Oklahoma Sooners #1 in BCS Poll (My Title)

BCS ^ | October 17, 2010 | Self

[optiguy]

New BCS Poll Just Released

[optiguy]

Go Sooners!

[tatown]

Just as long as it’s not Oregon.

[Perdogg]

Team BCS Average

1 Oklahoma .9215
2 Oregon .8921
3 Boise State .8898
4 Auburn .8641
5 TCU .8573
6 LSU .8245
7 Michigan State .7628
8 Alabama .6654
9 Utah .6540
10 Ohio State .5726
11 Missouri .5491
12 Stanford .5374
13 Wisconsin .5335
14 Oklahoma State .5261
15 Iowa .4824
16 Nebraska .4295
17 Florida State .4267
18 Arizona .3807
19 Texas .2214
20 West Virginia .1812
21 South Carolina .1555
22 Kansas State .1422
23 Arkansas .1302
24 Mississippi State .1253
25 Virginia Tech .0658

[optiguy]

Agreed.

[buccaneer81]

Ohio State # 10? BS. They should be # 30. They played nobody until last night, and they were all aglow over beating their usual non-conference cupcake foes before.

[Tamatoa]

BCS is BS..

[PugetSoundSoldier]

Hopefully it ends up with Boise State and TCU at #1 and #2, and then the BCS will finally crumble, to be replaced with a playoff system (just like in NCAA division II). Bowl games and the “ratings” are bunk...

[neodad]

Gee don’t see Texas Tech anywhere on that list. Oh, maybe because Tupperware SUCKS!!!!!

[BookmanTheJanitor]

wow, I looked at Ohio State’s schedule...I noticed 4 home games in a row to start the season. Does anyone else do that?

[Perdogg]

amen to that!

[optiguy]

1 Oklahoma 6-0
2 Oregon 6-0
3 Boise State 6-0
4 Auburn 7-0
5 TCU 7-0
6 LSU 7-0
7 Michigan State 7-0
8 Alabama 6-1
9 Utah 6-0
10 Ohio State 6-1
11 Missouri 6-0
12 Stanford 5-1
13 Wisconsin 6-1
14 Oklahoma State 6-0
15 Iowa 5-1
16 Nebraska 5-1
17 Florida State 6-1
18 Arizona 5-1
19 Texas 4-2
20 West Virginia 5-1
21 South Carolina 4-2
22 Kansas State 5-1
23 Arkansas 4-2
24 Mississippi State 5-2
25 Virginia Tech 5-2

[SeaHawkFan]

I think Nebraska will beat Oklahoma. Nebraska recievers dropped three TD passes. Had they caught even one of them, the complexion of the game would have been much different.

[Victor]

As an OU grad, all I can say is BOOMER SOONER!!!!

[RightFighter]

This is how you know it’s all BS:

10 Ohio State 6-1
13 Wisconsin 6-1

Saturday’s final score: Wisconsin 31, Ohio State 18

Same exact record. How can the team who won the head to head be ranked lower? It’s not like Wisconsin lost to a nobody. It was Michigan State!

[PaleoBob]

Not that I give a ‘bleep’ but Auburn (7-0) is 3-0 against top 30 teams and no one else can touch this record at this point so—

Well. Like I said.

[re_nortex]

Hopefully it ends up with Boise State and TCU at #1 and #2, and then the BCS will finally crumble, to be replaced with a playoff system (just like in NCAA division II). Bowl games and the “ratings” are bunk...

I'm a college football traditionalist and have mixed feelings about both the current BCS system and playoffs. My perception is that a playoff reduces the value of games in the regular season.

I may be wrong about that so convince me how such scheme still makes "every game count" leading up to the playoffs.

[Proud_USA_Republican]

Couldn’t agree more.

[Migraine]

I feel sorry for OU now. #1 has been a curse the past two weeks.

[PugetSoundSoldier]

Here’s how - you have the top 2 of each conference go to the playoffs. There are 12 conferences, that gives you 24 teams. Add 8 floating bids (perhaps a tossed bone to the AP/ESPN polls), and you have 32 teams. At most, a team would have 5 rounds of playoffs. Yes, that’s 5 to 6 weeks. Of course, bowl season lasts nearly that long as-is!

For conference schools, go by the conference record; use head-to-head conference wins to break any ties. For the independents, go by overall record.

For example, the PAC-10. Say USC is unbeaten, Oregon, Stanford and UCLA each have one conference loss. During the season, Stanford beat UCLA. Oregon beat Stanford. UCLA didn’t beat Stanford or Oregon. Oregon’s only loss was the USC - the conference champion. Thus the top 2 would be USC and Oregon.

Note this also makes the non-conference games not important in terms of the playoffs. There’s no reason to just schedule patsies for you to beat up on, to pad your season start. Scheduling a few “big boys” as non-conference, but sweeping your conference still gets you in. That’s got to be better than what we have now, with a lot of the perennial powerhouses (I’m looking at Nebraska and Ohio) from scheduling nominal Div I teams (teams that really belong in Div II).

I think it would work well to encourage teams to win every game - if you don’t place in the top of your conference in record, you’re not in the playoffs. Make your non-conference games about excitement and fans and rivalries - it doesn’t hurt in terms of your standings (like preseason games in the NFL).

I think it would work better than what we have now, which is a bunch of professional beer-drinkers (known as sports writers) and friends (coaches) voting for what they think is best. At least there’s a semblance of sanity in there with the computer rankings...

[piytar]

That would be great, but it won’t happen.

What might is a “plus one” scheme. How often is the best team in the country not in the top 4? NEVER. So run the bowls, designate 2 as playoffs, and then have the winners play for the title. Really don’t get why they won’t at least do that.