Congratulations to LSU. They won the undisputed #1 conference in America, and it's easy to make an argument in support of their right to play for the title.
That having been said, I'd like to point out how the system has failed us again.
Regarding LSU, the Tigers jumped over Georgia, VT, and Kansas to take the #2 spot in both polls this week. In last week's standings, LSU trailed VT. Yesterday, each won their conference title, though I would argue VT's win was more impressive because they overcame a defensive TD by BC, while LSU needed an INT return to take the lead. BC was also ranked higher than Tennessee coming into the games. How does LSU leapfrog up to #2, receiving 11 first place votes in the AP poll, while VT stayed at #5 and #6? What happened? What game did I not watch? VT's #1 in the computer rankings, won their conference, and played a tough game out of conference (LSU, which actually cost them a spot in the championship game). This was a blatant effort by voters to "remedy" the BCS rankings which would have put VT in the championship game. Didn't we implement the BCS to take it out of the voters' hands in the first place? If the voters felt LSU was the better two loss team, why did they fall so far last week? Ridiculous. The voters should be ashamed. Not too long ago, the computers' importance was reduced to 1/3. The voters made it 0 this year. If we can't trust the voters or the computers, what should we do? PLAYOFF. Please, God, playoff...
In an equally terrible move, and one which was fully in the humans' hands, Missouri was left out of the BCS. Missouri beat Kansas, and had a better strength of schedule (26th vs 109th). Missouri was #1 before losing to OU again, a team that KU never had to face. Missouri beat them at a neutral site, and was ranked better prior to the conference championship. Missouri is still ranked higher in the BCS (6th vs. 8th). Why then is KU going to a BCS bowl and while Mizzou is not? Tell me, please. Is there any argument in support of KU? Anything?
The lesson I learned this year, and one that all AD's should learn from, is to play a completely shitty out-of-conference schedule. Ohio St. played a I-AA opponent, two bad MAC teams, and Washington (4-9). USC's 3 non-conference opponents combined for 9 wins this year. Hawaii's schedule is, I believe, dead last in difficulty. Kansas played Directional Michigan, SE La, Toledo, and FIU. KU and Hawaii are arguably in the BCS BECAUSE of their weak schedule. On the other hand, VT scheduled LSU, lost, and lost their shot at the championship as a result. Missouri gained nothing by playing Illinois and Ole Miss this year. This is a terrible message to send to major programs. Everyone gains from high profile out of conference matchups, or at least they should.
Finally, way to go Terps for not getting snubbed by the Emerald Nuts Bowl, and letting GT freeze their nuts off in Boise.
Enjoy 4 matchups between spread offenses and traditional styles in each of the BCS games before the championship.
December 3, 2007
Voters, BCS Blow It Again
Summer is here and there's never been a better time to try your hand at online sports betting. Place your bets on your favorite horse with horse racing or even try your luck with your favorite football team. Enjoying sport is just a click away!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 Responses:
As much as I have tried to stop the madness that is the love for LSU (and Les Miles) and the SEC, I would put LSU in over VaTech. Same record and in head-to-head, it wasn't even close. That game may have been a long time ago, but it still took place this season, so it counts.
As for the Mizzou-Kansas debate, that's a total debacle. Kansas over Missouri makes no sense. Does Kansas travel better than Mizzouri? How would anyone even know?
And the Rose Bowl taking Illinois with the first at-large is absurd, though it helped Michigan.
By the way, I realize I spelled Missouri as Mizzouri. No, I don't know why I did that.
As Ben pointed out (and you mentioned in passing), LSU beat Virginia Tech. If they have the same record, what more do you need to know?
But I agree, Missouri should not have been left out of the BCS; that's not a very nice reward for beating Kansas and losing in the conference championship.
No one was complaining that LSU was ranked below VT last week. What changed? Everyone agrees that VT's win on Saturday was more impressive than LSU's, so why the leapfrog?
No one complained last week because last week's rankings meant squat.
Thank goodness that voters were able to throw out last week's poll and come up with one that made more sense for the BCS title game.
If anyone got screwed, it's Oklahoma or USC, not VaTech.
And if you wanted to be a slave to last week's polls, then UGA would be in the title game.
You might note in my previous post, I said Georgia was who I thought deserved to go, based somewhat on last week's poll. Why do we have a poll every week if it's meaningless?
But it's not meaningless, because everyone knows that if you start high, you are much more likely to finish high. That's why there's been debate about eliminating preseason polls.
Russ (can I call you Russ?):
Georgia has had a fine year. They are going to a BCS game. If there were a playoff, they'd be in it with a shot to win.
As it is, LSU is the SEC champion, with the same record as Georgia. It's too bad LSU and Georgia didn't play each other. If Georgia hadn't gotten smoked by Tennessee, they would have played each other.
You can make a case for tons of teams this year. Fact is, only two get to go. The voters did not "blow" it. Blowing it would be if there was an obvious choice. There wasn't.
You will only be happy when there is a playoff. Personally, I can handle having this system. My first choice is to go back to the pre-BCS era.
As for the polls, there is not a standardized system for moving teams in the polls. If I had known you would be so upset about the shake up in the polls, I would have complained last week about how LSU got screwed. But since they had a week to make it up, it didn't matter.
A better question is why didn't VaTech jump UGA in the polls, if LSU got to. If VaTech were #4 in the human polls, would that have been enough to boost them to #2 in the BCS? I don't know how it works.
I don't remember his name, but ESPN's BCS expert made two good points:
1) The voters didn't really think about last week's poll, because the top two teams controlled their destiny. Even if one lost, OhSU moved up to fill in. In any other business in the world, if there are four contingencies that are possible, even if not likely, you prepare for all four. Sportswriters are lazy, and did not do this. When Mizzou and WVU lost, then they looked hard at 3 through 10 and hand-picked the replacement team.
(11 of them extra-weighting their vote by putting LSU #1. That looks collusive. Good thing mid-Atlantic writers didn't pull the same stunt with VT, or we could have somehow had VT-LSU in the title game and a lot of people looking foolish.)
2) The BCS is ONLY designed to pair the top two teams in the nation. The other four games are only designed to make as much money as possible. The BCS expert explained that the recency of the sting of disappointment greatly affects willingness to travel. Mizzou fans just got stomach-punched (and shown how not-great the team is), plus they just traveled to a championship game. Kansas fans aren't as depressed right now.
Thanks J-Red. #2 answered one of the things I honestly didn't understand. I knew it had to be about travel, but I didn't understand why. That makes sense.
Until he explained that they've shown statistically that recency of loss affects travel, I didn't get it either. With basketball season underway, this football season would seem a pleasant distraction for Kansas, but a possible trampoline to competitiveness for Mizzou. I also assumed Mizzou had more fans.
That's a very good point about recency. Missouri fans are busy mourning their loss of the #1 ranking, while KU is excited that they only lost one game this year. San Antonio is also quite a hike from Columbia.
Answering Ben from earlier, I don't think the choice of LSU was blowing it. I think the manner in which it was done, especially the 11 first place votes, undermined an already weak system. If the voters will go to any length to get the matchup they want, what's the point of having the computers? Just putting LSU #2 and VT #3 would probably have gotten LSU in, and maintained a semblance of respect for the system.
And yes, I desperately want a playoff. There is no legitimate reason why there shouldn't be one. The year Auburn was 12-0 and SEC Champs should have ended the current system once and for all.
FYI, he prefers Rusty.
Russ is fine.
TMQ had a long rant/explanation for the BCS process in today's column. He failed to identify WHY Mizzou was passed over for Kansas in the Orange Bowl, but he did point out that money is the only important motivator.
For the record, I am not sure how big Hawaii's fan base is, but I would think you'd rather have them in Tempe than New Orleans.
Post a Comment