 | ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
|
« Bloglet List Reveals Popularity of Iranian Blogs | Main | Are Saddam's WMD in Syria? » January 6, 2004How to Fix the BCSOkay, admittedly I'm wading into a controversy waaaay outside my area of expertise. I don't spend all day mulling college football and debating the pros and cons of the bowl system versus a playoff, or exploring the intracacies of the multiple human and computer rankings that combine to form the Bowl Championship Series ranking and determine which teams play in the BCS National Championship bowl game. But after this year's BCS debacle, it is almost impossible to escape the debate. So, forthwith, some details about the current BCS system, and my simple suggestion for reforming it. Currently, the champions of the six most powerful conferences - the Pac 10, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, Big East and SEC - have automatic spots in the four BCS bowl games - the Rose, Orange, Sugar and Fiesta Bowls, with two spots open for "at-large" teams. The BCS combines a series of human polls and computer rankings into one "BCS ranking" that determines spots in the polls, and the top two teams in the BCS ranking play a "championship game," which rotates each year among the four Bowls. The big Bowls created the BCS as a way to protect the big Bowls from being minimized by a playoff system. Bowls are Big Money. The big Bowls are not going to give up without a fight. So... a solution must: A) protect the Bowls, B) guarantee a true championship game between the top 2 teams in the country, and, C) involve the BCS. Here's how to do it: 1. Expand the BCS Bowl alliance to six bowls by adding the Cotton Bowl and the Peach Bowl. 2. Use the BCS rankings to determine the top 7 teams in the country. 3. Place teams 2-7 teams in three of the six BCS bowls via a seeding that pits #2 versus #7, #3 vs. #6, and #4 vs. #5. The top-ranked team gets a bye. 4. Play those three bowl games on New Years Eve or New Years Day. 5. The following week, take the #1 team and the three winners of the New Years BCS bowls and play #1 vs #4, and #2 versus #3, in two of the three remaining un-played BCS bowls. 6. One week later, the two winners meet in the final BCS bowl, which rotates each year among six five BCS bowls. The semi-final games also rotate among the six BCS bowls - meaning that each of the six bowls is guaranteed to host a semi-final game once every three years, and the championship once every six. Perfect? No - there will always be a #8 team that thinks it got the shaft. But this plan enhances the importance of the bowls because each bowl plays a role in determining the national champion, and because each bowl gets a chance to host the final championship game. Comments
What debacle? This season ended with 3 teams who had 1 loss each. Because the college presidents have refused to allow a playoff (and show no interest in allowing one in the future), the BCS formula was created to place two teams in one of the bowls. This year the formula chose those two teams (of the 3) which had played the most difficult schedules. The team which had played the weakest schedule was left out. I think it is perfectly reasonable to choose the two teams who played the better slates of opponents over the team which played the easy schedule. So I don't understand why all the crazy Chicken Littles are screaming that the sky is falling. Given the long history of inexplicable votes, bias and brain-dead rankings that the writers and coaches have given us with their polls, one would have to be a fool to take their complaints very seriously. There ARE legitimate arguments that one can make against the BCS system. What is so depressing is to listen to the ridiculous nonsense coming from so many of the critics. As for your proposed playoff Bill, it is as nice as any other. Until the college presidents give their OK, however, it is merely fantasy. Playoff proponents who slam the BCS because it isn't a playoff remind me of the son whose father had agreed to buy him a used car. Given a choice between a used Chevy and a used Ford, he complained that he really wanted a new Mercedes. When his father reminded him that he didn't have that kind of money, the son said he wanted a new father. Given that the REAL WORLD choice is between the old bowl system or the BCS, I'll take the BCS every time. And I'll take the unbiased computers over the idiot poll voters as well. Posted by: stan at January 6, 2004 11:59 AMWhat Stan said, and I'll add I prefer it as it is. The NCAA should not be NFL light, there is a reason the NFL is known as the NO Fun League, reducing the pagentry of the college game will stifle the passion that makes Div 1 better than the NFL. Posted by: Steve Malynn at January 6, 2004 01:45 PMOr we could simply say that in order to play in the National Championship Game you must have won your conference. If we add that to the criteria, Nebraska would not have played Miami three years ago. And Oklahoma, which did not win the Big 12, would not have played in the title game. A simple answer that would eliminate quite a lot of problems. The only hitch would be an Independant(Notre Dame), but that is a very rare instance in this day and age. Posted by: Darren at January 6, 2004 04:32 PMThe biggest problem with your suggestion is that some teams could play up to three postseason games, and that long of a schedule is not permitted under the rules. Besides, D1 college football argues a playoff would keep players away from their studies too long. The problem this year is that the NCAA allowed computers to overrule what human eyes saw. Next year, I anticipate a committee (much like the men's baskeball tournament committee) that will take the BCS rankings and make a decision on who will play for the title. That kind of committee certainly would have picked LSU-USC in the championship game. Posted by: CJ at January 6, 2004 05:34 PMThere should be some provision for conference champions. But rather than excluding teams that don't win their conference, rather give the conference champions a bonus like -1. This will still allow teams like Notre Dame to be eligible for the BCS Championship. By the way, a conference championship bonus would have nocked OU out of contention and placed USC in the Sugar Bowl. That's a better solution than instituting a NCAA star chamber of "distinguished gentlemen" to make an "unbiased" choice. As bad as they are, I prefer the sports writers. What is a disgrace though are the coaches who agreed to abide by a system for selecting a national champion and then reneged because they didn't like the results. Like the Democrats saying Algore should be President because he won the popular vote. Fortunately the Constitution says differently. Shame. Geaux Tigers! Posted by: Kevin at January 6, 2004 10:47 PMhttp://www.routenplanung.de.tk/routenplaner-berlin.html Post a comment
Comments Policy: Your comment is subject to deletion if it is off-topic or includes foul language or personal attack. Readers, please email me if you find comments that include egregious violations of this policy. Comments may not post immediately - do not post twice!
|
|||||||||||
