Don't see where the system has become worse... its had the same issues from the beginning.
The system has plenty of time to sort things out... if Stanford runs the table they are in... if Okie State runs the table they are in. The issue would be if both run the table and LSU wins out... one would be left out...probably Stanford
Its time for many of these teams to start scheduling tougher non conference opponents... many of these teams schedule cupcakes and then wonder why they are not higher in the BCS.
The playoff is coming... but we need a bad matchup to cost the talking heads money before the change occurs.
As for a team beating Boise by 30.... was saying thats the type of result we need... didn't say thats what I thought would happen
0
Don't see where the system has become worse... its had the same issues from the beginning.
The system has plenty of time to sort things out... if Stanford runs the table they are in... if Okie State runs the table they are in. The issue would be if both run the table and LSU wins out... one would be left out...probably Stanford
Its time for many of these teams to start scheduling tougher non conference opponents... many of these teams schedule cupcakes and then wonder why they are not higher in the BCS.
The playoff is coming... but we need a bad matchup to cost the talking heads money before the change occurs.
As for a team beating Boise by 30.... was saying thats the type of result we need... didn't say thats what I thought would happen
pay attention here.... The point of this thread is not whether Oregon beats Stanford or not.... its that Stanford as of right now deserves to be ranked higher
Doesn't matter......... shit about to be changed in a week. Same as LSU / Bama........ rankings don't matter until after.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Boom_Boom:
pay attention here.... The point of this thread is not whether Oregon beats Stanford or not.... its that Stanford as of right now deserves to be ranked higher
Doesn't matter......... shit about to be changed in a week. Same as LSU / Bama........ rankings don't matter until after.
As for the BCS being "broken".....you, myself, and millions more have been screaming this for years. This is nothing new. All of us have not only had our opinions on who should be playing for the "title" each year, but we've also come up with several ways in which a different system could more fairly decide who the national champion is. More often than not, a worthy team is left out of the opportunity to play for a "national title."
As the college football veteran that you say you are, were you not just as frustrated with the way a national champ was decided prior to the BCS? The "national champion" was, and still technically is, decided by the media. This is a large portion of the current system, the BCS. Prior to the Bowl Championship Series, we simply relied on the media to tell us who the "national champs" were. For instance, your Clemson Tigers claim a title in 1981. Why? Because the Associated Press said they were. That's it.
I guess I'm more confused as to why you chose right now to rant about this, rather than in years past. The NCAA does not choose, nor do they endorse the entitlement of a football national champion. The never have. There is no NCAA Football Champion. Period. No such thing. Never has been.
Not trying to diminish the point of your thread, but the FACT is, this is simply your opinion, and the media's opinion has practically decided every "national champion" in college football.
Instead of everyone bashing the BCS on an annual basis, I just wish we had a simple 8 team tournament. But you and I both know there are tons of technicalities that make this nearly impossible to construct and put into action.
Again, the fact is, this is the current system, and whether you agree with it or not, 5 years down the road, you're going to consider the winner of the BCS National Championship game played in January 2012 as the 2011 champion. Instead of listening to these arguments year in and year out, I wish we would be hit with the news that the NCAA has devised a system that they could determine their own national champion. After all, the NCAA organizes and governs every football program and it's schedule, but has no say in determining who it's top team is.
0
Boom,
As for the BCS being "broken".....you, myself, and millions more have been screaming this for years. This is nothing new. All of us have not only had our opinions on who should be playing for the "title" each year, but we've also come up with several ways in which a different system could more fairly decide who the national champion is. More often than not, a worthy team is left out of the opportunity to play for a "national title."
As the college football veteran that you say you are, were you not just as frustrated with the way a national champ was decided prior to the BCS? The "national champion" was, and still technically is, decided by the media. This is a large portion of the current system, the BCS. Prior to the Bowl Championship Series, we simply relied on the media to tell us who the "national champs" were. For instance, your Clemson Tigers claim a title in 1981. Why? Because the Associated Press said they were. That's it.
I guess I'm more confused as to why you chose right now to rant about this, rather than in years past. The NCAA does not choose, nor do they endorse the entitlement of a football national champion. The never have. There is no NCAA Football Champion. Period. No such thing. Never has been.
Not trying to diminish the point of your thread, but the FACT is, this is simply your opinion, and the media's opinion has practically decided every "national champion" in college football.
Instead of everyone bashing the BCS on an annual basis, I just wish we had a simple 8 team tournament. But you and I both know there are tons of technicalities that make this nearly impossible to construct and put into action.
Again, the fact is, this is the current system, and whether you agree with it or not, 5 years down the road, you're going to consider the winner of the BCS National Championship game played in January 2012 as the 2011 champion. Instead of listening to these arguments year in and year out, I wish we would be hit with the news that the NCAA has devised a system that they could determine their own national champion. After all, the NCAA organizes and governs every football program and it's schedule, but has no say in determining who it's top team is.
I gotta go with WallStreet and Sparty here. If Stanford does beat Oregon and win out then they will jump over Alabama. I mean the rankings don't mean too much until the very end where the rankings are solidified. Things change from week to week, teams Okie and Stanford still control their own destiny.
0
I gotta go with WallStreet and Sparty here. If Stanford does beat Oregon and win out then they will jump over Alabama. I mean the rankings don't mean too much until the very end where the rankings are solidified. Things change from week to week, teams Okie and Stanford still control their own destiny.
guys i understand what you are saying...im not saying bama sucks by any means. im saying is most of the sec sucks just like most of the pac 10 or 12 whatever the fuck is sucks. but if stanford lost to usc how far would they fall? and oregon when they lost to lsu pretty much shot themselves in the foot with turnovers the first game of the year and were detroyed in the standings. didnt they drop like 8+ spots? so if they dropped that far why shouldnt bama? im not a huge boise supporter (boom i know you are) but if this is the way they want the system to be then boise should be ahead of bama...they jumped ahead of oregon.. fair is fair. again it has nothing to do with who alabama can beat...tehy can beat anybody no question. but if this is the system then make consistant across the board.
I could be wrong, but I think a lot of it had to do with LSU being ranked 4th at the time, and Oregon 3rd. They had not played anyone at that point in the season, so they didn't have anything on SOS to help them. And also because they lost by 13 points... Bama was ranked 2nd, and they lost by 3 in OT, and a lot of the season has been played at this point. They have dominated all of their opponents as well, and played 4 ranked teams now.
0
Quote Originally Posted by badlands:
guys i understand what you are saying...im not saying bama sucks by any means. im saying is most of the sec sucks just like most of the pac 10 or 12 whatever the fuck is sucks. but if stanford lost to usc how far would they fall? and oregon when they lost to lsu pretty much shot themselves in the foot with turnovers the first game of the year and were detroyed in the standings. didnt they drop like 8+ spots? so if they dropped that far why shouldnt bama? im not a huge boise supporter (boom i know you are) but if this is the way they want the system to be then boise should be ahead of bama...they jumped ahead of oregon.. fair is fair. again it has nothing to do with who alabama can beat...tehy can beat anybody no question. but if this is the system then make consistant across the board.
I could be wrong, but I think a lot of it had to do with LSU being ranked 4th at the time, and Oregon 3rd. They had not played anyone at that point in the season, so they didn't have anything on SOS to help them. And also because they lost by 13 points... Bama was ranked 2nd, and they lost by 3 in OT, and a lot of the season has been played at this point. They have dominated all of their opponents as well, and played 4 ranked teams now.
Come to think of it, who does know exactly what data is used and how it's weighted in these BCS computers? How do the computer formulas differ and who in the BCS has enough knowledge of the subject to approve them for application to evaluate which programs represent the best college football teams in the country?
Can anyone elaborate on this subject?
0
Come to think of it, who does know exactly what data is used and how it's weighted in these BCS computers? How do the computer formulas differ and who in the BCS has enough knowledge of the subject to approve them for application to evaluate which programs represent the best college football teams in the country?
Gonna disagree with you on this one, Boom, uneducated homer that I am.
Stanford has looked really damn impressive, but they've only played one top 25 team all year, a game they won in OT. Bama has played a pair of top 10 teams and gone 1-1, with a dominating win and a narrow, narrow loss. Losing to the #1 team says nothing except that you aren't the #1 team. Bama could be as good as #2.
Do they deserve a rematch? Absolutely not. Do they deserve to be ranked ahead of Stanford if Stanford beats Oregon this week? Absolutely not. Do they deserve to be ranked ahead right now? That depends on what the rankings are for. If they're for getting us a BCS championship game, no, they should go behind Stanford and Okie State. If they're a ranking of the best teams, you could argue Alabama anywhere between #2 and #6 convincingly, and #3 is well within the range of reason.
$.02.
0
Gonna disagree with you on this one, Boom, uneducated homer that I am.
Stanford has looked really damn impressive, but they've only played one top 25 team all year, a game they won in OT. Bama has played a pair of top 10 teams and gone 1-1, with a dominating win and a narrow, narrow loss. Losing to the #1 team says nothing except that you aren't the #1 team. Bama could be as good as #2.
Do they deserve a rematch? Absolutely not. Do they deserve to be ranked ahead of Stanford if Stanford beats Oregon this week? Absolutely not. Do they deserve to be ranked ahead right now? That depends on what the rankings are for. If they're for getting us a BCS championship game, no, they should go behind Stanford and Okie State. If they're a ranking of the best teams, you could argue Alabama anywhere between #2 and #6 convincingly, and #3 is well within the range of reason.
As for the BCS being "broken".....you, myself, and millions more have been screaming this for years. This is nothing new. All of us have not only had our opinions on who should be playing for the "title" each year, but we've also come up with several ways in which a different system could more fairly decide who the national champion is. More often than not, a worthy team is left out of the opportunity to play for a "national title."
As the college football veteran that you say you are, were you not just as frustrated with the way a national champ was decided prior to the BCS? The "national champion" was, and still technically is, decided by the media. This is a large portion of the current system, the BCS. Prior to the Bowl Championship Series, we simply relied on the media to tell us who the "national champs" were. For instance, your Clemson Tigers claim a title in 1981. Why? Because the Associated Press said they were. That's it.
I guess I'm more confused as to why you chose right now to rant about this, rather than in years past. The NCAA does not choose, nor do they endorse the entitlement of a football national champion. The never have. There is no NCAA Football Champion. Period. No such thing. Never has been.
Not trying to diminish the point of your thread, but the FACT is, this is simply your opinion, and the media's opinion has practically decided every "national champion" in college football.
Instead of everyone bashing the BCS on an annual basis, I just wish we had a simple 8 team tournament. But you and I both know there are tons of technicalities that make this nearly impossible to construct and put into action.
Again, the fact is, this is the current system, and whether you agree with it or not, 5 years down the road, you're going to consider the winner of the BCS National Championship game played in January 2012 as the 2011 champion. Instead of listening to these arguments year in and year out, I wish we would be hit with the news that the NCAA has devised a system that they could determine their own national champion. After all, the NCAA organizes and governs every football program and it's schedule, but has no say in determining who it's top team is.
good post I agree the system has always been "fucked up" in a sense... not now more recently then in the past.
i could not agree with you more about having a 8 team playoff.
that has been my solution for a while now.... only take the top 8 cause really after that it becomes watered down.
0
Quote Originally Posted by The-Kid-Is-Good:
Boom,
As for the BCS being "broken".....you, myself, and millions more have been screaming this for years. This is nothing new. All of us have not only had our opinions on who should be playing for the "title" each year, but we've also come up with several ways in which a different system could more fairly decide who the national champion is. More often than not, a worthy team is left out of the opportunity to play for a "national title."
As the college football veteran that you say you are, were you not just as frustrated with the way a national champ was decided prior to the BCS? The "national champion" was, and still technically is, decided by the media. This is a large portion of the current system, the BCS. Prior to the Bowl Championship Series, we simply relied on the media to tell us who the "national champs" were. For instance, your Clemson Tigers claim a title in 1981. Why? Because the Associated Press said they were. That's it.
I guess I'm more confused as to why you chose right now to rant about this, rather than in years past. The NCAA does not choose, nor do they endorse the entitlement of a football national champion. The never have. There is no NCAA Football Champion. Period. No such thing. Never has been.
Not trying to diminish the point of your thread, but the FACT is, this is simply your opinion, and the media's opinion has practically decided every "national champion" in college football.
Instead of everyone bashing the BCS on an annual basis, I just wish we had a simple 8 team tournament. But you and I both know there are tons of technicalities that make this nearly impossible to construct and put into action.
Again, the fact is, this is the current system, and whether you agree with it or not, 5 years down the road, you're going to consider the winner of the BCS National Championship game played in January 2012 as the 2011 champion. Instead of listening to these arguments year in and year out, I wish we would be hit with the news that the NCAA has devised a system that they could determine their own national champion. After all, the NCAA organizes and governs every football program and it's schedule, but has no say in determining who it's top team is.
good post I agree the system has always been "fucked up" in a sense... not now more recently then in the past.
i could not agree with you more about having a 8 team playoff.
that has been my solution for a while now.... only take the top 8 cause really after that it becomes watered down.
It's gonna be LSU / Stanfaord and is going to be a fantastic game.
No.......... I don't think Stanford could beat Bama but it's still gonna be a good game.
Who's gonna' beat Oklahoma State ?
A home date with the Sooners who will be without Whalen and Broyles (who have a combined 19 TDs and over 2,000 yards) doesn't seem as scary as it did a few weeks ago.
0
Quote Originally Posted by FriedShrimp:
It's gonna be LSU / Stanfaord and is going to be a fantastic game.
No.......... I don't think Stanford could beat Bama but it's still gonna be a good game.
Who's gonna' beat Oklahoma State ?
A home date with the Sooners who will be without Whalen and Broyles (who have a combined 19 TDs and over 2,000 yards) doesn't seem as scary as it did a few weeks ago.
I gotta go with WallStreet and Sparty here. If Stanford does beat Oregon and win out then they will jump over Alabama. I mean the rankings don't mean too much until the very end where the rankings are solidified. Things change from week to week, teams Okie and Stanford still control their own destiny.
I agree laroja.... but the point is that Stanford was completely dis respected in the rankings this past week..... would they have done the same to a SEC School? NO
0
Quote Originally Posted by Laroja:
I gotta go with WallStreet and Sparty here. If Stanford does beat Oregon and win out then they will jump over Alabama. I mean the rankings don't mean too much until the very end where the rankings are solidified. Things change from week to week, teams Okie and Stanford still control their own destiny.
I agree laroja.... but the point is that Stanford was completely dis respected in the rankings this past week..... would they have done the same to a SEC School? NO
A home date with the Sooners who will be without Whalen and Broyles (who have a combined 19 TDs and over 2,000 yards) doesn't seem as scary as it did a few weeks ago.
agree.... Losing Broyles is HUGE OK S.T is no longer Oklahoma's little brother. They beat Oklahoma this year
0
Quote Originally Posted by -29-:
Who's gonna' beat Oklahoma State ?
A home date with the Sooners who will be without Whalen and Broyles (who have a combined 19 TDs and over 2,000 yards) doesn't seem as scary as it did a few weeks ago.
agree.... Losing Broyles is HUGE OK S.T is no longer Oklahoma's little brother. They beat Oklahoma this year
BOOM all agree that system in place sucks, it is just there to maximize dollars, and that is the sole objective of placing Alabama 3rd. If Stanford beats Oregon, they leap frog Bama. Case closed. If the Cardinals lose, Bama stays #3 with a shot to play for NC if Okie State loses. The Oregon/Stanford Game will be the highest and most viewed Pac 10 game ever, thats it. Then it will be the Bedlam Game. The system isnt about football its about money.
As in the most cases and most business enterprise, systems are in place to the generate the most revenues possible the systems might be fucked up, but in all these cases its all about the Benjamins
0
BOOM all agree that system in place sucks, it is just there to maximize dollars, and that is the sole objective of placing Alabama 3rd. If Stanford beats Oregon, they leap frog Bama. Case closed. If the Cardinals lose, Bama stays #3 with a shot to play for NC if Okie State loses. The Oregon/Stanford Game will be the highest and most viewed Pac 10 game ever, thats it. Then it will be the Bedlam Game. The system isnt about football its about money.
As in the most cases and most business enterprise, systems are in place to the generate the most revenues possible the systems might be fucked up, but in all these cases its all about the Benjamins
Another couple of points you should digest before getting so worked up bro:
1.) As teams win and lose, their strengths of schedule adjust, and so do all of their opponents, and their opponents. This makes a drastic change on how the teams are ranked at the end of the season. Which brings me to my next point...
2.) There are still FOUR weeks left, plus conference championship games!!! Relax! A lot will shakedown between now and early December. Several of the teams most consider "in the hunt" will lose between now and then, and some a couple of times. The teams that truly deserve a look at the title game will rise to the top. Which reminds me, see my 1st point!
I'm damn-near disappointed in you Boom. Getting so goddamn worked up over all this hypothetical bullshit, with a whole month to go. We won't get a rematch of Bama/LSU. You can go ahead and mark that down while you're at it. Now go grab a fucking beer and relax...there's still a lot of football to watch!
0
Boom-
Another couple of points you should digest before getting so worked up bro:
1.) As teams win and lose, their strengths of schedule adjust, and so do all of their opponents, and their opponents. This makes a drastic change on how the teams are ranked at the end of the season. Which brings me to my next point...
2.) There are still FOUR weeks left, plus conference championship games!!! Relax! A lot will shakedown between now and early December. Several of the teams most consider "in the hunt" will lose between now and then, and some a couple of times. The teams that truly deserve a look at the title game will rise to the top. Which reminds me, see my 1st point!
I'm damn-near disappointed in you Boom. Getting so goddamn worked up over all this hypothetical bullshit, with a whole month to go. We won't get a rematch of Bama/LSU. You can go ahead and mark that down while you're at it. Now go grab a fucking beer and relax...there's still a lot of football to watch!
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
