Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Tennessean)   BCS to revise formula, utilizing a cutting-edge technology called "polls"   ( divider line 102
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

7460 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 May 2004 at 12:24 PM (11 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

102 Comments   (+0 »)

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
2004-05-12 10:33:32 AM  
Holy crap. No SOS, Quality Wins or losses? WTF?

BCS = Joke
2004-05-12 10:42:08 AM  
SOS is calculated in a horrible manner (2/3 based on record of the opponents of a team, and 1/3 based on record of their opponents). It should NOT have been part of the BCS formula, as it was also taken into account with the polls. Same goes for quality wins and losses.

Fact is: The polls have had it right EVERY TIME (the 2000 season is the only argument... we needed a playoff that year) since the BCS began. The BCS, however, has been wrong in 2000, 2001, and 2003.
2004-05-12 10:48:54 AM  
Oh, wait, the computer polls are still part of the BCS.

Perfect. Has anyone checked out the standings during the year in some of these computer polls? The majority of them seem to be regionally biased.
2004-05-12 11:10:48 AM  
The BCS was not conceived to give a true champion, anyway. It was designed to create hype and to make more money for the NCAA, networks and the big football schools.

Money is the only reason there is no D-I playoff. The commissioners and bowl officials don't want to give up their power and influence.

I say the time for a limited playoff has come.
2004-05-12 11:34:27 AM  
The BCS has done nothing more than cause more problems than it has to solve them. There was always a chance of split "national titles" under the pure poll system, and it still happened with the BCS, and the big conferences will never agree to a playoff system. Unlike other NCAA sports, there is no "national champion" in D-I football officially sanctioned by the NCAA. It's a media/marketing creation and nothing more. It's done to sell merchandise and ads. Don't get me wrong. I love college football, but the BCS is just a load of garbage.
2004-05-12 11:44:01 AM  
A 16-week playoff could be started the first week of December (I believe all conference championships are done by then), and could end with a traditional Jan. 1 bowl game. Rotate the big bowls (Rose, Fiesta, etc.) through the championship games and semifinals.

If it's all about money, one would think they could take in a LOT more this way. Hell, if it were expanded to 32 teams, you would have to come up with 31 bowl games, more than we currently have.
2004-05-12 12:23:53 PM  
What a bunch of dumbasses.

I don't see how a playoff system hurts anyone in terms of money. Take the top 8 or 16 teams. Call each game a different bowl, sponsored by a different company, etc.

1st Round, 16 seed vs. 1 seed would be something like the GMAC Bowl... all the way to the championship... which could alternate being the Rose Bowl, Fiesta, Sugar, etc.

Then every game has meaning. Right now the GMAC Bowl, Bowl or whatever are meaningless.

Polls are all politics, and trying to compare stats are meaningless when no one plays each other.

I don't understand how there is an argument against this?

The lesser bowls would see top-ranked teams fighting against an upset. The top bowls would have true, undisputed championships.
2004-05-12 12:27:40 PM  
My biggest problem with polls is that worthless pre-season rankings have a big factor in end of the year rankings.
2004-05-12 12:28:56 PM  
The NCAA can't have a football tournament because it'd cut into class schedules.

Clearly, they are only concerned about the poor kids and their education. Clearly.

2004-05-12 12:29:00 PM  
playoffs never work for anyone. just look at college basketball.

2004-05-12 12:29:24 PM  
The BCS has been BS. It's a huge money grab for the bowls, TV, and the NCAA. The BCS never "Guaranteed" anything more than having the Number 1 and 2 teams play each other. And it can't even do that right. In many ways the old system that guaranteed traditional confrence matchups worked better, and all the games were played on New Years Day. We know that isn't gong to happen. So it's past time for some sort of playoff system, be it 16, 8, or even 4 teams. It won't be perfect, logistics may be a nightmare, the big bowls will scream to high heaven, but it's time.
2004-05-12 12:29:43 PM  
I'm an LSU fan, I think LSU unquestionably should've been in the national championship; but I think USC should've been too.

You'll never have a system that dispenses with subjectivity.
2004-05-12 12:30:13 PM  

Face it, Major College sports are nothing but a farm system for the big leagues. Pay the players (yes I know they get scholarships: what percentage of players actually gratuate ?), and have a true football playoff system, like NCAA basketball.

Really, the schools, Vegas books, illegal bookies, bettors, ect. all make money. Why not the players as well ?

2004-05-12 12:30:52 PM  
I really don't care. All I know is Duke sucks.
2004-05-12 12:32:52 PM  
Great. We get another BYU national championship for routing the WAC?
2004-05-12 12:35:59 PM  

"I'm an LSU fan, I think LSU unquestionably should've been in the national championship; but I think USC should've been too."

I'm a USC fan and I agree. Would have been a much better game than seeing a soft OU team getting punked by you guys.
2004-05-12 12:36:52 PM  
I call shenanigans. I mean, who really cares if you lose games or if you beat a bunch of crappy teams or if you beat all of the top teams. Opinions are much more important.
2004-05-12 12:37:19 PM  
Well, I guess here we go, back to having actual bias in ranking instead of merely perceived bias.

I can't hardly wait for another split in the poll #1.
2004-05-12 12:39:22 PM  
Here Ye, Here Ye,,, off w/ the BCS' head.
Playoffs would rule,, but this is a start, or a regression to the past,, or whatever.
2004-05-12 12:39:40 PM  
The computers were the reason for last year's debacle, but they're going to stay. Makes sense, doesn't it?
2004-05-12 12:40:07 PM  
The BCS is the biggest fraud ever perpetrated against sports fans. I've never met a single person who likes it, so how it has remained in place is utterly beyond me. It has nothing to do with reality and everything to do with grabbing as much money as possible for four bowls.

And while I'm at it, the Seattle Times poll can suck my cock. At least try to make it look like you're not regionally biased. You're nothing but a bunch of whores for the PAC 10.
2004-05-12 12:42:06 PM  
I think its great that the British Computer Society is changing its policy toward Poles. Since breaking from the influence of the USSR they have had a long road to catch up to technology used by the rest of the world. Yeah Brits!
2004-05-12 12:42:34 PM  
Thanks, no_fotis. With the clicheless headline, I was perpelxed that Duke now somehow "ruled".

carry on.
2004-05-12 12:43:02 PM  
SOS may have calculated wrong, but I think that it definatly had a place. Otherwise, we're gonna have the TCUs of college football claming that they're fantastic because they're undefeated.
2004-05-12 12:44:47 PM  
College football: bleah

BCS: moronic

Just a popularity contest mixed in with a set of attempted objective opinions. Too many teams and too many games for any sportswriter to have sufficient context to perform rankings. Exposure correlates to rank.
2004-05-12 12:47:37 PM  
Re: 2004-05-12 12:43:02 PM kieran57

Adding SOS was a bit redundant, since all of the mathematical rankings utilize it, but redundancy in this case can be a good thing, since it shakes out a little bit more discernment between rankings.

Problem is, if you make one thing redundant, it gets an unfair weight, and combined with the poor SOS calculation method, it probably should have been dropped in its current form.
2004-05-12 12:49:42 PM  
BCS commissioner Tranghese made a good point that I as well realized. The problem with the ESPN and AP poll is that the preseason polls, based on absolutely no games played whatsoever, has too much influence. What I mean is this: Say we take annual powerhouse Michigan and my team, West Virginia. Michigan would be ranked around #10 in the preseason polls and West Virginia would usually not be in the top25(let's say they are #40). Then, let's say WVU plays Wisconsin and Penn State in Week 1 and 2 while Mich plays Penn State then Wisconsin in Weeks 1 and 2. If Michigan wins one of those games (and then moves 1 spot up in the polls) and then loses the second(and moves 3 spots down), Mich ends up being ranked #12th. If WVU wins both those games, on the other hand, it will move up in the polls about 3 spots for each win and thus be ranked #34. Michigan gets to hover at the top of the rankings despite a poor performance while WVU hovers at the bottom despite a good performance. As you can see, it is extremely unfair. What I am basically saying is that the Coaches and AP are rewarding potential to be good in the preseason rather than rewarding actually being good. Barring a miraculous win/loss streak that shocks then nation, a team is basically locked into the position where they were assigned in the preseason and can only deviate up or down in the polls from that position very little. Finally, whoever said computer polls were regionally biased is an idiot. Their objectivity is their main purpose. A computer polls use the same formula applied to every team in the country to make their rankings.
2004-05-12 12:50:00 PM  
Fact is: The polls have had it right EVERY TIME (the 2000 season is the only argument... we needed a playoff that year) since the BCS began. The BCS, however, has been wrong in 2000, 2001, and 2003.

How do you know the polls have been 'right?' I think the BCS is right more often than the polls. The BCS factors out inherent biases such as big conference teams, the 'last loss' rule, and such. The media's pissed at the BCS simply because it does not take into account the human biases, and simply figures which team has played the best against the best opponents. I'd prefer computers over human pollsters.
2004-05-12 12:52:16 PM  
The new Bowl Championship Series formula, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has learned, will have just three equal parts: the Associated Press poll of sportswriters and broadcasters, the ESPN/USA Today coaches poll and the average of seven computer polls.

That sounds like nine parts to me, none of which are "equal".
2004-05-12 12:53:30 PM  
The government is in peoples lives anyway in every aspectsocial security, taxes. If its going to make a person better off by offering them services, then I support it. I believe that marriage is very important. I believe it is very much needed in the community. You want to be a good example for your children. You can have a family with a boyfriend and kids, but its a more solid foundation with a married couple. Marriage respects the values of God as well as the values of community.
2004-05-12 12:54:56 PM  
2 out of 3 people polled want to ban all Florida teams from competing
2004-05-12 12:55:16 PM  
here is a solution to College Football, and why it wont work:
Determine the top 64 teams in the NCAA, based on tradition, and divide the teams into 8 conferences based on regions. Each conference has two divisions.
A team plays their division team once a year (3 games) plus two teams from the other division in the same conf (2 games). Then they have to play 4 teams from other conferences (4 games) and have one freebie (1 game). Every team has a ten game record and they can pay more than that, but those games will not count to the standings. All Division winners go the tournment (16 teams) that starts on weekend following thanksgiving. The tournament ends on the first of January. With the winning teams advancing. There are two games that end the season. The game for no. 1 and no 3.
Why it wont work? Too much like the NFL, against the Tradition of College Football, no constrovesy regarding the winner (sports writer have no subjects to write about), the Commissioner of the current conferences will never sign off, etc.
2004-05-12 12:55:52 PM  
Having 3 undefeated or 1-loss teams like last year at the end of the season will always be a problem. If the BCS took USC and LSU, then most of the LSU supporters would shutup but then theres the OU supporters. A playoff system would solve this, but I do not think it is feasible. If you notice at games, each half of the audience cheers for their respective teams while a very small portion is general interest fans who live in the city where the bowl is. They pay ALOT of money for tickets, food, loding, travel, etc. Do you expect these people to follow their team across the country for 5 weeks during a 16team playoff? This would result in first round games have basically no people just like the NCAA tournament. People are just waiting for their team to go deep in the tournament before they attend a game. The bowl comssioners aren't idiots. They have spent hundreds of thousands with economists, advisors, etc looking at the $$$ involved in a playoff while we just speculate on it. Obviously, it would seem that the current system is better for them.
2004-05-12 12:58:08 PM  
Why polling sucks:

1994 - Nebraska #1 Penn State #2 (Penn State would've won, but these were both good teams)
1997 - Nebraska #1 Michigan #1 (Nebraska would've killed them)
2004-05-12 12:58:14 PM  
In other news, the BCS announced they would be buying time on the new Oak Ridge National Labratory supercomputer to develop a "fair" ranking system. ter_2
2004-05-12 12:58:43 PM  
Go Mounties, davidshi123! Morgantown representin'...and actually, they've been ranked around 14th in most preseason polls I've seen.

I think 16 teams is too much. Why not take the top 4 and have two rounds? First one the week before X-mas, championship on New Year's Day or thereabouts. You never see a team finish outside of the top 4 that really deserves a shot, anyway. 3rd, all the time, maybe 4th. That gives you three big-time bowl games to rotate between Sugar, Rose, Fiesta, etc. We can still have all the other Weedeater and Toilet Bowls.
2004-05-12 12:59:39 PM  
say it with me people:


the BCS can burn in hell. until this is decided on the FIELD (what a novel concept, actually beating a team to win, instead of relying on computers and voters), they can change the formula all the want, it will still be bogus.
2004-05-12 01:00:10 PM  
My biggest problem with polls is that worthless pre-season rankings have a big factor in end of the year rankings.

Quoted for truth. There should be no polls until at least week five or six. The preseason polls create a lot of frauds and leave a lot of deserving teams out.

The computer polls are pretty bad too. Last year the Sagarin poll had Miami of Ohio ranked Top 5 and even Top 3 towards the end of the year.

I love watching the NCAA try and pimp the "cuts into class time argument" about a playoff. Never mind that (a) every other division of football has a playoff, and those kids NEED to graduate--you're lucky to see one guy a year from 1-AA and lower make an NFL team and (b) the basketball playoffs are far more destructive to class time than any football playoff could ever be.
2004-05-12 01:01:57 PM  
this is stupid. SOS absolutely matters. if you think it factors into real polls, you're an idiot. usc didn't play any tough teams last year (wazoo aside) but people still voted them #1. purely subjective. LSU, despite having a couple patsies on the schedule, finsihed with better SOS and had more wins over better teams (two over georgia, ole miss, arkansas) that look way better than the trojans' resume. now if there's a close battle in the polls, one voter tanking a team and dropping them down could cost someone a shot at a title. theoretically it could before, but it's much more likely now. furthermore, singular differences as small as one place on one vote (among 60) can be just as important as an enormous seven-spot gap in any given computer poll. stupid stupid stupid
2004-05-12 01:03:23 PM  
OK I'll say it...keep the BCS system as is, play all the bowl games like regular, then play one more game for the national championship between top 2 teams after the bowl games as determined by the BCS. It is just so simple, it might work


2004-05-12 01:04:05 PM  
As flaky as college football "experts" are, who's to say that this new system is better? (A) Sportswriter are prone to having regional biases, whether or not they should or would admit to it, and (B) most of the coaches don't even vote for the Coaches's usually the SID of the athletic department. So now the majority of the BCS formula is inherently flawed. Every week it seems that some team is the new "it" teams, while others are dumped on the whole season in spite of how they perform on Saturday. I think that objectivity is key in deciding who plays for a national championship, and at this point, the "system" seems to be moving in the direction of subjectivity. At least last year, at worst the result could be a split national championship, but I still think the system got the right teams in the game. OU may have lost in conference championship, but at least they lost to a good team...USC lost to an unranked and unimpressive Cal.
2004-05-12 01:05:19 PM  

I never understood the logic to not settling it on the field either. It would make sense. It takes a month to play all the damn meaningless bowl games anyways, so why not spend that time doing things like every other God damned sport?
2004-05-12 01:06:22 PM  

SOS is calculated in a horrible manner (2/3 based on record of the opponents of a team, and 1/3 based on record of their opponents). It should NOT have been part of the BCS formula, as it was also taken into account with the polls. Same goes for quality wins and losses.

Ok, I'll grant you the point about SOS, but how can anyone make the case against QW and losses?

This will hit the fan when the a team with 0-1 losses is left out of the NC in favor of a team with 1-2 losses.

QW was a nice bonus, and if your opponents truly suck, you lose the QW as they fall in the polls.
2004-05-12 01:07:26 PM  
ok farks before igniting any flame wars go check this out

I think those Tennesean folks just aren't in the loop...

because from the tone of this article it sounds like they are leaning towards a +1 format not a poll average or whatever non-sense they are puking up in Tenn
2004-05-12 01:09:02 PM  

not to mention the assinine claim by college coaches that a playoff would hurt the players in their STUDIES(?!?!?!?!?!).


i guess division 2 coaches and admins just don't give a fark about student-athletes...
2004-05-12 01:10:56 PM  

The answer to your question lies in the Tostitos, Taco Bell, Pace Picante Fiesta Bowl. Money talks and the NCAA think tank doesn't want to crimp, the sponsorship, TV cash cow that they've created. I don't blame them - just add one more game.

/my 2 cents

2004-05-12 01:13:36 PM  
2004-05-12 12:54:56 PM typosaurus

I don't think that UF poses that much of a threat anymore.

/stopped buying season tickets after Spurrier left.
2004-05-12 01:15:48 PM  

Why 2000 in particular?
2004-05-12 01:19:20 PM  
My vote goes to a playoff system. That way you know the best teams will make it to the championship. Just try to name another sport that names their champion by who the columnists say is best?

And one more thing...War Damn Eagle!!
2004-05-12 01:26:22 PM  
I hope next year there are 10 2-loss teams, all with claims to the National Championship, just to screw up the BCS again.

Then maybe we'll get a playoff. (but I doubt it).
Displayed 50 of 102 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter

In Other Media

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.