Comments on: Time to End the BCS

By: SportsBlog

SportsBlog — Tue, 04 Jan 2005 14:08:51 +0000

Auburn Tigers Go 13-0
Sugar Bowl: Auburn 16, Virginia Tech 13 No national championship, but a terrific season for the Auburn Tigers. Update (1-4): Tigers Lobbying for National Title The roar echoed through the brick walls in the basement of the Superdome without any...

By: bryan

bryan — Wed, 08 Dec 2004 20:28:57 +0000

The thing that bothers me about the BCS is the total lack of concern with the BCS members for the people who pay their paychecks - the fans of the teams - for anything approaching a sensible playoff system. For instance, Denise mentions that the playoff only works in college basketball because they can play two games a week, but the playoff system also works in Div. I-AA, II, and III college FOOTBALL! In short, it's not that these poor, struggling student athletes can't handle an additional three games (try cutting out the first two games of St. Mary's Prep. School for the Blind and South Carolina College for the Differently Abled). It's that the fat cats in college football have people hoodwinked with their "tradition" of bowl games that don't mean anything, don't make any money, but hey, they give Tommy Bowden a chance to keep his job at Clemson despite going 6-5, 7-4 every year.

By: Beth of MVRWC

Beth of MVRWC — Wed, 08 Dec 2004 17:42:23 +0000

Yeah. Roll Tide! (Well, maybe next year.)

Other than that, I don't even care. Like skillzy said, "Yes, the BCS is dumb, but people only care when it affects their team."

Besides, I hate Auburn.

By: denise

denise — Tue, 07 Dec 2004 20:44:54 +0000

I never thought the BCS system would work, and I am glad to be proved right. When Nebraska and Michigan split the "championship" in 1998,* everyone said that it wasn't going to be a problem after that because there would be a championship game. I knew it was BS all along. 4-team play-off, 8-team playoff, it's never going to come out right on a consistent basis. Give up. Quit worrying about who is the national champion and just enjoy the game.

The only reason it works in basketball is because teams can play 2 games a week (so they can havea 64+ team tournament in 3 weeks), and they play enough games in the regular season to make a meaningful evaluation.

And Melvin is wrong about the number 5 team. That's the equivalent of a No. 2 seed in the NCAA basketball tournament. In 6 of the last 10 years, a 1-seed did win the championship, but in 4 of 10, it went to a lower seeded team. In 2 of the last 10, it was a number 2 seed; once it was a 3, and once it was a 4.

*Michigan was the rightful champion that year and the only reason Neb. won in the coaches' poll was because Tom Osborn made a well-timed retirement announcement to gain sympathy. I favor going back to the old system, but I would institute a rule that retirements cannot be announced right before final polls come out.

By: bryan

bryan — Tue, 07 Dec 2004 17:56:26 +0000

I wouldn't be surprised to see John Walters' name on some checks in the BCS offices the way he's been defending the system. This is the same guy who said ND was right to fire Willingham. In short, the sports equivalent of Walter Duranty.

By: melvin toast

melvin toast — Tue, 07 Dec 2004 16:35:35 +0000

There is always controversy no matter what you do but in sports, controversy is settled by what happens on the field, not by polls and computers.

A 2 round playoff would give the top 4 teams a chance at the national title. That still means that either Cal or Texas would get left out and Utah who is undefeated would get left out.
But you're no longer arguing over who's number one or two. You're arguing over who's number 4. And number 4 teams generally aren't national champions.

By: skillzy

skillzy — Tue, 07 Dec 2004 16:33:03 +0000

Aw, shucks, I have to settle for an undefeated season and 4 nights in New Orleans, including New Year's Eve. Woe is me!

Yes, the BCS is dumb, but people only care when it affects their team.