a sports thing

[Wolverine]

Isn't the winner of the #1 and #2 given the BCS title automatically?

No. The participants in the ESPN/USA Today Coaches' poll have an agreement to vote the winner of the BCS title game #1 in their final poll. The sportswriters that comprise the AP poll are under no such obligation.

This year it's very possible for the AP to vote USC #1 at the end of the season. There's even an outside chance they could vote Michigan #1.

This marks the third time (with the highest probability coming this season) since the inception of the BCS that there's been a possibility of a split national championship, which, of course, the system was designed to avoid.

Doh.

 

[Tmy]

"6 teams from the Big Ten will make the NCAA tournament. 6 Teams from the Pac Ten. 6 teams from the ACC. But the MEAC regular season champion will not make the tournament if they lose in the conference tournament."

**Thats not true. Its not like the Pac 10, or ACC orr whatever has 6 guaranteed spots. THey have 1 spot. Other teams make it via at large bids, which depends on who/how they played during the year.



"You win the right games, you win the championship"

So how does that not apply to football?


**You can go undefeated in Football and not make it to the champ game.(as TCU almost did). In basketball you go undefeated you are definately in the tournament.


"Isn't the winner of the #1 and #2 given the BCS title automatically?"

Shouldnt it come down to the formula and not automatics? Thats how they got to # 1+ 2

 

[pgwenthold]

["You win the right games, you win the championship"

So how does that not apply to football?


**You can go undefeated in Football and not make it to the champ game.(as TCU almost did).

But it's not like TCU was not allowed to play in the championship game. The other BCS bowls have overall conference requirements (in addition to at larges), but the championship game is still set for the top two teams, regardless of conference affiliation. You just have to win the right games to get there, which is what TCU did not do...

Now, as for the "non-competitive" aspects of the rest of the BCS bowls, it's no more anti-competitive than it was before when the Rose Bowl took the champs of the Pac 10 and Big 10, the Sugar Bowl always took the SEC champ, and the Big 12 champ always played in the Orange Bowl. Now, if you want to claim that bowls themselves are anti-competitive, it would be a different case, but you can't single out the BCS.

 

[Wolverine]

pgwenthold: Isn't the winner of the #1 and #2 given the BCS title automatically?

Tmy: Shouldnt it come down to the formula and not automatics? Thats how they got to # 1+ 2

Tmy: I hope I'm understanding you clearly; if not, please let me know. The BCS is finished for the season; its last function was to deliver the final BCS rankings, which it did Sunday. There will be no more adjustments to the rankings, nor is the BCS title game winner dependent upon its formula to recieve (at least a share of, in this case) the national title.

The only two remaining rankings to be issued are the final ESPN/USA Today Coaches' Poll and the final Associated Press Poll, which will be published after this year's Sugar Bowl.

 

[pgwenthold]

Shouldnt it come down to the formula and not automatics? Thats how they got to # 1+ 2

Do you want a championship game or not?

The BCS formula finds the two teams to play for the championship. The winner is the BCS champion.

Application of the BCS formula afterward is another way to do it, but not the method they use.

 

[Wolverine]

The BCS formula finds the two teams to play for the championship. The winner is the BCS champion.

Except in this case, where there are technically two championship games being played.

 

[Tmy]

Me, Im a Pac 10 boy. I liked the days of the Big vs Pac Rose Bowl. Is there anything better than watching Michigan getting smacked around on New Years day???

I wouldnt mind a small playoff but the BCS is really no better than the old system. Only now they ruin the Rose Bowl every other year.

 

[Wolverine]

Me, Im a Pac 10 boy. I liked the days of the Big vs Pac Rose Bowl. Is there anything better than watching Michigan getting smacked around on New Years day???

This year, I wouldn't mind getting smacked around by USC if it delivers a split national championship. Careful though, we might be the ones who end up doing the smacking. It just cracks me up that we lost two games and are still not completely ruled out from receiving a share of the title.

I wouldnt mind a small playoff but the BCS is really no better than the old system.

The upside of the BCS is that we're being presented with a couple of great games which wouldn't have been paired off under the previous system. In terms of crowning a national champion though, it has now ultimately been demonstrated as flawed, having failed three of the last four seasons (with this year yielding the worst outcome).

Only now they ruin the Rose Bowl every other year.

Well, technically once every four years; the difficulty was recently compounded by Ohio State's championship season, and the selection order of the remaining BCS bowls last year... but ah what the heck, we'll just say it was all OSU's fault.

 

[Tmy]

The BCS practices Pac10ism! Theres an east coast bias in the polls and this has led to USC getting bummped and the same thing happened to Oregon a couple years ago.


FYI Im a UW fan. USC can go to hell.