Discussion in 'Football, Baseball, and Hockey' started by Darth Tater, Jun 27, 2011.
#13 Michigan gets the Sugar Bowl against #11 VT.
Congrats to all Wolverine fans............
I can't believe MSU gets penalized for a 3-point loss to Wisconsin in the conference championship game and misses a BCS invite while Michigan, who lost to MSU, gets to fly under the radar and go to a BCS bowl.
It's not a good system. Oklahoma State beat more ranked teams and also beat more +.500 teams than Alabama. They also won their conference by playing an extra game, and Alabama gets in. Alabama didn't even play in a conference championship game and finished in 2nd place in their division...yet they go to the championship game. Finally...the computers determined that Oklahoma played in the best conference...better than the SEC... Both teams had only one loss..........
The only thing that Michigan had going for it was a 10-2 record...vs 10-3 for MSU.
Our opponent in the BCS game, Virginia Tech, got clobbered 38-10 in their conference championship game by a 10-3 team...like MSU.
Yet...they got picked for a BCS game and MSU didn't...........
I totally understand all the criticism of the BCS selection process by MSU fans and others...
Lots of 3 team circle losses happened this year though.
For example: UM beat ND. ND beat MSU. MSU beat UM.
There were more of these than any other year it seems like.
If that UM/ ND/ MSU data set was all you had to go on, how would you create a system to fairly rank them?
A playoff would go a long way toward fairness, but the ranking system is still difficult as you mention. The only way to do it that I can think of is totally unrealistic and fraught with many undesirable side-effects. What I'm talking about is having a governing body organize the conferences and scheduling to create parity across the NCAA. A more even playing field allows then for a more even comparison.
It's too big to think of it as a league. 200 teams and only 12 games in a season. Even the big 10 has grown too much for all of the teams to play each other.
It really is a job for computers, but it's a tough one to program and it seems like human rules are forced upon it (for example, we don't like the idea of a 3 loss team being ranked ahead of a 1 loss team, so we force the computer to weigh L's more heavily than it otherwise might in a pure regression analysis).
Pretty much every fan is in favor of a playoff system though, so no need to over think an alternative. If you let 16 teams in, then there will be some bubble teams that get screwed... but the odds of a #16 team beating the #1 team is fairly low anyways (10% or less?). Hold all 15 playoff games in neutral locations and you would have quite a money making scheme!
Problem with a 16 team playoff system is that people would still complain.
This year....UM in, but MSU out...ranked at #17
This guy ranks all the bowls from worst to best:
Boise State got screwed.
Michigan should clobber their opponent, since VT only played teams that were ranked 45th or lower...except for Clemson, who clobbered them twice...the second time in the ACC championship game.
Georgia lost to Boise State, South Carolina, and got clobbered by LSU in their Conference championship game.
They put up a lot of points, but they also surrender 20 points per game. They didn't really beat anybody of signifigance, and I expect State to handle them easily.
I was actually surprised that the Surgar Bowl game was rated that high...
Not shocked at the ranking of the Outback Bowl......
If you want to play with the big boys in the prime post season bowl games, shouldn't you need to lay them and beat them in the regular season?
That would be like Michigan State playing in the MAC, losing one game, not even winning the conference, and playing Georgia as their only REAL opponent all season. Then crying that they deserve to be in the BCS Sugar or Fiesta Bowl.
they have an impressive record over the last decade, going to a Bowl game in each of those years......
From the Boise State team page...........
Boise State has led a bit of a charmed life in the bowl system—until this year. The Broncos were snubbed by the BCS with a Top 10 ranking for the fourth time in eight years and for the first time since 2005 they are disappointed with their bowl situation. They were able to play ranked opponents in non-BCS bowls in 2010 and 2008 and go to Hawaii for a little vacation in 2007. The Broncos finished No. 7 in the BCS this year and watched the Sugar Bowl select No. 11 Virginia Tech and No. 13 Michigan, neither of which had particularly distinguished themselves this year.
Boise State (11-1) will face Arizona State (6-6) in the MAACO Bowl Las Vegas, the same game the Broncos won last year. “It’s disappointing,” interim Athletic Director Curt Apsey said. “I think these seniors deserved a chance and I feel bad for them, I really do. But hey, it’s a system that we live in and sometimes it’s frustrating. … We’re very excited about Vegas and we’re looking forward to the game. We’re going to go down there and hopefully play well.”
The game is a no-win proposition for the Broncos, in terms of their national image and ranking. A win is expected and any struggle against a 6-6 Pac-12 team will be considered a sign of weakness, even though the Sun Devils steamrolled No. 5 USC earlier this year. What should motivate the Broncos is that this is the last game for 21 accomplished seniors who can set a school record by earning the 50th win of their careers. The group is 4-0 vs. current members of the Pac-12—beating Oregon in 2008 and 2009 and Oregon State and Utah in 2010.
Coach Chris Petersen, in fact, is 7-1 against BCS-conference teams. His loss was in 2007 against Washington. That also is the only time in Petersen’s six seasons that the Broncos lost multiple games.
Arizona State should provide a decent test for a team that hasn’t been challenged much this season. Georgia and Air Force hung with the Broncos but never threatened and TCU was able to pull out a 36-35 win in Boise. The rest of the games were blowouts.
1 FG miss away from the National Championship and they are playing Arizona State in the Vance Refridgeration Bowl. The line shouldn't be that fine between glory and shame.
The BCS is obviously flawed. State has gotten screwed by it two years in a row with last season even more heinous than this one.
State was 11-1 at the end of the season, but Wisconsin (also 11-1) goes to the Rose Bowl after MSU handed them their only loss? How the BCS determined Wisconsin was more deserving of the Rose Bowl is a complete mystery. It should be abolished.
How can you say which bowl is best without weighing the payout ?
The mo money the better the bowl.
Although the Las Vegas Bowl has aluminium bench seats at the stadium it the hi-chairs at the blackjack tables that
make the trip fun.
Sounds like Wisconsin is trying to position themselves as Sparty's nemesis.
Sparty is the only reason Wisconsin is not playing for the national Championship.
Wrong Elk breath...They also lost to 6-6 Ohio State.
MSU loses to Wisconsin...Wisconsin loses to OSU...and OSU loses to MSU...
I guess it's like Al Davis used to say...."Just win baby"...........
Yeah, I remembered that a few minutes later but couldn't edit it. Still...I'll bet if they had beat MSU they would have got by Ohio State too. Ahhhh....IF IF IF for the Spartans.
lol. Seems more like the BCS is trying to position Wisconsin as our nemesis.
Separate names with a comma.