Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2011-2012 College Football Thread

The BCS usually sucks, but this year is an absolute disgrace...and a total clusterfuck.

Three BCS teams couldn't even win their conferences.

Michigan got an at-large bid (SOS was 40th in the country, record against the top 25 was 1-1, only played 4 away games and had a 2-2 record.) MSU beat them head-to-head, was runner-up in the conference championship game...and is going to the Outback Steakhouse Bowl.

Virginia Tech got thrashed in the ACC (lol) championship game and still got a BCS berth.

The #6 team (Arkansas) - who only lost to #1 and #2 - didn't get a BCS bid...but the #13 team (Michigan), who lost to the #17 MSU and an unranked Iowa team...is going to a BCS game.

Obama said it best:

 
Abyssgh0st said:
So you'd rather have a less deserving and worse team (OSU) play (and lose) because they won the Big 12 (not even an actual championship game)?
Click to expand...

Less deserving? They have a higher quality schedule than Alabama

What if Alabama beats LSU 9-6 in OT? Is Alabama the champion? lol


In regards to not winning your conference but playing in the NC game, that is exactly what happened with NU and CU in 2001 only more aggravating. NU got throttled by CU (and CU went on to win the Big 12) and barely edged CU out for the #2 BCS spot behind Miami
 
dukebound85 said:
Less deserving? They have a higher quality schedule than Alabama
Click to expand...

As if OSU really had any difficult match ups?

1. A&M- The beginning of their 2nd half collapses.
2. Texas- Please.
3. KSU- Probably their hardest game, and the score shows it. However, OU (a worse team) snapped KSU's perfect season and beat them by a much larger margin than 7 (OSU win.)
4. Unranked Baylor- Kind of a rough spot in Baylor's season, score showed it.
5. OU- Tired, injured, and overall completely outplayed them.

What's so hard about that? OU manhandled Texas and KSU, didn't have an issue with A&M, and had a tough but close loss to Baylor. Would you say OU's schedule was just as hard (if not harder? Had to play an over ranked #5 FSU team.)

I'm not saying Alabama had a hard schedule, but their hardest game was a WHOLE lot harder than KSU (or any of OSU's games.)
 
I really don't have that big of a problem with teams that don't win their conference playing for the BCS title. Six NFL wildcard teams have won the Super Bowl. It's also happened in MLB. Yes, they played their way to the championship through the playoffs, but it's similar.
 
steve2112 said:
I really don't have that big of a problem with teams that don't win their conference playing for the BCS title. Six NFL wildcard teams have won the Super Bowl. It's also happened in MLB. Yes, they played their way to the championship through the playoffs, but it's similar.
Click to expand...

But the system is set up for that. The BCS has alot more subjectivity in the loop due to their being no play off

Here is what they should do

Take the top 6 BCS schools (this would eliminate all doubt about the NC worthy team being left out)
1 and 2 get a bye
3 plays 6 in say the Fiesta
4 plays 5 in say the Rose

1 then plays the (4-5) winner in say the Sugar
2 then plays the (3-6) winner in the Orange

The winner of the Sugar and Orange in the above play in the NC game

This way, you keep the 4 marquee BCS bowls as well as the NC game as in the current setup
 
dukebound85 said:
But the system is set up for that. The BCS has alot more subjectivity in the loop due to their being no play off

Here is what they should do

Take the top 6 BCS schools (this would eliminate all doubt about the NC worthy team being left out)
1 and 2 get a bye
3 plays 6 in say the Fiesta
4 plays 5 in say the Rose

1 then plays the (4-5) winner in say the Sugar
2 then plays the (3-6) winner in the Orange

The winner of the Sugar and Orange in the above play in the NC game

This way, you keep the 4 marquee BCS bowls as well as the NC game as in the current setup
Click to expand...

I've been in favor of a system like that for years. It's pretty obvious the bowls aren't going away any time soon, so I don't see why that type of system couldn't be worked out.
 
dukebound85 said:
But the system is set up for that. The BCS has alot more subjectivity in the loop due to their being no play off

Here is what they should do

Take the top 6 BCS schools (this would eliminate all doubt about the NC worthy team being left out)
1 and 2 get a bye
3 plays 6 in say the Fiesta
4 plays 5 in say the Rose

1 then plays the (4-5) winner in say the Sugar
2 then plays the (3-6) winner in the Orange

The winner of the Sugar and Orange in the above play in the NC game

This way, you keep the 4 marquee BCS bowls as well as the NC game as in the current setup
Click to expand...

I like your thinking. One potential problem with this scenario is that the best two schools get less TV exposure and less bowl revenue than a 6th place team that runs the table. The legal details could always be worked out, though. You're system would give a very satisfying result.
 
I would get rid of the rankings all together as they are subjective. Just use the conference standings as seedings. Turn the conferences into true leagues and have a playoff.
 
Abyssgh0st said:
As if OSU really had any difficult match ups?

I'm not saying Alabama had a hard schedule, but their hardest game was a WHOLE lot harder than KSU (or any of OSU's games.)
Click to expand...

You really need to take a look at the article I posted above. OSU has played more top 20 ranked teams than Bama. And overall in their schedule the teams OSU played have a better average Sagarin ranking than the teams Bama played.

Like I said, I'm an SEC guy and I'd love to pull for Bama in this case. But, to me, the facts are in OSU's favor. They deserve a shot at LSU.
 
mscriv said:
You really need to take a look at the article I posted above. OSU has played more top 20 ranked teams than Bama. And overall in their schedule the teams OSU played have a better average Sagarin ranking than the teams Bama played.

Like I said, I'm an SEC guy and I'd love to pull for Bama in this case. But, to me, the facts are in OSU's favor. They deserve a shot at LSU.
Click to expand...

I've read that article- it was posted here last week or so. My point still stands- I explicitly went through all of OSU's ranked-opponent games (and even an unranked at the time opponent) and my argument still stands- OSU's schedule was not indicative of a more difficult season, seeing as though based off of performance/score, KSU was their hardest game.
 
Abyssgh0st said:
I explicitly went through all of OSU's ranked-opponent games (and even an unranked at the time opponent) and in my opinion, my argument still stands- OSU's schedule was not indicative of a more difficult season, seeing as though based off of performance/score, KSU was their hardest game.
Click to expand...

*bold added by me

I fixed that for you, because the numbers say otherwise. ;)

OSU has played more top 20 ranked teams than Bama. And overall in their schedule the teams OSU played have a better average Sagarin ranking than the teams Bama played.
Click to expand...
 
mscriv said:
*bold added by me

I fixed that for you, because the numbers say otherwise. ;)
Click to expand...

You're missing it. I went through and listed the games that OSU played against ranked teams, and called them out for what they were. We're talking about an OSU team that was down something like 21-3 at halftime against A&M! A&M singlehandedly gave them that game (and it was still super close.)

The KSU game was the one that OSU had to "try" the hardest for, and that wasn't near as difficult as Alabama v. LSU.
 
Abyssgh0st said:
You're missing it. I went through and listed the games that OSU played against ranked teams, and called them out for what they were. We're talking about an OSU team that was down something like 21-3 at halftime against A&M! A&M singlehandedly gave them that game (and it was still super close.)

The KSU game was the one that OSU had to "try" the hardest for, and that wasn't near as difficult as Alabama v. LSU.
Click to expand...

I hear what you are saying, but my point is that "called them out for what they were" is your subjective opinion about the back and forth that occurs in a game. When it comes to sports all that matters is the final score. The only truly significant factor is wins or losses. We could endlessly debate about the rest, but that won't get us anywhere.

I'm glad Bama is playing in the Championship, it means more money goes to the SEC which in turn affects my homer team, the Vols. But, just looking at the objective stats (rankings and W's vs. L's), in my opinion, OSU should be there instead of them.
 
mscriv said:
I hear what you are saying, but my point is that "called them out for what they were" is your subjective opinion about the back and forth that occurs in a game. When it comes to sports all that matters is the final score. The only truly significant factor is wins or losses. We could endlessly debate about the rest, but that won't get us anywhere.

I'm glad Bama is playing in the Championship, it means more money goes to the SEC which in turn affects my homer team, the Vols. But, just looking at the objective stats (rankings and W's vs. L's), in my opinion, OSU should be there instead of them.
Click to expand...

No the SEC does not get more money by having 2 teams in the NC. Due to the agreement between the conferences they split the money. They get pay out from having 2 teams in BCS but money wise it is still split up the same among the AQs
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

Abyssgh0st said:
Rodimus Prime said:
1. Sorry but no matter how you cut if you are not Conference champ you can not be NC. No if's and's or but's about it. Alabama should not be playing for the NC.

2. Does not matter as case 1. Alamaba has no right to play for it as they are not SEC confence champ.

This is a pretty strong case on a need for a play off.
Click to expand...

So you'd rather have a less deserving and worse team (OSU) play (and lose) because they won the Big 12 (not even an actual championship game)?
Click to expand...

First of all, everything you say is conjecture. It is debatable which team is better or more deserving.

Secondly, OSU won an outright title playing a full round robin in the Big 12. This is much more legit than any CCG.
 
Mr Kram said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)



First of all, everything you say is conjecture. It is debatable which team is better or more deserving.

Secondly, OSU won an outright title playing a full round robin in the Big 12. This is much more legit than any CCG.
Click to expand...

exactly, because Wisconsin is actually the best team in the nation. They lost two fluke games on last second hail marys (one of which is very debatable whether it was actually a touchdown). So Wisconsin should be in the NC game. :stirs the pot:
 
einmusiker said:
exactly, because Wisconsin is actually the best team in the nation. They lost two fluke games on last second hail marys (one of which is very debatable whether it was actually a touchdown). So Wisconsin should be in the NC game. :stirs the pot:
Click to expand...

Are you implying that the selection process takes into account the vagaries of the officiating?

witch.gif
 
Last edited:
einmusiker said:
exactly, because Wisconsin is actually the best team in the nation. They lost two fluke games on last second hail marys (one of which is very debatable whether it was actually a touchdown). So Wisconsin should be in the NC game. :stirs the pot:
Click to expand...
I'm a Badger fan too, but...come on lol. It'd be one thing if both those last moment losses were to top 10 teams...but they were to the #17 and an unranked.

I do think we should be the highest ranked 2 loss team, though (and if we were just ranking team offenses, then I may agree with you...but the Badger defense/special teams drop them way down)
 
Sorry, Division 1-A (pardon me, FBS) is a joke with how it decides a champion. Almost every other sport, including the other football divisions, has a playoff. Alabama in the title game? They didn't win their conference and have made it on the strength of their reputation, not their play on the field. I'd rather see OSU, Stanford, etc., play - Alabama had its chance at LSU and lost. At home.

One more reason to forget college football until next year.
 
Naimfan said:
Sorry, Division 1-A (pardon me, FBS) is a joke with how it decides a champion. Almost every other sport, including the other football divisions, has a playoff. Alabama in the title game? They didn't win their conference and have made it on the strength of their reputation, not their play on the field. I'd rather see OSU, Stanford, etc., play - Alabama had its chance at LSU and lost. At home.

One more reason to forget college football until next year.
Click to expand...

Stanford didn't win their conference either.
 
Naimfan said:
Sorry, Division 1-A (pardon me, FBS) is a joke with how it decides a champion. Almost every other sport, including the other football divisions, has a playoff. Alabama in the title game? They didn't win their conference and have made it on the strength of their reputation, not their play on the field. I'd rather see OSU, Stanford, etc., play - Alabama had its chance at LSU and lost. At home.

One more reason to forget college football until next year.
Click to expand...

How do you go 11-1 without having good play on the field? Give me a break. Oh that is right, it was all on reputation, riiiiiggghhhtt. A little sour grapes is what it sounds like to me.

Roll Tide.

swiftaw said:
Stanford didn't win their conference either.
Click to expand...

Yeah but that is ok.... Because they are not Alabama..:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back