BCS - Essentially got it right?

[4down20]

And you bama fans still ignore the circumstances surrounding that loss.

Excuses is all that is.

 

[4down20]

when quality losses were brought to the table...it was on its way out
we saw utah pound alabama, louisville pound florida...is it really justified to just assume a team deserves another shot because it lost to number one? there's nothing unreasonable about thinking osu could've rolled LSU...or the other way around...who knows? that would have been one of the best nc matchups ever...but the bcs fucked it up

And we saw Iowa St beat OSU, so I guess Iowa St should have been in the national championship game that year.

It's fun living in bizzaro world where losing to a #1 team doesn't mean you deserve another shot, but losing to a team that doesn't even have a winning record means you do.

 

[7Samurai13]

And we saw Iowa St beat OSU, so I guess Iowa St should have been in the national championship game that year.

It's fun living in bizzaro world where losing to a #1 team doesn't mean you deserve another shot, but losing to a team that doesn't even have a winning record means you do.

Well considering Alabama played a schedule that would make Boise State fans shake their heads at how easy it was, that needs to be taken in account. Penn State was the only mediocre OOC game that they played and they were the 5th best team in one of the worst seasons for the Big10. They played a grand total of 4 FBS teams with a record above .500 and lost one of them.

 

[BOTSLAYER]

the biggest problem with the BCS was the human voting, computers are rational non biased voters.

Also the actual voters did not have to disclose their vote? That is horrible and screams collusion.

 

[Codaxx]

And we saw Iowa St beat OSU, so I guess Iowa St should have been in the national championship game that year.

It's fun living in bizzaro world where losing to a #1 team doesn't mean you deserve another shot, but losing to a team that doesn't even have a winning record means you do.

Just weak. Using that logic Michigan gets in over Florida. LSU doesnt get in because of a lose to Kentucky. It is utterly illogical to base an opinion about teams based on 1/12th of their schedule. Again the biggest issue is the lack of precedents. I would be fine if best loss, best win, or SOS were the dominant guideline. My biggest issue is that the reasoning for picking teams is constantly changing.

 

[4down20]

Well considering Alabama played a schedule that would make Boise State fans shake their heads at how easy it was, that needs to be taken in account. Penn State was the only mediocre OOC game that they played and they were the 5th best team in one of the worst seasons for the Big10. They played a grand total of 4 FBS teams with a record above .500 and lost one of them.

That you would classify the schedule as something that would make Boise St fans shake their heads only goes to signify your obvious bias.

OSU had a slightly better SoS than Alabama, and lost to a team that didn't even finish the season with a winning record. The only reason Iowa St even got to go to bowl game was because they beat OSU.

OSU had their chance and blew it against Iowa St. Deal with it.

 

[4down20]

Just weak. Using that logic Michigan gets in over Florida. LSU doesnt get in because of a lose to Kentucky. It is utterly illogical to base an opinion about teams based on 1/12th of their schedule. Again the biggest issue is the lack of precedents. I would be fine if best loss, best win, or SOS were the dominant guideline. My biggest issue is that the reasoning for picking teams is constantly changing.

It's a combination of factors.

 

[romeo212000]

Excuses is all that is.

And what an objective opinion that is.

 

[Codaxx]

It's a combination of factors.

-
Generally it is pure opinion and after that is decided people find the fact to support it. In this case most prior discussions were thrown out. Georgia could not go in, because they didnt win there conference. Florida got in based on SOS and no rematch.

 

[Codaxx]

That you would classify the schedule as something that would make Boise St fans shake their heads only goes to signify your obvious bias.

OSU had a slightly better SoS than Alabama, and lost to a team that didn't even finish the season with a winning record. The only reason Iowa St even got to go to bowl game was because they beat OSU.

OSU had their chance and blew it against Iowa St. Deal with it.

-
i never got that. OSU had a chance to win 12 games and Bama had a chance to win 1 games. Both won 11. I am not sure how OSU blew their chance, considering OSU was judged to have had a harder slate of 12 games by every SOS published.

 

[ckhokie]

We had a thread about this months ago and I posted the teams that would have had a legit argument for the #4 spot every year, and it was a total clusterfuck. There were 3-4 teams every year that could easily contend for the single spot. Much worse IMO than the few times there has been true question about who was #2.

 

[Codaxx]

We had a thread about this months ago and I posted the teams that would have had a legit argument for the #4 spot every year, and it was a total clusterfuck. There were 3-4 teams every year that could easily contend for the single spot. Much worse IMO than the few times there has been true question about who was #2.

-
I dont understand that logic. There is always going to be a a question of the the last team, but the significance of the argument diminishes with every team you allow in a playoff. Lets take it to the extreme. If there was 128 team playoff, you can bet the 4 teams left out would be complaining. Does that really matter?

 

[4down20]

-
i never got that. OSU had a chance to win 12 games and Bama had a chance to win 1 games. Both won 11. I am not sure how OSU blew their chance, considering OSU was judged to have had a harder slate of 12 games by every SOS published.

OSU blew their chance when they lost to a team who didn't even have a winning schedule.

 

[4down20]

-
I dont understand that logic. There is always going to be a a question of the the last team, but the significance of the argument diminishes with every team you allow in a playoff. Lets take it to the extreme. If there was 128 team playoff, you can bet the 4 teams left out would be complaining. Does that really matter?

Oh, until it's an SEC team that makes it in the #4 spot. Then we will be hearing about SEC bias, and all the same stuff we hear now. And when it's your team, it's going to be "BS" and "we need to let more teams in".

It's all predictable.

That's why I just want to add in the extra playoff games as needed. So in 2011 we would have a playoff to include OSU. But in say 2009, it would just be Alabama vs Texas and no playoff. And in 2010, just Auburn vs Oregon and no playoff.

 

[Codaxx]

OSU blew their chance when they lost to a team who didn't even have a winning schedule.

-
They lost when favored, just like Bama. It is pretty simple. OSU had a harder SOS. Basically if OSU played Bama's schedule their expected wins would have been higher. If Bama played OSU's schedule Bama's expected wins would have been lower. That is the math.

 

[ckhokie]

-
I dont understand that logic. There is always going to be a a question of the the last team, but the significance of the argument diminishes with every team you allow in a playoff. Lets take it to the extreme. If there was 128 team playoff, you can bet the 4 teams left out would be complaining. Does that really matter?

I agree that the top 1 and 2 teams are normally easy to pick, but when you go down the line, it really clouds. Leaving certain schools out, missing out on $$, exposure, etc. gets marginally harder and harder to do.

Going the playoff route, I think if you took 8, you would have without a doubt the most deserving schools. Sure you would get some complaint from #9, but they would have a much weaker argument than school #5 who will be left out with the current setup, especially with how negligible the difference between 5,6, & 7 have been historically by the end of the season.

 

[4down20]

-
They lost when favored, just like Bama. It is pretty simple. OSU had a harder SOS. Basically if OSU played Bama's schedule their expected wins would have been higher. If Bama played OSU's schedule Bama's expected wins would have been lower. That is the math.

Dude, the SoS is based on the overall schedule. If both teams are undefeated, then sure the greater SoS by default wins out. But when you start to look at losses, who you lose to actually matters. Saying oh well overall SoS is higher no longer matters in the same way. You have to take "points" away based on the loss, and there is many more points going to be gone from losing to a team with a losing record than against the #1 team in the country.

Pretending like losing to the #1 team and losing to a team that doesn't have a winning record is equal is just ridiculous.

If OSU had went undefeated, they would have been in that game. Bottom line. Both teams lost, and the SMALL advantage OSU had in SoS was negated by a horrible quality loss.

 

[Codaxx]

Dude, the SoS is based on the overall schedule. If both teams are undefeated, then sure the greater SoS by default wins out. But when you start to look at losses, who you lose to actually matters. Saying oh well overall SoS is higher no longer matters in the same way. You have to take "points" away based on the loss, and there is many more points going to be gone from losing to a team with a losing record than against the #1 team in the country.

Pretending like losing to the #1 team and losing to a team that doesn't have a winning record is equal is just ridiculous.

If OSU had went undefeated, they would have been in that game. Bottom line. Both teams lost, and the SMALL advantage OSU had in SoS was negated by a horrible quality loss.

but you are only looking at one side of the coin. You also have to add pts for winning 11 games vs a harder schedule. You can simply deduct for a worse loss. To go to the extreme. Lets say LSU beats TCU, Bama, A&M, Florida, and South Carolina this yr, but lose to Miss State a mediocre MissState. Do you keep them out of the title, because Ohio State played an inferior schedule, but only lost to Michigan?

 

[4down20]

but you are only looking at one side of the coin. You also have to add pts for winning 11 games vs a harder schedule. You can simply deduct for a worse loss. To go to the extreme. Lets say LSU beats TCU, Bama, A&M, Florida, and South Carolina this yr, but lose to Miss State a mediocre MissState. Do you keep them out of the title, because Ohio State played an inferior schedule, but only lost to Michigan?

I am looking at that. I know you hate my rankings, but this is the meat of what my rankings do, and those rankings follow my general philosophy on the topic of ranking teams.

That is just how bad that loss is.

 

[Codaxx]

I am looking at that. I know you hate my rankings, but this is the meat of what my rankings do, and those rankings follow my general philosophy on the topic of ranking teams.

That is just how bad that loss is.

-
I do not know your rankings, so I certainly can not hate them.