Semi-OT? - Yet another example of why the BCS system sucks

Submitted by gebe659 on

The USA Today Coaches' Poll just came out...

Highest ranked ACC team: Virginia Tech at #17

Highest ranked Big East team: they're all unranked

Yet these two craptastic conferences each get 1 automatic BCS bid.

I know you all hate OSU and MSU, but please look at this by team merits, as a Big Ten vs. other crappier conferences thing, and as a "BCS sucks" thing... isn't it a travesty that TWO of Wisconsin, OSU, MSU, and Iowa will miss out on BCS bids to accomodate teams from those two awful conferences?

We desperately need a playoff system... no teams from those two conferences would make it to a playoff... and that's the way it should be!

GREEAR.10

November 7th, 2010 at 6:14 PM ^

Yeah, and Oregon went on to almost lose to an awful Purdue team the next week, and barely beat Utah in week 3. They didn't hit their stride until later in the year.

Regardless, it is unclear if Boise has improved from last year, but Oregon has improved leaps and bounds so its not a very meaningful data point to use a game played almost two years ago.

Oh, and it was at Boise.

BlueTimesTwo

November 7th, 2010 at 6:51 PM ^

Some of that could be that they just hadn't hit their stride, or they could have suffered a letdown after losing to BSU and after losing their top RB after the first game.  BSU also beat a quality Oregon team the year before too, in Eugene.  BSU matches up well with Oregon, which is why I don't take it as given that Oregon would beat BSU this year.

GREEAR.10

November 7th, 2010 at 7:05 PM ^

Its never a given that team A will beat team B, but the point is that Oregon would be favored as they are the better team. So they deserve to go to the NC over Boise.

As little relevance as a game played in Sept. 2009 has on this year, a game from Sept. 2008 has even less.

Oregon had already had their top 2 QBs injured(Costa and Roper), then Masoli got a concussion and had to leave the game and they put in true frosh Chris Harper who threw 2 picks in 3 attempts. Who is Harper you ask? He was converted to WR, and transferred at the end of the season to KState, where he is a marginal contributor at WR.

DThomas then came into the game as a true frosh and led UO on a furious 4th quarter comeback, but ran out of time.

So yeah, not much relevance to the UO offensive juggernaut of 2010, it was an Oregon team struggling with their 4th and 5th string QBs leading the way.

BlueTimesTwo

November 7th, 2010 at 8:12 PM ^

BTW, I am not making a case for BSU over an undefeated Oregon, or an undefeated Auburn, etc.  I am, however, taking issue with the people who would keep BSU and TCU at #3 even if there were no undefeated or 1-loss teams remaining.  They are quality teams, and if there are no undefeated teams remaining, then they should get their shot over 1-loss teams.

blueinwestlansing

November 7th, 2010 at 2:21 PM ^

College football is the only sport that I know, where you don't control your own destiny to win a championship. In any other sport, if you win all your games you will be given a shot at the national title

the_white_tiger

November 7th, 2010 at 2:55 PM ^

What an original thought, the BCS sucks. Yeah, I know that this isn't a popular opinion, but I think that the BCS is infinitely better than an 8 or 16 team tournament. Personally, I'm in favor of a plus-one, but the thought of a two or three loss team getting a shot at a title is really asinine.

Tater

November 7th, 2010 at 6:17 PM ^

NSFMF.  I have a feeling that we will truly see "asinine" in this season's title game.  Also, as long as there is no playoff with conference champions included, there is absolutely no incentive for teams to schedule tough non-conference matchups when they can cost a team a shot at a National Championship while a team with an easier schedule gets in. 

The BCS richly deserves BSU vs TCU this year.  Oregon has Cal, Arizona, and Oregon St left, while Auburn has UGA, Bama, and the SEC title game left.  Both could go undefeated, but both could stub their toes, too.  Meanwhile, TCU will be playing SDSU and NMU, while BSU will be playing Idaho, Fresno St, Nevada, and Utah St.  Nevada is a threat, but they did lose to Hawaii. 

So, as much as I would love to see Auburn get the chance that a USC team with an ineligible star player stole from them a few years ago, it would be a lot more fun to see everybody lose and the BCS get stuck with a dog of a game that almost nobody watches.  Only when they start losing money will they start seriously thinking about doing it the right way.  D-1 football has been the only NCAA sport without a true champion determined on the field long enough.

the_white_tiger

November 7th, 2010 at 7:04 PM ^

Like I said, a four team playoff would be the best. All the people clamoring for 8, 16, or more need to realize that a three loss team does not deserve a shot at the title. With four, there still is some selectivity, which I think is for the best. I don't think the voters will allow Boise or TCU to be part of the tourney, but hey, I could be wrong.

GREEAR.10

November 7th, 2010 at 3:23 PM ^

The Big East gets bashed a lot around here, so I thought it would be worth pointing out that prior to this year the last time the Big Ten was ranked higher than the Big East(according to Sagarin ratings) was 2005.

Seth9

November 7th, 2010 at 6:14 PM ^

Sagarin's conference rankings stress the middle of a conference at the expense of the top and bottom of a conference. There are fair arguments in favor of this method, but it is utterly irrelevant when discussing who deserves an autobid because autobids should go to conferences that consistently produce teams that deserve them.

Seth9

November 7th, 2010 at 11:30 PM ^

That said, I would argue that the top of the Big East has generally not been as good as the top of the other BCS conferences (except, perhaps, the ACC). I don't think that any program in the Big East that lacks the ability to compete as a midlevel team in the other BCS conferences, but I also don't that there's any program in the Big East that could compete for Big Ten, Big 12, Pac 10, or SEC titles on a yearly basis. And that's important when evaluating conference strength.