BCS Blog

All Categories >> Sports >> Football

11/15/2006 8:42 pm

Scott's Archive

Rate this Blog

Yours:

Rated 0 times.

I'll splinter off the BCS topic.

Ok, here's my only real problem with the BCS. If Wisconsin ends up ranked in the top 10 in the BCS, (and they will because they won't lose to Buffalo and hence won't lose ground), and they don't end up in one of the 5 BCS bowls, then what the crap is the point of the "Bowl Championship Series"? I don't think that Wisconsin is under ranked or anything like that. The rankings seem to be ok (Louisville and Rutgers are in a week conference). But it just doesn't make any sense at all. Either a team is ranked #9 or they are not. I read on Sport Illustrated that Wake Forest is a possible candidate to play in one of the BCS games. Wake Forest is something like 15th or 16th. If you are going to call something a "championship series" you can't place the 15th ranked team in it and call it legit. Utimately it doesn't matter because only 2 teams get to play for the National Title, and Wisconsin is not one of those teams. Someone just needs to explain the BCS to me, because the current system is messed up.

	Alex - I was too weak to give in Too strong to lose 11/16/2006 @ 12:47:50 PM
It's the same as having divisions in other sport. If the top 5 teams are all in one division they don't all get to go to the playoffs.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 11/16/2006 @ 12:54:23 PM
And a few years ago 6-10 (or maybe 7-9) would have won the NFC North division and MADE the playoffs automatically.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.
Jeremy messed with this at 11/16/2006 12:54:47 pm

	Scott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue. 11/16/2006 @ 01:21:39 PM
But that's the NFL system. The BCS bases it's decision on rankings. So there is basically no point except to figure out 1 and 2. The other 8 teams are apparently arbitrary.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this at 11/16/2006 1:26:02 pm

	Jeremy - As Seen On The Internet 11/16/2006 @ 01:43:43 PM
Put it this way. If it was programmed into the BCS ranking to actually take into account the "only 2 teams can go" thing and the Badgers were ranked #11 instead of #9 so they were out of the running for the top 5 games would you be complaining? It's just a matter of at what point they apply the arbitrary "two team" rule. Either they let the natural rankings be and say "too bad so sad" to a team in the top 10 or they make it part of the algorithm in the first place and no one really knows why they are where they are. I imagine the reason they have the rule is because they assume that if a bunch of teams have really good records from a conference it means that a) they didn't play each other a lot and b) that implies they all played the rest of the conference that must not be very good.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 2 times.

	craig - 132 Posts 11/16/2006 @ 02:22:24 PM
Regardless of the fairness of there only being 2 teams from the Big Ten (or any other conference) allowed into the BCS. You can't really believe that Wisconsin belongs in the BCS? The 'best' team they beat is Penn State (7-4), followed by Purdue (7-4), and Iowa (6-5), all of whom have played the same crappy Big Ten teams that Wisconsin has. The Big Ten (besides the obvious 2) is awful this year, and Wisconsin was lucky enough not to play Ohio State. Oh, those three teams are also the only teams that Wisconsin has beat that have winning records.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 2 times.
craig screwed with this 2 times, last at 11/16/2006 2:26:51 pm

	Scott - 6225 Posts 11/16/2006 @ 06:14:35 PM
I really do believe that Wisconsin belongs in the BCS. Well, that would prove my point even further. If Wisconsin isn't that good, how did the BCS end up ranking them 9th? So it sucks if I'm right and it sucks if I'm wrong. Just because the Big Ten doesn't have many ranked teams doesn't mean that it is a week conference. All of Penn St.'s losses came against ranked opponents. Purdue also lost 3 games to ranked opponents and then lost to Penn State. Now again, my argument is not on that the rankings are wrong (Michigan was NOT at all impressive when they played Wisconsin, and I think honestly, if Wisconsin were to play them again, Wisconsin would probably win(irrelevant point however).) but the system kind of sucks. What Jeremy says makes sense, except that the "calculations" are based on algorythms (which is another reason why the system is not good. A math equation simply cannot figure out how good a team really is). Oh well, I'm obviously not going to convince this crowd. I'll move to something else.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - I don't need to get steady I know just how I feel 11/16/2006 @ 06:41:49 PM
What do you suggest? The only non-arbitrary way to do it is to round robin all 117 teams. So 116 games for each, at one game a week, so that's only like 2 years and 3 months. We probably wouldn't have to worry about multiple undefeateds or one-loss teams though. Who's to say that a computer algorithm is anymore or less valid than a coach or reporter who surely isn't watching every single game each week. And I'm not saying that either computer or voter is better, each one has strengths and flaws. So you combine them together to get one ranking! And even though the Badger's schedule hasn't been overly difficult, it still takes a good team to only have one loss. I think they are deserving of their ranking. I also think Rutgers will beat West Virginia, USC and Notre Dame play each other, and I think Florida and Arkansas could potentially match up yet. So it's certainly not impossible that they'll end up 6th yet. Then you'll really be flummoxed.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Alex screwed with this at 11/16/2006 11:38:22 pm

	Scott - 6225 Posts 11/16/2006 @ 08:47:30 PM
ok, It's Flummoxed, with 2 M's. I usually don't point out spelling errors, but I tried to search on google for the definition of this word, but I couldn't find it because it was spelled wrong. And yes, if Wisconsin ends up ranked 6th and still has no BCS bowl, I will definitely be bewildered.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Sarah - So's your face 11/16/2006 @ 08:48:30 PM
So's your face.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 2 times.

	Jeremy - 1.21 Gigawatts!?!? 11/16/2006 @ 09:09:42 PM
When Sarah made that post she made herself laugh for like 5 minutes and broke into an improv song about how much she loves Scrubs. I just thought you should know that.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 2 times.
Jeremy messed with this at 11/16/2006 9:12:16 pm

	Alex - 3619 Posts 11/18/2006 @ 02:11:19 PM
It's almost time for kick-off....! Though it would be more exciting if I had someone to root for. If Michigin wins would all 3 teams share the Big Ten title equally?? Screw it, I can't stand Michigan. Buckeye!		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Alex screwed with this at 11/18/2006 2:11:37 pm

	Alex - I was too weak to give in Too strong to lose 11/19/2006 @ 06:33:28 PM
Well, the Badgers are up to 8th now. I'd say it's still possible for them to get as high as 5th. I'd also say that only USC and Florida have a chance to pass Michigan for the oppurtunity to get beat down by Ohio State.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings 11/19/2006 @ 06:46:10 PM
What would happen to the Badgers if Michigan ends up rematching against Ohio State in the "National Championship Game". Who would end up playing in the Rose Bowl? Would they wave the Badgers in? Last year was the first time since 1946 that a non-Big Ten team played in the game, and it was only because last year served as the national championship game. And while I'm thinking about this, Technically, the Rose Bowl goes to the top Big Ten Team, and If Michigan and Ohio State might be playing each other, the Badgers would be the top. If this scenario plays out, the Badgers should earn their spot in the Rose Bowl.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Micah - Bring me the finest muffins and bagels in all the land. 11/19/2006 @ 08:16:21 PM
I agree but it appears that they are headed to the Capital One Bowl. Also, it appears Badger basketball will be number 8 as well		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Micah perfected this at 11/19/2006 8:16:40 pm

	Alex - 3619 Posts 11/20/2006 @ 12:07:52 AM
The "2 teams from one conference in the BCS" rule still applies. The only Big Ten team with a chance to play in the Rose Bowl is Michigan if they aren't in the title game. I think the question for the Badgers is will Florida and Arkansas both end up in a BCS game? If either one doesn't, that's probably who Wisconsin will play in the Capital One Bowl. If they both do, then I'm not too sure who they would play. Maybe LSU.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 11/20/2006 @ 06:22:26 PM
Just to follow up, ESPN's current prediction is that the Badgers will play Florida, which means they're going with Arkansas beating LSU this week and then Florida in the championship game.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 11/26/2006 @ 11:56:32 AM
Nice prediction ESPN. I don't think anyone has any clue how things are going to shake out now. Seeing all the updated polls will help, but the SEC championship game of Florida v Arkansas is going to have major BCS as well as Capital One bowl implications. Wisconsin is up to 6th in the USA today poll, not that it really matters. Actually it would matter if they've moved up in the computers, as it would help Michigan's strength of schedule. I think I'm pulling for USC to make the title game so that OSU, Mich, and Wis can all dominate a good team in a bowl game.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 11/26/2006 @ 01:24:54 PM
Plus that poll doesn't count for the BCS anyway Wisconsin is 7th in the AP poll.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it. 11/27/2006 @ 09:25:53 AM
Argument for Michigan Over USC. Michigan's only loss came to #1 Ohio State on the road. USC's loss came against unranked Oregon St. on the road. In their only common came, Notre Dame, Michigan won on the road 47-21 when ND was ranked #2, while USC won 44-24 at home. Michigan had a 26 point advantage on the road and usc had only a 20 point advantage at home. While USC did play a number of ranked teams, they played every game against a ranked team at home. They were never tested on the road, even though they lost to unranked Oregon St on the road. And here's my number 1 reason why Michigan should play in the national title game: They took the number 1 team in the nation to 3 points on the road. So despite losing, I actually felt that Michigan came out looking like the better team vs. Ohio State. To the pollsters: Don't put USC in the title game just because "it would be a good matchup" or "Michigan had their chance". I think Michigan deserves the chance.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Micah - 584 Posts 12/04/2006 @ 12:20:22 PM
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news;_ylt=AqYbbEH4IAs6SIi2PlEQzUo5nYcB?slug=tb-bracket120406&prov=yhoo&type=lgns		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 12/04/2006 @ 12:34:47 PM
If the bracket is predetermined in what sense it it a playoff?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - 3619 Posts 12/04/2006 @ 01:07:10 PM
That guy has Wisconsin #4 so he's cool, but seriously enough of the playoff talky talk. Even it was somehow "better", there would still be controversy when picking the playoff field. And more importantly, it's just not feasible. It doesn't fit with the bowl system and you can't play 2 games a weekend like in Basketball or most other sports.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Resident Tech Support 01/02/2007 @ 08:42:28 AM
I don't know if anyone saw the end of the Fiesta Bowl between Boise State and Oklahoma, but it was a game for the ages. Go to Fox Sports and watch the video. It is probably one of the most improbable finishes in college football history.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this 2 times, last at 01/02/2007 8:45:53 am

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 01/02/2007 @ 09:18:21 AM
Everyone keeps repeating that "improbable finish" comment but I must be missing something. It was a 2 possession OT. That was an interesting 2pt conversion though.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/02/2007 @ 10:25:13 AM
when you say 2 possession OT do mean 2 possessions each? or just that you're not a fan of the the college overtime system? Because the 2 teams each scoredon their 1st overtime possessions.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 01/02/2007 @ 10:52:51 AM
When I said "It was a 2 possession OT." What I meant to say was that it was a 2 possession OT. I'm really not sure how that can be read into.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Resident Tech Support 01/02/2007 @ 10:54:33 AM
What did you mean by your comment? What are you missing, as stated by your comment?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 01/02/2007 @ 11:05:16 AM
I just don't see how amazing, once in a lifetime, crazy finish, a 2 possession OT game ending on a cool, but not unorthodox misdirection play can be. Was it so special because of how it got to OT in the first place? Was there more than the hook and ladder to tie it up?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 01/02/2007 @ 11:10:16 AM
In other words between your comment and the ensuing hype I read I expected to go find a video of like a 29 possession overtime in which 200 points were scored before someone bested the other team.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings 01/02/2007 @ 11:32:22 AM
There were 22 points scored in the final 86 seconds. Boise State blew an 18 point lead, and int touchdown with like 1:00 left for OK to take the lead, and the hook and ladder on a 4th and 18 for a 50 yard touchdown for Boise St. to tie the game. Another 4th down conversion for Boise State in Overtime to score a touchdown to go down by 1 point and a two point conversion to win or lose the game with a Statue of Liberty play, all the while the winning team came from a Mid Major conference. I haven't witnessed a statue of liberty play probably in my lifetime, let alone one performed that well. Not to mention that the guy who scored the 2point conversion ran to sideline and proposed to his girlfriend!! I just haven't seen a finish like that in a long time. I was impressed anyway. Everything about the final 5 minutes and overtime was crazy.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Matt - Ombudsman 01/02/2007 @ 11:35:54 AM
I only started watching the game with about 2 minutes left in the 4th quarter (I was sleeping and luckily I woke up when I did), so that is what I will consider as the beginning of the finish of the game. Anyway here is why I think it counts as a special game/ending: 1. Oklahoma is down by 8 (about 2 minutes left) and drives for a TD 2. Two 2-pt tries (one missed, one made) called back for penalties, followed by a successful 3rd try. 3. Game now tied, Oklahoma intercepts the ball on Boise State's first play of the drive and returns it for a TD to go up 7 with about a minute left. 4. Fourth down hook-and-ladder play by Boise State to tie the game with 7 seconds left. 5. Adrian Peterson's 25-yd TD run on the first play of OT puts Oklahoma up 7. 6. 4th and 2 on the 5 yd line for Boise, they send the QB out wide and snap to their WR/RB who then hits the TE for a TD. 7. They decide to go for the win and pull a Statue of Liberty play for the 2 pt conversion. So Oklahoma went from down 8 to up 7 in less that a minute and looked to have the game in hand, Boise State ties it on an improbable trick play and then ends up winning in OT on another trick play. It was an unbelievable sequence of events.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 2 times.
Matt screwed with this at 01/02/2007 11:55:48 am

	Jeremy - As Seen On The Internet 01/02/2007 @ 11:47:33 AM
See the problem is that if you're told something is amazing and then you go watch it you're expectations are high, and not knowing the context that any of it happened in takes a lot away from it. It wasn't exciting that they scored those points because you knew they would to fulfill the outcome you already knew....if that makes any sense.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.
Jeremy messed with this at 01/02/2007 11:48:51 am

	Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings 01/02/2007 @ 11:49:33 AM
I guess, but I didn't hear about it until this morning and I and then I watched the video and I was still amazingly shocked and awed.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this at 01/02/2007 11:49:44 am

	Alex - 3619 Posts 01/02/2007 @ 02:36:10 PM
I watched the whole game and the ending was amazing. I think it would be fair to say that it was a one in a million type sequence of events. On the 4th and 18 play my cousin called for the hook and ladder and I just kind of laughed because it's a funny sounding play but also because it was fairly obvious that they would run it and 99% of the time it doesn't work. Apparently no one from OU had ever heard of it though.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/04/2007 @ 09:43:00 AM
Ok, Notre Dame is officially not allowed to play in any more BCS bowls for a while. 9 straight bowl losses including a whooping to LSU. They are kind of a December/January embarrasment. Until they join a conference and stop playing Army, Navy, and Air Force they are not allowed to be considered for a BCS bowl.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - I was too weak to give in Too strong to lose 01/04/2007 @ 01:10:41 PM
Word. They shouldn't be allowed to be on TV every week of the regular season either. I'd rather watch Boise State.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/08/2007 @ 08:30:01 PM
Good game between Ohio St. and Florida so far. I'm shocked that Ohio St. has allowed 21 points already. I still think Florida is going down, and nothing will convince me that they deserve to be in this game.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it. 01/08/2007 @ 10:35:30 PM
I don't know if anyone is watching the BCS game, but it's kind of a joke. Florida is beating down Ohio State. I still don't think Florida is the best team in the nation. It was a joke that they got into the game to begin with. If you looked at the ESPN polls after Florida was voted in to the BCS game, the SEC States (or the South) said that the BCS got the decision right. The whole rest of the nation disagreed and thought that Michigan should have been in. It's a joke in my opinion.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - Refactor Mercilessly 01/09/2007 @ 12:16:02 AM
The majority of the rest of the nation disagreed but it's not like it was unanimous. I was in the boat with those that said Michigan already had their shot at Ohio State so if there was another worthy 1 loss team they should get a chance. I won't lie, I slept through the entire second half (but apparently didn't miss much, 48 points in the 1st half and only 7 in the 2nd?) but Florida was definitely the better team in the first half. It's hard to define "best team in the nation" when you're dealing with maturing athletes. Players and teams can improve a lot from week 1 to bowl season. I watched Florida a few times this season and they looked fairly crappy, especially in the South Carolina game which they had to block 2 FGs to win. But they were on fire tonight. More than likely that was their best half all season and it might take them 50 tries to reproduce it, but the fact remains that they outplayed the other team when it mattered. Also Ginn missed the whole game other than his kickoff return, which was a huge loss for Ohio State. I think things definitely would have been different it he had been in. In summary, Wisconsin should have just beat Michigan and then they could have played Ohio State in this game and Michigan could've beaten Arkansas. Then the Big 10 would've ended on a much better note.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/09/2007 @ 08:53:25 AM
Here's my thoughts on the "Michigan had their shot" argument, because I hear that from just about everyone. Since the BCS refuses to implement a playoff system of any kind, they cannot just make one up simply because 2 teams play during the regular season. You can't say we're not going to have a playoff, but since Team A already lost to Team B we'll now treat it like a playoff game. If you want a playoff, create a 2 week or so playoff system. If your not going to have a playoff, be fair to every team and don't deny someone a shot just because the 2 teams have already played. Because of this major screw up, I refuse to recognize Florida as the national champs.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 01/09/2007 @ 09:12:39 AM
Even if they had a playoff system not everyone would get in and some tiebreakers, such as regular season head to head victories, would need to be implemented. Situations like above can still happen. The fact of the matter is with that many teams playing so few other teams there would be no system that didn't have something wrong with it.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone! 01/09/2007 @ 09:18:49 AM
True, but the people responsible for putting together bowl games and championship games shouldn't just be making up a system of rules as they go. In my opinion, having co-National Champions is better than having a National champ that shouldn't have had a chance.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - You've got to trust your instinct, and let go of regret 01/09/2007 @ 01:02:18 PM
If Michigan had won their bowl game I would attempt to continue this thread civily, but you're just not making much sense now. If the Michigan-OSU game had been any other week than the last of the regular season for them voters might have given them the rematch, even though in hindsight it certainly doesn't seem like they deserved it. And a playoff system in general, even if you could convince me it was "better" than what we have now, is almost completely unfeasible. The bowl system would die (there's a lot of money there so don't under estimate the difficulty of that), teams would have to play more games and either the almost too long season would have to be extended or they'd be having games during finals, and as Jeremy already alluded to there would be just as much if not more controversy about which teams got into the playoffs in the first place and who had to play who first and on and on. The whole point of having voters vote is so that they can make up the rules as they go. The only logical conclusion I can come to from your last comment is that you would prefer that the computers, which operate based upon a predefined set of rules, determined everything and the human voters be left out?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue. 01/09/2007 @ 01:08:29 PM
I don't want human voters to be left out, but there seemed to be a collective "Michigan had their shot" mentality. And as far as Michigan losing their bowl game, they went from maybe playing in the national Title game to playing in a game that was only for Pride. No kidding they weren't motivated. No excuse, but still.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 01/09/2007 @ 01:08:34 PM
I think it should be a giant algorithm. People would hate it, but it would sort of be the whole point. People who argue the BCS is stupid because it doesn't mirror the polls are forgetting that that is exactly WHY the polls aren't being used. People are stupid, make picks to fulfill some self serving opinions and couldn't possibly know everything about every team. They playoff system wouldn't have to get rid of bowls, it could just tier the bowls. the winner of bowl a and bowl b play in bowl c.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.

	Scott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it. 01/09/2007 @ 01:14:32 PM
exactly!		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - I don't need to get steady I know just how I feel 01/09/2007 @ 01:16:35 PM
Yes but the bowl committees wouldn't be picking the matchups. It's not secret that some fan bases travel better than others, which means more fans spending money. Having tie-ins to specific conferences probably also helps them secure more money for broadcasting rights. I don't think it should be a giant algorithm, mostly because as you already pointed out the sample size is too small with an 11 or 12 game season and 100 some teams. That's why I think the current system of algorithm mixed with potential voter override is actually quite good.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - I believe virtually everything I read. 01/09/2007 @ 01:17:09 PM
I, uh, think I disagreed with everything you were saying Scott. Even if the playoffs were the bowl games there would still be less bowl eligible teams.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 01/09/2007 @ 01:21:48 PM
Yeah, but that (picking the $$$ teams) kind of makes Bowls a farce to begin with. The sample size being small is exactly why it should be a computer, which could compare the 4th quarter 3rd down conversion percentage as the 900th tie breaker. With so few games, so many teams and so little knowledge at a certain point a human would have to be picking one team over another because everyone else is, because it's their alma mater, or because their dog barked twice when the question was posed to him.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 01/09/2007 @ 01:25:53 PM
Also, if it was an algorithm everyone would know why one team is here and another is there, there wouldn't be any of this BS were losing to a good team late in the year hurts you more than losing your opener to a high school team but then "looking hot" from there on out. It would get rid of all the unquantifiable nonsense people incorporate into decisions to fulfill opinions they decided on 6 months ago.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - I was too weak to give in Too strong to lose 01/09/2007 @ 02:58:21 PM
That wouldn't be any fun though :) I just wanted to add that if anyone has a beef this year it's Boise State not Michigan.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 01/09/2007 @ 03:06:45 PM
Well you could still have the human poll. It's only purpose though would be to serve as evidence that humans are illogical.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Jeremy edited this at 01/09/2007 3:07:04 pm

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/09/2007 @ 04:12:16 PM
I never said the BCS was stupid. I don't think we were in that much disagreement. My gripe was that the voters took it upon themselves to assume that a playoff had taken place between Ohio St. and Michigan when in fact there was no playoff. Florida lost to Auburn, so shouldn't Auburn be upset that Florida ended up ahead of them? The voters are supposed to be judges of who are the best teams, and they all basically admitted that they were doing just the opposite because most used the "michigan had their shot" justification for letting an inferior team into the game. I'm not so much mad at the BCS or the system in general. I'm upset that people sort of abused their power.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9475 Posts 01/09/2007 @ 04:21:06 PM
What was the "exactly!" in regards to?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/09/2007 @ 04:29:23 PM
because I agreed with your comment. It may have appeared that we were in disagreement, but what you said is kind of what I was trying to say. Or I'm just a suckup to the sys admin, take your pick.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 1.21 Gigawatts!?!? 01/09/2007 @ 05:02:25 PM
Scott: I don't want human voters to be left out.... Jeremy: I think it should be a giant algorithm.... Scott: Exactly! Jeremy:		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Scott - 6225 Posts 01/09/2007 @ 05:36:40 PM
I didn't get that out of your statement. When you said Giant Algarithm I assumed that it still included the voting. I's wrong.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Sarah - How do you use these things? 01/09/2007 @ 06:43:55 PM
Do you people even work? I read like none of that		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jon - Nutcan.com's kitten expert 01/10/2007 @ 06:42:24 PM
I read roughly 5% of the posts within the last few days, but I have to say that I think it's ridiculous to say Florida didn't deserve to be in the game. They won the toughest conference in the nation. That's right I said the toughest. Their only loss was a game that featured at least one terrible call against them at a crucial moment, so if you wanna play the "Michigan just lost to OSU and only by a bit" then you have to acknowledge how close Florida was to being undefeated too. And I don't think it's ridiculous that they leaped Michigan by winning while Michigan was idle. A win is better than a nothing. If you're behind a team, but your season isn't over yet, shouldn't you be able to improve your position? My postition of course is much easier for me to take after the bowl season. Michigan looked like crap compared to Florida. The Big Ten looked mostly weak. Plus Notre Dame (Michigan's supposed quality win) looked awful. So maybe they weren't deserving of the high ranking anyway. I agree that there's some flaw with the whole notion of counting Michigan out because you don't want a rematch, but I think the fact that they're from the same conference is a valid reason to be against it. The bowl season should be about teams playing other conferences. Otherwise we have even less evidence than we already ahve of how good teams are overall. With so little information to compare teams, why waste it on a game of two teams who might have just played in a bad conference? thank you for reading my comment even though I didn't read most of the ones you guys wrote. yet.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.
Jon perfected this at 01/10/2007 6:43:19 pm