winner is the guy who wins the coin toss
>> Anonymous
>>463908

two games....to the schedules of a very small number of schools
>> Anonymous
>>463869
>>Sponsors get to advertise

This is solved by incorporating the top tiers of bowls into the playoff system

In an 8-team playoff, there's the championship game and six quarterfinal and semifinal games. Simply use the four existing BCS bowls (Fiesta, Rose, Orange, and Sugar) and add two of the better non-BCS bowls (Cotton, Chik-Fil-A, Gator, etc.)

Rotate the bowls in and out of the semifinal round every year.

Problem solved.
>> Anonymous
>>464331
not to mention, they just ADDED an extra game to everybody's schedules a couple years back. how about we toss that game, and suddenly a 4-team playoff in 2009 would be no different at all from any 2008 bowl team's schedule.

>>463799
the pac-10 may suck balls, but usc is legit every season, pretty much (and i say this as a ucla fan). go look at their nonconf games since 2002. they've been beaten by k-state 27-20 @KSU in a year when k state went 11-2, and obvs the OMGVINCEYOUNG ridiculousness. other than that, it's been usc rolling up pretty much every non-pac 10 team by double digits (average margin of victory against SEC teams since carroll showed up - 32; AVERAGE margin of victory).

fans of pretty much every other team just have to pray that somebody from the pac-10 takes out usc in the miracle that seems to happen every season. when it comes to OOC, it's usually -insert random team here- gets whipped while bitching about how usc never would make it through the SEC undefeated (right, because auburn really was a better team in 2004, JUST ASK THE CITADEL)
>> Anonymous
Before they do anything else, they should institute uniformity across the conferences regarding Conf. Championship games. It's very odd that some have them and some don't.
>> Anonymous
"creates unnecessary tension"

lulz

What horrible entertainment value!
>> Anonymous
>>464353
i'm going to disagree - not because i don't think there should be uniformity amidst similar conferences, but because conferences simply aren't uniform. how would you go about making the big 10 split into divisions, given its uneven numbers? the pac-10 already plays a full true round-robin - can that be reconciled with a split into divisions plus a conf champ game? plus, what about the smaller conferences, or the 4 independents?

forcing uniformity due to convenience is what got us into this bcs mess. i would advise against it.
>> Anonymous
>>464365

The Big 11 should get themselves a 12th team. Notre Dame is a good candidate.
>> Anonymous
>>464368
ND will never join a conference as long as the bcs exists. as it stands, they're almost guaranteed a bcs slot with 9 wins (every time ND's had 9+ wins since the bcs began, they've been in a bcs bowl except 1998, the bcs's first season, when they went to the gator bowl). in a conference, a) they wouldn't be able to get away with playing SC, UM, and 10 teams of varying degrees of extreme creaminess; b) they'd have to make their way into the bcs like everybody else, as opposed to the current ruleset in which they have their very own provision written in.
>> Anonymous
>>464375

Notre Dame can suck on it
Just one more good reason to adopt a playoff format
>> ????
staunch lover of bcs. The game america wants to see is Florida vs. USC. and all your other shitty teams will lose in the next month. Goodnight ppl.
>> Anonymous
>>464383
No one outside of Los Angeles County wants to see USC in the title game.
>> ????
>>464387
bullshit. I live in Auburn Alabama, and I like sports, and the only team that can possibly stop Florida is USC. I'm sorry you graduated from Texas.
>> Anonymous
>>the only team that can possibly stop Florida is USC

I would take USC, Texas, Texas Tech, or Oklahoma over Florida.
>> Anonymous
>>464394
I went to Oklahoma. Also, Ole Miss.
>> Anonymous
>>464394
i think you and he are saying the same thing.

no one outside l.a. wants to see usc in the title game because it means usc will likely win another title (unless john parker wilson = vince young)
>> Anonymous
>>464394
USC is overrated
>> Anonymous
>>464398
oh, right, OKLAHOMA has certainly never laid an egg in a bcs game
>> Anonymous
>>464401
SEC is overrated
>> Anonymous
>>464406
Well they've certainly never been bitch slapped by a team with a lame-duck coach who lost to Appalachian State.
>> Anonymous
>>464413
WOOOOO SEC SPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED
>> Anonymous
>>464411
Most wins in BCS bowls etc etc
>> Anonymous
>>464423
woo for top-heavy conferences.

or do you honestly believe that the pac-10 (8-4) is better than the big 12 (6-8)? or that the big east (6-4) is better than ANYBODY?
>> Anonymous
>>464425
I honestly believe that the SEC is better than the pac-10
>> Anonymous
>>464427
i honestly believe you didn't answer my question. everybody knows the pac-10 sucks. doesn't mean the sec can't still be overrated, which it is.

it must be nice to get to play against ohio state in a bcs bowl every year, tho - really helps those win totals. i think we can all agree the buckeyes should never be permitted into a nat'l championship game again?
>> Anonymous
>>464429
You gotta give Ohio State credit for trying, no matter how hard they failed two years in a row.
>> Anonymous
>>464431
well at least they're better than notre dame.

anybody want to take a guess as to which school has the worst record, all-time, in bcs bowl games?
>> Anonymous
>>464432

Notre Dame and Virginia Tech are each 0-3.

Give some credit to Florida State, who is 1-5.
>> Anonymous
>>464434
Dame hasn't won a bowl game since like 92'
>> Anonymous
>>464434
... good point on fsu.

on a side note, ohio state is incredibly 4-2. i guess sweatervest's deal with the devil expired in '07.
>> Anonymous
>>464439

"Remember when Ohio State was good?"