NONDESCRIPT SOLAR SYSTEM IN MILKY WAY
AN OPEN LETTER TO THE PEOPLE OF EARTH
Citizens of the planet, I come before you today to make an announcement. That announcement is: I do not give a microdamn about the things 1) Rich Rodriguez or 2) Michigan alumni such as Desmond Howard have to say about Michigan and Rich Rodriguez, respectively.
My interest levels are declining into femtodamn levels. On message boards I now flip past entire threads in which the same tired debates are brought forth with the speed and determination I ignore threads about politics on the internet. Let that sink in. Yeah. That's right. I have as much interest in this topic as I do Herman Cain.
So I don't want to dedicate yet more time to a guy who was fired a year ago except to talk about the things that made his offense very effective and his defense very ineffective. Those things affect Michigan's fortunes on the field and are interesting examples of the ever-evolving college football metagame. Also interesting, if slightly depressing, is the pickle Rodriguez's last couple recruiting classes have left Michigan in, especially on both lines.
Talking about other aspects of Rich Rodriguez's tenure makes me want to claw at my face. But I will do this for you, like I will eat a lemon if Yuri Wright picks Colorado over Michigan. So here is a handy chart for you to follow.
1. Is it about Michigan? If yes, go to 2. If no, go to 3.
2. Is it really about Michigan or is it a paranoid delusion? If paranoid delusion, go to 3. If still about Michigan, go to 4.
3. Don't care.
4. Still don't care. However, this incident is further evidence that Rodriguez is deservedly bitter about his three year tenure at Michigan and impolitic about discussing it.
Yes, it is further evidence that Rodriguez's maturity level and ability to play "the game" are low. Yes, it reminds me how nice it is to have a guy like Brady Hoke, who says all the correct things in all the generic ways possible. Yes—
What? Where am I? Why am I upside down in some sort of river valley? Why is there a bridge above/below me?
I was probably bungee jumping at the time in an effort to prevent the inevitable—this is the level of my dedication to you, reader—but this topic was still massively boring enough to result in nappy times. I apologize. I'm so, so happy to be talking about this, no, serious—
1. Is it about Rich Rodriguez? If yes, go to 2. If no, go to 3.
2. Is it really about Rich Rodriguez or is it more of a rapturous thing about Brady Hoke that sets the lack of support given during the Rodriguez tenure in stark relief? If rapturous thing, go to 3. If actually about Rodriguez, go to 4.
3. Yes, that is annoying but let's just suck it up because it's in the best interests of the program.
4. Yes, it is extremely disappointing that certain program alumni appear to be jerks. What can you do, though?
To take one example, when you're so dim and callous as to deride Rodriguez as "Cherry Coke"—probably meant "New Coke"—in front of 60-70 players who were recruited by Rodriguez, are the living embodiment of that change, and went 10-2 and reached the Sugar Bowl, well… that's hopeless. Anyone who would trash-talk Denard, even indirectly, is never going to Get It.
It's further evidence that several recent program alums' maturity levels are low. It reminds me of how nice it was to have Bo around. There's nothing to do about it but wait. Eventually the Rodriguez recruits will be out of the program and the Rodriguez years far enough in the—
Right, this again. Upside down in a river valley.
If I can remain conscious long enough to respond to these things in the future, all future events will be filed "3" or "4". This, people of Earth, is my sacrifice for your well-being. Let it not be in vain. File these things 3 or 4 and live your lives without Rodriguez-Michigan-induced narcolepsy. You, too, can live—
An upside-down Brian Cook who would greatly appreciate being reeled in now
PS. Many of you have passed out in front of your computers and are in danger of entering an infinite loop wherein you wake up, forget what you were reading, begin reading again, and fall asleep. In an effort to prevent the thousands of deaths that may result, here is an animated GIF of some levitating cats.
Hopefully this will catch the newly-awakened reader's eye sufficiently to prevent them from entering a fatal boredom loop.
ANN ARBOR, Michigan (AP) -
University of Michigan Athletic Director Dave Brandon unveiled a brand new look for the Wolverines football team in preparation for their January 3rd Sugar Bowl appearance against the Virginia Tech Hokies. The announcement caused a firestorm of controversy amongst boosters, university officials, and unemployed arm-chair blog-critics alike.
The audacious uniform design features a University of Michigan student known in fan circles as Lloyd Brady. Brady is screen-printed prominently above the familiar block M logo, holding a spoonful of sugar in rapturous delight to celebrate Michigan's BCS berth.
Ryan VanBergen models the new Wolverines designs and pensively contemplates suicide.
"This is all about extending the Michigan brand," said Brandon in front of an assembly of visibly shocked press correspondants and fans. "Lloyd Brady is an emblem of the plugged-in, 24/7 blogosphere. We worked hand-in-hand with Adidas to make sure he is presented in full splendor. These uniforms harken back to the great traditions of the past while looking forward, boldly, to the coming day when the tail of internet fandom will inevitably wag the dog."
When asked how the idea began, Brandon detailed a wild night of inspiration. "Well, the nebula of the idea started one evening at a local bar with Jim Brandstatter. Beers led to shots, shots led to harder stuff, and, well... Let's just say cocaine played a role. Jim was keyed up, to say the least. Rambling on about Michigan Replay, about how the spread offense was really an outgrowth of the homosexual agenda... lots of wild ideas. I saw his white, powdery mustache and made a comment about how apropos it looked in light of our sugar bowl appearance. Once we got on the subject of sugar, the rest is history."
From there, a team of over three-hundred Adidas designers set to work creating a Sugar Bowl uniform worthy of the annals of Michigan history. "I think, clearly, we're entering a new era in sportswear," said Marty Tisdale, senior game apparel supervisor at Adidas. "The front of the uniform makes a bold statement. This isn't your father's Michigan Wolverines, no way. This uniform is the sportswear equivalent of social media - it gets people talking. In fact, the uniforms are outfitted with smart chips and keypads sewn into the fabric. During timeouts, players can tweet messages, via voice recognition, to fans in real-time with the push of a button."
The eye-catching uniform backsides are sure to turn heads on Jan. 3rd.
"The front of the uniform is really the tip of the iceberg," said Tisdale. "The backside is where we really pushed the envelope. The forty-two block M's on the back represent Michigan's forty-two Big Ten championships. As you can also see, we've tastefully adorned the uniform with a ghost-twill, sweat-wicking logo decal of our marketing partners, Domino Sugar. We hope the fans will appreciate the surprising blend of unrestrained whimsy and soul-crushing corporate fellatio."
When asked what he thought of the design, head coach Brady Hoke muttered something indistinct, then caught Brandon's stern gaze. He then offered, rather half-heartedly, "Well, you know, I think they're... tremendous."
The only coach who didn't seem on-board with the design was offensive coordinator Al Borges, who missed the press conference. He walked into the Schembechler Hall after his lunch break, took one look at the uniform concept, and turned away. After minutes of staring blankly out into the distance, hands in pockets, he said, "What have we done? God in heaven, what have we done?"
Brandon pays no mind to criticism, however. "The future is a scary thing to some people. I mean, think of the first facemasks. At the time, the guys wearing them looked pretty faggy. These are the next step in that evolution."
If Wolverine fans are unhappy with the Sugar Bowl uniforms, they can take heart; they are not permanent. Brandon also announced plans to wear different uniforms for each and every game next season, a total of twelve unique Adidas Tech-Fit designs. "Right now we're experimenting with different looks. Brandstatter and I like black-on-black, maize-on-maize, really eye-catching stuff." Then, with a furtive snort from a rolled hundred-dollar bill, Brandon added, "And of course, there's always white-on-white."
Was the bust what you remembered it to be?
“Yeah. That was a great night. I was riding up there with my wife, and we were on the bus, and Fred Jackson was right next to me, and I said, ‘Fred, where was it? I can’t remember this.’ And when I got up to the hill right there and I saw it up the road, I said, ‘Oh yeah, I remember this.’ That was a special night, a special night because that’s a special group of seniors. That was neat that that many people turned out to honor them, and they’ve earned that. I think that’s again another one of those things that separate Michigan football from a lot of other people and a lot of other places. It was a nice night.”
What does it take to keep a group from not sliding back for the bowl game?
“It’s always something that’s in the back of your mind, but I don’t think that’s going to happen with this gorup. This group is so hungry, and they already have talked about it themselves. That’s the good and bad about a bowl game. You’ll rememeber that one. That’s your last game. You always are going to remember your last game. It’s not about saying, ‘well, we had a good season and that was a bowl game.’ That’s not the case, especially when it’s a BCS bowl. These guys are focused, they’re doing everything that Brady’s asked them to do up to this point, which is the conditioning part of it. The practices that we’ve had to get them back going again, we’re real up tempo, and all signs show that that’s the same team that’s going to keep trying to get better and better.”
How has this season stacked up to the expectations you had when you took the job earlier this year?
“Well I don’t think I’d be telling the truth if I didn’t think they exceeded them. I think as the season went on, it didn’t exceed them because I started seeing that this group of guys and the job that Brady’s done and the way the staff worked, it was a great great situation, and these kids just keep trying to do everything you ask them to do. The interesting thing is forever here -- and it’s not a corny deal -- in our team room, it’s ‘team, team, team’ … and if you want to look at a great example of team, it would be this team so far. There may not be a lot of great, great players there -- there’s some really good ones -- but when they all did their thing and all worked together, and the offense picked us up, and there were games where we picked them up, and the special teams picked up both sides, that’s what a team is. That’s what you remember Michigan as, is team. As far as expectations, I think the thing they did do is they became a team. A real team. That always is a lot better than anything else.”
(more after the jump)
It's cool, guys. We're just in our teal phase.
Ty Cobb; Al Kaline and Harvey Kuenn; Magglio Ordonez
Gordie Howe; Steve Yzerman; Henrik Zetterberg
Bill Laimbeer; Allan Houston and Grant Hill; Ben Wallace and Chauncey Billups
Tom Harmon; Jim Mandich; Tom Brady
UPDATE: someone said the "fair comparison" is the changes in Michigan's away uniforms over the years, as if 1) the Notre Dame game was not at home, 2) Michigan changed their away unis three times in a season, four if you count helmet numbers, back in the day 3) and looking stupid is acceptable as long as it's a road game. Here are the incredible changes in the last 40 years.
1971 MSU program; Jim Harbaugh; Mike Hart
Dave Brandon; Dave Brandon; Dave Brandon
Seven interceptions, heat from the fans, lots of running to come. Sounds familiar, but it's 1982.
"Wild man" Mike Boren also features in the pregame. Via WH.
The lemon bet. A few weeks ago Mike Farrell tweeted that Yuri Wright's top two were Colorado and Michigan, to which I responded that I would eat a lemon and put it on the internet if Michigan lost Wright to CU*. I'd rather have a super athletic, if raw, corner than do this, so this quote($) from his trip to Boulder is a relief:
“I wish they would have picked a different weekend [ie, not finals] for me to come out there, but I still had a good time for the most part. I know it’s a good school.”
A small relief. I mean, I'll believe a guy with options like Michigan and Notre Dame going to Colorado several years after I see it.
*[FINE PRINT: Lemon will be consumed if Wright ends up signing with Colorado AND Michigan is still pursuing him at the time of his commitment. If M picks up Armani Reeves and stops going after corners, bet is void. To prevent this from being weaselly, this will have to be a direct quote to that effect or something from Sam Webb.]
Bust bits. The football bust transpired without hand-holding or weeping and with a minimum of Rodriguez hur hur that was made awkward when players thanked Rodriguez during speeches. There was one notable newsbit:
LIVONIA -- Michigan football coach Brady Hoke said at the team's annual bust Monday that he does not expect linebacker Marell Evans to return next year.
The fifth-year senior from Richmond, Va., has not played this year. Hoke, who declined throughout the season to elaborate on the situation, revealed at the banquet that Evans had eligibility issues because of "a twist of fate" resulting from his transfers.
You can remove the vague possibility Evans is on the team from your scholarship calculations. Also Molk made certain people feel bad:
"Going through what we did for five years … it's hard to put into words truly what it means and truly what we've been through," Molk said Monday night at the Laurel Manor. "Because frankly, I don't think there's many people in this room or in this country that understand. Unless you've been a fifth-year senior here, you don't know. You didn't live it you didn't feel it, you didn't see the pain, you didn't hear the anguish, you didn't hear the hate."
Take that, guy I threw an empty water bottle at after the Toledo game. You probably think Demanding Excellence is what got Michigan back on track. I hate you so much.
Q: How many times will people make the joke about Fred Jackson having coached Tom Harmon? IIRC, Rodriguez (of all people) was one of millions to get that zinger off. It is as traditional as Fred Jackson proclaiming all tailbacks to be Olympian gods.
AnnArbor.com has the fullest rundown of things that were said.
No sale, literally. If you're still looking for Sugar Bowl tickets, Virginia Tech has a deal for you:
As of Monday evening, Virginia Tech had sold a little over 9,500 of its 17,500 ticket allotment to the Sugar Bowl, a number that is only slightly higher than the 9,200 the school announced last Friday. So it's clear ticket sales -- at least through the school -- are slowing to a crawl at this point.
I bet Kansas State would have done better.
I've seen many a tweet about Kansas State and Arkansas' rush on Cotton Bowl tickets as proof that the Wildcats should have been chose for the Sugar Bowl instead of the Hokies. Kansas State reportedly sold out its 12,500-ticket allotment before the bowl was announced. Tickets are so in demand for the Cotton Bowl that the cheapest on StubHub are going for $219.99. Only the BCS title game ($1,299 for the cheapest seat) is a tougher ticket right now of the bowl games.
Andy Bitter suggests that's a factor of the distances—Dallas is driveable for both fanbases, but they're enthused after a big year and VT is coming off a hammering in the ACC title game.
VT is struggling in part because resellers are currently undercutting VT by two to one. An interesting note from Bitter: the ACC now picks up the tab for unsold tickets once schools get over the 8k mark. At least the risk the bowls have migrated from themselves to the teams is being spread over a greater number of institutions these days. Still: scam, scam, scam.
First halves maybe some. Your impression that Tim Hardaway spends many first halfs chilling, relaxing, maxing all cool are accurate. Via Wolverine Nation, Hardaway averages 5.2 points in the first half and 11.2 in the second. That's… more scoring in the second, there. I'd be fine if M started every game with a possession on which Hardaway is given those double high screens and given the green light to shoot if he comes open for a three. There are points in the first half when it feels like the offense bogs down because Hardaway isn't being enough of an option.
This is going well. This has no relation to anything you care about except the tenuous connection I can make between all bad coaches and Charlie Weis, but man does Randy Edsall remind you of an even less accomplished Charlie Weis or what? One of the early warning signs that Weis's colossal dickishness wasn't a Parcell-style asset was when starting defensive end Ronald Talley, a guy with almost no competition on the depth chart, transferred. To Delaware.
Presenting Randy Edsall's Maryland:
In a move that surprised no one, D.J. Adams announced his intention to transfer. The controversial running back had the class to wish Edsall and the program luck in a statement. Meanwhile, we're still waiting for Edsall's thoughts on losing the most talented tailback the team had after Davin Meggett. Heck, we're still waiting to hear why Adams was benched for most of the year.
Offensive tackle R.J. Dill — a starter and one of the team's best linemen — is transferring, too. Not only does it hurt the team from a football standpoint in the short run, but it also begs the questions: Who else is leaving, and who is going to come to College Park now?
Edsall went 2-10. Meanwhile, Freidgen coach-in-waiting James Franklin had something of a breakthrough year at Vandy and Maryland is dropping a bunch of sports after paying massive buyouts all over the place to hire Edsall and Gary Crowton. The yutz at Tennessee resigned in June, so Maryland's Kevin Anderson is now Worst Athletic Director In The Country.
In case you haven't seen it. Tom Crean's expression after Indiana hits their game-winning three against Kentucky is priceless:
Court rush approved. Indiana has spent some time in the wilderness after their disastrous decision to hire Kelvin Sampson (speaking of yutz athletic directors…) and this was a "OMG we're back" moment. Also beating #1 on a buzzer beater… yeah. That court rush is the reason everyone's so upset when people rush for dumb reasons.
Etc.: Dylan previews Arkansas Pine Bluff more thoroughly than they have ever been previewed before. The Pac-12 is not good at basketball. Floyd and Woolfolk are rehab BFFs. Why is the NBA stuck with the Hornets? Because of their publicly funded stadium.
In 1997, back when 7-point leads were comfortable and safeties were meant for hitting people while corners did the covering* undefeated and no-brainer No. 1 Michigan went to the Rose Bowl. That was pretty cool. We faced Washington State and Ryan Leaf back when he was Ryan Leaf and not Ryan Leaf, Woodson made that interception to
stop the comeback keep Michigan in striking distance (wow I forgot that context), and woo forever.
Meanwhile the conferences that weren't the Big Ten and Pac Ten were into their third year of a "bowl coalition" to match up the best two teams possible. Undefeated kick-ball-in-OT-vs-Mizzou Nebraska went to that and beat the tar out of Tennessee. The AP declared the next day's Daily cover something to hang on your wall forever, the coaches gave Osborne his send-off gift, and it didn't matter that there was a co- because starting next year there would be the perfect championship system to determine an unquestionable champion…for 1997.
* This wasn't at all true unless you literally had Charles Woodson in your backfield. Dude should win an award for that or something.
Getting' Jiggy With It isn't working. This has been the BCS's problem since its inception. In 1998 it was the perfect system to pit the last big conference undefeateds against each other, but then it left out an undefeated minor conference team and arbitrarily selected one of several similar 1-loss teams to face unquestioned numero uno Tennessee. Every year there was at least some complaint they patched with an overreaction on the next one. Team A beat Team B beat Team C who got in? Overrate head-to-head and dump half the computers. Too influenced by pollsters? Let's get more computers. Teams running up the score? Dump the margin of victory. AP and Coaches No. 1 USC left out of a three-horse race? Overrate the polls. Undefeated SEC team left out of a three-horse race? Overrate schedule strength. Boise State keeps going undefeated by playing Wyoming 12 times? Autobid the little guys. Two Big Ten teams about to rematch? Oh the pollsters can jig the system. Wait the pollsters are jigging the system? Kick 'em out and get our own pollsters. Two SEC teams about to rematch? Dammit.
This is what a process looks like when it has no forethought. I could say the same about many playoff proposals. Every year there's a perfect system that would be perfect for that year if we had that system. What we should be asking for is a system that would be good enough every year.
Good enough is good enough. Math says if you found the best team in a 120-team league after 12-13 games of unbalanced schedules, you just got lucky. What we're shooting for here is something where only the homeriest homer of Domer will be claiming their team got duked. The last team in should have an ironclad case, were they to emerge victorious, to be the No. 1 overall team, but the first team out should not have a very good case to be given that chance.
Autobids are bad (for this). This includes conference champions, sorry. The championship games help clear things up by giving contenders an extra bellwether. However a two-division format means 8-4 teams can beat 12-0 teams they lost to the first time. The Big Longhorns Conference still technically exists. So does the Big East. Bowl tie-ins for conference champions are great and should stay but nothing should be automatic about a playoff.
The right process is some kind of playoff. I'd be fine if it just went back to bowl games and polls to determine the National Champion, but the game has gone national and there's money to be made.
The question is how many teams should be in it. The current system has two teams. The Plus-One proposal discussed by the conferences last year is basically four with some measure of flexibility. Brian wants six, which is the fewest that will accommodate undefeated mid-majors most years. Hinton proposed 10, which reasonably fits most of the good 2-loss teams.
What I'd like to do here is UFR the BCS years past and see which of these playoff systems, the BCS, a Plus-One, Brian's, or Doc Saturday's, would have been best.
1998: Slightly similar to this year, with one undisputed team on top, then lots of 1-loss teams to pick from. Four-teamer is #1 Tennessee (12-0), #2 FSU, #3 Kansas St, and #4 Ohio State. Six teamer includes #5 UCLA and #10 Tulane. Ten teams nets #6 Texas A&M with 2 losses, #7 Arizona with 1 loss, #8 Florida with 2 losses, and #9 Wisconsin with 1 loss (the Big Ten Champ). Ideally: Brian.
1999: The first obvious matchup of two undefeated BCS teams, #1 Florida State, and #2 Virginia Tech. Clear #3 Nebraska stands apart from a ton of 2-loss teams like Tennessee, Bama, Michigan, Wisconsin and MSU. 1-loss KSU is in there too. 10 teams works if you take Marshall over 3-loss Florida or Penn State. Ideally: BCS
2000: #1 Oklahoma, #2 Florida State, who lost to #3 Miami, who lost to #4 Washington. #5 V-Tech, and #6 Oregon State also had 1 loss each. After that is a lot of 2-loss BCS teams. The BCS system generated all sorts of controversy for teams 2-4 being mostly indiscernible, and lo more overreactive rules were written into the BCS codec. Ideally: Brian.
2001: Another year where 1 is clear but the rest ain't. #1 Miami, then #2 Nebraska, #3 Colorado with 2 losses but who just beat Nebraska, #4 Oregon with Joey Harrington. Getting to six includes 2-loss SEC teams #5 Florida and #6 Tennessee. You're leaving out 1-loss Illinois and 2-loss Texas here but 2-loss Tennessee was a shoe-in for the national championship game until falling in the SEC championship. An expanded field of 10 also draws in Stanford and Maryland. Ideally: Plus-One.
2002: #1 Miami, #2 Ohio State, HUGE GAP, #3 Georgia, #4 USC, #5 Iowa, #6 Washington State. This is the year you want to just skip to an N.C. game because the top two are undefeated and everyone else has 1 or 2 losses against easier schedules. A 10-team playoff includes Oklahoma, Kansas State, Notre Dame, and either Texas or Michigan. Could you really build a strong argument that the 2002 team is a national title contender? Ideally: BCS
2003: A top tier of three 1-loss teams: #1 Oklahoma, #2 LSU, #3 USC, then and easy cutoff between #4 Michigan and #5 Ohio State, #7 Florida State. Again you're picking between 2-loss teams for the 6th spot. Here I drew in FSU over Texas for winning their conference (not an auto-bid but it can count). Whichever team that is would have to play in Ann Arbor under the Brian plan to avoid having a repeat of M-OSU in the same place a week after The Game. The next four teams would include Texas, Tennessee, Miami (YTM), and either K-State or 1-loss Miami (NTM). This is a great case for a 4-team playoff, a decent case study for a 6-teamer, and shows how a 10-teamer is getting down to 1-loss MAC teams. Ideally: Brian.
2004: Again a clear top tier: #1 USC, #2 Oklahoma, #3 Auburn. A fourth is #5 Cal or #4 Texas, a sixth undefeated #6 Utah. Undefeated #9 Boise State is out there too. Expanding to 10 includes 2-loss Georgia, Virginia Tech, and 1-loss (not Big East yet) Louisville. Ideally: Brian.
2005: #1 USC, #2 Texas, BIG GAP, #3 Penn State, #4 Ohio State, #5 Oregon, #6 Notre Dame or maybe #11 WVU? Like '02 this is a "just play the NC" year. Twice in four years is enough to write a fix into the system for this sort of thing (more on this below). A 10-teamer includes Georgia, Miami (YTM), Auburn, and either VT, WVa., or LSU, or ??? – there are fully 10 two-loss BCS teams. Ideally: BCS.
2006: A one and many situation again. #1 Ohio State, then pick one from #3 Michigan (no need for shenanigans), #2 Florida, #5 USC, #4 LSU, #8 Boise State. I slotted in undefeated Boise over 1-loss Louisville and Wisconsin, and also moved USC over LSU for winning their conference. Going to 10 includes them plus probably Auburn and Oklahoma; after that is Brady Quinn's 10-2 Notre Dame who don't belong near an NC game except in ND fans' minds. Ideally: Brian.
2007: Sixer would have #1 Ohio State, #2 LSU, #3 Virginia Tech, #4 Oklahoma, #5 Georgia, and #10 Hawai'i. This might as well be 2011 with another pretty sure-fire #1 and some confusion after that. This would be a hard call between a BCS game (LSU's a strong #2 while the other 1-loss team is #8 Kansas) and a 6-teamer. Going to 10 includes Mizzou, USC, Kansas, and West Virginia, who are indiscernible from Georgia and VT but cuts off before 10-2 Arizona State. Ideally: Doc Sat.
2008: This was the season that wasn't played. Henri the Otter of Ennui wins. Okay fine this is a mess of seven 1-loss teams at the top and two undefeated mid-majors, one of which played Michigan and respectable MWC schedule. Sixer ends up with #1 Oklahoma, #2 Florida, #3 Texas, #4 Bama, #6 Utah, and #5 USC. Sorry #9 Boise State. After that there's 1-loss Texas Tech and Penn State and 2-loss Ohio State. If you're okay with leaving out Boise for USC it's Ideally: Brian.
2009: It's not 2004 despite three undefeated BCS teams since the Big East was by now a mid-major. #1 Alabama and #2 Texas in easy, and #3 Cincy and #4 TCU after. Going to six includes #5 Florida and #6 Boise State. Only Florida among the six has a loss. The next four are Oregon, Ohio State, Georgia Tech and Iowa, all with 2 losses so 10 teams would only muddle things that are fine, but this year would work well as BCS, Plus-One, or the Cook Six Plan. Ideally: Brian.
2010: Top two are easy #1 Auburn and #2 Oregon. Top six hauls in #3 TCU, #4 Stanford, #5 Wisconsin, and #6 Ohio State. Again this is tailor-made for six teams (three undefeated, three with one loss). It's tempting to go with the NC format, TCU be screwed, but six is just fine. The 2-loss Sooners and Razorbacks, and 1-loss MSU and Boise would draw into a 10-team field. Ideally: Brian.
2011: Two is a rematch of #1 LSU and #2 Alabama. Four is #3 Oklahoma State, plus either #4 Stanford or #5 Oregon who beat them. And #7 Boise State, now with BCS scheduled teams and TCU. I'm giving Boise the entry in a six-team system over Arkansas so we don't have half the field from one conference. Ten teams would be a bitch (Hinton includes Clemson in there—the BCS standings would have four SEC teams in a 10-team field). Ideally: Brian.
So you're saying the boss's system is better?
Yeah, I…wait I have a bolded subconscious alter-ego too now?
No I'm Ace's bolded alter-ego, filling in.
The coaches like me better. Boom BCS'ed!
He got bored right around the time you started going over every year since 1998.
:( So final score is Brian 9, BCS 3, and 1 each for a Plus One and Doc Saturday's 10-team bowlstravaganza. So six is the best solution, but far from a perfect solution. This makes sense when you look at an average season. For this I can even give you a
..art of how many of each type of contender we've had in 14 Final BCS Standings:
|Team type||Avg. per season|
|Undefeated BCS Teams||1.4|
|One-loss BCS Teams||3.4|
|Two-loss BCS Teams||5.8|
This is a loose argument for a six-team playoff. There's a reasonable chance of having four or five undefeated or 1-loss BCS teams, plus one perfect mid-major, every year. Those mid-majors aren't going away with TCU and Boise joining one of the recently pilfered BCS leagues; you can see Marshall and Tulane popped up before they did. However any given year should expect plenty of 2-loss BCS teams, more than you want to pick from to expand to a field of 10. Six draws an imaginary circle around the top three rows and suggests most years you can get between 5 and 6 comfortably competitive playoff contenders.
But then you still have 5/14 years when that's not ideal in just this little sample. Is that acceptable?
No it isn't. Even if you figure the perfect Plus-One year and the perfect Doctor Saturday year wouldn't bother too many people if we rammed them into a six-team field, what's unacceptable are those three BCS wins. It's better than the BCS's 3/14 but hell some years you just wanna see Ohio State versus Miami (YTM), or Florida State versus Vick, or the Pete Carroll's Hollywood All Stars versus the Vince Young Show. So:
Let's have that!
Let's propose the six-team playoff system I'll call Brian-Plus:
- Six-team field chosen by a select committee/cabal like in basketball
- #3 and #4 hosting #6 and #5 respectively in home field quarterfinals the week after the conference championships (mid-majors who get in will almost certainly fall in that that 5- or 6-seed range to preclude too much blue turf in Round 1)
- Semifinals in Sugar and Orange Bowls on Jan. 1.
- Final a week later in the Rose Bowl.
- All other bowls left alone; bowls can schedule Round 1 losers. Rose Bowl can have its regular game a week earlier with the parade.
…but that seeding committee can also choose to declare a clear national championship game. So basically when they meet they decide a.) Is it two or six this year, and then b.) If it's six who gets in and how are they seeded? On years when there's a clear two-team BCS game we revert to something like the current system, with bowl tie-ins for the regularly scheduled bowl games.
I would also suggest removing one game from the regular season schedule (if only this would solve the FCS problem) so that the conference championships are played over Thanksgiving and Round One of the playoffs be a week after. Maybe that's pushing it.