Uh-oh LSU fans the Bayou Bengals may get screwed (BCS)

[underpants]

Terry Bowden (okay consider the source) was on PTI yesterday and was explaining that apparently LSU is damned if they do and damned if they don't.

IF OU,USC, and LSU all win out the following MAY happen.

IF LSU goes to the SEC championship and beats Georgia again they might knock themselves out of the championship game. See LSU has already beaten Georgia once this year and the BCS does not count as a "quality win" the second defeat of a team in the same year regardless of whether that team has been in or around the top10 all year. So LSU wouldn't get that additional credit for beating such a team.

Here's the kicker:

IF the above mentioned happens LSU could knock Georgia out of the top 10 in the BCS and thus lose credit for the FIRST win against them.

Georgia is currently 5th in the Coaches' poll and 7th in the BCS standings.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/rankings

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/abcsports/BCSRankings

Now is that screwed up or what? Not only do you not get credit for beating a damned good team twice (hard to beat a team twice anyway) you actually penalize yourself for beating them the second time. Regardless of who you are rooting for that sucks.

[GOPisEvil]

1. That sucks the big one!

If LSU wins out, I think that's more impressive than what USC has done. They will have beaten more good teams than USC, although part of that is the SEC vs. PAC-10.

[underpants]

3. We'll see if Bowden is right but that just blew my mind

I think the boys at the lab need to do some more tinkering.

[seasat]

2. I agree about LSU but still have to say...

Go Dawgs

UGA class of '86 B-)

[Braden]

4. the BCS is BS

we all know that. I would like to revert to the old system. Play 'em all on the same day and let the voters decide. Not the computers. I know I will never see a playoff in college football.

[frylock]

8. not as long as the schools and conferences keep raking in $$..

we will never see a legit championship. One need only look as far as the preseason ratings to see what a farce the BCS is. USC gets penalized for beating the number one team in the nation in Auburn. Is it USC's fault that Auburn sucks? Who should be held accountable for Auburn's preseason ranking?

[GumboYaYa]

5. Yeah it sucks, but

it wouldn't matter if they had beaten Florida. If you don't take care of business on the field then you have no reason to complain, and I'm a rabid LSU fan. We also need to win two more games before we get indignant, so I reserving my ire until we have a real reason for it.

I've read quite a bit on this and my understanding is that if LSU goes to the SEC Championship and beats GA, LSU loses quality win points if GA falls out of the top ten in the BCS, but can still pass USC if six to seven of the computer polls move LSU to #2. 3 of the computer polls have LSU ahead right now. Apparently there is a good chance of others moving them up wth two more wins. LSU also moves ahead of USC if the human polls move LSU to #2. Assuming LSU does win the SEC championship, its strength of schedule should move ahead of USC's and help LSU also (perhpas substantially ahead based on other games this weekend).

At the end of the day, if LSU and USC win out they both have legitimate arguments to be #2 and one of them will get screwed.

[jus_the_facts]

6. THIS IS WHY WE NEED PLAYOFFS.......THE BASTARDS!!!!!!!

.....AS USUSAL MY TEAM GETS FUCKED! :mad:

[PVnRT]

7. It's funny

I bet if your team ends up #2 and plays Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl, you will be perfectly happy with the BCS.

I'll ask of you what I ask of everyone who supports a playoff - who plays in it? Do you come up with a ranking system that people will STILL bitch and moan constantly about? What about conference champions, even though no one plays every team in their conference? And do you keep the bowl games? Do they even have a point anymore? Do you extend the season into February, making it a full-time job for the kids playing?

If you can answer any of those questions, I will be pleasantly surprised.

[frylock]

9. take a look at division II, and build your model from that..

Yes, teams will get screwed like they do now, but not on the scale that they do under the current structure. I mean, do we really need three weeks of meaningless bowl games? Set up an NIT for teams that didn't make the cut. This isn't impossible.

[northzax]

11. what do you mean meaningless?

do you think it's meaningless for Navy to get a bid to some crappy bowl? think they'd ever get to play in a playoff? Say we create an 8 team playoffs, on any given year, seven of those teams would be comprised from the following schools:

Miami
Florida State
Oklahoma
Michigan
Ohio State
Tennessee
Texas
Nebraska
USC/UCLA


most of the time the other slot will be filled by (in no particular order)

Georgia
Alabama
Virginia Tech
Colorado
Washington
Notre Dame
Penn State
Michigan State
Clemson
Florida

Sounds fair to the rest, don't it? The Bowl system may not help determine a national champion, but a lot of schools get to play. Players get to go to bowls, and get national attention, that they'd otherwise have no chance at. what, 30 school can go out winners? compared to only one in a playoff? what's wrong with that? in Basketball, 64 teams can make the show, and getting to the second round, for some of them, makes a season. In football, you could only have a three game playoff, at most, leaving 110 of the 118 Div I schools shut out. the rich get richer, as usual.

[PVnRT]

14. Shhhhhhh!!

You're shattering the comfortable illusions that people have! Don't tell them that a playoff won't solve all the problems in college football!

Seriously, if anyone can give me a specific, concrete plan for how a playoff would be run, I would be shocked and amazed. No one has yet, no one will.

[Brotherjohn]

21. But your assumption that those are the only teams that would be chosen...

is faulty.

Yes, more often than not, most of those teams might be there. But that is not a foregone conclusion, nor is it arbitrary. If and when these teams make it to the Top 10, it is because they have proven their worth during the season and played very well. Many of those teams have been in the top tier in the last decade or two. You know this in picking your teams. And even though you actually list 20 teams that you say the Top 8 will come from, you still are not including half the likely playoff picks from the last few years alone. Going back to the 1996 season, here are teams you do not list that have been in the Top 10 at the end of the year (I use the Coaches Poll b/c the BCS has not been around that long):

Kansas State, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan State, Wash. St., Arizona State, Arizona, Oregon State, Oregon, LSU, Colorado, Maryland, North Carolina, Va. Tech, Marshall, Tulane, Air Force, Brigham Young...

Do we add those 20 or so teams, or everyone? No, we just pick from the teams that have played well, and that is what you have done with your list. My point is that the polls or the BCS, used to determine a playoff, WOULD include these teams, and that would only be right, as they have played well enough to deserve it. Any team playing well enough would likely get into the Top 10 or so and be in the running for the playoff (witness the Marshalls and Tulanes in the past few years, in addition to most of the teams from the PAC 10, Big 10, and other teams you do not list from the other conferences, because they had good years).

You say in bowls, at least a lot of teams get to play and get the national exposure. That would not change if a playoff was instituted. Seven bowl games would be used in an 8 team playoff. The rest of the bowls would still be there. Many other teams would get national exposure. Half the non-playoff teams in bowls would also go out winners. For the eight in the playoffs, I don't think they would complain about their season ending on a losing note if they were allowed to play for the championship. Getting to the second round, or even just to the playoffs, would "make the season" for 8 college teams. The others would not be shut out. The 20 or so more who make a bowl would be rewarded, just as they are now.

Your assumption seems to be that everyone deserves to play for the national championship, but that is simply not the case. A limited playoff would simply assure that among the best "guess" of the top 2 or 4 teams, they would have to prove on the field that they were actually the best. No one would get "shut out" any more than any teams that do not make a bowl today are shut out. In fact, more teams would have a shot at the championship. Any team, be it Oklahoma or a Marshall, can earn a shot at the playoffs if they prove during the season that they deserve it.

Your premise is that only a limited number would always be up for the championship. But what have we now? A much MORE limited number (two) get the chance for a championship. And you assumption that the limited number would ALWAYS be drawn from a select few teams is simply not correct. It is easy to list 20 teams from which you assume the Top 8 would always come from (you're casting a big net there), when you have the benefit of knowing how the last few years have turned out. But comparing your 20 to even the current BCS Top 20, and they only share 10 teams. Yes, most of the 10 you did not include are between 11-20. But that is their own damn fault. If any of these teams had won one more game, they would likely be in the Top 10.

[jus_the_facts]

10. No the BCS SUX regardless....

....and anything they would come up with would be better than how they *set up* their rankings now...and there will be bitchin' and moanin' no matter how it'd be structured. Your last comment is rather snide and I really don't give a rats ass what you think...does that surprise YOU? :eyes:

[PVnRT]

12. Deal with it

Your complaining would be much less if LSU was #2 right now instead of USC. If you can't face that simple fact, that's your problem, not mine.

[jus_the_facts]

20. dunno what your problem is.....

..or what's with your condesending comments and assumptions about what the fuck I think or choose to complain about either...but you just made my ignore list...BUH BYE! :eyes:

[GumboYaYa]

13. No playoffs, please.

The uncertainty is fun. It makes for great arguments. These are 18-22 year old kids for the most part and the season is already too long. Leave college football alone.

[underpants]

15. Thank you

The arguments and "what coulda been"s and "we were the best team at the end of the year" make colleg football what it is. If you think recruiting is near a blood sport now ('Bama got caught BUYING a player from Memphis from his HS coach) wait until there one and only one winner.


Personally even as a college football fan I think this illustrates that our priorities are way out of whack. They are supposed to be A team that represents the college/university not THE college/university.

[Brotherjohn]

19. Here's some answers:

Who plays in it?

The Top 8 (or even 4). Us whatever system you want. BCS, AP/Coaches poll average, whatever. You could keep the Top 6 "BCS" teams and include 2 "at large", which would be reserved for any other undefeated Div. I teams. If there were none, then take teams 7 & 8.

Yes, someone ranked 9 (or 5) will always bitch. But by including only 2, you will often have a situation where you can't really be sure that you've even picked the "best" team. Sometimes there may be no undefeateds, or 3 or 4 one-loss teams who can all make a legitimate claim to be the "best". What if OU loses the Big 12 Championship? Not likely, but we should have as system that works in any case.

Who's "best" is hypothetical anyway... we're just guessing. The only way to settle it is on the field. And the point is not to pick EVERY team that, if they play 3 of their best games in a row, COULD POSSIBLY win the National Championship. The point is to include enough of the top few teams where you can be sure that the "best" team is somewhere among them, and let them prove it on the field. Teams that are ranked 9th or below can gripe all they want, but can they realistically say they are the BEST team in the nation and deserve a chance to prove it? As it is now, however, there will often be a #3 or #4 team that can legitimately make a claim, but will get no shot.

Do you keep the bowl games? Do they even have a point anymore?

Yes. Just like now, you use the top bowls in the playoff. If it is 4 teams, you use the top 3 or 4 bowls, rotating who gets in the mix and who gets the Championship Game each year. If it's 8 teams, more bowls (7) can be included in the mix. Do the bowls even have a point anymore? Well, the only point they ever had was a reward for teams who did well, and they figure into the final polls. A playoff wouldn't change any of that. For the ones in the playoff bowls, the reward would be even greater.

Do you extend the season into February, making it a full-time job for the kids playing?

That is an exagerration. For an 8-team playoff, teams will play at MOST 2 extra games, and that's only the two teams who make the finals. Remember, they already play one extra game (a bowl). Most teams would play zero to one extra game. The outside possibility of 1 or 2 extra games could be countered by limiting NCAA Div. I teams to the old-fashioned 11 games a year (some play 12 and 13 these days). Loss of revenue would be a complaint, but the playoff system would bring much additional revenue in. CBS pays the NCAA BILLIONS for March Madness.

We already have a playoff now (2-teams). The problem is, we can never be sure we are always even including the "best" team in that 2 teams. There isn't always a dominant Oklahoma as the sole undefeated. The only way to pick the "best" is to have the Top tier of teams fight it out on the field. The winner will usually come from No. 1 or 2, but if they don't, perhaps the No. 4 team that wins that year was underrated. No one would argue with them winning it on the field. No one argues with the NCAA hoops winner, even though Cinderellas such as Villanova and N.C. State sometimes win. If you didn't prove it on the field, you have no argument.

In answer to the last question you might ask in response to this: "Then what do they play the regular season for?" Well, to narrow down the "best" teams to a small enough number to play a playoff. But having so few games, and often few to no common opponents, unless this top tier play it out on the field, it will always be a guess. My point (and the point of a playoff) is not that "No. 8 deserves a shot but No. 9 doesn't." My point is that anyone who can make a LEGITIMATE claim to be the BEST team in the country after the regular season deserves a shot, and if we only include 2 (or even 4) teams, we are often not casting a wide enough net to include those teams.

All this being said, I still think the BCS is better than just the polls. At least the hypothetical No. 1 has to prove it on the field against the hypothetical No. 2. But at the same time, I wouldn't be opposed to just going back to the polls. If there's a tie, let the teams share it! That's better than a team being left out altogether.

I know you might not agree with all those answers, but I think they're workable solutions to the questions you posed. One of the funs things about college football is that it's just fun talking about all this stuff.

[Brotherjohn]

16. As an LSU fan, I'm not really as P.O.'d about it.

Yes, I think you should get QW points for each individual game, but as far as the possibility of us getting knocked down a notch b/c we beat our "QW" team twice, here's my take.

First, we have to beat Arkansas first, and then win the SEC Championship. Without those two wins, this is all moot.

Second, say we play UGA, and they're 7th in the BCS (as they are now). Before the game, we'd have 0.4 QW points. Everyone is assuming they'd get knocked out of the Top 10 and LSU would lose 0.4 pts, but I don't think so. If, in the last game of the season, a 10-2 team is beaten by an 11-1 team in the conference championship, I don't know if they would drop more than a spot or two (especially in the human polls). So LSU may very well retain some QW points.

And then there's this. If I, as an LSU fan, think my team deserves the credit for beating a team again that I have already played once and beaten (and they do get credit in SOS, human polls, computer polls, etc.), then I believe the game should be treated as an entirely separate game. If so, then UGAs record, at the end of the year, is what we should judge them by. If they are 10-3 and just outside of the Top 10, then they are simply not a Top 10 team, regardless of whether or not that is because of us beating them a second time.

If LSU wins out and beats UGA, they'll get credit in numerous ways in the BCS system for beating a 10-win team. They may not get the QW points, but I think the points they get from the win will more than cancel that out. But if they lost to UGA, they wouldn't get the points for beating a Top 10 team and they'd fall an additional point for a loss, but they'd still get the QW points. Which would you rather?

[underpants]

17. I'd punt

Yeah the polls could equal this out (where's that pencil with an eraser) so we will see. I think the visibility of the two games (the SEC specifically) will go a long way IF they win.

[JackDragna]

18. I already accept this.

LSU will likely beat Arkansas, win the SEC championship, then go to the Fiesta Bowl. I really don't mind, to be honest. I've always considered the idea of the "championship" to be ridiculous. It's not even a real championship..it's an arbitrary assessment of the best team based on polls. If LSU goes to a BCS bowl and plays well, I'll still be happy.

[Awsi Dooger]

22. I mentioned this possibility on a Miami Hurricane website

Months ago, regarding the stupidity of Miami agreeing to be in opposite divisions from FSU in a revamped ACC, once Boston College joins and there is an ACC championship game.

Scenario: Miami defeats FSU but has one loss going into the ACC title game. FSU loses it finale to Florida, giving it two losses. Then Miami defeats FSU a second time in the ACC title game, but the defeat drops FSU out of the top ten and Miami is denied a BCS title shot as a result.

The regulars of that 'Canes website scoffed at my hypothetical, but Terry Bowden is absolutely correct. I have an Excel model of the BCS formula, and that is one of many obvious flaws.

The primary BCS weaknesses, IMO:

1) the computers they currently use severely overrate SOS, leading to absurd computer rankings

2) margin of victory was eliminated, so teams would not benefit by running up scores to help their rating. However, some of the best computers previously in use by the BCS refused to eliminate margin of victory as a criteria. Those computers were dumped by the BCS and replaced by inferior computer models

3) SOS is irrationally calculated at end of season, not when each game is played. Teams like Florida and West Virginia demonstrate how much can change from September to November

4) The computer rankings, and their faulty love of SOS, are given too much weight in the BCS numbers. For example, it is virtually impossible for voter consensus to trump computer rankings, but simple for a 5-2 or 6-1 computer breakdown to override the opinions of the poll voters

My Hurricanes and inept Brock Berlin may actually play a big role in the Sugar Bowl matchup. A Miami victory over Pitt would likely assure that Georgia would fall below Miami, and out of the BCS top ten, should LSU defeat the Bulldogs. Georgia could easily remain in the top ten with a Pitt victory over the 'Canes. The Florida/FSU matchup could play a similar role.

[argyl]

23. Since the BCS has been instituted they've managed to dodge a bullet

because the eventual BCS winner has been generally accepted as being the best in the country.This will probably be the case again this year as OU will play either USC or LSU.OU will probably win by about three touchdowns but if USC or LSU can beat them they will be a legitimate #1.The fighting is really over who gets the chance to beat the team who's established itself as the best over the season.That team is without a doubt OU.

[Chomskyite]

24. What you do not do if you want a national title shot

You don't lose to Florida in YOUR stadium by THAT many points.

You just don't do that and expect a title shot.

And I say that living here in Baton Rouge.