- 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: The BCS has been undeniably kind to LSU
Posted on 5/29/11 at 3:16 am to Tigerfan7218
Posted on 5/29/11 at 3:16 am to Tigerfan7218
the seahawks were undeserving since they shouldn't have gotten to host a game.
the others are all in sports where midmajors have no problems with big guys plus fresno falls under hottest team.
butler was a good team.
gmu and vcu didnt really steal a worthy teams spot since they let so many in. Also in basketball id bet upsets or more common. Its 3 in the morning so im not going to look it up but it would seem to me being a midmajor type school a upset is more common in a sport like basketball or baseball.
I might do some research on it and try to find the last time a sunbelt team beat a team that was a actual nc contender.
the others are all in sports where midmajors have no problems with big guys plus fresno falls under hottest team.
butler was a good team.
gmu and vcu didnt really steal a worthy teams spot since they let so many in. Also in basketball id bet upsets or more common. Its 3 in the morning so im not going to look it up but it would seem to me being a midmajor type school a upset is more common in a sport like basketball or baseball.
I might do some research on it and try to find the last time a sunbelt team beat a team that was a actual nc contender.
3
Posted on 5/29/11 at 3:22 am to heartbreakTiger
I could tell you that the last NC contender from a mid-major was likely SMU back in the 80s. Certainly not since the BCS because they are "unworthy". And I know it didn't happen, but Troy got damn close to knocking off LSU and UAB did knock of LSU in the last decade.
I mean in every other sport all the conferences get an AQ.
I mean in every other sport all the conferences get an AQ.
Posted on 5/29/11 at 3:22 am to Tigerfan7218
I'm going to sleep now so I can wake up for the Indy 500 tomorrow, I'll see if I can find this thread in the AM.
Posted on 5/29/11 at 3:58 am to Tigerfan7218
quote:
all of the FBS conferences get a team in
+
quote:NFL, BB, etc, =/= FBS
Fresno State, the Seahawks, Butler, George Mason and VCU
You'd need an rpi to weed out Sunbelt, WAC, MWC, MAm, CUSA and INDs.
You're going to give all Conf Champs AQ staus?
It's unfair enough now with some teams vying for BCS Bowls playing 1 or 2 challenging games a year, imo.
Posted on 5/29/11 at 4:38 am to PRK
the BCS is much better than it used to be. think about how many NC's alabama claims. it's disgusting that when any obscure magazine with a regional base could name them NC and they would claim it. Now only USC trys that crap. oh, they use the AP, that's right. 
Posted on 5/29/11 at 5:22 am to LSU GrandDad
I am not a LSU fan of course, but I strongly feel the BCS system is a bunch of horse shite. And the whole freaking country wants one. Even your SEC comish has spoken much in the past wanting one years ago.That has kept out teams like the undefeated BSU's or TCU's or Utah's or Auburn, or USC or Oregon from having a chance some years.
I have the most simple BCS fix that came to me in the middle of the night last year. I plan on starting a website to push this idea. I think ALL sides would be happy with it and it is SUPER easy to fix all this...
You only have a 8 team playoff. And you keep all things as they are, all bowls the same. But here is what you do. You take the 6 Major AQ Conferences and give them a team in. Then you let the BCS system computers pick the other two at large but cannot be from a BCS Conference. (ie. no one wants to see Oregon and Oregon St. in, or Bama and Auburn in). You let the regular season and each Conferences Champ game(if they have one) be the playoff in theory, and each AQ power Conference sends their 1 best team, and only 1. The other 2 slots will be given to Indies like ND or programs like BSU or such that really are deserving. And you rank them, 1 against 8 ect. and so on. Their are 4 major BCS bowls. Put those 4 games in their normal bowls. And play it all out. It will be only adding 2 more weekends of football past the Rose Bowl and other bowls for example. Everything stays the same, all other bowls everything.
The sucky thing is the SEC usually has 2 teams in BCS games, so lots of money. In this system they can even make more for each time a team wins, they get the pay out. And if LSU for example is #1, they might only be playing ND or something, whoever is the lowest of the 8 teams. So the odds are really good.
This would bring TONS more money for CF. This would ensure that virtually no other undefeated team was left out. It would ensure the best was known. And well, this would open up all Conferences to playing better OC games (like ours coming up) cause they would not hurt against your Conference record if you lost to us. Each Conference send your #1 best team, however you determine that team. And play them off.
The Crux in this however is the Rose Bowl is the oldest and most premier bowls and because of that the PAC and Big Ten will not want to give up their bowl very easy. I hear it is our PAC Comish and bowl people who have held this playoff up the most then anybody. Your SEC people have been on record much over the years wanting this. Its my PAC people who are the bad guys and it pisses me off.
And the best feature is, if a certain Conference was super tight one year with much Parity(like in the Big Ten last year with 3 teams)even if you had a 2 or 3 loss Conference Champ team, under my idea they still would get in. It just could be that the SEC is so harder one year to go undefeated then the ACC or whoever, and each power Conference should send their #1 best team, no matter the record.
This idea would virtually stop playing creampuffs during the year cause OC games would not really matter, only Conference games. Conferences make more money, Teams make more money, TV makes more money and all other bowls and the BCS would stay the same, everyone is happy. The only unhappy people would be my people and Big Ten people who would have to give up the RB as it should be all rotated for the 8 team playoff bowls. And as a side note, If I were the President, I would force there to be no independents. Every one would have to join some Conference. And the hype for this 8 team playoff would be way more then what the bowls are now cause literally you have each Conferences best facing off, so it would also be a grand battle of the Conferences too. But I hate the idea of a 16 team or large group as that is what Conference Title games are for and would reward teams going in that lost their C title game and drag on the season too long. Short, sweet, more money for all, very simple, hardly have to change the current system. Cant get better then that IMO.
Does anyone like my idea?
I have the most simple BCS fix that came to me in the middle of the night last year. I plan on starting a website to push this idea. I think ALL sides would be happy with it and it is SUPER easy to fix all this...
You only have a 8 team playoff. And you keep all things as they are, all bowls the same. But here is what you do. You take the 6 Major AQ Conferences and give them a team in. Then you let the BCS system computers pick the other two at large but cannot be from a BCS Conference. (ie. no one wants to see Oregon and Oregon St. in, or Bama and Auburn in). You let the regular season and each Conferences Champ game(if they have one) be the playoff in theory, and each AQ power Conference sends their 1 best team, and only 1. The other 2 slots will be given to Indies like ND or programs like BSU or such that really are deserving. And you rank them, 1 against 8 ect. and so on. Their are 4 major BCS bowls. Put those 4 games in their normal bowls. And play it all out. It will be only adding 2 more weekends of football past the Rose Bowl and other bowls for example. Everything stays the same, all other bowls everything.
The sucky thing is the SEC usually has 2 teams in BCS games, so lots of money. In this system they can even make more for each time a team wins, they get the pay out. And if LSU for example is #1, they might only be playing ND or something, whoever is the lowest of the 8 teams. So the odds are really good.
This would bring TONS more money for CF. This would ensure that virtually no other undefeated team was left out. It would ensure the best was known. And well, this would open up all Conferences to playing better OC games (like ours coming up) cause they would not hurt against your Conference record if you lost to us. Each Conference send your #1 best team, however you determine that team. And play them off.
The Crux in this however is the Rose Bowl is the oldest and most premier bowls and because of that the PAC and Big Ten will not want to give up their bowl very easy. I hear it is our PAC Comish and bowl people who have held this playoff up the most then anybody. Your SEC people have been on record much over the years wanting this. Its my PAC people who are the bad guys and it pisses me off.
And the best feature is, if a certain Conference was super tight one year with much Parity(like in the Big Ten last year with 3 teams)even if you had a 2 or 3 loss Conference Champ team, under my idea they still would get in. It just could be that the SEC is so harder one year to go undefeated then the ACC or whoever, and each power Conference should send their #1 best team, no matter the record.
This idea would virtually stop playing creampuffs during the year cause OC games would not really matter, only Conference games. Conferences make more money, Teams make more money, TV makes more money and all other bowls and the BCS would stay the same, everyone is happy. The only unhappy people would be my people and Big Ten people who would have to give up the RB as it should be all rotated for the 8 team playoff bowls. And as a side note, If I were the President, I would force there to be no independents. Every one would have to join some Conference. And the hype for this 8 team playoff would be way more then what the bowls are now cause literally you have each Conferences best facing off, so it would also be a grand battle of the Conferences too. But I hate the idea of a 16 team or large group as that is what Conference Title games are for and would reward teams going in that lost their C title game and drag on the season too long. Short, sweet, more money for all, very simple, hardly have to change the current system. Cant get better then that IMO.
Does anyone like my idea?
Posted on 5/29/11 at 5:26 am to Mayhawman
I don't see why we have to have a fixed number of teams in the playoffs. Instead I think they should collect all the teams that "qualify" and then set up a playoff around them. You start with the two highest ranked teams from the BCS conferences. Then and any other team that can match the record of either of the two teams also gets in. Due to the weakness of their schedule, teams from the mid-majors will start with a loss.
Note that the regular season is preserved because you don't know what record will qualify until the very end. In addition, about half the time you'll just have a NCG between the two top teams. But then some years (like 2007), you could see a big field and chaos will ensue. Of course during those years you don't have a clear cut champion anyway. Should make everyone happy.
Note that the regular season is preserved because you don't know what record will qualify until the very end. In addition, about half the time you'll just have a NCG between the two top teams. But then some years (like 2007), you could see a big field and chaos will ensue. Of course during those years you don't have a clear cut champion anyway. Should make everyone happy.
Posted on 5/29/11 at 5:33 am to DocBugbear
Interesting idea buddy. However I see that idea having one flaw. What if one year the SEC has so much parity that 3 teams in the SEC loose 2 games each, but then you have 4 other teams in the other Conferences that go undefeated? Under your system the SEC would not get in, when in truth it just may look like on paper they are down that year while in truth it was just they had so much incredible Parity that year and in theory still be light years better then any champ in another Conference. Thus, we cant just go by a record for a year cause we would not be considering that one Conference may just have SEVERAL awesome teams. Under my system, send us your #1 best, whatever the record, and that #1 reps each Conference, and it will be very easy through a quick 8 team playoff to see which conference is better as well.
Posted on 5/29/11 at 5:35 am to PRK
If there had been a playoff in 2006 I am convinced that LSU would have won the National Championship.
Posted on 5/29/11 at 5:43 am to Michael J
You might indeed be right. However, until their is SOME kind of playoff the NCAA does not recognise one single national champion. Yes the BCS system is better then the old poll votes, but still its still a vote to who gets in. And it needs to change bad! The country is getting fed up! Plus, I would like to shut the mouths of BSU in my system when they have to play 2-3 games in a row with the best and loose. Then you would not hear all that whining from Non AQ's how they never got a chance. Under my idea there would not have a chance of having more then one undefeated team at the end of the year, which is the biggest complaint to the whole BCS system and how it is unfair. Everyone gets happy. If the SEC really is that dominant, under my idea, the whole country will see that easily and they would of had to prove it to earn it.
Posted on 5/29/11 at 6:05 am to heartbreakTiger
quote:
the others are all in sports where midmajors have no problems with big guys plus fresno falls under hottest team. butler was a good team
What does this even mean? And yes Butler was a good team, but they didn't play top level competition week in and week out. I don't see what makes them any different from Boise State. Except Boise State wins 90% of their games, which is far more than you can say for Butler. I just don't believe you are making a very good point. It all sounds good, but when this guy brings up teams, everything you say can be compared to a College Football team. I'd like to see a change in the way its done, whether it be a playoff or plus-1, it really doesn't matter. Then again, I won't complain if it stays the same. I just don't like how you are saying Boise doesn't deserve a chance because they aren't good enough based on who they have on the schedule, and then go and put a far less accomplished team out there as a good team who deserved to be there.
Posted on 5/29/11 at 6:50 am to Tigerfan7218
quote:
Just FYI I did an argumentative paper on playoff vs. BCS for an english class, got a 100 and actually convinced my professor that a playoff done correctly is better, but you don't want to hear my system because it'd probably just piss you off and start shite.
I would retroactively flunk your arse for writing something as stupid as this, but I digress. Can a playoff be designed that would minimize the impact on the regular season? Yes. A small playoff that does not include autoqualifiers will do just that. However, as soon as you get to 8 teams BCS conferences will insist on AQs for financial reasons. AQs is what has the biggest detrimental impact on the regular season.
The problem with AQs is that the basis for the AQ will be conference championship, and not the overall record. Theoretically, teams with 4 or 5 losses could, and over time will, make the playoffs (conference CGs only exacerbate the problem). In the BCS this cannot happen at all.
In the BCS, because of the SOS component in the models, every game played can have an impact on who goes. This doesn't mean that every game is decisive, only that it could be (e.g. flip the outcome of the Boise/Hawaii game in 2003 and USC goes to the CG instead of us). This makes people who normally wouldn't give a rat's arse about a game to take note. It enhances the regular season. In addition, it's very difficult to get a handle on what matters and doesn't until the very end.
AQs, or the first step to be an AQ (i.e. win your division), can be determined much earlier. At that point subsequent regular season games can become like exhibition games. One of college football great rivalries is the Ohio State - Michigan game (IRL this one may not matter anymore due to the Big 10 realignment, IDK, but the concept is valid regardless). Imagine a situation where one team has the division in the bag when the game is played. While it's unfortunate that the underdog will no longer be able to screw their rival big time, I don't think that will subdue passions. However, for the rest who think this game is just two jackasses fighting over a turnip, it will. And that really diminishes the game imo.
I could go on about the lesser meaning of OOC games, but that's just piling on. The bottom line is that any playoff with AQs will have a major negative impact on the regular season. It's also maive to think that an 8 team or more playoff would be implemented without AQs.
This post was edited on 5/29/11 at 6:53 am
Posted on 5/29/11 at 7:04 am to DucksflyinPAC
quote:
DucksflyinPAC
Does anyone like my idea?
I do.
Posted on 5/29/11 at 7:08 am to DucksflyinPAC
The BCS is flawed yes but it has for the most part gotten the game the people wanted to see at the end of the year. Everyone wanted to see Oregon Auburn last year and Alabama Texas the year before. In this system your whole season matters not just how you finish. For example this LSU oregon game coming up if there was a playoff it would greatly diminish the importance of the game.
Posted on 5/29/11 at 7:21 am to DucksflyinPAC
quote:
Then you let the BCS system computers pick the other two at large but cannot be from a BCS Conference.
So if USC went 12-0, and an 11-1 UO, who's only loss was to USC, sit's out, while a 9-3 Big East conf champ that lost to a couple conf cellar dwellers and UO and 11-1 BSU, 0-1 vs AQ, both danced, you'd be happy.
This could happen quite often and would endure more disgruntlement than the BCS has ever caused.
Posted on 5/29/11 at 7:30 am to PRK
I think the BCS sorts it all out just fine. Even with a playoff the AP could still name their own champ so a playoff does not guarantee there won't be a co natl champ. As long A's there's more than one poll it can happen.
BCS FTW
BCS FTW
Posted on 5/29/11 at 8:22 am to PRK
No doubt....but I think Oklahoma has benefitted even more than LSU in making championship games (not that they win them when they get there). 2003, 2004, 2008 (thanks in part to the Big 12 denying Texas the opportunity)
Posted on 5/29/11 at 8:48 am to heartbreakTiger
I'm old school
I prefer the bowl system because of the politics it would still be fricked up because some good team would not have enough money to buy votes. The bowls have been around for decades so why change them? We all know that some sport writers have their favorite schools & will vote for them no matter what . Some favorite teams over the last 30 years are USC ND OK TEX OHIO STATE &MIA.
I prefer the bowl system because of the politics it would still be fricked up because some good team would not have enough money to buy votes. The bowls have been around for decades so why change them? We all know that some sport writers have their favorite schools & will vote for them no matter what . Some favorite teams over the last 30 years are USC ND OK TEX OHIO STATE &MIA.
This post was edited on 5/29/11 at 8:51 am
Posted on 5/29/11 at 9:00 am to cajunjj
im a fan of system we have now... for the simple reason that you have the pageantry of the rose bowl or cotton or sugar bowls... you have these marquee matchups most of the time...now the only thing i would change is some of the automatic bids...
take that crap away I think the top teams should get into the top bowls regardless of conference or bowl preference
take that crap away I think the top teams should get into the top bowls regardless of conference or bowl preference
Posted on 5/29/11 at 9:01 am to jledet
for example in 07, i dont think it should have been usc/illinois in the rose...why not do away with the pac10/big ten game seeing is how illinois wasnt in the top ten....
a uga/usc match up would have been epic that year
a uga/usc match up would have been epic that year
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News