Question for proponents of the BCS system...

amazing, huh?  they support a system that leaves out #3 and 4... but oppose a system that leaves out #9 and 10...

it's really hard for me to figure how this could be difficult to understand...

No one would argue with you if Bama lost to Iowa St.

Also, I don't like the current BCS system but it doesn't mean I agree with on Okie St.

but do you agree that this scenario presents a problem for people who support the BCS based on the argument that every game is a playoff?


think of it this way... if we had an 8-team playoff... in accordance with BCS rules you would have 2 SEC teams this year (LSU, Alabama) and 2 Big 12 teams this year (OSU, OU)... along with 4 other teams (doesn't matter who for the sake of this argument)...

that means that the truly "playoff caliber" game that Alabama played this year (i.e. NC play-in game) was against LSU... and the only one OSU will play this year is OU...

if OSU wins theirs, but Alabama loses theirs... and in all other ways, the BCS has them neck and neck, with OSU having a more difficult schedule and more quality wins...

wouldn't you agree that this causes a conundrum for these people?

one thing i think people aren't understanding...


if Oklahoma St had WON against Iowa St... but then ended up losing to Oklahoma... this would be an entirely different discussion, and would be messy...

i would not necessarily try to argue this same argument... both teams would still have 1 loss... but now OSU would not have that "playoff caliber" win that makes their resume distinctly more impressive than Alabama's...

some people are focused on "who the 1 loss came against"... but totally throwing out the 11 or 12 wins (conveniently)... it's nonsense!  and again, this is a mirror-image argument of the Boise debate last year (prior to them blowing the Nevada game), where these same SEC backers were saying Boise doesn't belong because they haven't beaten anybody...

double-standards are an ugly business...

Can we just ban this guy already? If you lose to iowa state you aren't playing for the national title period.

yea, you're argument is clearly more well-thought out than mine...

Stop cluttering the forum with this crap.  When someone other than Texas learns how to play defense in that conference, your argument will get stronger.  In the meantime get off the meth.

i am not a proponent of the current BCS however there is NOOOOO doubt that BAMA and LSU are the two best teams in the country... Anyone who thinks otherwise has absolutly no and i mean no fucking clue what they are talking about. I think Ice has already shown he has no fucking clue about college football.

[Quote: Originally Posted by Ice4Blood] one thing i think people aren't understanding...


if Oklahoma St had WON against Iowa St... but then ended up losing to Oklahoma... this would be an entirely different discussion, and would be messy...

i would not necessarily try to argue this same argument... both teams would still have 1 loss... but now OSU would not have that "playoff caliber" win that makes their resume distinctly more impressive than Alabama's...

some people are focused on "who the 1 loss came against"... but totally throwing out the 11 or 12 wins (conveniently)... it's nonsense!  and again, this is a mirror-image argument of the Boise debate last year (prior to them blowing the Nevada game), where these same SEC backers were saying Boise doesn't belong because they haven't beaten anybody...

double-standards are an ugly business...
[/Quote

Yes but that didnt happen. And ok st lost.... Tell me who you think the two best teams in the country are??? your probably a houston fan.

yes and when anybody in the SEC learns how to play offense, yours gets stronger... blah blah blah same old nonsense...

no shit they lost... read the whole post!


i won't answer the last question for two reasons...

1. because you said "you probably like Houston"... that's weak ass shit!  LAWYER-SPEAK, again!  come up with SOMETHING that isn't garbage-ass bullshit, and i will address your questions... but don't TELL ME who i fucking think is the best team... either you got an argument, or you got SHIT... and when you do that, you got SHIT!
   
2. it is a totally irrelevant issue with respect to this debate... you might as well have asked me if the U.S. is better than Russia during a debate about Automobiles... doesn't have jackshit to do with this thread...

 

you clearly have no idea wtf you're talking about and only making yourself sound dumber by each post you make.  if the defenses are better it only stands to reason that the scoring will be down.

nevermind, you're right losing on the road to Iowa State and losing at home to the No. 1 team in the country cause your kicker missed 12 field goals is clearly the same thing.  please friend me so that i can fade you from hear to eternity.  thanks

Iowa State has the 8th toughest schedule in the nation, is in the top 30 in the power ratings, and is a bowl team. Not saying the loss is excusable, but it should be irrelevant enough when comparing the fact that Oklahoma State has accomplished more than Alabama.

It doesn't matter who they have played, and who they will play. The fact of the matter is, they don't play in the SEC, and they struggled against teams that Bama and LSU would destroy. SOS rankings, and all that BS don't matter, because simply put, these aren't SEC teams. 

BCS is not a perfect system but this is a horrible year to use as example of opposing it w/ a play-off system.

If you play 10 times w/ a 4-team play-off this yr, I would say 7 or 8 of those times, you would end up w/ LSU and Bama in the title game.  You can debate that SEC overall is over-rated but it'd be hard to say that them 2 is not heads and shoulders above everyone else.

If LSU beat GA on Sat, is there any doubt what-so-ever that LSU is best team so far this yr?  Take it to the next step and having seen how LSU and Bama played evenly against each other (IMO, Bama lost bc of 1 special-team pos), it's hard then not to conclude that these are the best 2 teams in the country.

For me, it's just not that Bama is winning, it's that they have talent.  I see the min. following players playing at the next level - Richardson, Jones, Upshaw, Hightower, Kirkpatrick, Barron.  Not going thru LSU roster as they deserve to be in NC game.

If OSU wins and Bama going to NC game, I can understand OSU outcry as Bama already had their shot.  In every other yr, OSU would be going but given how Bama has dominated and going into season #1, OSU is most likely going to be left out.

First I hate the BCS but it is Simple to me Bama lost to the best team in the country LSU.Okls st lost to Iowa st end of story Bama has to be in front of Okla st!!

The BCS is going to get it right this year... explain to me how it is incorrect.. Who ice are the best two teams in the nation??? It is clear they are LSU and Bama... and your statement of tell the SEC to learn how to play offense?? Defense wins championships you dumb fuck.

sorry about misspelling i am on my phone and pissed... have a nice day.

if it's so clear why do we even bother having a system that is designed to evaluate the teams on a level-playing field?

the whole point of having national championships and playoffs is to let teams decide it on the field... not just go with whoever "somebody" thinks are the top two teams, because it's "obvious" to them...

to appeal to the "obvious" (according to you) goes completely against what sports is about, and makes no sense when you have such an UN-level playing field as you do in college sports...

the BCS system (this system YOU are apparently supporting by  being in this thread), was the SOLUTION to the problem of YOU... i.e.... taking it out of the hands of voters... that is the whole reason the BCS system came about... because there was WAY too much subjectivity (and politics!!!) in the polls...

so they created a system that factors in both the subjective (voters) and the objective (computers) to solve that problem...

and now here you are arguing that we need to go back to the old system... just let the voters pick the "obvious" teams...

first off, there have been several other seasons where equally messy controversies were created by this BAD system...

but secondly, are we only supposed to evaluate it when everything works out beautifully?  i'm sure that's what the BCS and its proponents would like... but if this system was even CLOSE to perfect, debates like this one would be MUCH fewer and farther between...

if we want to scrutinize the effectiveness of the BCS system, the "horrible years" are just as important of a sample as the "wonderful years"...

The only way to fix it would be for the best 8 teams playoff for the title thus deciding it on the field. However there goes all the Bowl dollars so that's out.I think were going to have to learn to live with this anything but perfect system.

also... it's possible OSU will lose this week, and the mess will be conveniently resolved for the BCS... but that doesn't make it any less of a guy in the armor... the system allows for these scenarios to take place, because it assumes there will be two teams that stand out and are significantly better... but very often that is not the case, and when it isn't, you will always be stuck with the argument of who really deserves to be given a shot...

of course!  and it's not remotely difficult to work out the details, like people always say it is... not even a little bit...

however, it wouldn't change the amount of Bowl Dollars... it would just change which teams and conferences are getting what % of the bowl dollars year-in and year-out... mostly it would disperse it a bit more fairly, by giving non-AQ conferences at least SOME chance at winning a national championship... currently they really don't have any chance...

all other non-playoff Bowls would be exactly the same as they are now... exactly the same... they would still be exactly as meaningless as they are now...

just year-end exhibition games... that's all they are...