her her her
HATE THE BCS? HATE AMERICA
The dumbest thing ever written. This is not literally true, but it may be the dumbest thing ever written about college football. It is this Bill Hancock guy's shoddily argued nonsense about the BCS. I've become a playoff guy over the past decade or so but even BCS proponents in the blogosphere (of which there appears to be one, the guy behind Get The Picture) have to wince at statements like this:
College football was one weekend away from Boise State participating in the BCS National Championship Game because of what happened on the playing field — not in a chatroom, a boardroom or a newsroom.
In the event that Auburn lost and Boise State won, yes. The reverse happened and instead the BCS works and is fair and that's Gary Patterson's artery spraying a red mist over most of the Southwest but how did you think Sedona, Arizona, ended up looking like that? Do you want a thriving tourist mecca to evaporate overnight when college football coaches cease venting the bloodmist that gently descends on the mesas?
Orson has gone FJM on the thing—it exists to be fisked, I thought about doing it myself—but you don't have to do anything other than blockquote to obliterate this extremely stupid system:
A playoff also would mean the end of America's bowl tradition as we know it. As Rick Baker, president of the Cotton Bowl, said, "A playoff system would ruin the AT&T Cotton Bowl Classic."
We can't have that.
BONUS: Putting "Classic" in the name of your thing is a 100% sure way to tell that your thing is neither classic nor an actual thing anymore, in the, you know, traditional sense where entities are somewhat authentic outgrowths of desires instead of remanufactured bullcrap like "chocolate" diamonds that make me wish that authentic outgrowths of desires that form entities like Adbusters weren't equally odious and even more shrill. The "Cotton Bowl Classic" is at Jerryworld, not the Cotton Bowl. It can die in a fire for all I care.
OBLIGATORY REMINDER OF MGOBLOG PLAYOFF PLAN: Six teams, no autobids, byes to the top two teams. No more than two teams per conference, and those teams can't play each other in the first round. Home games until the final, one the week after the championship games, one on January 1st, final at the Rose Bowl January 8th, leave bowl system alone.
This preserves almost all of the urgency of regular season and guarantees that the champion is also the team with the best season-long resume since five of the top six lose and anyone not 1 or 2 wades through three elite opponents, staking an undeniable claim.
This year's hypothetical bracket:
1. Oregon vs winner of 3. TCU / 6. Ohio State
2. Auburn vs winner of 4. Wisconsin / 5. Stanford
If Auburn had lost to Alabama they would probably have fallen to fifth (ballparking it) and gone from a first round bye and January 1 home game to a first round game in Madison or Palo Alto—a freaking huge deal. Losing one game boots Boise and Michigan State, and two is fatal for everyone. Since the current system frequently sees one-loss teams into the championship game it's difficult to argue this system cheapens the regular season.
If you want a lengthier explanation I pretended I was talking to Joe Posnanski about it last January. In sum, there is no reason people who do not stand to lose money would oppose the idea.
This Week In Less Charismatic Than Stalin. Terrelle Pryor:
"I'll put it like this: You put me in any of their offenses — any of them — and I'd dominate," Pryor said, when asked about the attention afforded the likes of Newton, Robinson and Persa. "I'd dominate the nation. What those guys do, that's what they're supposed to do in their offense."
He goes on to say the usual boilerplate about how he's all about winning, which could be interpreted as a mitigating factor if Pryor didn't manage to twist every bit of boilerplate into another reason to think Pryor should be locked in the basement by Tressel until his graduation. Doctor Saturday looks at the numbers and says pretty much what I did in the OSU preview—against defenses that are actually good Pryor folds alarmingly.
Robinson said he also remembers picking up some snow, playfully chucking it at Rodriguez, "and then running pretty fast after that."
Robinson also packed snow into a plastic bag for his return flight.
"Melted on the plane," he said.
How does Robinson know if he's running fast?
This Week In Coaching Blah Blah Blah. Have fielded a couple inquiries as to why I'm not covering the "coaching search" or "situation," depending on your point of view. I'm not because there is no "search" and there is no reliable information on the situation. Time and again I have been told by people one or two or three steps removed from insiders that Rodriguez is going to get fired after the Ohio State game. Or on Monday (yes, as in three days ago, which makes absolutely no sense). Or pretty dang soon. Or that Brady Hoke is a viable candidate. Or etc etc etc etc. I got so much chatter in my inbox that made no sense that even the plausible stuff now carries the sheen of ulterior motive (not necessarily from the emailer, but from the discontent insider-type person) or wishful thinking (from Brady Hoke's friends and family).
I have no updates that are reliable enough to relate. There is a cottage industry of people telling other people that Rodriguez is definitely gone that has proven inaccurate multiple times so far in the past month, so I probably won't be able to say much definitively unless I get something solid from a few established guys.
To reiterate, I've run everything I've heard through filters of reliability and making a damn lick of sense and come up with this:
The conclusion is that on January second Harbaugh or Rodriguez will be Michigan's coach and that person will be the coach in 2011. No one peddling a story other than that is credible unless their name is Dave Brandon, and even then he's probably just having you on.
I don't know which is more likely. If I get anything that changes my opinion I'll mention it.
BONUS: A scientific poll shows that Michigan fans are split right down the middle: 35 percent want him gone, 32 percent want him to stay, and 33 percent are unsure. That's amazingly apropos. Too bad it doesn't include a section asking people "have you raged incoherently at someone about this opinion?" Three percent said they'd prefer Brady Hoke over Harbaugh (64 percent) or Miles(23 percent).
Penn State exodus? With Joe Paterno slightly old and doddering Penn State relies heavily on its ancient, incredibly stable coaching staff to prop up the ship. There was slight panic when DL coach Larry Johnson Sr. seriously considered taking the Illinois DC job a few years ago—it's testament to the loyalty of the staff that he stayed—and now with Pitt searching around BSD's a little concerned the Panthers might look at the blindingly obvious candidate: Tom Bradley. Bradley's considered the be the heir apparent to Paterno and probably should be since he's been the motive force behind the good bit of Penn State forever, but if he can't leverage the Pitt opening into something approximating a guarantee he's the guy he could be tempted to go. Too bad the NCAA put a kibosh on that coach-in-waiting stuff.
Meanwhile, LB coach Ron Vanderlinden is "linked to" the Ball State job. This will probably lead to nothing except a couple of raises but it's worth keeping an eye on if only to see how easy OSU's path to the Big Ten Championship game is going to be.
Etc.: The Daily's Nicole Auerbach scores a WSJ article about the Big Chill and the growth potential of college hockey. Big Ten Hockey cannot come fast enough. Thoroughly patronizing AA.com article explains to you what "faceoffs" and "hat tricks" are. Dave Brandon says Michigan is "highly interested" in adding D-I lacrosse if it proves viable. Monumental's series of awesome wallpapers continues.
her her her
DJK also packed "snow" into a plastic bag for his return flight. That didn't work out quite as well for him, now did it?
One thing i like about the bowl system as it currently stands is that it allows 35 teams to end the year on a win. Without the bowl system, we wouldn't have kicked florida's ass a few years ago, and we wouldn't have out Jan 1 date with MSU (ntmsu).
I think that an "elite playoff" (brian's top 6 proposal or something similar) should happen, and keep the lower bowls. It lets the teams get the trip, the swag, and the chance to end their year on a win.
I think this is the biggest hold up to a 6+ team playoff. While I like Brian's proposal, what do the road teams that lose in the first round get? If they are played at campus sites, I'm guessing not even half of the ticket revenue would equal the payout from a current bowl (depending on conference $$ sharing).
I think we're much more likely to see a +1 title game, which means just adding another "bowl" and even more money for schools. It's very tough to incorporate keeping all the revenue the same or higher, Jan. 1 bowl sanctity, and more than 4 teams into a playoff.
How about a loser's consolation bowl? (That would be an awesome bowl name, btw!) That way everyone gets their bowl game (playoff round #2 would be technically a bowl game, I think...the round #3 is the championship +1 bowl you speak of). I actually really like Brian's idea, it seems to be the most logical and a great way to hybrid this playoff vs. Bowl game issue.
FWIW, I've seen lots of college coaches at clinics and such, but very few have been more impressive than Penn State's crew. Several of those guys seemed to have the magnetism and charisma to be a head coach at some point: Ron Vanderlinden, Tom Bradley, and Larry Johnson.
I'm also thinking Tressel might want to take away his Twitter and let him go back to writing messages on his eye black. At least eye black washes off when you're done.
but I sensed a bit of resentment there...
"well, I could do that too, if coach let me!"
I sometimes get upset at Pryor talking nonsense, but then I think about how he could be the first OSU QB ever to beat Michigan 4 straight times. As a fan through the Cooper years, maybe I'll cut him some slack.
I like the play-off proposal by the way.
Here's my serious question (I'm not just being an assface) about the 23% of people that want Les Miles. Are they;
A. Paying attention and like what he's done recently.
B. Paying attention only to the record.
C. Not paying attention and still fighting the last coaching search battle.
without a doubt it's a combination of not paying attention and vaguely remembering people talking about him when RR was hired.
but I'd say Miles is definitely qualified.
Am I just tripping or does the timing of Urban Meyers resignation seem a bit spooky? Are there two possible candidates for RR's job available right now?
Answer, you are tripping.
You mean 1 vs the 4/5 winner, and 2 vs the 3/6 winner, right?
...after Harbaugh's bowl game.
All i have to fucking say is that LSUfreek photo made my jaw drop...I don't know what to say
My critique of Brian's is that it still relys so heavily on the polls. Oklahoma, MSU, Boise, Arkansas and others have strong arguments they belong over Ohio State in 2010.
My preference: 8 teams, auto-bids from 6 BCS conference champs. 2 bids for non-BCS conferences (e.g. Notre Dame, Boise, etc.) Most years the top 2 seeds will have relatively easy matchups with whatever crap is produced from non-BCS schools or whatever weak team is coming out of the BCS (e.g. Big East champ)...so it still retains the spirit of the 6 team system which rewards the top 2 teams more heavily than others.
I'd prefer only conference champs advance to put the focus back on winning the conference and put less responsibility in the polls. Polls can be used for seeding, but don't need to decide who does or doesn't gets a shot at the title.
Your version doesn't solve your critique of Brian's method at all. If you have 8 spots and 6 autobids, then only 2 of TCU, OSU, MSU, Stanford, OU, Arkansas and Boise get to go. However you determine the at-large bids, your system would guarantee that a top 6 team (TCU, Stanford or OSU) would miss out so that UConn, VT and OU get in. And most likely those teams you listed would all be left out in either system.
Polls would only determine who the top 2 non-BCS teams would be. OSU, MSU, etc would be ineligible.
Ranks would only matter for non-BCS teams. In 95% of season there aren't more than 2 non-BCS conference teams who deserve a playoff invite.
The thing I have hated the most about the BCS is its reliance on polls, especially the coaches' poll. They used to use the AP poll when the BCS started.... but after a year or two, the AP decided they'd have none of it.
I'd be ok with the MGoBlog 6-team plan if the top 6 were determined by the AP poll coupled with some sort of SOS factor, AND that poll would not be released until the end of the regular season (incl. conference championship games). That said, your 8-team plan is ideally what I'd like to see, use a poll for seeding.... or maybe even an NCAA seeding committee.
would be fine too. I actually think the polls are kind of fun, but they shouldn't be relied upon so heavily.
The added bonus of the BCS-conference-champs-only proposal is that it would encourage teams to schedule difficult non-conference games, and even (gasp) away games, in order to better prepare for the all-important conference schedule. Who cares if you go 0-3 in non-conference against Alabama, Texas, and USC - win your conference and you go to the playoffs. (I realize this is wishful thinking since tiebreakers and home game revenues will still trump that...but its a little more incentive to play challenging games.)
This will probably lead to nothing except a couple of raises but it's worth keeping an eye on if only to see how easy OSU's path to the Big Ten Championship game is going to be
Meh, Wisconsin is tough for them, and PSU might have a resurgence under a non-corpse of a head coach. But yeah, OSU has the easier division as long as PSU is down.
Tougher divisions because storied programs are down....
Art Regner was on WDFN today saying that his sources tell him Brady Hoke is a done deal. Makes no sense to me but apparently he was confident in it. He also said that Harbaugh wants the job, but it wasn't offered.
Which makes him the perfect stooge to feed misinformation to.
"The conclusion is that on January second Harbaugh or Rodriguez will be Michigan's coach and that person will be the coach in 2011."
While I 100 percent agree with your five points, I believe the conclusion should be that we will find out on January 4th, possibly the 3rd, rather than the 2nd, because Stanford plays onthe 3rd.
Best part of the poll is that only roughly a third of the people polled said they were Michigan fans. Why even ask them the questions then?
Non-Michigan fans weren't asked the questions about RR.
Pryor should be locked in the basement by Tressel until his graduation.
You misspelled "...until his eligibility is up."
to see what comes out of his mouth next year. If they have a less than expected year or if time just goes by while Terrell Pryor thinks about himself than his studies, there should be some good lines to feed upon here.
In sum, there is no reason people who do not stand to lose money would oppose the idea.
The problem is, there are people that stand to lose money, and not just the bowl operators. Playoffs make remaining bowls even more meaningless, meaning less payout. Under a strictly top-6 system, every non-BCS conference would look at it and think they have almost no chance at making the playoffs. They lose the extra money from the BCS on a yearly basis, paltry as it may be, to join a playoff system that will almost always exclude them. Similarly, how often will the Big East put a team in the playoff? Adding the two groups together, those are 61 of the 120 teams of NCAA FBS that are in line to lose money from your 6 team proposal.
The NCAA has to approve any additional games to be played, I don't see it happening unless it makes more money for EVERY school, not just those in BCS conferences. Most people's ideas for a playoff that aims to maintain the intensity of the regular season rely on 4-8 teams getting in. This just isn't probable with what it would take to replace the BCS. When we get a playoff, it will be Weitzel's 16 team, every conference gets an automatic entry proposal.
Please explain how a playoff with make the remaining bowls even more meaningless. The non-playoff teams would still play in the bowls just like the non-BCS teams still play in bowls. These bowls will be as relevant as always. Right now, only 2 of the 70 odd teams playing in bowls can possibly win the national championship, so how would the bowls for the 68 other teams (or 64 under a 6 team playoff) be any different?
The playoffs would just replace the BCS bowls and would consist of additional games, thus make more money.
My vote, if I had one, would be a "plus 1" system. Play all the traditional bowls as they were, Pac 10 v Big 10 in the Rose, Big 12 v whoever in the Orange, SEC v whoever in the Sugar, and then chose the top 2 teams to play in the Chapionship Game. At this point, there's almost 2 weeks between the new years day games and the BCS championship game.
Right now only one game really matters, this is true. But you still have good match-ups in three of the remaining BCS bowls. Additionally, this one game that matters is 6-10 days after the other semi-meaningful bowls. The BCS bowls and select non-BCS match-ups still get plenty of attention.
Under a six game, three week playoff. The playoffs are going to dominate the entire bowl schedule. There isn't a 35 day window where you can only dissect one game for so long, so you might as well cover the other bowls. Not to mention, the other games being played will be without the six best teams. Think about it this way, how disappointed are we during the regular season when there isn't a top 5 team playing anyone in the top 25. That would become the bowl season, except there's a whole separate playoff where the top 6 are just playing each other. Which set of games do you think people are going to care about?
You're right that the bowl games that are pretty much meaningless today, will still be meaningless, but that doesn't hurt my argument. Schools actually lose money playing in those games.
POSIT: The more you know about football, the more likely you are to be of the opinion that RichRod keeps his job.
I'd like to counter that with a very specific example: Wojo from the Detroit News. He's recently strongly expressed a view that RR should not be back in 2011. I personally believe Wojo to be the best MSM football writer in the state of Michigan, and he certainly seems to know a lot about football (more than I, or probably any posters on this site except for Brian do).
On this site who know more about football than Wojo. Have played, coached, been around programs, or simply watched more. They may or may not be as funny, and your point of best of a bad bounce holds true, but Wojo wasn't passed over for any coaching positions.
He is, however, qualified to run the Lions.
Writes opinion columns. He is not a reporter (if any of those people still exist) or a beat writer. His depth of knowledge about football rivals that of his knowledge of most sports. He's been spewing thd same stuff for years, and although he's one of the better parts of the dead tree press, provides nothing new.
Arrogant and presumptuous.
POSIT: The more you know about football, the more likely you are to be of the opinion that RichRod keeps his job.
There are a lot of former Michigan football players who would strongly object to this claim.
please don't use the words "pryor" and "graduation" in the same sentence as it makes my eyes bleed.
I like Delaney's responses and it shows that he is really sticking up for his conference. I never thought about the consequences to the conferences by letting the small 5 into the BCS. The Big 10 along with the other AQ conferences are losing out on millions of dollars by allowing these small conferences to play in their bowl games, while the small conferences just show up asking for the free handouts because they have nothing to offer, yet they are still pressuring for more. This starts to get really polictical and I know that politics aren't allowed here so I will be careful, but this can really hurt the Big 10s smaller teams that don't generate as much revenue as the bigger teams. Indiana and Minnesota are already at disadvantages to us, but take away millions in revenue from them and the disparity worsens. This may be setting a dangerous precedent for all of the big conferences to become diluted with great teams and terrible teams which will definately hurt college football. Now this is all speculation and it wouldn't happen over the course of a few years, but the future has always been hard to predict.
Yeah, probably along the same lines as last time too. The Big 10 vs. The SEC, with the PAC10 looking on (because it's not really releveant) and UT just minding their own buisness because they are so awesome and want to become their own country.
It's exactly those smaller Big 10 teams that really piss off the non-BCS conferences. To the non-BCS schools, they look at schools like Indiana, Minnesota, Vandy, Duke, Baylor, etc. and see a bunch of schools that haven't contributed anything to building CFB into what it is today, yet they get "free handouts" equal to their conferencemates that have built it into something. Some of these BCS schools have tradition equal to or less than many non-BCS schools.
I should have waited for your post than added what I wrote above in a reply.
This is exactly what I was getting at. The BCS currently gives some money and decent access to the non-BCS schools. A playoff that is limited to 6 or 8 teams would almost certainly eliminate this. The non-BCS schools already feel like they're at a huge disadvantage, it only gets worse with a 6 team playoff.
The NCAA has to sanction any additional games, and the chances of this happening without the non-BCS conferences at least maintaining their current access level is essentially zero.
If we see a playoff, it will be 16 teams, run by the NCAA with every conference getting an automatic entry. I think it maintains the integrity of the regular season while making lots more money for the BCS conferences and more money for the non-BCS conferences. The other option is that the BCS conferences leave the NCAA and form their own organization.
I would like there to be a requirement to precede the words "champion" and "championship" with either "playoff" or "bowl" -- but NEVER "national." A playoff doesn't produce an undisputed national champion; it produces an undisputed playoff champion. They may happen to coincide from time to time, but they're not the same thing. Let's keep the discussion honest.
would be the champions of the respective 1A conferences play one another and the winner declared national champion. It would cover most teams except the unaffiliated like Notre Dame and force them to join a conference. Forget the subjective or computer based national rankings.
I am not sure of the number conferences but if it is odd number then you could use national ranking to determine who gets the bye.
Regarding RR though I would like to see him go, I believe it as a matter of fairness to him Brandon just confidential tell him now so he has an opportunity to quietly seek other positions given the number of openings. MY view is if he has not already told RR, Brandon is being somewhat cruel in the treatment of his coach/staff and their families.
For all we know he may have already told him especially when the Pittsburgh job became available.