Archive

First BCS Rankings

  • wildcats20
    http://espn.go.com/college-football/bcs

    LSU, Bama, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Boise St.
  • karen lotz
    Didn't watch the show, but apparently Skip Bayless and Craig James were on and debated the standings. Good work ESPN.
  • dazedconfused
    karen lotz;935982 wrote:Didn't watch the show, but apparently Skip Bayless and Craig James were on and debated the standings. Good work ESPN.
    at this point with espn's college football coverage, anything outside of the gameday crew is laughable at best
  • sleeper
    I don't see anyone beating Wisconsin. Let's just hope Oklahoma or LSU loses so we don't get the wrong champion like we've had the past couple years.
  • karen lotz
    dazedconfused;936033 wrote:at this point with espn's college football coverage, anything outside of the gameday crew is laughable at best

    And with Corso stumbling over words and Fowler becoming an ass, even that is questionable.
  • dave
    Looks like the computers love Clemson. They play a lot of games against teams with decent/good records. Of course they will probably drop a couple games they should win.
  • ohiotiger33
    Yeah the computers do seem to love us because of the ranked wins, and with VT being 12th and Auburn now being ranked in the top 25, that can only help. That being said, I think we will likely drop a game down the stretch here, which to be honest I am fine with. Just want an ACC title.
  • Pick6
    I know its early, but this is why we need a playoff. Winner of LSU/Bama, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Boise...We will probably never really never know who is the best out of these teams.
  • 2kool4skool
    Just rooting for as many teams as possible to go undefeated. Anything to screw up the current system is fine by me.
  • sherm03
    Pick6;936086 wrote:I know its early, but this is why we need a playoff. Winner of LSU/Bama, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Boise...We will probably never really never know who is the best out of these teams.
    A playoff doesn't let you know that either...
  • Pick6
    sherm03;936120 wrote:A playoff doesn't let you know that either...
    um, how?
  • SportsAndLady
    Pick6;936086 wrote:I know its early, but this is why we need a playoff. Winner of LSU/Bama, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Boise...We will probably never really never know who is the best out of these teams.
    What about Clemson? Stanford?

    With a playoff system, there's going to be teams "left out" just like there are teams "left out" in the current system.
  • SportsAndLady
    Oh and Rutgers movin up!
  • WebFire
    SportsAndLady;936134 wrote:What about Clemson? Stanford?

    With a playoff system, there's going to be teams "left out" just like there are teams "left out" in the current system.
    8 team playoff. And if not, being "left out" at 7 or 8 is way different than being left out at 3 or 4. If there was a 50 team playoff, 51 would be "left out".
  • Pick6
    SportsAndLady;936134 wrote:What about Clemson? Stanford?

    With a playoff system, there's going to be teams "left out" just like there are teams "left out" in the current system.
    I expect Stanford to lose to Oregon and Clemson to slip up somewhere. There are always going to be teams left out, just like in the NFL, but there is obviously a difference between the 4th ranked team and the 10th ranked team.
  • sleeper
    2kool4skool;936091 wrote:Just rooting for as many teams as possible to go undefeated. Anything to screw up the current system is fine by me.
    +1
  • Skyhook79
    WebFire;936142 wrote:8 team playoff. And if not, being "left out" at 7 or 8 is way different than being left out at 3 or 4. If there was a 50 team playoff, 51 would be "left out".
    The lower Divisions (1-AA,Div 2, Div 3) have a 20-24 team playoff, there is no reason why D-1A couldn't do something similar.
  • WebFire
    Skyhook79;936155 wrote:The lower Divisions (1-AA,Div 2, Div 3) have a 20-24 team playoff, there is no reason why D-1A couldn't do something similar.
    I think 8 is perfect. Frustrating thing is, it's doable while allowing the bowls and others to make their money.
  • HitsRus
    With a playoff system, there's going to be teams "left out" just like there are teams "left out" in the current system.
    If you can't take care of business enough during the regular season to be ranked at least 8th, then you don't deserve a shot at the title.
  • jordo212000
    HitsRus;936166 wrote:If you can't take care of business enough during the regular season to be ranked at least 8th, then you don't deserve a shot at the title.

    This.

    I absolutely despise the "well the system is far from perfect, but a playoff isn't perfect either, therefore we should not tweak the system; even if a playoff would better answer the 'best team' argument"

    Such a lazy way to debunk a playoff
  • karen lotz
    Why is 8 the magic number?
  • sleeper
    karen lotz;936177 wrote:Why is 8 the magic number?
    6 BCS conference champions + 2 at large(with preference towards undefeated non-BCS conferences). If more than 2 exist, give top teams byes and have 10.

    I just fixed college football and assured no SEC school will win ever again.
  • WebFire
    karen lotz;936177 wrote:Why is 8 the magic number?
    For me, there are a few reasons.

    1. I don't think there needs to be more than 8 to crown a champ. Realistically, if you aren't in the top 8, you aren't good enough.

    2. It helps with the argument that a playoff would be too many games. Keep the 12 game schedule, and only 2 teams would play 15 games.

    3. 8 teams work pretty well in being able to keep your premier (or BCS) bowls in the playoff structure.
  • Mulva
    SportsAndLady;936134 wrote:With a playoff system, there's going to be teams "left out" just like there are teams "left out" in the current system.
    A 10-2 #9 team being left out is pretty significantly different than a 12-0 #3 team being left out in my opinion.
  • Tobias Fünke
    The eight-team format works the best. But you cannot scrap the bowls and would have to incorporate them into the playoff as well as stand-alone bowl games like usual.

    You'd take the champions of the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC, Pac-12 and 3 at-large bids (yes, the Big East loses their spot).

    1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4v5 - round 1
    1v4, 2v3 - round 2
    1v2 - round 3

    The issue is that you'd have people flying all over the country, and I don't think that works out well. You'd probably have to have the first round be at the higher seed's stadium (i.e. the #5 team plays at the #4 team). But then the second and third round would have to be at the Fiesta or Rose Bowl maybe, no?

    Do you make the national championship rotate between the BCS Bowls, and have the other bowls be relegated to less prestigious games? If the Rose Bowl gets the national championship, the Fiesta Bowl probably wouldn't host a semi game, but it'd get some 2nd-place Big Ten vs 3rd-place ACC. Not as cool.