Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Breaking Down the BCS

While the Dawgs will be nowhere in vicinity of the radar when the ensuing BCS rankings are released this Sunday, I do think it generates great discussion on the system itself. Some want a playoff system, some want the old conference Bowl tie-in system (i.e. Big Ten/Pac Ten in Rose Bowl no matter who is ranked what), and some think the current system is fine.

Personally, I do think the current system is okay, but I do question how the BCS rankings are formulated. Here is why I like the current system; if you go back and look at previous year's results, the BCS rankings worked out just fine with the exception of 2000 (Nebraska played in NC game despite not making it to the Big 12 Championship game), 2003 (LSU and USC split), and 2007 (a complete cluster-eff). I guess my point is, what would be the purspse of having a playoff last year? There were two undefeated powers (Alabama and Texas) and three undefeated "lesser" teams (TCU, Boise, and Cinci). If we give these "little guys" a chance, what we are really doing is encouraging weak scheduling. Every coach/AD would be scheduling to go undefeated as opposed to scheduling to get "powerful" wins. In other words, we would be playing three yawn-inducing, crap home games at 1:00 while we sweat our a$$ off -- doesn't sound appealing to say the least. So, here is my fix for the controversy:

Decide whether we need a playoff or not at the end of each season. Pretty easy:
  1. If we have two undefeated BCS teams then we don't need a playoff. Just use the current system.
  2. If we have three contenders, use a plus-one system.
  3. and if we have four contenders, then bring on the playoff.
I figure we could have a committee similar to the NCAA basketball tournament to vote on the appropriate outcome.

As for the rankings themselves, I do not have a simple answer but I am NOT a fan of the coaches poll for obvious reasons: a) they don't watch every team, b) their SID who actually does the rankings don't watch every team, and c) who said coaches can judge these things? I mean, do you think Les Miles is qualified to decide who should play in the BCS game?

I know the school presidents act like congress when it comes to this, so we might not see a change in my lifetime, but when you think about it, the popularity of college football certainly hasn't been hurt by the controversy.

FYI here are the projected BCS rankings if they came out TODAY. This is via Brad Edwards at ESPN and BCSGuru.com. Obviously, this will change after this weekend's games:

Brad Edwards:

1. Boise State
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Oklahoma
5. Ohio State
6. LSU
7. Nebraska
8. Auburn
9. Michigan State
10. Alabama

BCS Guru:

1. Boise State
2. Oregon
3. TCU
4. Oklahoma
5. Ohio State
6. Nebraska
7. LSU
8. Auburn
9. Alabama
10. Michigan State

No comments:

Post a Comment