PDA

View Full Version : An Unbiased View of the BCS



Philter25
12-04-2006, 04:48 PM
Let me get this out of the way, I am a Penn State alumni. I hate Ohio State and I hate Michigan, (and I also hate Notre Dame but thats another story) nothing would thrill me more than seeing both of them lose in Bowl Games. I am well aware this is a miami dolphins message board which means there are a ton of Florida homers lurking in here which are going to disagree with me and tell me to "stop hating on Florida, shut-up, and just accept it" and all that other BS which people use to defend their team when nothing else makes sense and prevails. Again, to re-iterate, I haaaaaaaaaaaate Michigan and would prefer Florida in the NC game and hope they beat Ohio State.

The BCS is designed to put the top 2 teams in the nation against each other in the NC game. However, I dont understand the BCS at all this year and believe it failed. I feel the human element took over the past weekend and ruined the BCS this year.

Look at the timeline of events:

On Nov 19th, the BCS read Ohio State #1, Michigan #2, USC #3, Florida #4. Ohio State had just beat Michigan by 3 and claimed their spot as the #1 team in the nation. The hoopla in the media was that USC would jump Michigan into the #2 spot if USC beat Notre Dame and that Michigan would stay at #2 if Notre Dame beat USC. The NC game would be USC vs Ohio State if USC beat ND and UCLA. Michigan would be #3 and Florida was a solid #4 playing in a tough SEC. If the HUMAN element believed that Florida and USC were better than Michigan, why did they not jump them here? Michigan just came off a loss and if they are going to be passed, now is the time. Florida has been playing in a tough SEC all year long, not just the last week of the season.

On Nov 26th, the BCS read Ohio State #1, USC #2, Michigan #3, Florida #4. Despite everyone in Michigan rooting for Notre Dame, USC wins and it looks like USC vs. Ohio State in the NC game. Michigan is #3 and Florida is a solid #4 seed STILL playing in the tough SEC. Florida squeaks by Florida State and Arkansas loses to LSU and ends their chances. If the HUMAN element believed Florida was a better team, why not jump them here?

On Dec 3rd, the BCS read Ohio State #1, Florida #2, Michigan #3. It happened, USC lost to UCLA and Michigan fans think they are getting another shot at Ohio State. Everything that needed to fall into place fell into place for Michigan to get another title shot. Florida beat 2-loss Arkansas and won the SEC. However human pollsters decide to jump Florida past idle Michigan..... the only reason I can think is they did not want a rematch.

What I dont understand is if Florida was a better team than Michigan, why did Florida jump Michigan ONLY when USC lost? Florida was playing in the tough SEC ALL YEAR LONG, not just the last week of the season. The only reason is that the human element did not want to see a rematch, even if it meant not having the best 2 teams in the nation play each other.

Take a look back, what would have happened if USC LOST to Notre Dame? Does anyone actually think voters would have jumped Florida over Michigan then? Everyone keeps talking about how Florida plays in such a tough SEC, but what about the Big10? The Big10 has 3 teams in the top 6, not the SEC.

Ive read talk on here about Florida's 10 point loss to Auburn...... I agree with some arguments that it wasnt really a 10 point loss, it was a 3 point loss. People who watch college football are aware of junk points at the end of the game. I'll consider that game a 3 point loss to Auburn.

Michigan lost to the #1 team in the nation by 3 points. Ive read the debate here that it wasnt a 3 point game, the game was never close, etc. I disagree, at the start of the 4th quarter, it was a 4 point game and with 2:00 remaining in the game, it was a 3 point game. Even though OSU was up by 14 at points in the game, Michigan was still in the game and had the chance to win and played Ohio State close.

Comparing the losses, I will give Florida the benefit and consider the loss differential to be 3 for Florida and Michigan, however losing to the best team in the nation is a stronger loss than any other team in the nation by the same margin. Advantage, Michigan.

Michigan I think loses out because they were idle and not playing anyone. If Michigan was in ANY other conference except the Big10 and not behind Ohio State, they are in the national championship game. Rematch aside, if Michigan is the PAC-10 champ and its only loss was to Ohio State, they remain in the NC game.

A few years ago there was a lot of complaints about the computer system. This year, the complaints are on the human element. It seems every year there is a perfectly good reason why the BCS needs to keep evolving to a playoff system.

This year is a perfect example of why college football needs a 4 team playoff system. OSU vs. LSU and Mich vs. UF. The winners settle it in the national championship game. Let the teams DECIDE IT ON THE FIELD, not in the polls or by the computer or human element. The BCS is such a flawed system and it seems every year one team gets the benefit of the system and another team gets the shaft..... this year is no exception.

But hey, for all the talk about how college sports are more pure than pro sports, we all know that the Bowl Games revolve around one thing, money, which is more often than none the root of all problems.

Crowder52
12-04-2006, 04:56 PM
Not going to attack you but...

You failed to mention strength of schedule at all.

Also, idle teams get jumped all the time in college football. Every week of the year. In fact, Michigan got jumped the week before by USC. No one was griping then. Why is this so different?

Oboy
12-04-2006, 04:59 PM
Not going to attack you but...

You failed to mention strength of schedule at all.

Also, idle teams get jumped all the time in college football. Every week of the year. In fact, Michigan got jumped the week before by USC. No one was griping then. Why is this so different?
BINGO... UF played a #8 team on a neutral field and won soundly. Hence the reason they jumped an idle team with less wins (11-1 vs 12-1). That was the game that put the Gators over the top.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
12-04-2006, 05:03 PM
the human element is so important because people complained a few years ago when USC was #1 in both polls and they didn't get into the championship game. so they made it so the polls made a bigger impact. makes sense to me...

Timmy54
12-04-2006, 05:03 PM
I got one for ya, how about UF won their conference, Michgan did not! It is not UF's fault your conference doesnt have a championship game (why not??) and just crowns the best team. How can you sit with a straight face and say a team that didnt even win their own conference should be in the National championship game?? Also, it wasnt just the human voters, the computer had both teams even. Tie breaker could go more wins, or that conference championship, or the fact UF played against teams with a .63something record!!! Also, it was not just the harris poll but also the coaches poll that both had the gators #2, the AP poll even had the gators ahead of Michigan and said they would be even if USC didnt lose! Your still having a bit of big ten homerism over there. I dont see where Michigan has an argument other than to say...there should be a playoff system in place.

Stitches
12-04-2006, 05:05 PM
I got one for ya, how about UF won their conference, Michgan did not! It is not UF's fault your conference doesnt have a championship game (why not??) and just crowns the best team. How can you sit with a straight face and say a team that didnt even win their own conference should be in the National championship game?? Also, it wasnt just the human voters, the computer had both teams even. Tie breaker could go more wins, or that conference championship, or the fact UF played against teams with a .63something record!!! Also, it was not just the harris poll but also the coaches poll that both had the gators #2, the AP poll even had the gators ahead of Michigan and said they would be even if USC didnt lose! Your still having a bit of big ten homerism over there. I dont see where Michigan has an argument other than to say...there should be a playoff system in place.

Because they only have 11 teams, and need 12 for a championship game.

Timmy54
12-04-2006, 05:07 PM
Because they only have 11 teams, and need 12 for a championship game.

Well go ahead an admit Nuter Dame into your silly conference, it is not like they dont already play 3 teams a year.

Cuban Dave 9
12-04-2006, 05:07 PM
The Gators had MORE COWBELL! lol j/k

Stitches
12-04-2006, 05:10 PM
Well go ahead an admit Nuter Dame into your silly conference, it is not like they dont already play 3 teams a year.

Why would ND do that though? They'd probably have to give up thier NBC conract, and they wouldn't get all thier money from whatever bowl game they undeservedly get sent to.

kpcane
12-04-2006, 05:10 PM
On Nov 19th, the BCS read Ohio State #1, Michigan #2, USC #3, Florida #4...
If the HUMAN element believed that Florida and USC were better than Michigan, why did they not jump them here?

That's the point I've been trying to make, but it's lost on everyone here. I don't know what beating Arkansas says about a team that everyone didn't already know two weeks prior.

Philter25
12-04-2006, 05:12 PM
I had a feeling I was only feeding the homers.

Again, I HATE MICHIGAN. Never did I say that Florida DID NOT belong in the game, my post was more about the flaws in the system.

I didnt talk about strength of schedule because the computers cover it. No need to debate something thats already calculated and is a system that every teams plays with. The problem this year was the human element.

The BCS tweaks the system from year to year. UF FinKat is correct, the human element was a problem years ago and it got tweaked, if you were not a UF fan and were an unbiased fan, you would see how its the problem this year.

Again, the point of my post was not to get into a debate with 1000 UF fans who are going to say anything to justify UF getting into the NC game, it was to critique the BCS and show how this is just another year where all the turmoil and debates would be easily solved with a playoff system....... but ignore that and keep on debating about UF.

Crowder52
12-04-2006, 05:12 PM
That's the point I've been trying to make, but it's lost on everyone here. I don't know what beating Arkansas says about a team that everyone didn't already know two weeks prior.

Then where was the outburst when USC jumped Michigan after beating ND? It's a double standard that's just convenient for your argument.

Timmy54
12-04-2006, 05:12 PM
That's the point I've been trying to make, but it's lost on everyone here. I don't know what beating Arkansas says about a team that everyone didn't already know two weeks prior.

it is just another top 10 team that the gators beat!!! no big deal, really!!:sidelol:

Crowder52
12-04-2006, 05:13 PM
I had a feeling I was only feeding the homers.

Again, I HATE MICHIGAN. Never did I say that Florida DID NOT belong in the game, my post was more about the flaws in the system.

I didnt talk about strength of schedule because the computers cover it. No need to debate something thats already calculated and is a system that every teams plays with. The problem this year was the human element.

The BCS tweaks the system from year to year. UF FinKat is correct, the human element was a problem years ago and it got tweaked, if you were not a UF fan and were an unbiased fan, you would see how its the problem this year.

Again, the point of my post was not to get into a debate with 1000 UF fans who are going to say anything to justify UF getting into the NC game, it was to critique the BCS and show how this is just another year where all the turmoil and debates would be easily solved with a playoff system....... but ignore that and keep on debating about UF.

So wait...you're saying something is wrong with the BCS and a playoff should be used? This is revolutionary thinking!

Philter25
12-04-2006, 05:14 PM
Your still having a bit of big ten homerism over there. I think you missed the point where I stated I haaaaaaaaate Michigan and I haaaaaaaaaaaate Ohio State and I will be rooting for BOTH of them to lose in their Bowl Games.

kpcane
12-04-2006, 05:15 PM
Then where was the outburst when USC jumped Michigan after beating ND? It's a double standard that's just convenient for your argument.

That's a good point.

The only answer I have for that is people really didn't know much USC because they didn't have any solid wins. Florida's best wins were behind them (which I don't consider a negative - that's why I thought they should have been higher).

finswin56
12-04-2006, 05:15 PM
Because they only have 11 teams, and need 12 for a championship game.Either add one or drop one. Either have a championship game, or play every team in your conference.
The current Big Ten system is absurd.

Thanks for taking the time Philter, but that story can be spun any way you want it to turn out. I'm sure I can find a Tennesse fan who hates UF every bit as much as you hate OSU and UM, and he'd find an argument every bit as convincing for UF.

In the end, a playoff is so obvious it's getting tiresome. But, it's so obvious because it's so true.

Philter25
12-04-2006, 05:16 PM
*sigh* I have been defeated. Pointless thread. Mods, feel free to close.

Good luck UF.

I hope next year you are on the bad end of the crock that is the BCS. I'm sure you will be singing a different tune and hopefully you can look at it objectively and see whats wrong with it.

Stitches
12-04-2006, 05:17 PM
Either add one or drop one. Either have a championship game, or play every team in your conference.
The current Big Ten system is absurd.

Thanks for taking the time Philter, but that story can be spun any way you want it to turn out. I'm sure I can find a Tennesse fan who hates UF every bit as much as you hate OSU and UM, and he'd find an argument every bit as convincing for UF.

In the end, a playoff is so obvious it's getting tiresome. But, it's so obvious because it's so true.

I agree. I think it'd be easier to add one though. I mean Ohio State didn't even have to play the "3rd best" conference team in Wisconsin. Both Penn State and Michigan gave OSU trouble, who's to say Wisconsin wouldn't have won?

finswin56
12-04-2006, 05:18 PM
I had a feeling I was only feeding the homers.

Again, I HATE MICHIGAN. Never did I say that Florida DID NOT belong in the game, my post was more about the flaws in the system.

I didnt talk about strength of schedule because the computers cover it. No need to debate something thats already calculated and is a system that every teams plays with. The problem this year was the human element.

The BCS tweaks the system from year to year. UF FinKat is correct, the human element was a problem years ago and it got tweaked, if you were not a UF fan and were an unbiased fan, you would see how its the problem this year.

Again, the point of my post was not to get into a debate with 1000 UF fans who are going to say anything to justify UF getting into the NC game, it was to critique the BCS and show how this is just another year where all the turmoil and debates would be easily solved with a playoff system....... but ignore that and keep on debating about UF.No debating for UF here. I appreciate your post, and you expose the flaws well.

IMO, neither UF or UM are clearly #2 or #3.

Crowder52
12-04-2006, 05:18 PM
I still haven't met a single supporter of the BCS during my entire career as a college football fan, at least not since we realized what it was and noticed its shortcomings. My school is going to the BCS Title game and I still think the BCS is a joke. Unless there has been an outcry of praise for the BCS that I missed somewhere...

finswin56
12-04-2006, 05:19 PM
I agree. I think it'd be easier to add one though. I mean Ohio State didn't even have to play the "3rd best" conference team in Wisconsin. Both Penn State and Michigan gave OSU trouble, who's to say Wisconsin wouldn't have won?Tough to make an argument for Wisconsin when they didn't play OSU or any other ranked team.

Philter25
12-04-2006, 05:19 PM
I agree. I think it'd be easier to add one though. I mean Ohio State didn't even have to play the "3rd best" conference team in Wisconsin. Both Penn State and Michigan gave OSU trouble, who's to say Wisconsin wouldn't have won?

You can make the same argument for Florida not playing every team in their conference.... its a flaw in not just the Big10 (11)

Edited because I cant remember UF's schedule off the top of my head.

Stitches
12-04-2006, 05:20 PM
You can make that argument against Florida also..... they didnt play LSU. Who's to say the #4 team in the nation would have beaten Florida?
Florida beat LSU I thought. :confused:

Philter25
12-04-2006, 05:21 PM
No debating for UF here. I appreciate your post, and you expose the flaws well.

IMO, neither UF or UM are clearly #2 or #3.

Gracias. That was what I was getting at.

Crowder52
12-04-2006, 05:22 PM
You can make that argument against Florida also..... they didnt play LSU. Who's to say the #4 team in the nation would have beaten Florida?

There are 100+ teams in college football. With only 11-13 games on most schedules, everyone cant play everyone.

Oh my...

There are 5 ranked teams in the SEC. UF is one of them. They played the other 4, going 3-1.

Stitches
12-04-2006, 05:22 PM
Tough to make an argument for Wisconsin when they didn't play OSU or any other ranked team.

No, I'm saying OSU may have lost to Wisconsin, not that they are deserving of thier rank. I mean who knows, when they never played, Wisconsin may have destroyed them. I mean, Illinois almost beat OSU for crying out loud. It is absurd to think about how the Big Ten is handled games-wise.

Philter25
12-04-2006, 05:23 PM
Florida beat LSU I thought. :confused: Yea I edited it as soon as I posted it....... I forgot they beat LSU earlier in the year and I now cant remember what teams in the SEC they didnt play.....


Oh my...

There are 5 ranked teams in the SEC. UF is one of them. They played the other 4, going 3-1.
See above. You guys are fast. The team was wrong but the argument stays the same. You can make that argument for more conferences other than the Big10 that they dont play every team in their conference every year which was the point. My not following Florida's every game earlier in the year shows....

Cuban Dave 9
12-04-2006, 05:24 PM
You can make the same argument for Florida not playing every team in their conference....
???

Crowder52
12-04-2006, 05:26 PM
Yea I edited it as soon as I posted it....... I forgot they beat LSU earlier in the year and I now cant remember what teams in the SEC they didnt play.....

Want to know the only 2 teams in the conference UF didn't play?

Mississippi (4-8) and Miss. State (3-9), the two worst teams in the conference.

Philter25
12-04-2006, 05:27 PM
??? IIRC, The SEC does not play every team in the SEC each year. The same flaws with the Big10 happens in the SEC also..... I dont recall Florida's earlier schedule, but arent there 2 or 3 teams in the SEC they dont play every year?


Want to know the only 2 teams in the conference UF didn't play?

Mississippi (4-8) and Miss. State (3-9), the two worst teams in the conference.

Gracias. I forgot who. Regardless of their record, its a flaw in every conference where you can have that situation every year, not just the Big10.

Stitches
12-04-2006, 05:28 PM
Want to know the only 2 teams in the conference UF didn't play?

Mississippi (4-8) and Miss. State (3-9), the two worst teams in the conference.

Yea, they played West Carolina instead. :sidelol:

Still a tougher schedule than Michigan or Ohio State IMO though.

Oboy
12-04-2006, 05:28 PM
*sigh* I have been defeated. Pointless thread. Mods, feel free to close.

Good luck UF.

I hope next year you are on the bad end of the crock that is the BCS. I'm sure you will be singing a different tune and hopefully you can look at it objectively and see whats wrong with it.
LOL, I personally did not mean it that way. I was just adding more to your point.

Do I think the system is correct? NO. I did not realize that was the intend of this thread (I thought it was another endless debate over who should be #2). Do we need a playoff? Yes. Why is Div 1 the ONLY sport that does not have a playoff/tournament to decide the champ? It is really becoming a pain the rear how every year there is at least one team that feels it got "jobbed"

Crowder52
12-04-2006, 05:29 PM
Yea, they played West Carolina instead. :sidelol:

Still a tougher schedule than Michigan or Ohio State IMO though.

Everyone has a few crap teams on their schedule, I don't see what's laughable about it. We played two teams that aren't going to a bowl, and you picked one of them.

Philter25
12-04-2006, 05:32 PM
LOL, I personally did not mean it that way. I was just adding more to your point.

Do I think the system is correct? NO. I did not realize that was the intend of this thread (I thought it was another endless debate over who should be #2). Do we need a playoff? Yes. Why is Div 1 the ONLY sport that does not have a playoff/tournament to decide the champ? It is really becoming a pain the rear how every year there is at least one team that feels it got "jobbed"

NP. This is turning into another pointless debate about who is #2. I cant stand defending Michigan nor did I ever intend on defending Michigan. Everyone can make arguments for both sides, most arguments are also applicable to the other side. That was the point. This is just another perfect example of the flaws in the BCS and just another step towards a playoff system.

I am throwing in the towel......

finswin56
12-04-2006, 05:33 PM
You can make the same argument for Florida not playing every team in their conference.... its a flaw in not just the Big10 (11)

Edited because I cant remember UF's schedule off the top of my head.Yeah, but they do play 8 SEC teams during the season (the same as Big Ten schools). 5 from their division, plus LSU every year, plus 2 on a rotation, PLUS a championship game.

finswin56
12-04-2006, 05:34 PM
No, I'm saying OSU may have lost to Wisconsin, not that they are deserving of thier rank. I mean who knows, when they never played, Wisconsin may have destroyed them. I mean, Illinois almost beat OSU for crying out loud. It is absurd to think about how the Big Ten is handled games-wise. Gotcha :up:

Crowder52
12-04-2006, 05:35 PM
Yeah, but they do play 8 SEC teams during the season (the same as Big Ten schools). 5 from their division, plus LSU every year, plus 2 on a rotation, PLUS a championship game.

Yeah the championship game is what ensures you play the best or 2nd best team in the conference. If you win the East, if the West champion rotated off of your schedule that year then you still play them after all.

Philter25
12-04-2006, 05:37 PM
Yeah, but they do play 8 SEC teams during the season (the same as Big Ten schools). 5 from their division, plus LSU every year, plus 2 on a rotation, PLUS a championship game. :up:

finswin56
12-04-2006, 05:37 PM
Regardless of their record, its a flaw in every conference where you can have that situation every year, not just the Big10.A flaw, but one that is mitigated by a conference championship game, one where UF could have easily played LSU twice.

Don't throw in the towel. This is a good thread, and the #2 debate is an exercise in futility that should be saved for countless other threads.

finswin56
12-04-2006, 05:38 PM
:up:But, do note that it's 8 PLUS a ninth game with a championship game.
</IMG>

Philter25
12-04-2006, 05:41 PM
Yup, and as said before, with only 11 teams in the Big10, they cant have a championship game. Their system is flawed also. They can have co-Big10 champs each year if 2 teams end up with the same record. Just another flaw to add to the list.

Stitches
12-04-2006, 05:44 PM
Everyone has a few crap teams on their schedule, I don't see what's laughable about it. We played two teams that aren't going to a bowl, and you picked one of them.

I laughed because West Carolina is D-1AA, so of course they have no shot at goign to a bowl, regardless of record. It's laughable that they even bother scheduling that game, because it would be more of a challenge to scrimmage thier 1st team against thier 2nd team. And I know every big team schedules a cake opponent or two, notice how I went on to say Florida still played a tougher schedule than Michigan or Ohio State?

Timmy54
12-04-2006, 05:57 PM
I think you missed the point where I stated I haaaaaaaaate Michigan and I haaaaaaaaaaaate Ohio State and I will be rooting for BOTH of them to lose in their Bowl Games.

no i didnt miss it, it just sounds as if your giving more credit to Michigan than they deserve.

Timmy54
12-04-2006, 05:59 PM
*sigh* I have been defeated. Pointless thread. Mods, feel free to close.

Good luck UF.

I hope next year you are on the bad end of the crock that is the BCS. I'm sure you will be singing a different tune and hopefully you can look at it objectively and see whats wrong with it.

UF fans still see the BCS as a crock, still not as bad as Auburn got burned two years ago!!! Urban even said they have to change the system cause no matter what a team who is deserving will not get a chance.

Timmy54
12-04-2006, 06:00 PM
You can make the same argument for Florida not playing every team in their conference.... its a flaw in not just the Big10 (11)

Edited because I cant remember UF's schedule off the top of my head.

Where the SEC gets it right is that the east and west best teams play in the championship game!!! So no matter what there is a clear champ!

Timmy54
12-04-2006, 06:04 PM
Yea, they played West Carolina instead. :sidelol:

Still a tougher schedule than Michigan or Ohio State IMO though.

Western Carolina was a late add on when the 12th game was made ok last year. The only open week that would work was between the south carolina game and the florida state road game. Urban felt like he wanted to be at home cause the team already had their hard road trip schedule, so the offer was made for a bunch of teams to come into the swamp. they tried to get some bigger names but the schedule didnt allow. lets see how the schedule works in the next few years.

NJPHIN34
12-04-2006, 10:31 PM
*sigh* I have been defeated. Pointless thread. Mods, feel free to close.

Good luck UF.

I hope next year you are on the bad end of the crock that is the BCS. I'm sure you will be singing a different tune and hopefully you can look at it objectively and see whats wrong with it.

I support you man!! You made some great points. I'm not really sure who deserves to play in the NC game more, UF or Mich. But I do know that it sucks that decision sometimes comes down to people's perception of a team, conference, etc. Also, it's absolutely ridiculous how timing affects rankings as well. If OSU vs Mich was the first game of the season, we would probably be seeing a rematch. But because it was the last game of the season for them, the pollsters don't want to see a rematch. That's BS.

That was pretty interesting how you pointed out that UF jumped Mich when USC lost. I know they played a game and won, but you are correct, if the pollsters though UF was the better team, the previous week's rankings should have been 1.OSU, 2.USC, 3.UF, 4.Mich.

Crowder52
12-04-2006, 10:33 PM
I support you man!! You made some great points. I'm not really sure who deserves to play in the NC game more, UF or Mich. But I do know that it sucks that decision sometimes comes down to people's perception of a team, conference, etc. Also, it's absolutely ridiculous how timing affects rankings as well. If OSU vs Mich was the first game of the season, we would probably be seeing a rematch. But because it was the last game of the season for them, the pollsters don't want to see a rematch. That's BS.

That was pretty interesting how you pointed out that UF jumped Mich when USC lost. I know they played a game and won, but you are correct, if the pollsters though UF was the better team, the previous week's rankings should have been 1.OSU, 2.USC, 3.UF, 4.Mich.

USC jumped Michigan the week before when they played Notre Dame. No one said a word then...

brandon1986
12-04-2006, 11:19 PM
that is what gets me, no one bitched about usc jumping michigan, michigan lost to ohio state and they were done with their season

but when florida jumps michigan after USC loses it is an outrage

i mean while michigan has had a break for 2 weeks the gators were playing the # 8 team in the nation

idle teams get jumped all the time, and this is no different

who says michigan is the 2nd best team in the nation, when where they crowned that?

who is to say florida isnt better than michigan

Philter25
12-05-2006, 10:24 AM
I support you man!! You made some great points. I'm not really sure who deserves to play in the NC game more, UF or Mich. But I do know that it sucks that decision sometimes comes down to people's perception of a team, conference, etc. Also, it's absolutely ridiculous how timing affects rankings as well. If OSU vs Mich was the first game of the season, we would probably be seeing a rematch. But because it was the last game of the season for them, the pollsters don't want to see a rematch. That's BS.

That was pretty interesting how you pointed out that UF jumped Mich when USC lost. I know they played a game and won, but you are correct, if the pollsters though UF was the better team, the previous week's rankings should have been 1.OSU, 2.USC, 3.UF, 4.Mich.
:up: I cut and pasted my original text from a post I made on another board. The convo actually went pretty well and was very objective...... I thought I would be risky and try it here but the Florida fans are eating everything alive and turning every thread into a "#2 vs #3" debate.


USC jumped Michigan the week before when they played Notre Dame. No one said a word then... I did. I just didnt make a long post about it here. Michigan spanks Notre Dame earlier in the year..... Michigan loses to Ohio State, no one jumps them, Michigan is #2, USC beats the same ND team that Michigan spanked earlier in the season and the pollsters decide to jump them. Ridiculous.

Philter25
12-05-2006, 10:41 AM
Where the SEC gets it right is that the east and west best teams play in the championship game!!! So no matter what there is a clear champ!

I thought we clarified this earlier..... :deadhorse:


I got one for ya, how about UF won their conference, Michgan did not! It is not UF's fault your conference doesnt have a championship game (why not??) and just crowns the best team.


Because they only have 11 teams, and need 12 for a championship game.


Yup, and as said before, with only 11 teams in the Big10, they cant have a championship game. Their system is flawed also. They can have co-Big10 champs each year if 2 teams end up with the same record. Just another flaw to add to the list.

And as I said before in my original post:



Michigan I think loses out because they were idle and not playing anyone. If Michigan was in ANY other conference except the Big10 and not behind Ohio State, they are in the national championship game. Rematch aside, if Michigan is the PAC-10 champ and its only loss was to Ohio State, they remain in the NC game.


Based on how the pollsters voted, they pretty much did not want to see an all Big10 championship game no matter what. Whoever was a 1 loss team behind Michigan was jumping Michigan no matter what. That was evident to the fact that no team jumped Michigan AFTER they lost to Ohio State (when they SHOULD have been jumped) and Michigan was jumped the FOLLOWING consecutive weeks by the next highest ranked 1-loss team.

Whos to say Florida isnt the second best team in the nation? Or is USC? Or even Louisville? How about undefeated Boise State? Thats not the debate here. The debate is the process to which we arrived at Ohio State vs. Florida. This year is just another shining example of how the BCS needs to be tweaked.......again.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
12-05-2006, 10:47 AM
who cares when they were jumped? that's so irrelevant. michigan finished their schedule, and UF and USC still hadn't finished theirs, so their rankings 3 weeks ago weren't based on a complete schedule.

Stitches
12-05-2006, 10:55 AM
who cares when they were jumped? that's so irrelevant. michigan finished their schedule, and UF and USC still hadn't finished theirs, so their rankings 3 weeks ago weren't based on a complete schedule.

All the more reason to not have pre-season rankings, and to wait until like week 5 or so, because you are basing things on unfinished and untested schedules.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
12-05-2006, 11:07 AM
then you shouldn't have them week 5, either...

Philter25
12-05-2006, 11:15 AM
who cares when they were jumped? that's so irrelevant. michigan finished their schedule, and UF and USC still hadn't finished theirs, so their rankings 3 weeks ago weren't based on a complete schedule.

Timing is everything in college football. Take off your Florida glasses and look when they were jumped. You are correct on the complete schedule, however the problem doesnt lie within the COMPUTERS, who calculate all the scheduling, it lies in the human element. After Florida played their complete schedule, the computers didnt vault them ahead......

This isnt a debate about Florida not deserving a shot. They won one of the hardest conferences, they deserve a shot, the point is HOW they got there.

If Michigan lost to OSU earlier in the season and pounded Notre Dame the last game of the season, do you think Florida would be in the NC game?

Again, to re-iterate because it seems it needs to be, im not arguing that Florida doesnt deserve to be in the game, I can name a handful of teams that deserve to be there, this is a debate about the process.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
12-05-2006, 11:24 AM
as i said before, the human element is what people complained about the most before because it was missing. USC gets left out of the championship game despite being #1 in both polls. people complained that the polls should have more of a factor. so they changed it. it's still a combination of the computers and polls.

besides, the computers figure out all of their calculations and stuff each week, too.

Timmy54
12-05-2006, 11:31 AM
the computers also had them tied, it is not like UM can say it was just the voters.

Cuban Dave 9
12-05-2006, 11:36 AM
I don't hear too much bitching from Michigan fans anyway...so I don't know what the big deal is anyway.

Pennington's Rocket Arm
12-05-2006, 11:45 AM
well, michigan fans know that they'd get owned again in the championship. :lol:

also, are there any michigan fans here?

Cuban Dave 9
12-05-2006, 11:49 AM
From SPortsline



South Carolina's Steve Spurrier, who coached the Gators to the '96 national championship, moved Florida past Michigan in the coaches' poll.
His reasoning?
"Heck, I'm a Gator," he said. "I went there. So I had a lot of reason to vote for them right there. It just appeared they're 12-1, the other team is 11-1, I guess that's about it."

Pennington's Rocket Arm
12-05-2006, 11:51 AM
:lol: our old coaches are great.

Philter25
12-05-2006, 11:57 AM
as i said before, the human element is what people complained about the most before because it was missing. USC gets left out of the championship game despite being #1 in both polls. people complained that the polls should have more of a factor. so they changed it. it's still a combination of the computers and polls.
besides, the computers figure out all of their calculations and stuff each week, too.

Agree completely. The system has constantly been tweaked when a flaw has been found. Years ago, when USC got snubbed, they added the human element to make sure it wouldnt happen. This year, all the talk is about the human element.... why, because:

the computers also had them tied, it is not like UM can say it was just the voters.

Exactly. The computers had the two teams TIED and it was the human element which decided who played. Based on HOW the human element voted over the past weeks, its obvious that the human element is the flaw in this system.

The human element is based on timing, who has momentum, and allows the pollsters to decide who they want. It completely ignores anything mathematical and allows non-pertinent related occurances to influence decisions. The human vote takes into account matchups and ratings and financial measures, all of which arent fueling the computer rankings. Michigan can spank Notre Dame early in the season and lose to the #1 team in the nation by 3. USC can lose to unranked Oregon State but they beat Notre Dame, the same Notre Dame that Michigan spanks and yet the pollsters decide that USC should jump Michigan? Makes absolutely no sense.


well, michigan fans know that they'd get owned again in the championship. :lol:

also, are there any michigan fans here?

There is one guy I know of..... Brad(something) Last year I predicted Penn State, based on their freshman class, would win the Big10 over OSU and Michigan before the season started and he gave me crap all year saying PSU sucked and Michigan would win the Big10...... then he shut up when PSU won the Big10 and the Orange Bowl.

Crowder52
12-05-2006, 12:06 PM
Exactly. The computers had the two teams TIED and it was the human element which decided who played. Based on HOW the human element voted over the past weeks, its obvious that the human element is the flaw in this system.

You know they were behind Michigan in the computers before the final rankings, right? So the computers punished Michigan for not having a game too.

Philter, you definitely make a valid point. But the human polls have been this way since their inception. Teams get jumped that don't play when a team behind them gets a quality win. Happens nearly every week of the season.

I personally just don't understand the outcry that's happening right now. Where were all these people (not you obviously, you aren't a media member) every other time in college football history that this happened?

Crowder52
12-05-2006, 12:08 PM
All the more reason to not have pre-season rankings, and to wait until like week 5 or so, because you are basing things on unfinished and untested schedules.

Right on. Wait until about 1/2 way through the season, because a high pre-season rank is a major advantage late in the year for some reason.

Cuban Dave 9
12-05-2006, 01:32 PM
10 Reasons why the Gators deserve it more than the Wolverines:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=schlabach_mark&id=2684345

Philter25
12-05-2006, 01:42 PM
10 Reasons why the Gators deserve it more than the Wolverines:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=schlabach_mark&id=2684345

*Sigh*

Again, not the point of the thread.

There are a billion other spam threads where you can argue who is #2 and who is #3.

Philter25
12-05-2006, 01:51 PM
Philter, you definitely make a valid point. But the human polls have been this way since their inception. Teams get jumped that don't play when a team behind them gets a quality win. Happens nearly every week of the season.


This is correct. The human polls have been unchanged and exactly like this since they started. However as we know with the BCS, its a constantly changing and evolving system. Teams do get jumped every single week, the difference with this scenario is how and when they got jumped.

This isnt like #13 jumps #12 to #11, no one cares about that. When a jump happens like this that changes the picture of the NC game, it gets attention and people talk about it. When its a mediocre team jumping a few teams in the 20s, people dont care because in the grand scheme of things, it has no impact whatsoever.

A team is being punished because of how it scheduled games. Say for example Michigan had a bye week earlier in the season and the Big10 pushed back one of its earlier games until later in the season........ say Wisconsin for example. If Michigan beat Wisconsin the same week that USC beat Notre Dame, do you think the pollsters would have voted the same? I dont. A simple scheduling change in a conference would change its idle week and therefore could change the bowl lineup. True?

Its just another flaw in the BCS system. WHEN you play a team and WHEN you are idle can determine your position in the top 25.

Crowder52
12-05-2006, 01:52 PM
Analogy:

Let's say you go to a "battle of the bands" concert. Each band gets to play 3 songs. Band #1 finishes playing, but Band #2 still has one more song to play. Do you think the people at the concert have to make up their minds right then and there about who was the better band? Why can't they change their mind after seeing Band #2 finish their body of work?

Philter25
12-05-2006, 01:53 PM
Right on. Wait until about 1/2 way through the season, because a high pre-season rank is a major advantage late in the year for some reason.

Agree completely with everyone on the preseason rankings. I said the same thing last year. A top preseason ranking basically guarantees you the #1 spot unless you lose.

How do the computers calculate strength of schedule for teams?

Crowder52
12-05-2006, 01:55 PM
Its just another flaw in the BCS system. WHEN you play a team and WHEN you are idle can determine your position in the top 25.

Very true Philter. But this phenomenon is not unique to BCS voters. In psychology, it's called recency bias. We tend to associate more importance to recent events than we do to less recent events. It's human nature.

Philter25
12-05-2006, 01:58 PM
Analogy:

Let's say you go to a "battle of the bands" concert. Each band gets to play 3 songs. Band #1 finishes playing, but Band #2 still has one more song to play. Do you think the people at the concert have to make up their minds right then and there about who was the better band? Why can't they change their mind after seeing Band #2 finish their body of work?

Big difference.

Band #1 and Band #2 are not competing to play Band A in the finals and Band #1 and Band A come from the same hometown and ratings would decline and it wouldnt be as big of a financial pull to have Band #1 and Band A play.

People should be able to vote once they see the entire performance. I completely agree. However the vote shouldnt change if Band #1 and Band #2 were to finish performing at the same time rather than different times.

Philter25
12-05-2006, 02:04 PM
Very true Philter. But this phenomenon is not unique to BCS voters. In psychology, it's called recency bias. We tend to associate more importance to recent events than we do to less recent events. It's human nature.

Agreed. And the exact flaw with this year's BCS is the human element. Michigan, who hasnt played in weeks, and their best win, again Notre Dame, was months ago whereas their loss, to Ohio State, was the most recent. Florida, who's loss was months ago and best win occured recently, held an advantage in the human polls.

Just one of the many problems we have where a championship game is decided by polls, computers, and voters and not on the field.

This ties into exactly what I was talking about the scheduling...... unfortunately for teams, you can only beat who is on your schedule and when they are scheduled. However voters take that into account and that can hurt you or help you.

Good post.

Oboy
12-05-2006, 02:10 PM
Agreed. And the exact flaw with this year's BCS is the human element. Michigan, who hasnt played in weeks, and their best win, again Notre Dame, was months ago whereas their loss, to Ohio State, was the most recent. Florida, who's loss was months ago and best win occured recently, held an advantage in the human polls.

Just one of the many problems we have where a championship game is decided by polls, computers, and voters and not on the field.

This ties into exactly what I was talking about the scheduling...... unfortunately for teams, you can only beat who is on your schedule and when they are scheduled. However voters take that into account and that can hurt you or help you.

Good post.
I still think LSU, and Tennessee were better wins, but your point is well taken.

I really don't think that part of the equation will ever change. The only way to do it w/o this human aspect is to have a playoff. Which even then, there has to be a way to pick the teams that get into the playoff... :(

Crowder52
12-05-2006, 02:11 PM
This ties into exactly what I was talking about the scheduling...... unfortunately for teams, you can only beat who is on your schedule and when they are scheduled. However voters take that into account and that can hurt you or help you.

And the fact that we all know losing earlier in the year is preffered by the voters to losing later in the year supports what you are saying too.

i.e. If Michigan played Ohio St. first game of the year and lost, then won out, they very well could be in the title game right now.

Stitches
12-05-2006, 02:14 PM
I still think LSU, and Tennessee were better wins, but your point is well taken.

I really don't think that part of the equation will ever change. The only way to do it w/o this human aspect is to have a playoff. Which even then, there has to be a way to pick the teams that get into the playoff... :(

Most people don't percieve those as better wins, because neither of those came in the SEC CHAMPIONSHIP game. I do agree that I think LSU was a better win, albeit less convincing.

LtDan
12-05-2006, 02:18 PM
and the Florida homers are out in full force!!

Philter25
12-05-2006, 02:20 PM
I still think LSU, and Tennessee were better wins, but your point is well taken.

I really don't think that part of the equation will ever change. The only way to do it w/o this human aspect is to have a playoff. Which even then, there has to be a way to pick the teams that get into the playoff... :(

It wont change unless we have at least an 8 team playoff and even then there still might be debate as to who the last team in should be. What a playoff system does is it at least minimizes the debate. Most of the disagreement would probably be who is the last team in.... and unfortunately there would still need to be a computer/human factor in it.

The BCS is and will always be a flawed system but what they try to do is minimize the flaws and tweak the system. I think this year is in a step in the right direction to a 4 team playoff with the top 4 teams. We had a similar scenario a few years ago with USC and this year is another one to add to the list.


And the fact that we all know losing earlier in the year is preffered by the voters to losing later in the year supports what you are saying too.

i.e. If Michigan played Ohio St. first game of the year and lost, then won out, they very well could be in the title game right now. Because of the human aspect, absolutely.

Cuban Dave 9
12-05-2006, 02:28 PM
Without the human aspect...it would be a tie for 2nd! What is your point on this thread if not to contest who is in or who is out? You are doing a complete runaround

Amars
12-05-2006, 02:35 PM
First of all im a USC fan and have been ragging on UF all year. Here is my reason why they deserve to go.

1.UF are Confernce Champ
2.UF has better win against better teams.
3.UF has more wins
4. Big 10 is top heavy(OSU and Mich then it tanks and Wisc. is not on the level of LSU, Tenn,or Ark.) while the SEC is good througout.
5.. Mich play OSU and lost. There no rematches in NCAAF so pretty much every game is a playoff game. If you lose you can only blame yourself.
6. BCS will never be perfect but it is what we have.
7. Wouldnt be fair to OSU to play Mich again who they have beaten the last 3yrs. Hypothetically what happen if Mich wins against OSU all hell will break loose.

Philter25
12-05-2006, 02:43 PM
Without the human aspect...it would be a tie for 2nd! What is your point on this thread if not to contest who is in or who is out? You are doing a complete runaround

You found me out Dave! Im really a closet Michigan fan and I thought I would start another pointless debate about who is #2 and who is #3. Although my degrees say Penn State, I love Michigan. Why? Because even though the NC game is already set in stone, it still makes an impact if we beat it to the death because somewhere, someone in the BCS might read a thread on a miami dolphins internet message board and decide to change the matchup.

{end sarcasm}

Im not doing a runaround, the problem is with all the Florida homers on here, I need to take to the defense of Michigan. Thats how it is in any debate, when you are trying to have an objective conversation and everyone takes one side, you naturally need to defend the other side to make your point.

It also seems that no matter what, you guys need to defend Florida for being #2. Why is that? Is it because a flaw in the system might have given Florida an edge over Michigan for some reason whereas the computers had them ranked even? Is it because there was no clear cut #2 team in the nation and voters got to decide the matchup they wanted?

On one of the other boards that I post at (and discussion at work), this is actually a good objective thread and a few posters have thrown some history about the technical side of the BCS which I was unaware about and learned a few things. That obviously isnt happening here with everyone. Some people have posted great comments and thoughts in this thread, others have taken it upon themselves to defend Florida no matter what and turn this thread into another pointless debate about who deserves to be #2.

Every single year there is always discussion about the current BCS system and what needs to be tweaked. Look how it has evolved. I apologize for trying to have that discussion based on how the BCS played out this year here. Lets just debate who is the better team, ok. You go first.......

Stitches
12-05-2006, 03:16 PM
You found me out Dave! Im really a closet Michigan fan and I thought I would start another pointless debate about who is #2 and who is #3. Although my degrees say Penn State, I love Michigan. Why? Because even though the NC game is already set in stone, it still makes an impact if we beat it to the death because somewhere, someone in the BCS might read a thread on a miami dolphins internet message board and decide to change the matchup.

{end sarcasm}

Im not doing a runaround, the problem is with all the Florida homers on here, I need to take to the defense of Michigan. Thats how it is in any debate, when you are trying to have an objective conversation and everyone takes one side, you naturally need to defend the other side to make your point.

It also seems that no matter what, you guys need to defend Florida for being #2. Why is that? Is it because a flaw in the system might have given Florida an edge over Michigan for some reason whereas the computers had them ranked even? Is it because there was no clear cut #2 team in the nation and voters got to decide the matchup they wanted?

On one of the other boards that I post at (and discussion at work), this is actually a good objective thread and a few posters have thrown some history about the technical side of the BCS which I was unaware about and learned a few things. That obviously isnt happening here with everyone. Some people have posted great comments and thoughts in this thread, others have taken it upon themselves to defend Florida no matter what and turn this thread into another pointless debate about who deserves to be #2.

Every single year there is always discussion about the current BCS system and what needs to be tweaked. Look how it has evolved. I apologize for trying to have that discussion based on how the BCS played out this year here. Lets just debate who is the better team, ok. You go first.......

Boise State is better because they have no losses. :tongue:

I'm sorry, I like your thread.

Cuban Dave 9
12-06-2006, 05:32 PM
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news;_ylt=Atzz02vuYJluGHE1CWszFe8cvrYF?slug=uwire-ufloridapresidentspearhead&prov=uwire&type=lgns

finswin56
12-06-2006, 05:50 PM
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news;_ylt=Atzz02vuYJluGHE1CWszFe8cvrYF?slug=uwire-ufloridapresidentspearhead&prov=uwire&type=lgns

That's a good start. I guess we can put to bed the idea that the SEC would continue to block a playoff.