Posted on 11/22/2011 8:09:02 AM PST by Kaslin
There is a problem with the Bowl Championship Series, but its not the one you probably think.
College football doesnt need a playoff. A traditional playoff system an eight-team or even four-team bracket brings nothing in the way of advantages over the current system and probably would make things considerably worse.
Dont tell me the traditional architecture for playoffs is the only or even most accurate way to determine a champion. The St. Louis Cardinals just won the World Series under that system despite having fewer wins in the regular season than any other team that made the playoffs. They finished six games behind the Milwaukee Brewers in their own division. In fact, wild card teams have won half of the last 10 championships.
Yes, people would watch the playoff games, but people are going to watch the bowls as well. And college administrators are right. The present system gives 68 teams a shot at playing in the postseason. Does anyone argue all 68 teams ought to get a second chance at the national championship? No. Plus, ask the coaches. Teams that advance to bowls get three extra weeks of practices. See how many want to cut the number of teams that receive that privilege from 68 to eight.
Besides, bowl teams and their fans get an enjoyable week in a far-off city, a few doo-dads from the bowl committee and a chance to finish the season against an opponent of comparable accomplishment. We all love the NCAA basketball tournament, but does it really help the 16 seeds to get in for one game, only to get crushed by a No.1 seed in the first round every single year?
No, the problem with the BCS this year is the prospect of a rematch. Full disclosure: Im an LSU fan. I was born in Louisiana, went to a system school, have attended games there since I was a young child and have rooted for the Tigers every day of my life. I want that out there, even though it has little to do with the point Im trying to make.
Thats because, if LSU wins its last two games, it is in and nobody will argue. If the Tigers dont win out, its their own fault if they miss the big dance.
My argument focuses on the other question: Who will they play?
As of today, the top prospect would be Alabama provided Alabama beats Auburn in the Iron Bowl on Saturday. But LSU already has beaten Alabama, 9-6, in as epic and thrilling a game as youll ever see.
I dont think a traditional playoff system works for college football for a variety of reasons. How do you choose eight deserving teams out of 119 that have played wildly diverse schedules? Not all 12-0s are created equal. Boise State and TCU and this years unbeaten darling, Houston, play teams week-in-and-week-out that have perhaps one or two future pros. The LSU-Alabama game probably had 35-40 future pros. The mid-majors simply are not playing the same game.
Plus, the beauty of the present system is that every game among contenders is a playoff game. Stanford was eliminated by its loss to Oregon. Oregon was eliminated by its loss to LSU in Week 1 of the season. USC beat Oregon, but it was eliminated because of its status as a continuing criminal enterprise. Sorry, couldnt resist.
But similarly, Alabama has been eliminated. It had its shot at what most now must agree is the top team in the land. If Arkansas loses to LSU, it has even less claim on another chance having lost previously to Alabama.
If all the present seeds hold serve, LSU should advance. Its most deserving opponent as things stand now -- would be Virginia Tech. Virginia Tech will have won a division championship, a conference championship if it can prevail in the ACC title game, and will have lost only once to a then-Top 10 opponent at the top of its game.
No team in the Big 12, Pac 12 or Big Ten can claim a better resume. And the Big 12 has a higher burden of proof since it no longer has a conference championship game. The problem with the BCS is that, at present, its points system would give the second berth in its title game to Alabama. Im not sure how to fix that except to bar rematches.
College football does not have a traditional playoff system, which doesnt bother me one bit. It chooses champions in a way more similar to auto racing than basketball, and that is OK.
But it does have an elimination system, and that system requires that no team, under any circumstances, gets a rematch. Sorry, Alabama, but you had your chance. Its time others have theirs.
If you use the BCS rankings for the full playoff schedule you will reward the computer geeks who have cooked their results to rank an inept 4-loss Texas team ahead of likely B1G champ Wisconsin who is just 2 fluke plays away from a perfect season. The BCS rankings are not reliable as the ONLY resource for a playoff. Please see my earlier post for 2 different realistic playoff scenarios.
Alabama had their shot. At home. And lost. Why should Alabama have to beat LSU once while LSU has to beat them twice?
Ever seen a 1-0 pitchers duel in the playoffs? Or a 1-0 hockey game? Thrilling as it gets where literally one single play could make all the difference.
Round 1 Nightmare would be:
Holiday Bowl - LSU (at-large #1) vs. Houston (at-large #6)
Cotton Bowl - Arkansas (at-large #2) vs. Boise St. (at-large #5)
Gator Bowl - Oklahoma St. (at-large #3) vs. Alabama (at-large #4)
Round 2 Nightmare would be:
Rose Bowl - Penn St. vs. UCLA
Sugar Bowl - Georgia vs. Gator winner
Fiesta Bowl - Oklahoma vs. Cotton winner
Orange Bowl - Virginia vs. Holiday winner
While Penn St., UCLA, Georgia & Virginia are rewarded for being upset league champs, most of the top 10 BCS teams still have a chance to play their way to the top.
Most importantly, the Big Least is still nowhere to be seen.
I smell fear from this LSU fan.
Roll Tide!
Best line of the article - except for the apology.
TS
****
Yes, I've seen those things. LSU vs. Bama was not the same.
Multiple missed field goals and an inability to complete a forward pass are never thrilling.
You want the equivalent? LSU won the Bama game advancing to 1st base on a couple of 3rd strike passed balls, a fielder's choice and a pop-up sac fly to the 1st baseman where the throw to the plate ended up in the dugout. This "game" also featured 3 infield singles, a bloop Texas leaguer, and 12 full count walks.
There's your equivalent baseball comparison. Blech!
There is already an SEC Championship Game, that’s all the playoff we need.
There are three football conferences that really matter;
The NFC
The AFC
The SEC
I know it’s hard to take for some folks, but Vanderbilt could kick the shine-ola out of 95% of the rest of the Division One teams out there on any given day.
(and they’ll probably do it to Rocky Top this weekend...sadly)
Take the top 16 based on computer rankings and seed them based on those rankings. The ones on the edge will be nervous or upset if left out, but play a tougher schedule and win games and get into the top 10.
A play-off would be very simple.
The existing big bowls can rotate the games including the championship game. All the small, insignificant bowls can still do their games.
Can you imagine the TV ratings for these games? Sweet 16, elite 8, final 4, UNDISPUTED CHAMPIONSHIP!!!!
I hope it happens in my lifetime.
Any comment that disputes the superiority of a playoff is utter nonsense.
****
The computers are a large part of the BCS problem. I'd rather not have a bunch of computer geek programmers who never played the game having any input whatsoever.
Conferences, championships, bowl traditions and the opinions of coaches and sportswriters are all far more important in determining a playoff bracket.
USC is now #10 in the Associated Press!!!! They are not even in the top 25 of the BCS or USA Today poll. http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings
Michigan State is #11 in the AP even thought they were blown out by an unranked Notre Dame team (yeah, 3 loss ND has squeaked back up to 22, but were not ranked when they trounced Michigan State)
They computers are not perfect, but they do a lot better job than the bias North East, Mid-West and West coast sports writers who don't know anything about modern college football. i.e. the South East!
Oh, and btw, the BCS is irrelevant this year.
All the real 2011 national championship battles will have been played by the end of December 3rd.
Alabama vs. LSU
LSU vs. Arkansas
LSU vs. Georia (maybe Arkansas)
anything else is just month old left over Turkey.
YES!!!! A voting sportswriter's or broadcaster's bias (if it exists) is based on what they see on an actual football field and informed by years of work experience observing and reporting on football. Quite often, the sportswriter and (especially) the broadcaster is a former football player.
The computer geeks' bias is based on a bogus spreadheet and algorhythm and any other special secret sauce they throw into their formulae. The geeks do not watch any actual games and do not report on the play on the field, but instead input only the data they feel is statistically significant to their rankings. These geeks never, ever played tackle football. And probably not 2-hand touch or flag football. But I bet they are wizards at Madden 2011!
Bias obviously exists, but please note that the AP poll is not used in the computation of the BCS rankings. The sportswriters pulled their participation in 2004 after the University of Texas lobbied Big XII coaches to manipulate their votes to pull ahead of Cal-Berkley in BCS polling. Prior to the pre-bowl vote, some computer geek Texas supporter calculated that just 8 voting coaches needed to flip-flop Cal & Texas in the polls to give Texas & the Big XII (and not Cal) a big BCS bowl payout.
The Harris Poll replaced the AP poll in BCS computations in 2005. Harris Interactive is a marketing research firm who annually assembles a market based regionally-balanced slate of 115 voters comprised of former players, coaches, administrators and media.
Both the Harris Poll and the AP Poll enjoy the superiority of direct observation and actual game knowledge over the computer geeks. Beyond that, the biases of any one Harris voter (115 total votes) or any one AP voter (60 votes) are mitigated by the votes of other voters spread across the entire country. The 115 Harris voters combine for 33% of the BCS composite. But there are just 6 computer geeks who participate in the computer polls 33% share of the BCS composite. In addition, each team's high and low computer geek score is thrown out. Therefore, the bias of any computer geek is 29 TIMES WORSE than any Harris voter and 15 TIMES WORSE than that of any one sportswriter!
***
USC is now #10 in the Associated Press!!!!
And that's probably where they would be ranked in the other polls if those polls did not exclude teams that are on NCAA probation. The AP poll has no such restriction.
***
Michigan State is #11 in the AP even thought [sic] they were blown out by an unranked Notre Dame team (yeah, 3 loss ND has squeaked back up to 22, but were not ranked when they trounced Michigan State).
I actually think Michigan State should be ranked higher than #11. While I share in your disdain for Notre Dame, the fact is that Michigan State has lost just 2 games (both at difficult away stadiums) - to then #14 Nebraska & to bitter rival Notre Dame, who you grudgingly acknowledge is again ranked.
Contrast AP's #11 Michigan St. with AP's #12 Oklahoma. Oklahoma lost on the road to #25 Baylor (who had never previously beaten a ranked opponent) and lost at HOME to 5-6 Texas Tech - a game that had been a blow out until a late Sooner rally. Yet, the computer geeks still rank Oklahoma at #6 & Michigan St. at #17.
There is no real justification for Oklahoma's high computer ranking. They have just one win versus a currently ranked opponent (at home vs. Kansas St.). AP, Harris & USA Today (Coaches) all now recognize that Florida St. and Texas actually have mediocre teams and reflect those unimpressive Oklahoma victories in their polling. However, the computer geeks all build Florida State's and Texas' early season residual value into their half-baked formulae.
***
They computers are not perfect, but they do a lot better job than the bias North East, Mid-West and West coast sports writers who don't know anything about modern college football. i.e. the South East!
OK, this is getting too easy. In addition to the facts and logic listed above that utterly destroy your belief that the computer rankings hold ANY validity, I will simply point out that the writers and coaches do not view ACC or SEC football with any less value than the computer geeks.
Every single BCS ranked team in the SEC and ACC have Harris & USA Today rankings that are within one or 2 places of the average computer geek ranking. The AP poll (including bowl-banned Southern Cal which moves some teams back a spot) gives a little less love, especially to ACC teams.
I personally think that SEC teams are slightly overrated (especially Arkansas, Georgia, South Carolina & Auburn), but that opinion is not shared nor reflected in ANY of the polls - AP, Harris, Coaches, computer geek or BCS. If anything, an examination of the CURRENT computer geek and BCS rankings reveal a slight bias FOR the ACC, a slight bias FOR non-AQ schools like Boise St. & Houston, a huge bias FOR Big XII teams and a gargantuan bias AGAINST B1G teams.
The funniest thing I see in all of this is:
The Big Least is nowhere to be found in any of the rankings. The BCS should be embarrassed that this pretend football conference is guaranteed a BCS bowl berth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.