First BCS rankings

[Michael_ Gee]

Every year on this site the early BCS rankings spark debate. To me, it's like arguing about who's going to win the 2008 New Hampshire primaries. The rest of the season will resolve 99 percent of the absurdities and points of dispute.
Ohio State and Michigan play each other. USC will play Cal and Notre Dame. There cannot be three undefeated Big East teams by season's end. There will be an SEC conference title game. Knowing all this, why pay the slightest attention to the rankings as they now stand?

 

[Toolbox]

give us something to ***** about :-)

 

[Hammer Pants]

give us something to ***** about :-)

Hell yeah.

 

[farmerjerome]

The first standings show that it's indeed very possible that an Ohio State-Michigan rematch could happen, assuming USC and WVa lose at some point along the line.

USC could run the table, but I really don't see W. Va losing.

 

[JayFarrar]

So I was looking at the computer rankings. Tennessee is ahead of Cal in all but one. But Cal has the better average. UT is also ranked ahead of Cal, and also beat them early, but the Bears are still ahead.
So here's the question: How?
I must be missing something

 

[Hammer Pants]

So I was looking at the computer rankings. Tennessee is ahead of Cal in all but one. But Cal has the better average. UT is also ranked ahead of Cal, and also beat them early, but the Bears are still ahead.
So here's the question: How?
I must be missing something

It's not what you're missing. Or we're missing. The system is missing something. These things usually work themselves out, but Cal would stay ahead of UT if both won out (win over SC), and the SEC (nor anyone with a brain) would probably not be happy about that. Unbelievable. That game wasn't nearly as close as the score suggested.

I hate that we'll never get to see this thing settled on the field in a playoff. The I-AA playoffs are great ... can you imagine the national excitement every year for a I-A one???

 

[Michael_ Gee]

This is what I don't understand. They'd need freight trains to haul away the money from a I-A playoff, way more than the big bowls offer. The little and medium bowls could just keep on keepin' on.
If the final was the Saturday night of Super Bowl bye week, it'd get better ratings than the Super Bowl 7 years out of 10.

 

[Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L)]

What no Holy Cross? This is a travshamockery!!

 

[Ace]

This is what I don't understand. They'd need freight trains to haul away the money from a I-A playoff, way more than the big bowls offer. The little and medium bowls could just keep on keepin' on.
If the final was the Saturday night of Super Bowl bye week, it'd get better ratings than the Super Bowl 7 years out of 10.

In addition, it would force teams to beef up schedules to qualify for an 8- or 16-team playoff, rather than water down schedules to avoid a loss as many do now.

(I guess you could still schedule six stiffs and pat yourself on the back by become bowl-eligible, though).

 

[JayFarrar]

Actually I heard a college coach, a national championship winning coach, speak on this today.
He said the only way a playoff could happen is if the TV people forced the NCAA's hand. Pulled all broadcast money for the post-season and said, no more until the playoffs are put in.
But, like he said, that will never happen. If one network was to walk away, another one would take its place, and so on.
But what I hope happens, is the SEC pulls out of the BCS.
Why bother?
I mean if USC stays unbeaten, they'll play Ohio State or Michigan for the title. BCS people will say the system worked, the two best teams are in the championship, but it is really the two best unbeaten teams. You have to exclude the possibility of a one-loss team playing for a title now.
Even if Auburn or Florida had been unbeaten, neither would have had a shot at the No. 2 spot. And Cal, a team that is, at best, the fifth or sixth best team in the SEC, is No. 6 in the computer polls and No. 10 overall. Ahead of an SEC team that whipped Cal's butt.
The BCS was Kramer's baby, but he's gone and it's time for the SEC to back out.
Slive (Silve?) should call NBC and say for $15 million a team, the SEC title game winner will play Notre Dame in the one of the Southern bowl games, most likely Sugar.
And if the Fighting Irish don't have at least nine wins that year, tell the Big East (or ACC for that matter) that its conference champ has the same deal.

 

[Freelance Hack]

I think the BCS is a flawed system and until there's a playoff, there's no way we can really decide a national champion. But we're not going to get a playoff until the Big Six confereneces break away from the NCAA. Not sure that happens anytime soon.

So in the meantime, we have to live with the system that we have and tweak it as necessary. As it stands now, I'd have no problem with a Michigan/Ohio State-Southern Cal title game if it involves two undefeated teams. If that's the case, Michiagn would have knocked off Notre Dame and Ohio State or Ohio State would have dismissed Texas, Iowa and Michigan, USC would have dispatched of Notre Dame, Oregon and Cal. Those are enough quality wins to justify their placement in a title game.

Where I would have a problem is if a one-loss SEC team, Texas or Notre Dame supplanted an undefeated Big East school for a title shot. A 12-0 Big East school would have beaten two schools in the top 16 of the BCS (Rutgers is No. 16) and Pitt, which will be ranked as early as this weekend. Those would be quality wins.

 

[FireJimTressel.com]

The idea of an Ohio State-Michigan rematch seems like a too-good-to-be-true situation. Just think about how mad other teams would be, though. Teams waiting to move up when one loses would be ticked off like no other.

By the way, don't fire Jim Tressel!

 

[Freelance Hack]

I will be shocked, shocked I say, if a Michigan-Ohio State rematch happens.