The BCS

Okay, I can't believe that this started in 98 and there is still a problem with the BCS. I have an easy solution.

But first I will address the thought of a playoff. While I wouldn't
mind it, I understand the thought behind not having one. Knowing that
one loss might knock USC out of the title picture, that USC/ND game
was huge. Especially the win/lose but no OT call from Pete Caroll. I
mean if you knew that USC would get into the playoffs even with a
loss, that game doesn't matter that much. Besides, no one in power
wants a playoff, so we can forget it anyways.

And there is talk that USC, even if they go undefeated, there is a
chance they might not go to the title game. If Va Tech goes
undefeated, their strength of schedule could place them with texas in
the title game.

Here's the solution: Keep the BCS, get rid of the BCS rankings. This
is so perfect and simple, I can't beleive that I am the only one who
thought of this:

Keep the 4 major bowls, with one rotating as a title game. Keep having
a 1 vs 2 title, and then award automatic berths to the major
conferences (minus the big east) and then have at large bids round it
out.

But get rid of the stupid ranking formula with comptuers and just
award them based on the AP poll. The pollers would get to pick who
they thought were the 2 best teams and let them fight it out. You
could still have a #3 undefeated team, but if you're #3 in the polls
you didn't play well enough to be #1 or #2 in the minds of voters.
That's different than not playing well enough to impress computers.

If you go back to the old system where 1 didn't play 2, then USC would
play Penn State, and Texas would never have a chance to prove they are
better.

I like the 4 major bowls, and I love 1 vs 2. I just want it decided by
humans. What's wrong with that?



Mark Says:

the BCS was birthed out of the controversial split national championship between
michigan (go blue in '97) went undefeated and killed ryan leaf in the
rose bowl. nebraska also went undefeated, but was much less
impressive all season, but legendary coach tom osborne, who invented
the play for the win and not the tie, was retiring. a few coaches
dropped michigan far enough in their ballots to give nebraska the
coaches poll. hence, the desire for some computers. sagarin had
already been doing a computer poll and i'm sure others were too. they
wanted an imparital, non emotional way to pick the winners. the BCS
combines the polls and a playoff. pick the top two teams, and let
them play for the title. it keeps the human element, but the
computers are designed to moderate the human emotions involved in
ranking teams.

Dave Says:

Aha! So the only basis for the media griping about a controversy in the BCS is because the media polls aren't being obeyed as fact. But as Mark points out, that's why we have computers, because maybe the pollers aren't getting it exactly right. So either the media should just accept that the BCS does pick the 2 best teams, (and maybe the computers can recoginize that better than humans) or switch to the polls as the only rankings. Neither will happen any time soon.