I seem to say this every year on this day

'07 Football NCS Football95

Number two-ranked West Virginia just lost to Pitt (just as USC lost to UCLA last year). Number one-ranked Mizzou followed that by losing to Oklahoma.

As I sit here and watch ANOTHER final day of the college football season unfold with unfathomable results, I can only imagine how AWESOME – uh, I mean MEANINGLESS today’s football games would have been if we had that all important “playoff” for which so many fans think that they desperately long.

A little after 11pm ET, ABC’s Brent Musburger and Kirk Herbstreit commented that today could be the “BCS’ worst nightmare” and the system is literally imploding today. Conventional wisdom would agree with them. I do not.

You see, days like today and seasons like this season are exactly WHY college football is so wonderful. If a playoff existed heading into today’s games, then imagine how unimportant and unremarkable today’s events would have been. Heck, West Virginia probably would have played all of their back ups to rest their starters and lost their game with Pitt on purpose. (Why can’t fans ever recognize that behavor is not static when environments experience significant change?

College football continues to prove that every week is a playoff and fans just keep forgetting that if a playoff system existed the regular season wouldn’t be nearly as excited as we have today.

The events of this year is expose the crux of the BCS’ REAL PROBLEM – the selection of the TWO teams to play for the National Championship.

The problem with the BCS is NOT that more teams need an opportunity to play for a national championship after having an entire season to rise to the top of the polls. The problem with the BCS is that they need a more specific, precise and scientific formula for choosing the two teams to square off in the Championship Game.

If the BCS would construct a single, universal, scenario-tested, scientific computer formula then why would you need to select more than two teams after every team in the country has played 12 regular season games?

Contrary to popular opinion, the current system does NOT really utilize a computer program to analyze data to rank the teams. The current system actually uses a computer to sort the heavily weighted rankings of humans along side with various independent computer rankings, some of which are weak and based on misguided weightings of data that create stupdid rankings. The result is a diluted mess whereby the subjective polls outweigh everything and invariably is going to create controversy.

If a single computer program existed to analyze RESULTS from the field – not the subjective opinions of humans – then college football would achieve the kind of CONSISTENT ANALYSIS and OBJECTIVE RANKINGS for which we all want.

Take a look at this discussion about the reality of how “Strength of Schedule” is neglected under today’s current situation. People like to talk about SOS, but the reality is that even a ‘consideration’ of SOS is grossly subjective unless some kind of objective and consistent measurement criteria is applied. If a solid, accurate and UNIVERSAL computer program was used to analyze actual performance on the field and not various subjective human opinions then factors like strength of schedule would really matter than the system could accurately choose the two best teams in the country

I don’t care what teams that other people ‘THINK’ are better than each other. This means NOTHING. If the pundits were actually right about their selections, then the rankings would actually never change. I believe that the actual PERFORMANCE of team’s on the field should be all that matters. If #1 beats #10 by 1 point and #2 beats #10 by 50 points, then #2 has PERFORMED better than #1. It’s not that difficult. But, it doesn’t work that way in today’s world when the #1 could be a ‘loaded’ USC team with 25 first rounders on the roster that everyone knows is the ‘best team’.

Should the National Championship be awarded to the ‘best team’ or the ‘team that has performed the best’?

The construction of the computer formula would not be easy, but it would not be impossible. One current mistake that I would like to see fixed is the impact of WHEN a team loses. If all teams play 12 games per year, why does it matter more that a team just within the last month instead of in the first month? It’s absurd. The ONLY reason this problem currently exists is because of the imperfections of humans. Yet, they are the ones that complain about the rankings. The relative performance as judged by a team’s ENTIRE BODY OF WORK during the season should be criteria for judgement.

Every school, fan and media member in the country would know the criteria and the formula used to rank teams. Records (“Wins”) would obviously still be the driving factor, but strength of schedule, margins of victory (capped at something like 30 points), location of games and other criteria would/could play a major role in the rankings. For example, if a team went undefeated, but played one of the weakest schedules in America then they have nobody to blame but themselves if they can’t achieve a #1 or #2 ranking.

Allow me to give you a hypothetical example to make my point of the problems with the current system and how a computer could fix it –

Consider that Ohio State begins the season ranked #1 in the country and Minnesota begins the season picked last in the Big Ten with no expectations. Consider that it is one of those seasons in the Big 10 where the two teams do not play each other but they play identical Big 10 schedules.

If Ohio State and Minnesota beat each Big Ten team by the identical margin of victory who do you think would be ranked #1 in the country at the end of the year? What if OSU played an embarassing non-conference schedule and Minnesota played a particularly difficult non-conference schedule. Do you think that today’s Einstein-voters would rank Minnesota ahead of OSU who started the season #1? If they PERFORMED identically against the conference schedule, why wouldn’t Minnesota’s PERFORMANCE merit a higher ranking than OSU?

What if Oklahoma also ended the season undefeated and ended the season ranked #2? Minnesota would be more deserving to play OU than OSU yet would be boxed out by today’s ridiculous rankings. If we had a single computer formula there would never be a fear of this playing out and there never COULD be a situation where the more deserving team was discriminated against.

About StateFans

'StateFansNation' is the shared profile used by any/all of the dozen or so authors that contribute to the blog. You may not always agree with us, but you will have little doubt about where we stand on most issues. Please follow us on Twitter and FaceBook

'07 Football NCS Football

95 Responses to I seem to say this every year on this day

  1. chris92heel 12/02/2007 at 10:30 PM #

    College football’s regular season is unparalleled awesomeness.

    College football’s post-season is unparalleled crap. Crap so bad that it leaves a taste in your mouth so bad that you forget how awesome the regular was.

  2. EverettBeez 12/02/2007 at 10:53 PM #

    Isn’t this logic what UNX and Dook used to create the mythical regular season championship in the ACC? Tourny’s don’t reflect the best team over the course of the season – maybe the team that played best for the whole year – but the team that showed up and won that tourny. Which in ACC basketball is THE Champion.
    It would be nice to see it in football too in my opinion. But I doubt we ever will.

  3. Pack92 12/02/2007 at 11:18 PM #

    Hey Chris! WHat going on? I can’t believe it but I agree 100% with ^both your statements. How does the coach for Mizzou even look his players in the eye? Kansa over them? Give me a break!

  4. Primewolf 12/03/2007 at 12:09 AM #

    A formula is not the answer.

    I like sending the 6 power conf champs + 2 at large highest ranked and not from the power conferences.

    8 teams , 3 weekends, 7 games decide the national champ. No one can really complain they were left out. Win your conf and you are in.

    And, yeah, we can still have all the other bowls the way they are.

  5. Ismael 12/03/2007 at 1:43 AM #

    i can’t believe honestly, that people with two good eyes, two good ears and are not laid up comatose in a hospital for the past 10 years can honestly, with a straight-face, with what are perceived to be good answers say that the current state of crowning a national champion in college football is how it “should” be done, and how great the “system” is…maybe you all are the genesis/brain child of internet spam as well, maybe you are all just contrarian by nature, bureaucratic through nurturing, devoid of competetive spirit for some reason…College football bowl games have to be the antithesis and the most anti-climactic garbage ever foisted onto people. Believe me, when the power conferences start losing money because of “parity” and academic standards the presidents of the major universities will (and have already) get a plan in place in record time to do a December-Derangment (ala March Madness and the onamatopeia (sp?)) style of a college football playoff. The whole concept itself is so obvious that only could “the system” prevent it from taking place.

  6. bTHEredterror 12/03/2007 at 2:41 AM #

    64 teams put less (funny that word, that also sounds like a name, came up) emphasis on the entire regular season, less on the conference tournaments, waters it all down, and allows some very mediocre teams with very mediocre schedules to claim some kind of victory by just making an appearance.

    Les(s) Miles might be an argument against a playoff as well, put forth by ADs who love bowl checks.

    I understand what you are saying, and Football is impossible to play on back to back days of course, I wasn’t intending to say we should open the floodgates and teams like Maryland or Georgia Tech should get a shot. This is why the FCS model of 16 teams is perfect, enough teams to provide some madness but not so many that average teams can get in make noise.

    Using the NFL as an example, this does not nullify the regular season. The very nature of football makes this virtually impossible. There are simply too few games to overcome weakness in your team.

    I can even advise the regular season could actually become more interesting. With the computer involvement, a team could be compelled to schedule better. Why bother with Citadel when they could be the reason you are left in the cold. This is not a 35 game basketball schedule, it is a 12 game schedule. Will there be some years with a 7-4 team in the field? Possibly, though they are rare on the FCS level.

    As far as allowing some VERY mediocre teams to claim some sort of victory…..funny, that’s what the bowl system already does.

    Of course there will be the Clemson’s of the basketball world involved, scheduling light for a chance at the post season. But seriously, how’s that working out? Better a tourney to expose such pretenders in the round of 16 rather than a title game blowout.

  7. Packaholic1 12/03/2007 at 9:41 AM #

    So Georgia is the screwee – too bad for them. I hope the outrage allows this pos to be fixed before it affects us similarly.

  8. Astral Rain2 12/03/2007 at 10:21 AM #

    The problem with a 16 game schedule I think is too many games.
    It wouldn’t work in I-A. I-AA it works due to lower attendance and costs, and that they’d be doing home-site games.

    I’d use the 4 Bowls for the Playoffs
    Rose
    Sugar
    Orange
    Fiesta

  9. VaWolf82 12/03/2007 at 10:21 AM #

    UGa didn’t win their conference or even their division. I doubt that this “tragedy” is severe enough to spur any changes.

  10. newt 12/03/2007 at 11:04 AM #

    The problem is the insistence that a so-called “National Champion” must be named.

    No system will ensure that the best team in the nation is awarded the moniker “National Champion.” Fact is, there are several to quite-a-few teams any given year that are pretty much equal and could beat another on any given day.

    The solution is to forget the so-called National Championship and let there be bowl champions. Isn’t winning the Rose Bowl, the Sugar Bowl, the Fiesta Bowl, the Orange Bowl, etc. enough reward for a season well played?

  11. Dr. BadgerPack 12/03/2007 at 12:54 PM #

    Maybe they could just not keep score and give everyone a participation trophy at the end of the year. 🙂

  12. BJD95 12/03/2007 at 1:14 PM #

    Georgia lost 2 SEC games. Tennessee lost 2 SEC games. LSU lost 2 ACC games. because Georgia lost ON THE ROAD against Tennessee, it lost the tiebreaker to play in the SEC title game.

    Georgia is in no way undeserving. They are definitely playing better down the stretch than LSU. There should be a playoff to settle the argument. period.

  13. Ismael 12/03/2007 at 1:18 PM #

    badgerpack, exactly, why play at all, let the sportwriters, otherwise known as “geeks who could never make the team and have it out for elite athletes to begin with” decide. They’ll tell u now they thought that LSU was the best team anyway and that the SEC is the greatest conference since sliced-bread became a conference

  14. VaWolf82 12/03/2007 at 1:20 PM #

    There should be a playoff to settle the argument. period.

    Fix the money and I’m sure that we’ll get one. Until then, I’m equally sure that nothing will change.

    Personally, I just can’t get worked up over Oklahoma, UGA, or USC, getting left out of the title game. They all had a chance to win their way into the game and they didn’t. The can argue that they are “as good as…”, but they cannot say that they are better.

  15. Ismael 12/03/2007 at 1:20 PM #

    Remember the year when the sportwriters had the gall to name co-national champions GaTech (and i forgot who else, maybe Colorado?) and of course they never played each other. That’s got to be might satifsfying to a player to have another team co-national champion and you don’t play them on the field. You might as well have co-national champions with Canadian, Mexican, and European Universities.

  16. Dr. BadgerPack 12/03/2007 at 1:29 PM #

    BJD95– I don’t know whether Georgia was deserving or not (I won’t say they were UNdeserving, and there is a difference)… You could have thrown 3 or 4 (heck, maybe even 5) SEC east schools in a hat, drawn a name and they’d have been a suitable divisional champion.

    Georgia lost an ugly game against SC and didn’t just lose to Tennessee, it was a 35-14 beatdown. I wouldn’t be surprised one bit if Georgia lost a poll spot here and there for the whole “if you don’t get flagged 15 for celebration after your first TD I’m going to run you” incident vs. Florida.

  17. Wulfpack 12/03/2007 at 1:43 PM #

    “Personally, I just can’t get worked up over Oklahoma, UGA, or USC, getting left out of the title game.”

    Again, you are missing the point entirely. The BCS is telling the world that LSU is more desrving than all of these guys. That’s it, end of story, end of debate. No games to decide anyting, just let a bunch of freaking sports writers and computers tell us who can and can’t be the champion. It’s an absolute joke.

    And LSU had plenty of chances as the #1 team in the country to prove it belonged there. but they choked against Kentucky and Arkansas. Georgia lost to Tennesse and S. Carolina. Oklahoma lost to Colorado and Texas Tech. USC lost to Stanford and Oregon. The point you ask? There is no point in debating whose losses are worse or better than the other’s. The point is that we have a freaking computer telling us who is worthy and who is not.

  18. Dr. BadgerPack 12/03/2007 at 1:47 PM #

    ^That would be a computer, programmed by individual(s) with inherent biases as to what makes a team “good”.

  19. noah 12/03/2007 at 5:16 PM #

    “Remember the year when the sportwriters had the gall to name co-national champions GaTech (and i forgot who else, maybe Colorado?) and of course they never played each other.”

    Remember 1997 when the coaches poll gave a co-national championship to Nebraska as a parting gift to Tom Osbourne? And to do so meant that a sizeable portion of coaches had to vote Michigan something like 10th in the final poll to rig the votes for Nebraska? And that was the year Nebraska had the “fifth down” game to Mizzou?

    I’m much more comfortable with the sportswriters poll than the coaches poll.

    And yes, we’ll have a playoff the minute that you can figure out how to make more money on it than you would with the bowls.

  20. VaWolf82 12/03/2007 at 5:30 PM #

    Again, you are missing the point entirely…..just let a bunch of freaking sports writers and computers tell us who can and can’t be the champion. It’s an absolute joke.

    Well let’s discuss who is missing the pont. The current system is alot better than the chaos it repaced and it makes alot of money for the BCS schools….and alot of this money comes from corporate sponsors. Have you ever heard Tostitos, Chick-Fil-A, Fed-Ex, etc say how much they would enjoy sponsoring a play-off?

    Fix the money issue and then you will have something worth talking about. Until then, it’s just so much hot air.

  21. noah 12/03/2007 at 6:41 PM #

    Not just that…how happy are the networks going to be when you tell them you’re getting rid of about 120 hours of ridiculously profitable and inexpensive pre-packaged and unscripted original material and they’ll have to come up with something else to fill that time? In December…when there’s SO much to put on TV.

  22. Texpack 12/03/2007 at 7:18 PM #

    “Remember the year when the sportwriters had the gall to name co-national champions GaTech (and i forgot who else, maybe Colorado?) and of course they never played each other.”

    That was the year that Colorado won the Big 8 on an official’s error which granted them a 5th down that allowed them to score the winning touchdown with less than a minute to go. The Big 8 athletic directors all voted (conspired?) to uphold the result of the game in order to get Colorado a shot at half of the NC.

  23. McPete 12/03/2007 at 7:25 PM #

    “This doesn’t solve the problem at all. If you can’t select the two best teams, then you can’t select the best 4, 8, or 16”

    the point of a playoff would not be to select the best 4, 8, or 16 teams, but to select the best two teams, and widen the net enough for those to be included.

    any resonable person who’s followed this argument the past couple of years would agree that while a playoff would best determine one undisputed national champion, there are some serious financial obstacles to overcome. and a general rule to follow in life is that if change takes power (or money) away from those in control, it won’t happen easily (nor quickly). but dr. king once had a dream, dammit, so there’s hope for a better future – amen.

  24. redfred2 12/03/2007 at 8:20 PM #

    Hey, the good folks over in Chapel Hill all gathered around one day, sewed together a banner, and crowned themselves the national basketball champions dating back to the days when they lighted the gymnasium with torches. So at least it’s not just football, there is a history of clueless people declaring the national championship in other sports too.

1 2 3 4

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. StateFans Nation » Blog Archive » 2007 ACC Bowls - 12/03/2007

    Ki4lF4 zkytlgvbauho, [url=http://dfrctxlklmym.com/]dfrctxlklmym[/url], [link=http://xlrlhdakxili.com/]xlrlhdakxili[/link], http://cruwclfmpdfx.com/

Leave a Reply