Was there ever a good reason given for doing away with BCS and doing this committe crap?

LSU fans losing their minds probably

I am embarrassed reauly. We not all like this bro.

They did it simply for optics. It's BS

Problem was that, every year, there was some fresh controversy about the BCS that requires tweaking the rules.

USC missing out on the title game in 2003, Auburn being shut out of the title game in favor of USC and Oklahoma in 2004, etc.


So their solution was to replace it with the committee, who arguably are doing an even worse job of it.

Committee has got it right every year thus far. Committee has also sided with the projected BCS standings every year.

I still don't trust them either and think sticking with the BCS to determine the top 4 was better but you guys are being overdramatic.

Because the Tier 1 Media Darlings were struggling with that system. When that happens, everything has to change to cater to those few teams.

USC can't get in because they played nobody? Change the system so "quality wins" are no longer a thing.

Bama loses their most important regular season game when "Every Game Counts"? Put in the "eye test" to remedy that. Now those Tier 1 teams can make the playoff despite not winning their conference. Everyone else must win their conference for consideration.

There is a distinct pattern if you pay attention to it.

quote:

---

USC missing out on the title game in 2003

---

This.

The narrative was, "If everyone agrees this is the #1 team, why should some computer overrule that?"

quote:

---

The committee was established to eliminate the possibility of a similar rematch.

---

No. That's what it looked like, but it was to make sure that ratings and "eye tests" would solve perceived problems. There were already rumors of that before the season started. That just gave them a convenient excuse.

Remember, there was still a human ranking:

quote:

---

This system placed twice as much emphasis on polls than computer rankings (since there were two polls and an average of six computer rankings) and made it highly unlikely that the top team in both polls would be denied a place in the title game, as it happened in the 2003–04 season.

---

The emphasis placed on humans starting in 04, lead to their control of the narrative. Humans could have dropped Alabama lower in 2011, but didn't. Hence the rematch.

They wanted even MORE control after that, not less, but the "committee" looked like it was solving a problem, but it was really about more human influence. They took those steps over time to basically go back to a bastardized system of poll ratings anyway.

The committee was formed to prevent two same-conference teams in the national championship. If two teams make it, they will ALWAYS be paired in the first round.

Correct.

But there's also a trend I've noticed of the AP and coaches "correcting" their rankings in those 50-50 calls to reflect the CFP rankings. So the data on that mirroring comparison is somewhat corrupt.