- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: BCS works __% of the time? 27%
Posted on 7/16/09 at 9:38 pm to tiger in the gump
Posted on 7/16/09 at 9:38 pm to tiger in the gump
quote:
98 - OSU was left out
Nope, they got it right. Florida State had one loss and a much tougher SOS. 1 for 1
quote:
99 - two undefeated (doesn't mean it worked)
Both teams were undefeated in BCS conference with decent SOS. 2 for 2
quote:
2000 - Miami shafted
I'll agree here. Florida State lost to Miami, who lost to Washington. All three teams had one loss with top 10 SOS. 2 for 3
quote:
2001 - Neb should've never been either Oregon or CU
Another fricked up year. Nebraska deserved to be in over Oregon IMO. But the Nebraska-Colorado debate could go on for days. A 40 point loss to win your division of the conference doesn't say much. Tough call. 2 for 4
quote:
2002 - two undefeated(doesn't mean it worked)
Both teams were undefeated with good strength of schedules. Also, no other undefeated teams in the mix. 3 for 5
quote:
2003 - OU should've never been
They lost one game and were hands down the #1 team in then nation the last 6 weeks of the season. The BCS bases it's top 2 teams based off of the entire body of work. OU and LSU were both one loss teams with a much better SOS than USC. This is a tough call, but I think they got it right. 4 for 6
quote:
2004 - Undef. Auburn and Utah left out (gay)
I still think the right two teams got in, reguardless of how bad OU played in the championship. 5 for 7
quote:
2005 - two undefeated(doesn't mean it worked)
It worked here. Hands down the two best teams in the nation. 6 for 8
quote:
2006 - USC and FL one loss, and OSU didn't look like it shouldn't been in it
OSU deserved to be in, and Florida deserved to be in over USC and Michigan. 7 for 9
quote:
2007 - there were at least two other teams with 2 losses (USC & GA)
LSU won the conference that UGA was in and they had the SAME AMOUNT OF LOSSES. LSU had a much better SOS than USC, and they beat Virginia Tech head-to-head. It got it right. 8 for 10
quote:
2008 - TX, USC left out.
Although personally I do think the BCS put the right two teams in the championship game, this one can be debated. But at the end of the day, Oklahoma won the Big 12, and they had a tougher SOS than USC. It's not the BCS's fault that the Big 12 decided to pick the BCS rankings to determine their champion. 9 for 11
So I'd say 9 for 11.
This post was edited on 7/16/09 at 9:41 pm
Posted on 7/16/09 at 9:50 pm to BayouBengals03
I think anytime there is at least a legitimate argument that BOTH teams were deserving, it got it wrong...regardless of whether the best teams ultimately won the thing. The stated purpose of the BCS is to identify the TWO best teams.
I think 4 years had legitimate arguments:
2000
2001
2003
2004
2008
I think when you get down to splitting hairs over two weak OOC schedules to determine who gets in, like 04 when essentially OU's OOC shite was better than AU's OOC shite, it's at least debatable.
I think 4 years had legitimate arguments:
2000
2001
2003
2004
2008
I think when you get down to splitting hairs over two weak OOC schedules to determine who gets in, like 04 when essentially OU's OOC shite was better than AU's OOC shite, it's at least debatable.
This post was edited on 7/16/09 at 9:51 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News