- 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
A Layman's Attempt at Curbing BCS Controversy
Posted on 12/9/11 at 1:04 am
Posted on 12/9/11 at 1:04 am
I know that I am probably a little late to the prom on this, but I've been trying to think of a way that would solve the BCS system without having to entirely scrap our current bowl system, but would offer a compromise to those that wish to see a playoff system.
First, let me say that I understand that this doesn't solve all of the problems with the BCS. There are still potential problems with the way the BCS rankings are computed, but it seems that years where the BCS seems to fail it is due to trying to figure out who the number 2 team should be in the NC.
That said, this is what I am thinking:
1.) To qualify, a team must be in a conference that has a conference championship.
2.) A team must win their conference.
3.) In the event that there is "controversy" between the 2nd and 3rd ranked teams, an additional game should be played on the field of higher ranked team within 14 days of completion of their conference championships.
My logic is that since the majority of problems come from placing the #2 and #3 teams, playing an additional game when there is not a consensus on who should play for the BCS NC would settle that and would act as a semi-final.
Thoughts?
btw- this is my first post on the rant, looking forward to posting a whole lot more!
First, let me say that I understand that this doesn't solve all of the problems with the BCS. There are still potential problems with the way the BCS rankings are computed, but it seems that years where the BCS seems to fail it is due to trying to figure out who the number 2 team should be in the NC.
That said, this is what I am thinking:
1.) To qualify, a team must be in a conference that has a conference championship.
2.) A team must win their conference.
3.) In the event that there is "controversy" between the 2nd and 3rd ranked teams, an additional game should be played on the field of higher ranked team within 14 days of completion of their conference championships.
My logic is that since the majority of problems come from placing the #2 and #3 teams, playing an additional game when there is not a consensus on who should play for the BCS NC would settle that and would act as a semi-final.
Thoughts?
btw- this is my first post on the rant, looking forward to posting a whole lot more!
This post was edited on 12/9/11 at 1:10 am
8
Posted on 12/9/11 at 1:06 am to puhtost
quote:
A Lamen's Attempt
Posted on 12/9/11 at 1:09 am to ztucke2
ya, ya, ya... spelling isn't my forte.
Fixed.
Fixed.
Posted on 12/9/11 at 1:12 am to puhtost
By golly I think you've got it! Sound the alarm! No doubt this will be adopted in time for the 2012 season
Posted on 12/9/11 at 1:17 am to puhtost
The idea is to get the two best teams in the nation in a game to decide the champ. Nothing more. The more crap you add the more headaches there will be.
So you want to penalize teams because their conference has no title game. You have just eliminated half of the field before the season starts
Terrible idea imo. For example, Imagine an undefeated and dominant LSU team this year. Clearly they are one of the top two in the country. If they go to Atl and lose to a GA team on a fluke, they are out. Although everyone in the country knows that not only are they clearly a top 2 team, there schedule and resume is better than all other teams. So who would have been in the title game this year? OSU, Oregon, Wisconsin, USM, Clemson, would have been the only qualifiers.
More scenarios equals more headaches and controversy. What if the 3 and 4 team have a controversy, do they then play?
quote:
1.) To qualify, a team must be in a conference that has a conference championship.
So you want to penalize teams because their conference has no title game. You have just eliminated half of the field before the season starts
quote:
2.) A team must win their conference.
Terrible idea imo. For example, Imagine an undefeated and dominant LSU team this year. Clearly they are one of the top two in the country. If they go to Atl and lose to a GA team on a fluke, they are out. Although everyone in the country knows that not only are they clearly a top 2 team, there schedule and resume is better than all other teams. So who would have been in the title game this year? OSU, Oregon, Wisconsin, USM, Clemson, would have been the only qualifiers.
quote:
3.) In the event that there is "controversy" between the 2nd and 3rd ranked teams, an additional game should be played on the field of higher ranked team within 14 days of completion of their conference championships.
More scenarios equals more headaches and controversy. What if the 3 and 4 team have a controversy, do they then play?
Posted on 12/9/11 at 1:28 am to bona fide
quote:
So you want to penalize teams because their conference has no title game. You have just eliminated half of the field before the season starts
Yes. This is meant to quell the cries of teams like Boise State and other non-automatic qualifiers. I think that in this day and age there is a correlation between the strength of a conference and whether or not they have a conference championship. Also this would serve as an incentive for more conferences to create championship games, leveling the playing field.
quote:
If they go to Atl and lose to a GA team on a fluke, they are out.
You are correct sir.
quote:
What if the 3 and 4 team have a controversy, do they then play?
No, because if I understand what you are saying then there is no controversy on who is number 2. Since this is only meant to figure out who belongs in the NC, figuring out who is 3 and 4 would be a moot point.
This post was edited on 12/9/11 at 1:30 am
Posted on 12/9/11 at 1:28 am to bona fide
First off..
bona fide, are you really in thailand? If so, you are a lucky SOB. Some of the hottest chicks I've met are Thai and/or Philippine
Next,
I'd like to see Gary Danielson's idea happen. The 6 best teams in the country play it out at the end of the year. Top 2 get a bye, and highest ranking team gets home field. All 6 of those teams would be going to a late Dec/early Jan bowl, so playing an extra 1 to 2 games wouldn't be much of an issue.
8 would also work, but no more than that. If you go more than that, the fatigue factor and actual time away from what the players are supposed to be achieving (getting an education)now TRULLY comes in to play.
bona fide, are you really in thailand? If so, you are a lucky SOB. Some of the hottest chicks I've met are Thai and/or Philippine
Next,
I'd like to see Gary Danielson's idea happen. The 6 best teams in the country play it out at the end of the year. Top 2 get a bye, and highest ranking team gets home field. All 6 of those teams would be going to a late Dec/early Jan bowl, so playing an extra 1 to 2 games wouldn't be much of an issue.
8 would also work, but no more than that. If you go more than that, the fatigue factor and actual time away from what the players are supposed to be achieving (getting an education)now TRULLY comes in to play.
Posted on 12/9/11 at 1:47 am to dbbuilder79
quote:
bona fide, are you really in thailand?
Yes
quote:
hottest chicks I've met are Thai and/or Philippine
Some quality ladies here. Going back to Philippines or Vietnam soon.
quote:
I'd like to see Gary Danielson's idea happen
I like the system as is. Nice and simple. College football is the greatest sport in USA, not in spite of no playoffs but because of.
Posted on 12/9/11 at 12:18 pm to bona fide
quote:
I like the system as is. Nice and simple. College football is the greatest sport in USA, not in spite of no playoffs but because of.
seconded. the regular season is the playoffs. Did alabama win their conference? no. Do they have a better resume than anyone else? yes. Thus, they deserve to be there.
Posted on 12/9/11 at 12:29 pm to puhtost
I like it. Saban would have voted OSU 16th if that cenario existed. Ask voters to be fair and then vote the team most likely to keep you out 4th. Bet Gundy didn't vote Bama 4th. Class is class ans Saban is classless! 
Posted on 12/9/11 at 12:31 pm to bona fide
quote:
The idea is to get the two best teams in the nation in a game to decide the champ. Nothing more.
If your insinuating that is the purpose of the BCS......Please show me where it says that on their website.
You wont because you cant
Posted on 12/9/11 at 12:33 pm to puhtost
Why should the #2 team have to play an additional game?
Posted on 12/9/11 at 12:37 pm to OldSarge38
quote:
2.) A team must win their conference.
So in this year's scenario - If LSU had Lost to Gerogia with a couple other what ifs....
11-1Stanford was out for not winning thier conference
12-1 LSU is out
11-1 Alabama is out
If Okie State lost to Oklahoma they'd be 10-2
Va Tech lost and went down to 11-2
Oklahoma would be Big 12 champions at 10-2.
You would have ended up with a game like 10-2 Wisconsin vs 10-2 Oklahoma in the BCS game championship game while at a minimum 3 1 loss AQ teams would be fighting for At Large bids.
Genius.
Posted on 12/9/11 at 12:43 pm to bona fide
quote:
bona fide
not to get off topic, but does your mrs. claus have a hint of Asian in her? also, you bammers are a bunch of crusty dingleberries...see ya in Nola!
Posted on 12/9/11 at 12:52 pm to puhtost
quote:
3.) In the event that there is "controversy" between the 2nd and 3rd ranked teams, an additional game should be played on the field of higher ranked team within 14 days of completion of their conference championships.
In the event of controversy? If that's the case what would stop the third rank team from creating its own controversy every year? And who gets to decide what constitutes controversy? An article in the third place team's hometown newspaper declaring they were robbed? Is that sufficient? Sorry bad idea
quote:
A team must win their conference
Never felt this should be a requirement. There are BCS conference champs currently ranked lower than teams they beat. BCS conference champs who are ranked lower than teams who didn't win their BCS conference.
This post was edited on 12/9/11 at 12:53 pm
Posted on 12/9/11 at 12:55 pm to wilfont
Simply amazing that Bama fans are huge BCS supporters all of the sudden 
Posted on 12/9/11 at 12:57 pm to cookie
quote:
not to get off topic, but does your mrs. claus have a hint of Asian in her
So much fun to be had with that statment
Posted on 12/9/11 at 12:57 pm to puhtost
quote:
this is my first post on the rant, looking forward to posting a whole lot more!
Not me.
Posted on 12/9/11 at 12:57 pm to bona fide
Bona fide...you're avatar is really nice, especially when you look uo close. Well done.
Posted on 12/9/11 at 1:00 pm to puhtost
quote:
2.) A team must win their conference.
Stupid.
Here's the thing, and I know every media personality that has a personal interest in a playoff would call bullshite on me: the nature of the sport of college football does not lend itself to a playoff. This isn't basketball, where we play dozens of games that are relatively small scale. Football is an enormous operation that is extremely profitable. First we start with 4 teams, then schools who get left out will start bitching that its unfair and they deserve a shot, so we expand to 6, then 12, and before you know it we have January Madness. Everyone is self-interested. The regular season counts 99% of the time under the BCS, the current situation is a fluke.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News