PDA

View Full Version : The BCS is full of S



horsesense
10-25-2005, 11:23 AM
How does USC after winning its 29th straight game fall to # 2 with the BCS? I mean, didnt Texas play 1- and whatever Oklahoma. BCS must stand for Being Credible Sucks. :D

thesaint
10-25-2005, 11:26 AM
But as long as they both end the end season being #1 and #2 it doesnt matter...

y2cragie
10-25-2005, 11:33 AM
From what I have heard this isn't the first time they have made "questionable" choices.

horsesense
10-25-2005, 12:18 PM
One of the smart guys had SC at # 5. :eek:
It really doesnt matter till the end, but with back to back National Championships, and 29 consecutive Ws they should stay on top untill theyre defeated. :coffee:

broncofan303
10-25-2005, 12:28 PM
I don't see anything wrong with it...the BCS is a season by season not history by history thing...Texas is #1 in BCS because of their strength of schedule and how they have dominated their oppoenents... USC squeaked by Notre Dame and played very weak teams...BUT, USC has a stronger ending schedule than Texas, so if they should win out, They WILL be #1, there's no screw job on this, I really don't see a problem with it...

Texas is playing a very weak Okie State team, Trojans is playing a solid Washington State team, they'll be #1 after this week, funny how that stuff works..

horsesense
10-25-2005, 12:39 PM
The thing is Bro theres no consideration for being #1, and winning all those games w/o an L. You have to take into account every team wants to knock off the #1. Do you think ND would trade an L against another team with a W against the Trojans? Same goes for EVERY one of SCs opponents this season. Everybody wants a shot at the big boy on the block, and yes that should be worth a couple of points a week. Youre right though, with Cal, and UCLA still on the schedule that should put SC back on top providing they win out, but I didnt see Texas drop a spot when they played lowly Oklahoma, did you?

broncofan303
10-25-2005, 01:05 PM
but I didnt see Texas drop a spot when they played lowly Oklahoma, did you?

No, because they did what they had to, go in and dominate...SC trailed at halftime for probably half of their games, #1 teams should come out and dominate teams not blow them out in the second half...the most complete game they've played was against the Irish and they ONLY beat them by 4 points, on the last play of the game.. Texas dominated the undefeated Tech, that's what shot them up to a #1, but really if SC and Texas wins this week, SC will be #1 in the BCS again...

horsesense
10-25-2005, 01:27 PM
I havnt watched any Texas games YET this year, and I gather you havnt watched many SC games, had you then youd know Arizona St. is the only team thats led at halftime, and had there not been a fluke interseption by the Trojans they woulda lost to them. Guess where SC was after that week. #1. Do you see anything wrong with that? If SC was #1 after the lackluster performance against Ariz. St. why wouldnt they be #1 after destroying the Huskies. Which was in Pullman BTW, and not the easiest place to win for any team esp. not to mention another PAC 10 team.
BTW, thanks for mixing it up within this thread and not turning it into a smackfest. :beer:

broncofan303
10-25-2005, 01:40 PM
I could of sworn their was another team... after researching it...Oregon was up on them..

13-10 at half..

and Arizona was only down by 7 at half...

That's pretty close to half...

But SC fans have nothing to worry about, BCS will get it right if SC beats Wstate...

orangenblue420
10-25-2005, 01:45 PM
Its funny - cuz to me it seems you should take the best of college football rules and rankings and combine them with the NFL's and you could have a perfect system i.e. overtime - standings, playoffs and such

Maybe - who knows im just a girl

:P

horsesense
10-25-2005, 01:52 PM
And a pretty one at that. ;)
No, I like it. I also like the 1 foot in rule, only cause Ive seen a ton of great catches go for nought in the NFL cause the receiver didnt get both feet down.
Shall we get a thread started on it?
and Ariz. State was up at the half. Check your stats again 303. I may have been wrong about Oregon though. :heh:

broncofan303
10-25-2005, 01:54 PM
Its funny - cuz to me it seems you should take the best of college football rules and rankings and combine them with the NFL's and you could have a perfect system i.e. overtime - standings, playoffs and such

Maybe - who knows im just a girl

:P

I would love to see the playoff system in the NFL, its really a great system, it gives both teams an equal chance to actually score...

But otherwise, rankings in college is what makes it great, it makes each game mean something instead of messing around with teams like the Giants and going 5-2 ;) ...

twotone
10-25-2005, 01:55 PM
The thing is Bro theres no consideration for being #1, and winning all those games w/o an L. You have to take into account every team wants to knock off the #1. Do you think ND would trade an L against another team with a W against the Trojans? Same goes for EVERY one of SCs opponents this season. Everybody wants a shot at the big boy on the block, and yes that should be worth a couple of points a week. Youre right though, with Cal, and UCLA still on the schedule that should put SC back on top providing they win out, but I didnt see Texas drop a spot when they played lowly Oklahoma, did you?


yet none of the opponents who played Texas wanted to beat them? they didn't want to knock off the number 2 team? that statement pretty much covers any team in the top 10, anyone who plays them wants to be the spoiler.

and i have to agree with broncofan303 here, Texas has gone in and dominated every opponent, SC's had to have a little luck to finish off a couple of their opponents. couple that with the fact that Texas is playing harder teams and they should be number 1.

i can't believe i'm agreeing with the bcs...

horsesense
10-25-2005, 02:06 PM
couple that with the fact that Texas is playing harder teams
Harder Teams? Really? Like Oklahoma who BTW we crushed in a National Title game, or maybe OSU? Thats Bull. And yea knocking off a #1 current National Champ is a better feat then knocking off a number 2. We can go round n round all day though on tougher teams. Hopefully time will tell and the Rose Bowl will be the place. Peace ..

aberdien
10-25-2005, 03:55 PM
BCS= Bull Crap System
BCS= Broken Computer System

broncofan303
10-25-2005, 04:06 PM
BCS= Bull Crap System
BCS= Broken Computer System

I thought it was Bowl Championship Series :P

aberdien
10-25-2005, 04:29 PM
I thought it was Bowl Championship Series :P


Not quite there yet. ;)

bronerines
10-25-2005, 05:36 PM
Nothing is wrong with the system Texas has had a tougher scheldue the USC and they have always been winning by over 20 points while USC is playig weaker teams and just squeking by.

GridironChamp
10-25-2005, 06:09 PM
BS, BS, BS, BS all BCS is Bull Computer Sh1t, all it is is BS. :mad:


You dont take number 1 away from an undefeatd team thathas actually played decent teams. I understand Texas has had a harder schedule but not harder enough to take the NUMBER 1 spot, but no worries, USC WILL, i repeat, WILL take it back, but by some other wordly chance they dont they will be number 2 and beat Texas in the Bowl.

BTW VT wont be NUMBER 3 next Monday.....GO MIAMI :beer:

watchthemiddle
10-25-2005, 06:23 PM
BS, BS, BS, BS all BCS is Bull Computer Sh1t, all it is is BS. :mad:


You dont take number 1 away from an undefeatd team thathas actually played decent teams. I understand Texas has had a harder schedule but not harder enough to take the NUMBER 1 spot, but no worries, USC WILL, i repeat, WILL take it back, but by some other wordly chance they dont they will be number 2 and beat Texas in the Bowl.

BTW VT wont be NUMBER 3 next Monday.....GO MIAMI :beer:


I agree, until USC actually losses a game, then they should be #1. They have won back to back championships, haven't lost in like 57 games or something outrageous like that, then how can they lose the top spot?

Big Buck 1981
10-25-2005, 07:32 PM
While I agree that a team that doesn't lose shouldn't lose a spot in the rankings, my heart also tells me that Texas is the better team right now. Notice not only that Texas has been scoring tons of points, they really haven't been giving that many points up.

Vince Young wins the Heisman and Texas wins the Championship...and that's coming from a Husker fan! :ugh:

Skywalker
10-25-2005, 08:52 PM
While I agree that a team that doesn't lose shouldn't lose a spot in the rankings, my heart also tells me that Texas is the better team right now. Notice not only that Texas has been scoring tons of points, they really haven't been giving that many points up.

Vince Young wins the Heisman and Texas wins the Championship...and that's coming from a Husker fan! :ugh:


oh how I would love to see that.....




because I am a Longhorn fan.




I dont see what the problem is with Texas being #1 :P

rcsodak
10-25-2005, 09:47 PM
How does USC after winning its 29th straight game fall to # 2 with the BCS? I mean, didnt Texas play 1- and whatever Oklahoma. BCS must stand for Being Credible Sucks. :D
They played Texas Tech....a ranked team....and beat them convincingly.

And get off my OU's nuts.......they're sore enough as it is.....and they have 4 wins...... :mad:

rcsodak
10-25-2005, 09:52 PM
I agree, until USC actually losses a game, then they should be #1. They have won back to back championships, haven't lost in like 57 games or something outrageous like that, then how can they lose the top spot?
57 games?

What ARE you smoking, watch?

OU has the nation's longest winning record....and it's not remotely close for SC..... :goofy:

Booher
10-25-2005, 10:01 PM
Yea the bcs is crap how do they rank va tech behind anybody? :confused:

thesaint
10-26-2005, 05:09 AM
Yea the bcs is crap how do they rank va tech behind anybody? :confused:

Hmmm....maybe because they havent played ANYONE? :laugh:

mrsolo
10-26-2005, 06:47 AM
Harder Teams? Really? Like Oklahoma who BTW we crushed in a National Title game, or maybe OSU? Thats Bull. And yea knocking off a #1 current National Champ is a better feat then knocking off a number 2. We can go round n round all day though on tougher teams. Hopefully time will tell and the Rose Bowl will be the place. Peace ..

Beating OU last year has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS YEAR'S BCS RANKINGS!!! I know it's hard to swallow, but the rankings are for THIS YEAR. The winning streak is nice, in fact, it's getting up there with some of the all-time greats(OU still holds the record at 47 straight, and that won't likely be broken). But, the BCS is based on this year's games. Texas beat OSU, and a BCS #7 ranked, undefeated Texas Tech team. After Texas plays Ok State, their strength of schedule will drop. Then comes Baylor and Kansas. That will hurt their SOS even more.

Settle down. As long as USC runs the table, they will be there.

Big Buck 1981
10-26-2005, 07:18 AM
Beating OU last year has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS YEAR'S BCS RANKINGS!!! I know it's hard to swallow, but the rankings are for THIS YEAR. The winning streak is nice, in fact, it's getting up there with some of the all-time greats(OU still holds the record at 47 straight, and that won't likely be broken). But, the BCS is based on this year's games. Texas beat OSU, and a BCS #7 ranked, undefeated Texas Tech team. After Texas plays Ok State, their strength of schedule will drop. Then comes Baylor and Kansas. That will hurt their SOS even more.

Settle down. As long as USC runs the table, they will be there.

Precisely!

horsesense
10-26-2005, 07:22 AM
Now that weve aired this out some, how bout answering this then. Why do both human polls have SC at #1, and Texas at #2. What are they doing differently then the computer poll?

Big Buck 1981
10-26-2005, 09:07 AM
Humans tend to be sensationalists, computers do not. The computer is taking factors and comparing them mathmatically whereas humans, like you, are using the argument, "Well, they haven't lost, so they shouldn't drop in rank." While I tend to agree, I also believe that if there was no such thing as the Pre-Season Ranking system, that Texas actually would be #1 right now in the human polls...but the way the system is set up now, the team that wins the national championship pretty much gets a shoe-in for the top pre-season ranking...which to me seems flawed. Let's say the NFL had a similar ranking system, the Patriots would come into the season ranked #1, but it's clear now that they were not the top team coming into this season and that their pre-season ranking was merely arbitrary...that's the problem, it's an arbitrary system. Rather than handing out rankings based on what teams 'might' or 'are supposed' to do before any games have even been played, the voters should wait until the 3rd or 4th week of the season and then begin their rankings, I guarantee they would look different.

horsesense
10-26-2005, 09:19 AM
Excellent points, thanks for the take. CPs will follow. :D
I agree with most of it. Just cause Indy is undefeated doesnt mean theyre the #1 team in the NFL right now either. Thanks again man. :beer:

orangenblue420
10-26-2005, 09:57 AM
and they have 4 wins...... :mad:


yeah but how many losses ;)

hehehehe - sore nuts or not I couldnt resist :D

horsesense
10-26-2005, 10:08 AM
Found this after my rant of course.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=jones/051025

NJBRONCOSFAN
10-26-2005, 03:40 PM
Found this after my rant of course.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=jones/051025
great article, huh?
The Big 12 does seem to have received the benefit of the doubt over the past few years bcs-wise.

horsesense
10-27-2005, 06:54 AM
Yup! But how can that be? The computer doesnt get things wrong. :confused:

Big Buck 1981
10-27-2005, 06:59 AM
Statistically, no, the computer doesn't get things wrong...while the Big XII, Nebraska included, has gotten the benefit of the doubt a couple of times since the BCS started, it's often been because the teams played dominant football just about all year long, then had one or two games that looked awful. If the stats and the strength of schedule are enough to keep them in the top spot, then one could conclude that any drop in the polls without a coinciding drop in computer rankings is simply voter sensationalism.

Nick7
10-27-2005, 03:35 PM
How does USC after winning its 29th straight game fall to # 2 with the BCS? I mean, didnt Texas play 1- and whatever Oklahoma. BCS must stand for Being Credible Sucks. :D


The funniest thing is, the PAC-10 were the ones that were complaining about strength of schedule after the '01 season when Oregon didn't make the National Championship. Sure comes back to bite you in the a5s huh? Besides, Texas hasn't had any games where they had to come back from a two score margin to win, so I think that would also be a factor.

daniel80111
10-27-2005, 04:53 PM
It really doesnt matter what the BCS thinks. If we just do our thing and win out, it'll all take care of itself. We ll just have to make sure we don't make things interesting.

GridironChamp
10-27-2005, 06:00 PM
While I agree that a team that doesn't lose shouldn't lose a spot in the rankings, my heart also tells me that Texas is the better team right now. Notice not only that Texas has been scoring tons of points, they really haven't been giving that many points up.

Vince Young wins the Heisman and Texas wins the Championship...and that's coming from a Husker fan! :ugh:

Your opinion was good and fine up until you say Young wins the HEISMAN, no way Reggie Bush doesnt, and when you said Texas will win the CHAMPIONSHIP, that as USC written all over it.

Booher
11-01-2005, 08:44 PM
Watch tech take over #2 as texas's cakewalk schedule continues...and tech continues to pound good teams.

mrsolo
11-02-2005, 02:19 PM
Watch tech take over #2 as texas's cakewalk schedule continues...and tech continues to pound good teams.

Spoken like a true homer.

TXBRONC
11-02-2005, 05:01 PM
Spoken like a true homer.

Hey isn't there an old Jimmy Buffet song entitled "Wasten Away Again in Homerville"? :D

mrsolo
11-02-2005, 05:18 PM
Hey isn't there an old Jimmy Buffet song entitled "Wasten Away Again in Homerville"? :D

LOL...seems like I've heard that one a few times.

Hells Bells
11-02-2005, 10:42 PM
Dude I am a Cal fan.....after last year, there is no one who has experienced more pain from that system than us.....to see the #22 go to a BCS bowl and have us, the #4/5 team not go.....one of my lowest sports moments.

thesaint
11-03-2005, 06:06 AM
Dude I am a Cal fan.....after last year, there is no one who has experienced more pain from that system than us.....to see the #22 go to a BCS bowl and have us, the #4/5 team not go.....one of my lowest sports moments.


And then to lose that game on top of everything.... :laugh:

Hells Bells
11-03-2005, 09:41 PM
And then to lose that game on top of everything.... :laugh:

OK, still.....#4 team, no go, #22 team, go? No sense.

There NEEDS to be playoffs in collefe football. No more of this bowl system crap. It looks like Virginia Tech is gonna get screwed this year, like Auburn and Cal last year.

mrsolo
11-03-2005, 10:02 PM
OK, still.....#4 team, no go, #22 team, go? No sense.

There NEEDS to be playoffs in collefe football. No more of this bowl system crap. It looks like Virginia Tech is gonna get screwed this year, like Auburn and Cal last year.

How did Cal get screwed? The got spanked by Texas Tech. Why would they want to play someone better?

Hells Bells
11-09-2005, 11:16 PM
How did Cal get screwed? The got spanked by Texas Tech. Why would they want to play someone better?

The spanking....I can't explain. However, that was the same Cal team that outplayed USC in their house, but couldn't convert 4th and goal because Robert Jordan tripped on his route. They did a little better against USC than you guys did. Not only that they were THE NUMBER 4 TEAM IN THE COUNTRY, and PITT WAS 22. The whole thing was a fiasco. Mack Brown has no class; begging for votes on TV. Whatever, if Cal beats USC this year, I will be content.

horsesense
11-17-2005, 02:39 PM
and how you feeling right now? Cal got whooped, then the raiders got whooped. At least it was consistant... :D