re: BCS Champion should be # 1

I don't agree with the whole Championship-#1 thing. I agree with several people on this thread that the polls should be based on the coming season. I too think that polls should not come out until like...week 3-week 4, and I know that there are several OOC games, but, if a team were to lose to an OOC opponent, that could be factored in as well. Once you reach conference play, and start winning, then those games could "weigh" more and you would get bumped up, if you lose an OOC game.

JMO

When the coaches' poll comes out doesn't matter at all. Why? 2 reasons: First, we the consuming public demand polls and we would still gobble up the Athlon, Lindy's, SI Power Rankings, etc, week by week (and even if you could somehow eliminate those polls, they'd be replaced in the blogosphere). Second, a delayed coaches poll would do exactly what the Harris poll does right now: piggyback on the non-offical polls out there which represent the national consensus. In fact, the polls actually come out about ten seconds after the end of each season as each columnist and outlet posts their "way-early" rankings for the next season. Throughout the spring and summer, those rankings are modified based on perceptions of recruiting, early-entry, injuries, etc. Georgia (and I am no Dawg fan) survived this process to emerge as number 1 in the first "official" rankings. Whether one agrees with the choice or not (and I don't), the manic interest in and information about college football produces more national dialogue about the rankings than ever before. Also, regarding number one not dropping without a loss: I don't know if I agree with this. More and more we see CFN, Mandell, Dodd, et. al. posting weekly power rankings that go into detail explaining why teams are ranked the way they are. I think this moe fluid approach is slowly leaking into the official polls, and I think we saw abundant evidence last season in the final poll, when voters decided that LSU and tOSU were the right two teams to play for the title. Wether you agree with that decision or not, you can't argue that it was the simple result of moving teams up one slot automatically. I think the Auburn experience has provoked some of these changes, and that's a good thing. It's funny how we put our P&G glasses on and say that an undefeated '08 LSU team would deserve the title game over an undefeated OU or USC because the SEC is so strong. Isn't that a version of the same thing we criticize? Deciding how good the teams are before a game is played?

quote:

---

when voters decided that LSU and tOSU were the right two teams to play for the title. Wether you agree with that decision or not, you can't argue that it was the simple result of moving teams up one slot automatically.

---

I a talking PRE-SEASON...last year the movement was a result of all the upsets with some of "their darlings", I am not sure that they had that many choices. I guess until there is a playoff system, no clear choice will emerge.
I may be wrong, but I believe that some of the decisions (IF AN OBVIOUS ONE DOES NOT EXIST) and they can justify theirs, is partially done on the potential size of the national viewing audience for the Championship game.

Great day to all of you...gotta go.
Geaux Tigers

BTW..nice to talk to people with ideas w/out insults

The pre-season polls are based on where a team finished the previous year and how many starters and key positions they bring back. That's it.

It has nothing to do with this year's schedule or anything else.

Also, pre-season polls don't mean much unless they don't chage until the BCS comes out. It can give you a jump start but also lays on the pressure.

quote:

---

Also, pre-season polls don't mean much unless they don't chage until the BCS comes out. It can give you a jump start but also lays on the pressure.

---

They can mean a lot...
Maybe more in some polls than others but ......
Let's say that the top 3 teams go undefeated.....
chances are very good that 1 and 2 will play and 3 will be left out of the NC game.
IT IS HARDER than it should be to displace a TOP ranked team. There is an assumption of "we were right" that's why I said that IF ANYONE SHOULD RECEIVE THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT, it should be the previous year's winner.

I think we are now talking about what should be a different thread...it changed from my initial "point"

Hope you'll have a great day.

quote:

---

Let's say that the top 3 teams go undefeated.....
chances are very good that 1 and 2 will play and 3 will be left out of the NC game.

---

I don't think so. I think the 2 teams with the toughest schedules would play. The BCS formula would take care of this.

Preseason polls are an indication of how good your team is. The preseason polls are, however, for the uneducated, soundbyte college football fan.

He/she can quickly scan the top 25 polls and at least make a comment when the football talk comes up at the office.

Everyone who knows football realize the preason polls are just a guage of how people feel about how talented your team is. The real deal is who gets it done on the field, and that will be proven over the season until the bcs screws it up at the end because there is no playoff system.

And there is absolutely no way the national champion should be preseason number 1. The national champion is just that, the national champion for the previous year. The national champions or for that matter, most college teams not called Temple who actually has 21 of 22 starters coming back, actually lose a significant number of players to graduation. The team that won the championship is not the team playing this year.

Since the polls are for this year, obviously being national champ last year means nothing to the preseason polls. And just keeping the number 1 spot open, or not coming out with polls until the 5th week will not alleviate the bias that many of the voters have. The bias in any poll is just human nature. Certain pollsters will look at certain teams through rose colored glasses.

quote:

---

an additional perk.

---

What, like Make It-Take It? Is that how it should work? It would defeat the purpose of the rankings completely.

RBDallas
I've been trying to make the same point as you. I even called into the radio yesterday, but left field Bobby Hebert cut in and they hung up on me before I could explain. In a contraversy filled system, the worst case scenario, the biggest travesty of all that would greatly eclipse Auburn '04, is that a "defending" national champion goes undefeated the following year, but doesn't get a chance to "defend" because they are dependant on the losses of 5 of the 6 teams ahead of them in preseason rankings, for them to be in the game. Where's the crime in making the previous years champion #1 in preseason and the title theirs to lose if they don't measure up to last years team? Make last years accomplishment count for something. Why does the reign have to expire the day after the championship game? If they don't measure up to the team that won it last year, they will lose and as soon as they do, they fall and everybody behind is back to where they were. It's an easy way to eliminate the worst case scenario at no expense. What am I missing?

Edit: I think after the automatic # 1 as described above, the remaining top 25 should be picked as they currently are. The only intent in my comment is to totally eliminate the worse case scenario-that being an undefeated, previous years champion being left out. Do I think it will play out that way. No way, but you could easily eliminate that possibility.

quote:

---

I think that the BCS Champ should automatically be ranked # 1 the following season REGARDLESS of how they are perceived the following season Then if / when they loose, the rankings can be adjusted.

---

disagree. the previous season has nothing to do with the following season. rankings are stupid anyway. if you want to have them just for a conversational piece, so be it. but to use it to determine a champion is asanine.