- 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: Official BCS Discussion Thread
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:01 pm to Pauldean
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:01 pm to Pauldean
Pauldean: 1. Nobody is saying the Players, coaches, or even the fans don't think it is important. It is the BCS that is making it non important.
Stupid is a "CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES" that will allow a team to not win it's Conference Championship, but win against a team that did for the NC. Or even worse, if LSU loses the SECCG, the two teams playing for the NCG come from a conference that yet another team won.
Stupid is a "CHAMPIONSHIP SERIES" that will allow a team to not win it's Conference Championship, but win against a team that did for the NC. Or even worse, if LSU loses the SECCG, the two teams playing for the NCG come from a conference that yet another team won.
0
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:09 pm to filmmaker45
quote:
Do you not understand that this is what WE ALL WANT? Why is it being devalued then? Please tell me why the media is flat out throwing it out the window. Herbstriet is saying it's irrelevant but also relevantt. Pick a side.
I happen to agree with you. I can't explain to you why the media devalues it so much. It's like they are complimenting LSU the team SO MUCH that they devalue the SECCG itself.
Herbie's comments made sense in the context of the questions he was asked, but taken together reveal the absurdity of the whole system.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:09 pm to Geaux2002
quote:
Congrats ESPN for destroying the legitimacy of the regular season in college football.
This! Not that its ESPN, per se, but this is the silver lining to me as a fan of a playoff. I always hated the "every game counts" argument against a playoff. The current scenario proved that to be a fraud. A complete fraud. Because clearly November 5 was meaningless.
If its Bama, then fine. But maybe we can rid ourselves of the notion that a BCS-type system is as good as a playoff at determining a champion.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:12 pm to DaGarun
not only was the NOV 5 game meaningless, so is the SECCG. If I were a GA Bulldog fan, I would be pissed, what the hell? I am playing to win a game that does not matter, can't even be a spoiler? 
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:22 pm to LSUDKG
I remember being incredulous when KSU blew out OU in the Big XII championship in 2003 and it didn't drop Oklahoma from number 1. The system was changed to prevent this, but the powers that be are saying it could happen again.
Of course, the creators of this monster say specifically that they didn't want a conference championship as a prerequisite BECAUSE of situations like this year (the two best teams in the same conference). So I dunno anymore...
Of course, the creators of this monster say specifically that they didn't want a conference championship as a prerequisite BECAUSE of situations like this year (the two best teams in the same conference). So I dunno anymore...
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:30 pm to Pauldean
A playoff solves this, fwiw... It may have other issues, but it solves this.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:34 pm to Pauldean
I've been sort of a proponent of the BCS system but this year I've jumped off the wagon. This shite is broken as hell.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:36 pm to DaGarun
Playoff does not solve rematches. See AcC conference playoff ... Rematch. See sec last year. Auburn and USCe. If you had 8 team playoff this year, 3 SEC teams. Almost certain rematches.
Simple adjustment. BCS formula should give a small point adjustment for winning a conference title. Say .5. If okie lite wins they would be in. If not Bama would still be in cause even with .5 va tech wouldn't pass them. So non conference winner could make it but it would be higher hurdle.
Simple adjustment. BCS formula should give a small point adjustment for winning a conference title. Say .5. If okie lite wins they would be in. If not Bama would still be in cause even with .5 va tech wouldn't pass them. So non conference winner could make it but it would be higher hurdle.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:40 pm to Pauldean
They must support the system as it is, because all of them suck at its waste-filled, fraud-ridden trough. Herbie is a great big sucker, second only to Mr. "because I said so" James.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 8:58 pm to 7thWardTiger
Having looked at the computer rankings this week, several things jump out at me:
First, Bama jumped OSU in at least two of them because Bama played and OSU was idle, that means that an OSU in bedlam will put them back in 2nd in those polls.
Second, and following the above, if OSU jumps Bama in one of the other two remaining computer polls, then they will have erased 75% of the existing gap between them and Bama (approximately)
Third, there is plenty of room for them to move up a spot or two in each human poll, which would easily make up the remaining gap after the first two points above.
So it certainly appears to me that what I've been telling my friends is still a very good possiblity, if not a probability, in that if OSU wins on Saturday they will jump to second in the BCS standings.
Am I missing something?
First, Bama jumped OSU in at least two of them because Bama played and OSU was idle, that means that an OSU in bedlam will put them back in 2nd in those polls.
Second, and following the above, if OSU jumps Bama in one of the other two remaining computer polls, then they will have erased 75% of the existing gap between them and Bama (approximately)
Third, there is plenty of room for them to move up a spot or two in each human poll, which would easily make up the remaining gap after the first two points above.
So it certainly appears to me that what I've been telling my friends is still a very good possiblity, if not a probability, in that if OSU wins on Saturday they will jump to second in the BCS standings.
Am I missing something?
Posted on 11/27/11 at 9:02 pm to filmmaker45
quote:
I've been sort of a proponent of the BCS system but this year I've jumped off the wagon. This shite is broken as hell.
This.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 9:04 pm to DA
This is what I'm saying...even if both VT and Okie St. win, if there is a significant enough anti-rematch movement, why wouldn't the voters move Okie St. over both VT and Stanford as Okie St. would have beat the 10th ranked BCS team whereas VT beat the 20th ranked BCS team and Stanford is idle and not even a conference champion? Plus, isn't the Big 12 viewed as a stronger conference this year than the ACC?
This post was edited on 11/27/11 at 9:05 pm
Posted on 11/27/11 at 9:05 pm to filmmaker45
LSU fans have less reason to argue with BCS than any other school- we benefited greatly from it in 2003 and 2007. Here if we win out the system isn't broken, because the best team will have won out.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 9:05 pm to DaGarun
quote:
A playoff solves this, fwiw... It may have other issues, but it solves this.
a playoff does a lot for years where there are more than two teams with an argument for #1... or to a lesser extent in the years where the #2 is less clear
but it obviously does nothing to make rematches less likely or the keep the meaning of powerhouse head to heads in or out of conference
The first games would obviously mean less this year if there were an extended playoff and LSU played Oregon and Bama again
Posted on 11/27/11 at 9:20 pm to WikiTiger
quote:
Rod Gilmore bringing the heat about Bama's bye
what did he say?
He said that picking Bama before OSU has a chance to play next week is just "anointing Bama" to play in the Championship game while they get to sit home and do nothing! However, the others seem to want to do this and let Bama have a pass into playing LSU.
I guess we should forever refer to the Gumps as the "anointed ones".
This post was edited on 11/27/11 at 9:24 pm
Posted on 11/27/11 at 9:21 pm to molsusports
quote:
but it obviously does nothing to make rematches less likely or the keep the meaning of powerhouse head to heads in or out of conference
The point is 2 games that we played are now meaningless. Under a playoff system the regular season games would be just as important (more so this year) and the conference championship game would have meaning this year. I think we win it all no matter what the system is but this appears to be a fairly significant flaw with the BCS.
This post was edited on 11/27/11 at 9:25 pm
Posted on 11/27/11 at 9:26 pm to DaGarun
quote:
If its Bama, then fine. But maybe we can rid ourselves of the notion that a BCS-type system is as good as a playoff at determining a champion.
The reason many people want the BCS to fail it to usher in a playoff system. Unfortunately for those who dislike rematches, there will be some in a playoff.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 9:27 pm to northeasttiger
quote:
Playoff does not solve rematches
I have no problem with rematches. I have a problem with credible BCS Conference Champions being denied even the opportunity to compete for a title because of a popularity contest.
Posted on 11/27/11 at 9:41 pm to DaGarun
I think Houston, if they get the at large bcs bid, should play LSU for the nc. Hear me out. They are undefeated, ranked in the top 6 in both the polls and computers, won their conference, and will be in one of the BCS.
Not afraid of playing bama again, or osu for that matter...but you have an undefeated bcs participant that is highly ranked by the polls AND computers.
I've said this in another thread, but a selection committee could really help this whole process...
Not afraid of playing bama again, or osu for that matter...but you have an undefeated bcs participant that is highly ranked by the polls AND computers.
I've said this in another thread, but a selection committee could really help this whole process...
Posted on 11/27/11 at 9:45 pm to molsusports
Question for you LSUMatt...
Can you please tell me how the Sagarin Ratings @ USAToday Sagarin Ratings is calculated? How is it that ATM is at #12 with a 6-6 record? I get their SOS is at #2, but their W/L record is worse than AND they lost to both Texas (SOS #4) and Missouri (SOS #5) yet are ahead of both?
11 Kansas State A = 87.35 9 2
12 Texas A&M A = 86.51 6 6
13 Wisconsin A = 86.37 10 2
14 Texas A = 86.31 7 4
15 South Carolina A = 86.28 10 2
16 Baylor A = 86.22 8 3
17 Georgia A = 86.02 10 2
18 Missouri A = 85.76 7 5
19 Michigan A = 85.52 10 2
20 Michigan State A = 84.40 10 2
Not being a Bama homer but doesn't it take away some of the credibility of the Sagarin ratings...how much weight do the Sagarin ratings have on the BCS rankings?
Thanks.
Can you please tell me how the Sagarin Ratings @ USAToday Sagarin Ratings is calculated? How is it that ATM is at #12 with a 6-6 record? I get their SOS is at #2, but their W/L record is worse than AND they lost to both Texas (SOS #4) and Missouri (SOS #5) yet are ahead of both?
11 Kansas State A = 87.35 9 2
12 Texas A&M A = 86.51 6 6
13 Wisconsin A = 86.37 10 2
14 Texas A = 86.31 7 4
15 South Carolina A = 86.28 10 2
16 Baylor A = 86.22 8 3
17 Georgia A = 86.02 10 2
18 Missouri A = 85.76 7 5
19 Michigan A = 85.52 10 2
20 Michigan State A = 84.40 10 2
Not being a Bama homer but doesn't it take away some of the credibility of the Sagarin ratings...how much weight do the Sagarin ratings have on the BCS rankings?
Thanks.
Page 14 of 26
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News