's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions

Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )

Any thoughts on the BCS poll?(9 posts)

Any thoughts on the BCS poll?Ducky
Dec 9, 2001 5:55 PM
Anyone have any thoughts on the BCS system?
Quack! Quack! Quack!
re: Any thoughts on the BCS poll?BigLeadOutGuy
Dec 9, 2001 6:10 PM
well its a lot better than the coaches polls of the days gone past thats for sure. The only thing it doesnt really take into consideration is what teams won their confrence. I think this is the best its gunna get for awhile but ya never know
Dec 10, 2001 8:41 AM
As a former CU athlete, I was rooting for the Buffs to go to the Rose Bowl. But the problem was really not that I thought they deserved to go- because I don't think any 2-loss team does, but that nobody else seemed to deserve it either.

Nebraska is undoubtedly a great team, but they got SPANKED in Boulder- and only played four road games all year. One of which they lost. And the Rose Bowl is not played in Lincoln. I understand that Nebraska is a good team- but I can't get over that they got in ahead of a team that schooled them.

I don't think Colorado deserved to go simply because of the Fresno State loss. National Championship teams don't lose to Fresno State, no matter how good FS is.

Oregon got the short end of the stick- but in much the same way as BYU. Of their ten wins, only 4 were against opponents with a winning record. And each of those games was won by 7 points or less. I think Oregon was the most DESERVING, as PAC10 champs, but I don't think they'd have a chance against Miami. Unfortunately, we'll never know.

The good news is that we'll have a game- my opinion is that only a Big XII team can beat Miami. A team that runs, and runs hard against their soft run defense. I think Colorado probably had the best chance to beat Miami- simply because of their abusive style. But Nebraska's a close second. The Blackshirts won't let Miami get away with what CU did. And they match up well. The real problem for Colorado would have been stopping the Miami passing game- because CU is down to its 4th string defensive backs; Nebraska has quality DBs who should be able to shut Miami down.

In the end, I think Nebraska is probably the best team to play Miami in the Rose Bowl. I'd have liked to see Colorado there, but a two loss team (with one of the losses being Fresno), just shouldn't get that chance.
Why not just Miami?bikedodger
Dec 10, 2001 9:49 AM
The disagreements are over who is second best. The logical conclusion would be to have Miami play Miami as no one else seems worthy.

No matter who else came in second in the BCS ratings, there are many other teams with valid arguments in their favor as to why they should have been No. 2. A solution that everyone but the bowls themselves favor is to have a playoff of maybe the to 8 BCS teams. Of course that would have Nos. 9 and 10 gripping about why they should be No. eight.

'cause you can't win 'em all...TJeanloz
Dec 10, 2001 9:59 AM
Contrary to what most pundits and Lee Corso suggest, Miami is beatable. They went undefeated with the 18th ranked (BCS) schedule. They had an easier schedule than either Colorado or Nebraska, and had scares at Boston College and Virginia Tech. They abused some good teams along the way- but they aren't the favorite that people like to think they are.

As to the calls for a playoff- we effectively had one. Colorado probably would not have made the playoffs if there were one. And it was effectively single elimination in the last three weeks. Oklahoma lost, Florida lost, Texas lost, Tennessee lost. If any of those teams had won their last game, they'd be in the Rose Bowl. The only weirdness is that Oregon didn't lose, and they don't get a shot, and that Nebraska did lose, and they do get the shot. I don't think a playoff solves anything except proving who the deepest teams are- the Rose Bowl, three weeks after the season ends, lets two prepared, rested, and healthy teams play each other.
1.2 Apples=1 OrangeMe Dot Org
Dec 10, 2001 12:12 PM
It tries to be fair, but ultimately has to be arbitrary. Colorado lost twice, but soundly defeated the team that is playing for the National Championship. Seems to me that head-to-head should count for something more.

The only way to be truly fair would be to have a playoff system. College football is a game, not a profession (I know, I know) so that isn't going to happen. There will be some years where there is an undefeated National Champion, but most years that isn't going to happen.

The BCS tries to level the field, but it ain't perfect, that's for sure...
Colorado's Lack of Defense...jtolleson
Dec 10, 2001 12:44 PM
Would make them very vulnerable against Miami. I was thrilled at the Nebraska win, but allowing all those third quarter points was not an encouraging sign in the "defense wins championships" world of college football.

I'm not yet a true believer in the Buffs as a true top 5 finisher, much less a Rose Bowl contender. I can only cautiously hope...
Colorado's Lack of Defense...TJeanloz
Dec 10, 2001 1:05 PM
I'm not sure the Buffs are as good as their ranking- but beating Texas and Nebraska are worth something in my book.

As for their defense, the secondary is worthless. BUT Nebraska has the #1 rushing offense in the country, and Nebraska scored less than 36 only 4 times this year.

Colorado gave up big points only to Texas and Nebraska- and by big I mean more than 30. They held Kansas State to 6, Texas A&M to 21 and holding Fresno to 24 turned out to be something of an accomplishment. They're no Oklahoma defensively, but they're not that bad.

Defense wins championships. But the Colorado offense plays an interesting role- they try to hold the ball as long as possible, keeping the defense off the field.
TJ, That settles it! I LOVE YOU!!!jtolleson
Dec 11, 2001 5:51 PM