"It’s time to be honest about the BCS:" by Tony Barnhart

But when the Big 12 coaches got together Thursday in Phoenix, they voted (by a majority of at least seven) to keep the same system in place. Go figure.

http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2009/05/08/big-12-coaches-vote-to-keep-old-tiebreaking-guidelines/

I’m sure a selector SOMEWHERE said they were #1. That’s not really the same thing as winning the Crystal Football, though, is it?

I’ll volunteer to be a voter on the first poll officially recognized by the BCS where the voters have time to watch every game. I will dutifully watch EVERY SINGLE college football game that is played each week, and along with my fellow voters we will rank teams based on true performance instead of cold box scores and game notes by beat reporters. My guess is people will still find something to complain about, but I’ll be making 100 grand a year to do nothing but watch football! My kind of life! (Don’t tell anyone, but I’d even do it for 60 grand a year…)

Its not so much the BCS which is wrong…its the polls….but how do you get around it? The polls are designed to figure out who’s #1- whatever..(You are very correct in saying that most coaches and media just rank teams of the ESPN highlight reel).The BCS was created to use computers to take out the human element and make an unbiased #1 and #2…the problem is..the BCS still uses human polls in its equation.

I guess what im saying is this..If we have a playoff, we would still use the polls (which we admit are flawed) in determining who gets the playoff spots. So you would still have bitching and complaining….There is no way we can go to the NCAA Basketball format which has a selection committee or the Baseball format cause its just too damn long..so what we are left with is the BCS or some variation to it.

Like it or not, the BCS is here to stay. And i believe it will end up being the source for picking who gets into the playoffs…

Why? Why does this always delve down to PAC 10 thing?

Gimme a break bammer, in your own words. . .“you’re better than that”!

. . . . .I heart you. You are my hero. Today.

When talking about what SHOULD be done, limiting oneself to what another party is LIKELY to do is fallacious

I’m not talking about what should be done. When I said “let’s be realistic”, that was your hint that I was talking about what was likely, if anything, to be done. It’s obvious what should be done, but $$$ is putting a halt to that.

No. The only team that would have benefited from the change you described is Auburn. Which means your change was not nearly sufficient to solve the problems posed by the BCS.

Right, and the change I described is the only realistic one. You said a change needed to be made, I presented the only change that would REALISTICALLY happen, and stated the only deviation in history given said REALISTIC change.

How? Who is going to play them? What incentive does a major conference school have to play a mid-major on a hot streak? Zero. None. There’s a disincentive, actually: if you lose that game, you’re screwed. Utah can’t just go and pick four schools and force them to put the Utes on the schedule. Utah won every game they played last year, what else could they have done?

That’s no one’s problem but their own, I’m just stating what they’d have to do in order to get to the top. Until we get a 16+ team playoff, mid majors will have to overcompensate for their lack of a viable conference schedule with a hell of a non-conf schedule if you ever want to see a BYU national champion again.
Oh, and Utah won every game on their schedule. Fan F-in Tastic. They ran their 56th ranked gauntlet unscathed. Crown them the damn champions for having a schedule strength better than only half of the rest of college football. I guess any team that can fly through a schedule which touts a combined opponents’ record of 66-71 (among I-A teams) should make it to the championship game, right?
And Bammer is right in one respect: in the past 5 years of BCS football, just as many mid majors have made it to the major 4 bowls as they did from 30 year prior.
All this to say: I don’t like the BCS at all, but it’s what we’ve got. The low major conferences love it because they get what’s left over when the BCS dumps its account in April (since it’s a non profit organization) to the tune of about $5 mil per year. What happens to the Sun Belt if we go to a playoff? They get $350,000 for their one bowl allotment. You think they’re going to vote the BCS out anytime soon? Same for Conf USA. It’s not going anywhere anytime soon, and as far as playoffs, as much as I’d love to see it, it’s not going to happen. There’s too much money involved.

Utah won every game they played last year, what else could they have done?

Very true and there isn’t much more than can do…but its not the BCS’s fault. Well kinda. It sucks for them but even in the old system they wouldn’t have had a shot. Is that right? Nope..but the fact that they played in the Sugar Bowl is a huge step. Now, if they follow up this season with another 12-0 or 11-1 and win their conference, there is no way they get left out. No way..

The way to a championship in college football is consistency. A team like Utah (that can’t play the "big boys’’ ) has to put up “back to back (or even another back)” winning seasons to get a legit shot. Its true that teams from “BCS” conferences get the benefit of the doubt but that came from playing 50 to 75+ years of major college football…I will say that some teams from the Big East are a complete joke and shouldn’t be given this “benefit” but thats a different argument..

I looked Utah up on Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Utes_football

What i found interesting is this:

# 1 History

    * 1.1 Beginning of Utah football: 1892–1924
    * 1.2 1925–1949: Ike Armstrong era
    * 1.3 Fifties and Sixties: Mediocrity
    * 1.4 Seventies and Eighties: The Dark Years
     1.5 1990–2002: Ron McBride rebuilding
     1.6 2003–2005: Urban Meyer years
    * 1.7 2005–Present: Kyle Whittingham

Even though they have been playing football since the freakin 1800’s, the Fifties, Sixties, Seventies, Eighties and Nineties would either be described as “the Dark Years” or “Rebuilding”..Thats a freakin long time…..It wasn’t until 2003 when Urban Myer made them legit and really it wasn’t until 2004 when we all started paying attention…

So
2002 5-6 ehhh not so good
2003 10-2 very nice
2004 they went 12-0 Great!
2005 they went 7-5 while playing a very weak schedule
2006 8-5 with another weak schedule
2007 9-4 a little harder schedule
2008 12-0 with the hardest schedule to date..

If a Mid Major wants to put a wrench in the BCS, they can’t have a losing season then have two really good seasons, then follow that up with 3 mediocre seasons (9-4 is great but not good enough)…Again, other teams from BCS conferences might be able to but not Utah, TCU, BYU, or Boise St. And i think this is their and seems like your biggest gripe but it is what it is.It sucks..but i didn’t hear them complaining when they were in the "Dark Years:..

I think an eight team playoff is our best option. The “BCS” the name, isn’t going anywhere. ITs a money making machine and there is too much invested to just throw it away. At least to the powers that be.

So the only way to keep the BCS, give us a playoff, and keep our current bowl system for the ones who don’t make the playoff is an 8 team playoff. It’s a win win. The precious mid majors get their shot and their are no conference tie in’s..So they can’t complain about some silly “anit-trust” claim.

 I also like the fact that it keeps the same intensity of the regular season. I never want to see college football change from the fact that you have actually be like…good…to get a chance to play for the NC. I don’t want to see some 4 loss team get a shot just cause the snuck into their conference CG and won.

BUT…we’ve pretty much had the bowl system or BCS for like 10000 years….i hate to see that change cuase its so unique but change will come…

You’re “overly invested”.

Breathe. Kiss your girlfriend/wife. Do something else, other than think football. For a change.

ZING!

it was pretty epic..most of this happened in about an hour…when NLS got involved shit got serious.

was read or even hinted at by you man.

I respect the opinions of Alabama fans and all thoughtful commentary, even the fun stuff that picks on my team, is welcome.

Utah’s schedule will be tougher than last year’s. Both TCU and BYU we play at their place and both are picked to be better than us. Oregon should be very good, and Utah Stae, San Jose, Wyoming, SDSU, UNLV and New Mexico all look to be improved next year according to everything I’ve seen about them. In fact. San Jose State’s Dick Tomey is trying to build himself a little program. They’ve gone from joke to much tougher. Still get creamed occasionally, but hanging far tougher each year.

The teams I mentioned might not win a ton more games, but apparently talent and coaching wise all have upgraded so they should simply be better.

Louisville is a wild card, we scheduled a home and home with them when they were tough but they done falled apart.

Pac-10s OOC schedule is insane and no one in the eastern press cares or notices.

Florida has played 18 years without leaving the state for an OOC game—18.

That means something to me, it’s amazing it does not mean something to sportswriters. Saban is doing it right by saying he’ll play anyone in another venue. If he and Pete Carroll dominate dthis sport for a decade, I’d not be surprised.

you almost had me wondering until you said that USC/ Pac-10 doesn’t get respect from the SEC guys…oh yeah..i totally agree with that. I would wager a guess that a majority of SEC fans know little about other conferences outside of those in the south. Guys around here do, but most of your “die hards” don’t. Take my father for example. He played college ball and has followed the sport his entire life. He, could care less about USC, ND, and Utah. Its not that hes not educated about football, its just that he thinks that it all started in the SEC.

YOu will find that attitude in most of your older SEC generations fans..the youngins like me, who are only in our 20’s, are much more interested in the world outside the SEC…at least thats my out look.

If we put up a poll and asked." Are the USC Trojans Overrated" id bet 70% would say yes….hell..if i even say that SC is legit i get reamed…now last year i had yalls back until you lost to OSU…that was an embarrassment and you won’t find me jumping on the USC bandwagon until they prove they won’t lose that ONE game they should easily win.

So to sum up…yes, the Pac-10 doesn’t get much respect around the south. Some deserved..but a lot is due to that whole “tradition” thing i talked about….cause you know…Here in the SEC..we love us some Tradition…

And I believe both bammer and you have great points. “and by winning and playing nationally. Utah has to do the same. Utah has to go and play in venues where frankly, they are at a severe disadvantage. . .”

Do I believe the PAC 10 disrespect is warranted. Hell yah, I do. Until the PAC 10 teams win away and not cheat their way to winning at home against top-flight opponents- they deserve all the hate that comes their way. It’s a total two-way street. USC losing to fUcla, Stanford, and OSU in consecutive years is just nuts- and we don’t deserve to be in the same “name-recognition” of say- a SEC team that loses once in their season. NOT AT ALL!

adapt, flee, do nothing.

only one of those things will get Utah in a position to play fo rthe national title, and they are doing it. it really is too bad michigan sucked so bad last year. utah needs to keep up what they’re doing. not to be flippant, but thats what martin luther king and ghandi did. forced the system to destroy itself, by solemnly absorbing the wrongs inflicted upon them by the system, the unfairness and inherent cruelty used by the system was exposed to the world.

about it being “last years news”…its true in the sense we can’t change it…but what Utah did LAST year is huge in determining their success this year. perhaps not in W’s and L’s but their chance to win NC.