The BCS

DMW

I'm beginning to feel like I'm the only person in the world that realizes that short of a playoff, th BCS is clearly the best option for college football. It's amazing how universally hated it is, when it seems to get it right every time. The whole purpose of the BCS is to take subjectivity out of the equation (for the most part), and reward teams based on what they accomplish in terms of wins and losses, and that's exactly what it does. It's meant to counteract the idiots that want to put Notre Dame in the top 5 because they're a nice story, even though they have two losses.

Right now, they have the top 5 teams right, and they have them in the right order based on what they've accomplished this season. So why all the hate?

pp2

I think the hate exists because there isn't a playoff in place. I agree that the BCS would be more effective if used to seed an 8 or 16 team NCAA playoff system.

Freak

Right now it's doing a nice job, but I bet by the end of the year there'll be at least a little controversy around it. I think it's just the fact that it still DOES seem like a subjective system -- only we're letting computers be subjective instead of people.

Mr. Kennedy

Every year there is a controversy with the BCS system where most people disagree with the situation. I think they should just scrap it and have a tournament like they do with college basketball.

Visit and shop for video games at my Amazon-based store, also get discounted HD DVDs while they last.

Freak

A tournament would be SO much fun, but really it's just not that realistic. NCAA officials and coaches can't risk putting their kids through a schedule like that, especially when certain teams are already able to play up to 14 games a year.

Mr. Kennedy

All they have to do is limit the numbers of games schools can play to something like 10 or 12 games, but that won't happen because that would mean less money for them.

Visit and shop for video games at my Amazon-based store, also get discounted HD DVDs while they last.

Freak

That's exactly what it would mean. Most schools have traditionally played 11-game schedules, but I think the NCAA is now allowing a 12th regular season game to be played. That's on top of the fact that some conferences have a championship game which adds an additional game to the schedule.

If you throw in a 16-team playoff, you've got kids playing up to 16 or 17 football games a year.

It won't happen.

Blitzkrieg

Administrator

I'd like to make an interesting post, but I don't feel like it. The BCS has been shit from day one. How can you have an undefeated Auburn team, out of the SEC (toughest conference by far) not eligible for a championship game?

It sucks.. 4 or 8 team playoff would solve all issues.

DMW

There are very few people that don't believe a playoff tournament would be ideal. That's not really in question. I just think that without a playoff, the BCS is the best way to pick who should play for the national championship if you have more than 2 undefeated teams.

The problem with polling is that people often vote for who they think the best team is, not who has accomplished the most on the field. Right now one of the polls has both LSU and Miami (both with one loss) ranked above undefeated UCLA. I actually agree that LSU and Miami are probably better teams than UCLA, but at the end of the day, UCLA has not lost a game. If wins and losses don't mean anything, then why bother playing the games?

I bet if UCLA continues to play close games, and edges out USC at the end of the season to go undefeated, they still wouldn't make it into the top 2 in the polls, but I bet the BCS would put them there.

Blitzkrieg

Administrator

Why should LSU have to take a backseat to UCLA? I know you are a Pac 10 fan but c'mon.. That conference is a joke right now. I could take 5 or 6 teams out of the SEC that would roll UCLA.