The BCS sucks

[Mano]

Ok, I am a Utah fan, and the BCS seems to be screwing my team right now. I have watched the team all year, and they are very good. Arguments can be made for how good they are based on scoring margins, common opponents and what not. Bashers will point to strength of their conference schedule. None of this should matter,as it should be determined on the field of play. It is time to do away with the horrible, biased BCS system and bring a playoff system to college football.

[Boris]

Utah has a football team?

[MrGo]

If it was a playoff system, Utah wouldn't be included. They shouldn't be in the top 10.

[ThaSaltCracka]

dude, they play crap opponents. Boise State is the same way.

[Mano]

Pretty much the same response I would expect get from the east coast voters for the polls. The fact that it is so rare for my team to be this good makes us getting shafted sting even more.

[Mano]

They blew out the North Carolina team that beat Miami two weeks later. Also blew out Texas A&M, which took Oklahoma to the brink last week. As I said, both sides can be argued for. It needs to be decided on the field.

[J.R.]

Bashers will point to this fact: Utah has only won 2 games against teams with a winning record- Texas A&M at 6-3, and New Mexico 5-4. The A&M game was at home. Utah hasn't played a tough game on the road out of the altitude (where the BCS bowls are played).

Seven of their wins came aginst these heavyweights: Arizona is 2-7, San Diego State is 2-7, CSU is 3-6, UNLV is 2-7, N. Carolina is 4-5, Air Force is 4-5, Utah State is 2-7. The Carolina game, which you cite to as a quality win, was also a home game. Play somebody Urban.

[MrGo]

[ QUOTE ]
Bashers will point to this fact: Utah has only won 2 games against teams with a winning record- Texas A&M at 6-3, and New Mexico 5-4. The A&M game was at home. Utah hasn't played a tough game on the road out of the altitude (where the BCS bowls are played).

Seven of their wins came aginst these heavyweights: Arizona is 2-7, San Diego State is 2-7, CSU is 3-6, UNLV is 2-7, N. Carolina is 4-5, Air Force is 4-5, Utah State is 2-7. The Carolina game, which you cite to as a quality win, was also a home game. Play somebody Urban.

[/ QUOTE ]

*stands up and claps*

[Mano]

Have you seen them play? Their strength of schedule is better than Wisconsin's. They blew out Texas A&M which nearly beat Oklahoma last week, and also blew out North Carolina, who then beat Miami. The MWC sucks this year, but no worse than the Big East, and West Virginia is going to get an automatic BCS bowl bid with a much less impressive resume.

[ThaSaltCracka]

precisely. Utah is having the same problem this year that Boise State has every year. Their team is really good when compared to the conference they play in, but outside of their conference they are simply a middle of the pack good team.

[J.R.]

Strength of schedule? Wisconsin beat Ohio State, Purdue, Northwestern, and Minnesota. All 4 have winning records, and all are better than new mexico and comparable to Texas A&M. And unlike Utah, Wisconsin has won road games against quality opponents- see their wins aginst Ohio State and Purdue.

And don't worry, because they still have to play #19 Iowa on the road. If Wisconsin finishes undefeated there can be no argument that their season was more impressive that Utah's.

[J.R.]

No doubt the big east, after the departures Miami and tech, needs its BCS place reconsidered, but WV isn't any pushover, and would be undefeated but for a tough ROAD loss to #16 Va Tech. But they play #21 Boston College this week (where's Wyoming, Utah's opponent, ranked?), and WV isn't ranked as high as Utah.

[NoPeak]

The only notable team that Utah has defeated is Texas A&M. Texas A&M was defeated by Baylor(3-6). The combined record of all the teams that Utah has defeated is 30-51. Only two of the teams has a winning record. Utah doesnt belong in the top 10 much less any BCS consideration.

[Mano]

The Sagarin (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt04.htm) rankings have Utah's strength of schedule ranked higher than Wisconsin and Auburn. It was much higher until before the conference season started, and Utah can't controll their conference.

But all this is besides the point. I conceded that valid arguments can be made for and against Utah vs. other schools. They need to go to a playoff system so this can be decided on the field. I have been watching Utah play, and they are a very good team. It's sad that I will never know how good they are, because there is no playoff system in place. Even if they do finish in the BCS top 6, they will probably end up playing a mediocre WV team in the Fiesta bowl, and even if they blow them out it will prove nothing in most peoples minds. We need a 16 team playoff. Do you disagree?

[J.R.]

"We need a 16 team playoff. Do you disagree?"

No, but unfortunately the people whose opinions count do.

[bernie]

Seems this complaint always comes up about a game or 2 before the 'held back team' loses. Remember BYU a couple years back? Had a lawsuit on the table against the BCS until they met up with Hawaii. Then promptly took the lawsuit off the table after getting the asshanders award that week. Same thing happened to another team a year or 2 later. (the team escapes me) They start complaining, then get beat.

Complain around the 10th or 11th game. It's a long season. It will be an accomplishment if they just make it to a BCS bowl. Which they will do if they win the rest of their games.

Im all for fairness in the polls to 'lesser' teams. But the fact is, they do have an easier conference. This doesn't mean they aren't as good as some teams higher than them, it's just harder to prove. Fresno St. plays some of the toughest OOC schedules seen in the past few years, yet still fail at hitting the top 10. Their games against the then tough Oregon St. were classic. In fact, they usually do quite well in tough OOC games. But then they lose to a crap team in their conference for whatever reason, likely tired from the 'bigger' games, and plummet in the polls.

It takes more than a 1/2 a season.

Again, start complaining around game 10 or 11.

b

[Sincere]

I agree that there needs to be a playoff, but do you really think Utah would even be competitive in a 16 team playoff?

[ QUOTE ]
It's sad that I will never know how good they are, because there is no playoff system in place.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its sad that nobody will see them get crushed because they dont play good teams like Auburn, Oklahoma, Texas, Georgia even Miami and FSU would kill them.

I get tired of whining coming from some undefeated team every year that beats up on high school or junior college talent level teams.

If you want respect schedule 3 non-conference games against top 10 teams. Beating up on BYU, Wyoming, New Mexico, Utah State, and Air Force isnt going to cut it. Only 1 team on Utah's schedule is even ranked in the top 25. Tex AM and they are ranked 22 and have 3 losses.

[Mano]

Whether or not Utah finishes undefeated or not is irrellevant. My rant was about the lack of a playoff in college football, and my team getting the short end of the stick just brings it to a head for me. Regardless of how Utah or anyone else finishes, it seems ridiculous to me that college football is the only major college sport where the champion is not decided on the playing field. We need a playoff (last years debacle should have made that clear).

[Sincere]

Dont complain about anything, my high school football team could go undefeated against Utahs schedule.

[jakethebake]

They're lucky to be ranked where they are, given strength of schedule.

[tolbiny]

"We need a 16 team playoff. Do you disagree?"

I actually think that an 8 team playoff would be fair, i doubt that any team ranked between 9-16 would really have a decent shot at winning 4 in a row against other top 16 teams. 8 would cover teh vast majority of teams with a "legitimate" shot at winning it all, with enough big dogs to make for some bitchin upsets.

[mikeyvegas]

I love how everyone here is so quick to bash Utah, but have you guys looked at Cal's schedule. And let me say, the PAC-10 is a joke of a conference and I'm an ASU fan.

CAL non-conf.

Sep 4 at Air Force W, 56-14
Sep 11 vs New Mexico State W, 41-14
Sep 16 at Southern Miss Postponed

[Mano]

If you want respect schedule 3 non-conference games against top 10 teams. Beating up on BYU, Wyoming, New Mexico, Utah State, and Air Force isnt going to cut it. Only 1 team on Utah's schedule is even ranked in the top 25. Tex AM and they are ranked 22 and have 3 losses.

College football schedules are made several years in advance. When Utah's schedule was made 3 or 4 years ago, Arizona, Texas A&M and North Carolina were all top 25 teams.

I doubt that you watched any of the Utah games. By what logic do you conclude that a Miami team that lost to a NC team that Utah crushed would kill Utah?

All this aside, are you happy with the BCS? Do you not think that a playoff system is needed?

[PhatTBoll]

[ QUOTE ]
I actually think that an 8 team playoff would be fair, i doubt that any team ranked between 9-16 would really have a decent shot at winning 4 in a row against other top 16 teams. 8 would cover teh vast majority of teams with a "legitimate" shot at winning it all, with enough big dogs to make for some bitchin upsets.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with your answer but not with your reasoning. For me, the problem with a 16-team playoff is that some of the lower-ranked teams would have a chance at winning the title.
Imagine a team like Florida State goes 8-3 and finishes 14th in the polls. Then it gets real hot, wins a couple games at the end of the season, and runs the table in the playoffs. Then you have a national champ with a 12-3 record and a couple of sketchy losses. I think 8 teams would be plenty for a playoff, and 6 would be optimal.

[ClaytonN]

The BCS sucks because there is still a mathematical chance of one of the best 2 teams as decided by ESPN and AP that is not in the national championship game. There is zero sense of finality, something easily found in most, if not all other college sports.

The best solution is keeping the BCS, but allowing a single "championship game" to be contested after all the bowls are completed.

To Utah fans: Get out of your bumbefark conference, whatever it is, if you want to contend for a national title. Football teams, as well as the authorities, would never approve of an 8 team playoff system, and I never see a team like Utah making the top 4.

[Mano]

Does the entire Big 10 have a single win over a top 25 team not in their conference?

[mikeyvegas]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I actually think that an 8 team playoff would be fair, i doubt that any team ranked between 9-16 would really have a decent shot at winning 4 in a row against other top 16 teams. 8 would cover teh vast majority of teams with a "legitimate" shot at winning it all, with enough big dogs to make for some bitchin upsets.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with your answer but not with your reasoning. For me, the problem with a 16-team playoff is that some of the lower-ranked teams would have a chance at winning the title.
Imagine a team like Florida State goes 8-3 and finishes 14th in the polls. Then it gets real hot, wins a couple games at the end of the season, and runs the table in the playoffs. Then you have a national champ with a 12-3 record and a couple of sketchy losses. I think 8 teams would be plenty for a playoff, and 6 would be optimal.

[/ QUOTE ]

No one seems to have a problem when this happnes in NCAA basketball.

[ThaSaltCracka]

yeah, I was going to say the same thing. In fact, in the b-ball tourney, people actually root for upsets.

[mmbt0ne]

Some of us even go to San Antonio to root on our underdog in the Final Four. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[J.R.]

yes. Are you suggesting the MWC is a better football conference than the Big 10?

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
yes. Are you suggesting the MWC is a better football conference than the Big 10?

[/ QUOTE ] /images/graemlins/smile.gif, please say it..... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Sincere]

No Im not a fan of the BCS and would like to see a playoff.

[ QUOTE ]
do you conclude that a Miami team that lost to a NC team that Utah crushed would kill Utah?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes I do think Miami would kill Utah. You cant play the who beat who game.

[Mano]

Yes I do think Miami would kill Utah. You cant play the who beat who game.

Why? Have you watched Utah play and were unimpressed? I have watched a few Miami games (part of the UNC game and the Louiville game) and all of the Utah games, and I don't see Utah as being overmatched. You of course are entitled to your opinion, I am just wondering why you are so sure Utah would get killed by a Miami team that hasn't been blowing out many opponents.

[Mano]

Name the Big 10 wins vs. top 25 teams please.

[J.R.]

Utah can throw the ball against the athletically inferior athletes of the mountian west, but can't play that style of play against a good defense with fast, quick corners and big guys up front to tee off on Alex Smith. Johnson, Smith and Ganther haven't proven they can run the ball. Look, they are a good team but they haven't shown much balance and the ability to beat speedy, good defenses.

I know you love you N.Carolina, but before their miami upset N. Carolina's coach was a goner. Do you really think N/ Carolina is a better team than miami, and would beat them the majority of the time if they played say 10 games. Likewise, A&M isn't bad, but they scored two touchdowns on fake kicks/trick plays and didn't really outplay OU (although their run defense was decent until they wore down later in the game- and as Utah and OU proved, A&M is bad against the pass). OU outgained A&M and played a bad game. Did you think OU played as well as they did in earlier games, like the Texas game. And where was the game held? (College Station)

I watched the Utah / A&M game, and honestly believe A&M is a better team today than they were at the begining of the season, although they will always fare poorly against a passing team.

[PhatTBoll]

[ QUOTE ]
No one seems to have a problem when this happnes in NCAA basketball.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some people do. Every year around March somebody complains about it on espn.com. But the regular season actually means something in football. Would we care as much about Florida/FSU or the conference championship game if we knew that there was a good chance that they would meet again anyway in the playoffs? The BCS is crappy, but let's not go overboard by letting a lot of second-rate teams get a second, third, or even fourth chance at playing for a title.

In basketball, the casual fan stopped caring about the regular season a long time ago. Why would we want to do that to football too?

[J.R.]

Notre Dame is 24th AP poll and 25th in the BCS and lost to Purdue on October 2, 2004. Not to mention the fatc that playing in the big 10 is aload itself, and there are a number of ranked teams played inter-conference (by contrast, the MW often has 2- usually air force, csu or utah ranked).

[Mano]

Johnson, Smith and Ganther haven't proven they can run the ball.

NAME CAR YDS YPC TD
Marty Johnson 128 622 4.9 12
Quinton Ganther 85 494 5.8 1
Alex Smith 92 439 4.8 8

Looks like they run OK to me.


they haven't shown much balance

Passing

CMP ATT YDS TDS
169 254 2408 25

Rushing:
CAR YDS YPC TDS
404 2096 5.2 27

Doesn't seem all that unbalanced either.

Do you really think N/ Carolina is a better team than miami, and would beat them the majority of the time if they played say 10 games.

No, but from what I saw I think the games would be competitive. Utah CRUSHED North Carolina, and I saw no evidence that if they played 10 times the outcome would be any different.

and honestly believe A&M is a better team today than they were at the begining of the season
I believe this too, but I also have seen Utah get better as the season has progressed. Their offense has been completely unstoppable over the past 4-5 games, and not all the defenses they played against were poor.

[Mano]

OK, I was looking at the ESPN/USA Today poll, but the Big Ten's only win against top 25 is against a very mediocre ND team (which also lost to BYU). Do you apply the same "they haven't beaten anybody" mentality to the league and shut them out of the BCS games?

[ThaSaltCracka]

so what, how many top 25 teams are in the big ten? They're not rated that high because they are overrated, they are ranked that high because they play in one the toughest conferences.

[J.R.]

It looks OK, but the point is that when you are blowing out inferior competition (which Utah has done) you tend to run the ball more. They aren't crushing teams by running the ball, IMO, they are running when ahead. I'll stop. Utah is a very good team playing well (especially at home), and I don't dispute that. But they just haven't shown enough to be called one of the best 3 or 4 teams in the country. Top 10 no doubt, but OU, USC, Auburn, Wis, maybe Texas/Cal have shown more, IMO.

[J.R.]

"Do you apply the same "they haven't beaten anybody" mentality to the league and shut them out of the BCS games?"

No, because the big ten has a tough IN-conference schedule, inarguably tougher than the MWC.

[Mano]

I would say your assesment is very fair, although I am still not sold on Wisconsin ( Big Ten is way down this year, and Utah looks much better vs. 2 common opponents). Utah may be even better than that (probably not, but maybe) and I would like the opportunity to settle it on the field. I really want to see a playoff (and I realize if there ever is a playoff Utah will rarely ever be involved (although they would this year), but I think settling it on the field is much preferrable to what is currently in place).

[1111]

It's true that Wis. schedule hasn't been great this year, but their defense would keep them in any game against anybody in the country. I really hope they get a chance to play in the Orange Bowl -- I know, very unlikely -- because I think they'll crush whoever they were to play in the Rose.

[Sincere]

Because teams like Miami and FSU recruit the best of the best. The strongest of the strong the fastest of the fast. Those boys coming out of high school down here in florida are man beasts.

Plus the #1 reason why I think that is because of team depth. Miami and FSU 3rd string players are good enough to start on most teams. Utah would not have the depth to keep up and it would show in the 2nd half of a game.

[Sincere]

[ QUOTE ]
Their offense has been completely unstoppable over the past 4-5 games

[/ QUOTE ]

They were playing against high school teams.

[Mano]

One of those high school teams beat Miami.

[Sincere]

Good one. You keep pointing that out, underdogs do win sometimes, Buster Douglas knocked out Mike Tyson.

Look I think it should be settled on the field too. I wish every team in the country played a 10 game regular season schedule, then the top 16 had a playoff. The only way you are going to see how good your Utah team is, is if they win out and play a real team in a BCS bowl.

[Mano]

Agreed.

[Sincere]

[ QUOTE ]
but let's not go overboard by letting a lot of second-rate teams get a second, third, or even fourth chance at playing for a title.

In basketball, the casual fan stopped caring about the regular season a long time ago. Why would we want to do that to football too?


[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody gets a 3rd or 4th chance to play for the national title. Also, I think if there were a top 16 team playoff the regular season would still matter. There are some 1 and 2 loss teams that are just as good as the unbeatens and could beat any team on any given day.

[Sincere]

[ QUOTE ]
Not to mention the fatc that playing in the big 10 is aload itself,

[/ QUOTE ]

The big 10 has weakened greatly and is probably only the 4th toughest conference in the country now.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
Whether or not Utah finishes undefeated or not is irrellevant. My rant was about the lack of a playoff in college football, and my team getting the short end of the stick just brings it to a head for me

[/ QUOTE ]

If they win every game left, they will be in a BCS bowl and possibly the NC game. You don't know if they will get the short end of the stick because it hasn't been decided yet who will play in the bowls. There's alot of football left. Get a grip.

As for a playoff? I don't see it happening. I'd be very curious as to how they think they would accomplish this in a bowl system. There's simply too much money in the bowls to do it. They're not going to change venues for bowl games to coincide with a playoff track.

I also don't want to see a playoff system. I dont care about making it 'definite'. Besides, it would ruin alot of good debates.

b

[bernie]

Utah may still be a powerful team. Might even be one of the tops in the nation. Fact is, it's too early to start bitching or make claims of being shafted. 1 loss and this thread is obsolete. If they do win the rest and end up in the big one, then what would they have to complain about? What can they say they were justified in complaining at this point in time if that happened? Would they have been getting hosed even though they made it? Win the rest and then see where ya stand. If that happens, it gives more foundation for the complaint.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
And let me say, the PAC-10 is a joke of a conference and I'm an ASU fan

[/ QUOTE ]

All but one team in that conference has to play the #1 team. All but one team has to play #4. What other conference has 2 top 5 teams?

And some made quite a game(s) out of it against those teams. I don't underestimate the toughness of any of the big 5 conferences right now. There is no real way of comparing. The actual toughness cycles throughout the conferences. People said this last year about the pac 10 and look how they did in the big bowl games against 'better' opponents.

I think it'd be cool to have a Pac-10 NC game. Which is still in the realm of possibility.

b

[Sincere]

They can complain about getting beat by Oklahoma by 37 points!

[Sincere]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it'd be cool to have a Pac-10 NC game. Which is still in the realm of possibility.


[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe in bizzaro world. Oklahoma and Auburn would kill USC any day of the week.

[PhatTBoll]

[ QUOTE ]
Oklahoma and Auburn would kill USC any day of the week.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you seen Oklahoma's secondary lately? I don't think they can *kill* anyone in the top 25 right now.
As for Auburn, let's just see if they can beat Georgia.

[bernie]

Not sure about Auburn, but oklahoma? No way. Oklahoma has yet to win a big game. Including last year. They're scraping by on many games this year. So they likely won't be in the NC game. Auburn? Not sure who they have left, but they still have the SEC championship.

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe in bizzaro world

[/ QUOTE ]
Given the above, it's possible. Especially if they both win the rest of their games.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
As for Auburn, let's just see if they can beat Georgia

[/ QUOTE ]

They will likely have to beat Georgia twice at that.

b

[slavic]

Tex AM and they are ranked 22 and have 3 losses.

A&M will not be ranked for long.

They finish up at Texas Tech (the sand aggies normally pound A&M) and then they have to go to Austin.

A&M finishes with 5 losses.

[slavic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Whether or not Utah finishes undefeated or not is irrellevant. My rant was about the lack of a playoff in college football, and my team getting the short end of the stick just brings it to a head for me

[/ QUOTE ]

If they win every game left, they will be in a BCS bowl and possibly the NC game. You don't know if they will get the short end of the stick because it hasn't been decided yet who will play in the bowls. There's alot of football left. Get a grip.

As for a playoff? I don't see it happening. I'd be very curious as to how they think they would accomplish this in a bowl system. There's simply too much money in the bowls to do it. They're not going to change venues for bowl games to coincide with a playoff track.

I also don't want to see a playoff system. I dont care about making it 'definite'. Besides, it would ruin alot of good debates.

b

[/ QUOTE ]

Strength of schedule has started eating Utah alive in the computer poles. With no deductions for losses this year it's going to be hard for them to hit and stay top 6 without a few upsets.

If they aren't top 6 no bowl picks them because I can guarantee their fans don't travel like <insert your favorite top ten team here>.

[ddollevoet]

If they aren't top 6 no bowl picks them because I can guarantee their fans don't travel like WISCONSIN.

[sfer]

You're right. Cal should clearly be number 1. Discuss.

[NoPeak]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for Auburn, let's just see if they can beat Georgia

[/ QUOTE ]

They will likely have to beat Georgia twice at that.





[/ QUOTE ]

So either Vandy or Kentucky is going to beat Tenn?

[bernie]

Oops, i misread their conference record with their overall.

But hey, if the SEC is as tough a conference as SEC fans think, Vandy and Kentucky might be able to pull it off. Anything should be possible in this powerhouse conference, right?

b