Is the BCS Good or Bad for College Football?

[satjay]

Its a good thing, keeps things exciting all year, makes things intresting. Though I think the best matchup right now would be Oaklahoma VS Alabama, though that can all change next week

 

[mccoyrj]

Its a good thing, keeps things exciting all year, makes things intresting. Though I think the best matchup right now would be Oaklahoma VS Alabama, though that can all change next week

History has shown that it will.

 

[The Insider]

The BCS is better then what we had... But not better then what could be.

 

[yourbeliefs]

Here's a recent report from the Onion about the BCS:

BCS Picture Made Clearer By Pretending Certain Teams Don't Exist | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

 

[gremlin411]

I think the BCS is bad for football but it is all we have and I am tried of screaming at the tv it does no go.

 

[ronjohn]

I think the BCS is fine for rating teams to get into the top bowls. However, you cannot settle a national championship of over 100 teams with one game. Auburn could not have done anything else in 2004. They won every game in a tough conference, but were denied even an opportunity to play for a championship.

 

[meStevo]

Its a good thing, keeps things exciting all year

I'm not so sure I agree with this line. Your team loses week 1 and you're assured a lesser spot amongst the powers that be right off the bat. No chance to correct it by playing well the rest of the season unless others mess up. Same could be said for a playoff system, but to a lesser extent IMO.

If numbers are so important, devise some system of playoffs between the conferences, and the top 5 teams in those conferences are numbered as such... yeah #1 TCU vs #3 UNLV, #3 UNLV vs #3 Michigan for example.

However the seeding is determined, then re-seed it based off record (like what was proposed in the NFL... an 8-8 division winner shouldn't host a 10-6 wildcard team) and have them go at it. Name/sponsor each of the games including the title game as needed to make your $$/uphold tradition... and reap the benefits of a game where you don't need to sit a person down and pose hypotheticals and draw pictures to explain how teams get to where they do via BCS. Make all the games matter because your record always matters (which the BCS helps do now, and a playoff could potentially diminish).

 

[Neutron]

I think Texas got screwed this year. We beat OU yet in the tiebreaker we end up number 3 because of the BCS.

I call it BS.....

 

[salsadancer7]

I think Texas got screwed this year. We beat OU yet in the tiebreaker we end up number 3 because of the BCS.

I call it BS.....

AND the funniest part, a ESPN writer is BLAMING THE BIG 12!!!

This BCS mess lies at the feet of the Big 12

By Ivan Maisel of ESPN.com

Updated: November 30, 2008

Let us pause while BCS proponents try to clear their throats and their logic.

The BCS proponents insist their system is the best because Every Game Matters. Their system is the one that declared Oklahoma, and not Texas or Texas Tech, the Big 12 South champion. Their computers boosted the Sooners over the Longhorns in the most recent standings. Every Game Matters, but the games at the end of the season do matter more.

The human element of the BCS formula actually shifted toward Texas in the voting released Sunday. In the combined voting of the USA Today and Harris polls, the Longhorns went from 63 points behind the Sooners to five points ahead. That may be recount territory, but the polls rated Texas ahead.

The BCS formula's six computers sided with Oklahoma. That may represent the larger truth. Try selling that on the Forty Acres in Austin. All they know is that the Longhorns' 45-35 victory over the Sooners has plummeted in value.

What we have here is a Burnt Orange portfolio of General Motors stock.

"I bet you Oklahoma moves ahead of them," Florida State coach Bobby Bowden said Sunday morning at his media breakfast. "... I was just thinking Texas would be there unless Oklahoma had a big win over Oklahoma State."

The Sooners defeated the Cowboys 61-41 at Stillwater on Saturday night.

"That's fresh on the voters' minds," Bowden said.

Bowden has been a beneficiary of similar BCS logic. In 2000, Florida State lost to Miami, yet finished ahead of the Hurricanes and played in the BCS Championship Game. There is also 1993, when Florida State lost to Notre Dame, yet finished ahead of the Fighting Irish in the final poll.

The lessons are (a) lose early, and (b) if you must beat a top-five team, don't lose afterward.

The largest truth is there is no answer that will placate Texas, save for a Missouri upset of Oklahoma on Saturday night. Even then, the Longhorns would have to sweat out two possibilities that would prevent them from rising from No. 3 into the top two.

[ame="http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=maisel_ivan&id=3735638"]Ivan Maisel: This latest BCS episode does college football no favors - ESPN[/ame]

 

[rlarryvt]

I blame the Big 12 also. They are using a BS poll as a tie breaker. it is the big 12 rule not the BCS

 

[jlhugh]

if every conference had a championship game and get rid of these north, south, east , west crap in the divisions that would help. because right now tex and ou would be playing for the big 12 championship and all this talk goes away. they are talking about this right now on a sports radio station in dallas and i think it is a good idea.

 

[jwfgeol]

No matter how hated it is, if the question is whether the BCS is good or bad for college football, the answer is resoundingly....GOOD.

Why?

Since the beginning of the BCS in 1998, the sport has grown immensely. There is more interest now in college football than ever before, and much of that has to do with the BCS. Beyond that, college football has by far the most important regular season of any sport. Sure, March Madness is huge for college basketball, but does anyone besides hardcore fans really care what happens in December. Comparatively, an early season college football loss already has fans questioning the ability to win a national championship (think USC-OSU this year). You can argue whether the BCS is a fair way to determine a champion, but you can't argue whether it is good or bad for the sport.

 

[salsadancer7]

No matter how hated it is, if the question is whether the BCS is good or bad for college football, the answer is resoundingly....GOOD.

Why?

Since the beginning of the BCS in 1998, the sport has grown immensely. There is more interest now in college football than ever before, and much of that has to do with the BCS. Beyond that, college football has by far the most important regular season of any sport. Sure, March Madness is huge for college basketball, but does anyone besides hardcore fans really care what happens in December. Comparatively, an early season college football loss already has fans questioning the ability to win a national championship (think USC-OSU this year). You can argue whether the BCS is a fair way to determine a champion, but you can't argue whether it is good or bad for the sport.

Good as in $$$ for college football....of course it is, why? Because football fans thought the IDEA of the BCS was getting them ONE STEP CLOSER TO A PLAYOFF.
College football fans thought this was just a speed bump to getting a playoff system in place.....but why screw up the gravy train...?

 

[salsadancer7]

I blame the Big 12 also. They are using a BS poll as a tie breaker. it is the big 12 rule not the BCS

The problem is, the Big 12 has no other choice if I am not mistaken, so therefore, you cannot blame them for the system that is already in place.

 

[jwfgeol]

Good as in $$$ for college football....of course it is, why? Because football fans thought the IDEA of the BCS was getting them ONE STEP CLOSER TO A PLAYOFF.
College football fans thought this was just a speed bump to getting a playoff system in place.....but why screw up the gravy train...?

True. That's evident in the fact that they added a 5th BCS bowl game and just called it the BCS National Championship game. That would have been a perfect scenario for the +1 system.

 

[salsadancer7]

True. That's evident in the fact that they added a 5th BCS bowl game and just called it the BCS National Championship game. That would have been a perfect scenario for the +1 system.

YEP....and people can see through that but you know who is the blame for all this? The coaches, most LOVE the IDEA of a playoff, but are married to the concept of the "traditional bowl game at the end of the year" scenario. When you can have that AND a playoff too....

 

[vurbano]

The BcS is vomit.

The BCS system is like a woman that doesnt &%^#%*. You get all excited about the big finish and then they screw it all up.

 

[vurbano]

I think Texas got screwed this year. We beat OU yet in the tiebreaker we end up number 3 because of the BCS.

I call it BS.....

:up

 

[jwfgeol]

I think Texas got screwed this year. We beat OU yet in the tiebreaker we end up number 3 because of the BCS.

I call it BS.....

Like I said in another thread, if the Big XII had the same tie-breaker as the SEC, Texas would be going. In the case of a three way tie, if the top two teams in the BCS are within 5 spots, it reverts back to head-to-head for those two teams.

 

[The Insider]

Yea but you lost to Texas Tech. Which OK Creamed handily. Not just snuck by but destroyed.

Both OU and Texas have an argument. Either way it goes it sucks.