BCS Top 15: November 7

[macroboy]

The idea that Pitt of VTech get anywhere near a BCS bowl is doodoo!!

 

[JTrain]

The idea that Pitt of VTech get anywhere near a BCS bowl is doodoo!!

I know a lot of people fell asleep on VT (and the ACC in general) after the JMU loss... but they would be 11-2 and ranked about 10th going into the Orange Bowl. I'd say that's worthy.

 

[Huskertone14]

It's too bad they can't slide us into that Rose Bowl slot left vacant by Oregon(if they remain undefeated and put in the BCS NC game)... That would be awesome going into next season, it would be like a preview of the Big Ten next year. Or play Boise State. They were in the Fiesta against Oklahoma, but I think the Fiesta gets the last bid so they will probably be taken by then...

 

[walksalone]

At this juncture, this whole point is moot anyways.

Who cares who we play, if and when we make it to a BCS game.

We should have beaten UT, and been in top 3.

But, woulda, coulda, shoulda, and so if we play Pitt, we play Pitt. We beat the ever loving hell outta Wannstedt's team, and move on to the Big 10.

 

[JTrain]

(If we win the Big 12) About the only hope of us avoiding the Big East champ would be if the Orange picked Pitt to avoid the VT-Boise rematch, leaving the Fiesta with the choice of Boise/Stanford. Bo vs. Harbaugh would be awesome. We've only played Stanford once (our first bowl game in 1941). But I suppose even then the Orange might grab Stanford, leaving us with Pitt still and Boise screwed.

 

[suh_fan93]

If you absolutely can't handle the idea of playing Pitt or Cuse in the Fiesta, then you'll have to root against us in the CCG (count me out on that one), at which point we could grab an at-large against the ACC champ in the Orange.

It's not a lock that we are going to play Pittsburgh. They still have four games left on their schedule and they are no lock by any stretch to win all four of those. They play West Virginia in two weeks who has an identical record and the last game of the regular season they play a Cincinnati team that lost by 2 points to Oklahoma.

 

[walksalone]

I think the consensus here is that, if we play anybody, and I do mean anybody from the Big East, it's going to be viewed as a let down.

I can understand that. I guess I'm an a$$, but I'd be glad just to have our team make it to a BCS game. At the end of the season last year, many of us would have been competely on board with a BCS berth.

 

[JTrain]

If you absolutely can't handle the idea of playing Pitt or Cuse in the Fiesta, then you'll have to root against us in the CCG (count me out on that one), at which point we could grab an at-large against the ACC champ in the Orange.

It's not a lock that we are going to play Pittsburgh. They still have four games left on their schedule and they are no lock by any stretch to win all four of those. They play West Virginia in two weeks who has an identical record and the last game of the regular season they play a Cincinnati team that lost by 2 points to Oklahoma.

Yeah, as I mentioned, it could be Syracuse or USF. But I assume neither is any more appealing to most of us. Nor any other Big East team that manages to sneak in.

 

[suh_fan93]

I think the consensus here is that, if we play anybody, and I do mean anybody from the Big East, it's going to be viewed as a let down.

I can understand that. I guess I'm an a$$, but I'd be glad just to have our team make it to a BCS game. At the end of the season last year, many of us would have been competely on board with a BCS berth.

For me it's not that I'm not happy with a BCS birth. It's the way it is set up that I cannot stand. Pitt has lost 3 games already this year, were beaten by Notre Dame. ^^ Syracuse or USF... We win out and that is who we would play?

Anytime I hear the words 'BCS' and 'computers' in one sentence I find myself feeling irritated. Also if you're going to go by computer rankings then the five BCS bowl games should be games involving the top ranked teams, not a 1 loss Nebraska team automatically playing the winner of the Big East.

I get tired of having to watch stuff like this happen at the end of every college football season. It is beyond ridiculous to me that this is still the accepted set up to determine who plays who at the end of the year.

 

[JTrain]

I think the consensus here is that, if we play anybody, and I do mean anybody from the Big East, it's going to be viewed as a let down.

I can understand that. I guess I'm an a$$, but I'd be glad just to have our team make it to a BCS game. At the end of the season last year, many of us would have been competely on board with a BCS berth.

For me it's not that I'm not happy with a BCS birth. It's the way it is set up that I cannot stand. Pitt has lost 3 games already this year, were beaten by Notre Dame. ^^ Syracuse or USF... We win out and that is who we would play?

Anytime I hear the words 'BCS' and 'computers' in one sentence I find myself feeling irritated. Also if you're going to go by computer rankings then the five BCS bowl games should be games involving the top ranked teams, not a 1 loss Nebraska team automatically playing the winner of the Big East.

I get tired of having to watch stuff like this happen at the end of every college football season.

The Big East champion playing in a BCS bowl has nothing to do with the computer rankings. It has everything to do with the Big East being part of the BCS agreement.

 

[suh_fan93]

I think the consensus here is that, if we play anybody, and I do mean anybody from the Big East, it's going to be viewed as a let down.

I can understand that. I guess I'm an a$$, but I'd be glad just to have our team make it to a BCS game. At the end of the season last year, many of us would have been competely on board with a BCS berth.

For me it's not that I'm not happy with a BCS birth. It's the way it is set up that I cannot stand. Pitt has lost 3 games already this year, were beaten by Notre Dame. ^^ Syracuse or USF... We win out and that is who we would play?

Anytime I hear the words 'BCS' and 'computers' in one sentence I find myself feeling irritated. Also if you're going to go by computer rankings then the five BCS bowl games should be games involving the top ranked teams, not a 1 loss Nebraska team automatically playing the winner of the Big East.

I get tired of having to watch stuff like this happen at the end of every college football season.

The Big East champion playing in a BCS bowl has nothing to do with the computer rankings. It has everything to do with the Big East being part of the BCS agreement.

I already know that. Key words: BCS agreement....

 

[JTrain]

I think the consensus here is that, if we play anybody, and I do mean anybody from the Big East, it's going to be viewed as a let down.

I can understand that. I guess I'm an a$$, but I'd be glad just to have our team make it to a BCS game. At the end of the season last year, many of us would have been competely on board with a BCS berth.

For me it's not that I'm not happy with a BCS birth. It's the way it is set up that I cannot stand. Pitt has lost 3 games already this year, were beaten by Notre Dame. ^^ Syracuse or USF... We win out and that is who we would play?

Anytime I hear the words 'BCS' and 'computers' in one sentence I find myself feeling irritated. Also if you're going to go by computer rankings then the five BCS bowl games should be games involving the top ranked teams, not a 1 loss Nebraska team automatically playing the winner of the Big East.

I get tired of having to watch stuff like this happen at the end of every college football season.

The Big East champion playing in a BCS bowl has nothing to do with the computer rankings. It has everything to do with the Big East being part of the BCS agreement.

I already know that. Key words: BCS agreement....

Conference affiliations with big bowls have been around long before the BCS ever existed.

 

[suh_fan93]

I think the consensus here is that, if we play anybody, and I do mean anybody from the Big East, it's going to be viewed as a let down.

I can understand that. I guess I'm an a$$, but I'd be glad just to have our team make it to a BCS game. At the end of the season last year, many of us would have been competely on board with a BCS berth.

For me it's not that I'm not happy with a BCS birth. It's the way it is set up that I cannot stand. Pitt has lost 3 games already this year, were beaten by Notre Dame. ^^ Syracuse or USF... We win out and that is who we would play?

Anytime I hear the words 'BCS' and 'computers' in one sentence I find myself feeling irritated. Also if you're going to go by computer rankings then the five BCS bowl games should be games involving the top ranked teams, not a 1 loss Nebraska team automatically playing the winner of the Big East.

I get tired of having to watch stuff like this happen at the end of every college football season.

The Big East champion playing in a BCS bowl has nothing to do with the computer rankings. It has everything to do with the Big East being part of the BCS agreement.

I already know that. Key words: BCS agreement....

Conference affiliations with big bowls have been around long before the BCS ever existed.

Also very aware of this. I'm failing to see how this somehow makes it 'right'.

I said before that my problem is with the set up. We don't have a playoff system in place so we're stuck with undefeated teams being left out of the championship (not getting a chance to prove they can win it all), teams leap frogging other teams with identical records and tougher schedules in the computer determined BCS rankings or teams such as Pitt actually having the opportunity to play in a BCS bowl. It's majorly flawed.

 

[JTrain]

I think the consensus here is that, if we play anybody, and I do mean anybody from the Big East, it's going to be viewed as a let down.

I can understand that. I guess I'm an a$$, but I'd be glad just to have our team make it to a BCS game. At the end of the season last year, many of us would have been competely on board with a BCS berth.

For me it's not that I'm not happy with a BCS birth. It's the way it is set up that I cannot stand. Pitt has lost 3 games already this year, were beaten by Notre Dame. ^^ Syracuse or USF... We win out and that is who we would play?

Anytime I hear the words 'BCS' and 'computers' in one sentence I find myself feeling irritated. Also if you're going to go by computer rankings then the five BCS bowl games should be games involving the top ranked teams, not a 1 loss Nebraska team automatically playing the winner of the Big East.

I get tired of having to watch stuff like this happen at the end of every college football season.

The Big East champion playing in a BCS bowl has nothing to do with the computer rankings. It has everything to do with the Big East being part of the BCS agreement.

I already know that. Key words: BCS agreement....

Conference affiliations with big bowls have been around long before the BCS ever existed.

Also very aware of this. I'm failing to see how this somehow makes it 'right'.

I said before that my problem is with the set up. We don't have a playoff system in place so we're stuck with undefeated teams being left out of the championship (not getting a chance to prove they can win it all) or teams such as Pitt actually having the opportunity to play in a BCS bowl. It's flawed.

Not arguing with you there. Just pointing out that the BCS didn't bring about these issues. Ultimately it's a tough flaw to fix, because the big, traditional conferences bring in the majority of the revenue. The business and politics sides inevitably get in the way of improving the processes.

They could throw in an additional rule, like the champion of each BCS conference must also be in the BCS top 20 to qualify automatically (that would've taken out only three teams since the BCS began, plus the Big East champ this year). But then you have human voters (including Big East coaches) influencing this at the end of the season, and the potential for the rankings to be corrupted. Still, the votes could be monitored closely by a separate committee. (I still think the coaches poll should be removed completely. There's no way these coaches are watching much football on game day, and at best they only have in-depth knowledge of their own conference's teams. Plus there are all kinds of obvious biases.)

Ultimately the Big East may be kicked out of the club unless they manage to add TCU or another high profile team.

Here are some do-able changes that I'd like to see implemented in the next couple years:

1. Tweak the formula to get rid of the Coaches Poll, and allow MOV in the computers again.

2. Add a four-team playoff, with 4 v. 1 and 3 v. 2 the week after the conference title games.

3. Automatic Qualifiers are:

- The six BCS conference champs, IF they finish in the BCS Top 20

- Any remaining teams in the BCS Top 5

 

[suh_fan93]

I think the consensus here is that, if we play anybody, and I do mean anybody from the Big East, it's going to be viewed as a let down.

I can understand that. I guess I'm an a$$, but I'd be glad just to have our team make it to a BCS game. At the end of the season last year, many of us would have been competely on board with a BCS berth.

For me it's not that I'm not happy with a BCS birth. It's the way it is set up that I cannot stand. Pitt has lost 3 games already this year, were beaten by Notre Dame. ^^ Syracuse or USF... We win out and that is who we would play?

Anytime I hear the words 'BCS' and 'computers' in one sentence I find myself feeling irritated. Also if you're going to go by computer rankings then the five BCS bowl games should be games involving the top ranked teams, not a 1 loss Nebraska team automatically playing the winner of the Big East.

I get tired of having to watch stuff like this happen at the end of every college football season.

The Big East champion playing in a BCS bowl has nothing to do with the computer rankings. It has everything to do with the Big East being part of the BCS agreement.

I already know that. Key words: BCS agreement....

Conference affiliations with big bowls have been around long before the BCS ever existed.

Also very aware of this. I'm failing to see how this somehow makes it 'right'.

I said before that my problem is with the set up. We don't have a playoff system in place so we're stuck with undefeated teams being left out of the championship (not getting a chance to prove they can win it all) or teams such as Pitt actually having the opportunity to play in a BCS bowl. It's flawed.

Not arguing with you there. Just pointing out that the BCS didn't bring about these issues. Ultimately it's a tough flaw to fix, because the big, traditional conferences bring in the majority of the revenue. The business and politics sides inevitably get in the way of improving the processes.

They could throw in an additional rule, like the champion of each BCS conference must also be in the BCS top 20 to qualify automatically (that would've taken out only three teams since the BCS began, plus the Big East champ this year). But then you have human voters (including Big East coaches) influencing this at the end of the season, and the potential for the rankings to be corrupted. Still, the votes could be monitored closely by a separate committee. (I still think the coaches poll should be removed completely. There's no way these coaches are watching much football on game day, and at best they only have in-depth knowledge of their own conference's teams. Plus there are all kinds of obvious biases.)

Ultimately the Big East may be kicked out of the club unless they manage to add TCU or another high profile team.

Here are some do-able changes that I'd like to see implemented in the next couple years:

1. Tweak the formula to get rid of the Coaches Poll, and allow MOV in the computers again.

2. Add a four-team playoff, with 4 v. 1 and 3 v. 2 the week after the conference title games.

3. Automatic Qualifiers are:

- The six BCS conference champs, IF they finish in the BCS Top 20

- Any remaining teams in the BCS Top 5

No I know J-train. Not trying to argue with you either. The whole BCS thing is just frustrating to me even if Nebraska isn't in the mix for a championship. Like you I definitely think the current system needs to be modified if their is no true playoff system and that business and politics are getting in the way of that.