This year, Texas would manhandle FSU. I don't like to do the comparative opponent thing, but Texas dominated a UNC team that dominated FSU. You can hate Simms or feel let down by a team that lost basically in the last seconds to the defending champs (who have won 19 in a row). UT did exactly what it was supposed to do today to OSU. I'll be here to eat crow if they lose to CU, but don't bet on that happening.
I'm not saying UT is going to lose to CU, but CU is a much better opponent than Okla St. CU is a much better measuring and evaluation stick than OSU. UT will have the chance to shut me up for a little while. If we play in a BCS bowl, we will play against a top 10 opponent. I'd like to see how we fare. A win. I eat crow. A loss. You guys eat crow.
shanna (and anybody else): I have an interesting question for you. Let's say that Nebraska wins the rest of their regular season games and the Big 12 Title game. Let's also say that Miami wins out and is 11-0. However, UCLA also goes 11-0. These are your top 3 teams. Who would you think would play in the Rose Bowl? I hope it would be Nebraska and Miami. However, with the BCS and strength of schedule, I would be afraid that Miami would get screwed and UCLA would go instead. Could you imagine if that happened? After all, it would be a home game for the Bruins, if that did happened. I posted this article in another thread, but I'm going to post it again. It tells you how BS the BCS computers are: http://www.sportingnews.com/voices/matt_hayes/20011013.html Miami looked pretty good, yesterday, didn't they?
manny, I hate to bust your balls. . . but if nebraska, ucla and miami all go 11-0, there's no way miami gets to the Rose Bowl, nor should they. nebraska and ucla would have come through a much, much tougher schedule than miami. do you disagree? as for the home game situation for the bruins, that's just the way it goes. if this year's bcs system had been used last year, miami would have had that same home field advantage. granted, miami did get screwed last year [as did washington and oregon] and the entirety of all college football fans everywhere. the system sucks.
chievous: That's what I'm thinking too, man. UCLA and Nebraska both play in strong conferences that are ranked in the top 3 in the country (the SEC being the other). Unfortunately, the Big East has been like the ACC in that it is more of a basketball conference than a football conference. I keep hoping and praying that everything will work out for Miami to make it to the Rose Bowl game, but I won't lie to you that I'm hoping the PAC-10 knocks each other off. If UCLA can beat Oregon and Washington State can upset UCLA and then Washington beats WSU then things will be good. However, that's too many ifs. A more likely scenario is for no teams to come out of the Big 12 undefeated. It should be definitely interesting to see how it plays out. After all, who would have thought that Florida would lose to Auburn?
<B>I have an interesting question for you. Let's say that Nebraska wins the rest of their regular season games and the Big 12 Title game. Let's also say that Miami wins out and is 11-0. However, UCLA also goes 11-0. These are your top 3 teams. Who would you think would play in the Rose Bowl? </B> I have to agree with chievous here. I think Nebraska & UCLA would go. However, this could be pretty close. Miami would have beaten VTech, FSU, and Washington. Nebraska would have beaten K-State, Colorado, Notre Dame, and Oklahoma twice UCLA will have beaten all sorts of good teams. I think UCLA wins the computers. Miami wins the polls. Nebraska wins the schedule strength if K-State rebounds somewhat. Whatever happens, someone would be (rightfully) pissed. Best scenario (in my opinion) is that Miami is left out. Why? Because if they win their bowl game big, then the AP probably keeps them #1 and we have a split national title again.
One of the "positives" of the BCS system is that there will be one true national champion at the end of the year. The AP and Coaches Poll have agreed to have a united number 1 - the winner of the BCS national title game - winner of Rose Bowl. If Miami does not win the Rose Bowl, they will not be # 1. The highest any team not playing in the Rose Bowl can be is # 2.
<B>One of the "positives" of the BCS system is that there will be one true national champion at the end of the year. The AP and Coaches Poll have agreed to have a united number 1 - the winner of the BCS national title game - winner of Rose Bowl. If Miami does not win the Rose Bowl, they will not be # 1. The highest any team not playing in the Rose Bowl can be is # 2.</B> Smokey, are you sure on this? As of last year, the Coaches' Poll was locked into the BCS, but the AP had not agreed to guarantee they would vote the championship game winner #1. It made sense that in most cases the champion would end up #1, but there was no guarantee with the AP Poll. They talked about this last year -- if Florida State barely won the Orange Bowl and Miami blew out their opponent (don't remember who it was) in their bowl, many people thought the AP would give the championship to Miami. Oklahoma won making it all a moot point.
I believe that shanna is right. Only the Coaches poll has made it that whoever wins the BCS game is their #1 team. That's why Butch Davis was at the Orange Bowl game last season hoping for an OU loss. Unless the BCS changed it, there's still the possibility of having co-national champions.
I agree completely with you and I forgot about the split national champions thing. I think if Miami continues to win and win impressively, then they will not drop from the #1 spot in the AP Poll no matter what Nebraska/OU or UCLA/Oregon does. Maybe a split national champion would be the best thing because then that would prove that the BCS is still not the best way to decide the national champion in college football. A playoff is the best way, but it will neve happen, IMO.
I was under the impression that the winner of the BCS title game would be declared the national championship unanimously. The BCS makes no sense otherwise. Why do a # 1 vs # 2 if you are going to split titles?
That's right, the stupid AP doesn't have to vote for the BCS winner. I don't know if a split champ will ever happen though.
Exactly, my point. The BCS likes to say it is a good system, but I don't think it's much better than the old system. It is never gonna be good, IMO, until they go to a freakin' playoff!
<B>The BCS makes no sense otherwise. Why do a # 1 vs # 2 if you are going to split titles?</B> Basically, the idea was to guarantee that the theoretically #1 and #2 teams at least get to play each other. In the past, that wasn't always the case (for example, whenever Michigan & Nebraska split the national championship several years back). Now, at least #1 and #2 play. What the morons designing the BCS didn't figure out was that 3 teams might have a reasonable claim to the game -- they assumed no more than 2 teams would have a claim to that game. They got the coaches on-board, but never could convince the AP people to agree to it.
If Miami wins out, the ybetter get in. True, they play in a week conference, but they scheduled PSU (ok, not as good as we thought) and UW on the schedule. I think they play Tech after UW, and if they sweep both games, they should be in. I wish there were a playoff systyem, but these things work themselves out. I think/hope OU will lose to NU, and I think Miami slips up somewhere as well. BTW, Tech beat KSU, cna you believe that? I think KSU beats atm next week though.
<B>What the morons designing the BCS didn't figure out was that 3 teams might have a reasonable claim to the game -- they assumed no more than 2 teams would have a claim to that game. They got the coaches on-board, but never could convince the AP people to agree to it.</B> To be fair to the BCS people (I wasn't above), their job was two-fold: (1) If there are two undefeated teams, give them a chance to meet in a head-to-head game to determine a national title. (2) If there are 0 or 1 undefeated teams, come up with some unbiased way of determining which is the best of the 1-loss teams. There was really nothing they could do about THREE undefeated teams, because a playoff was not an option for them. That's ABC & the NCAA's fault. As far as their job, they still haven't done a great job of it, I don't think. The fact that they keep tweaking the formulas every year to fit their goals (they added 4 new computers because they didn't like the computer results, then the new "bonus points" to fix the Miami problem last year) instead of designing good formulas is messed up. The fact that the computers are biased is screwy too. The Seattle Times poll had Washington #1 last week. The Atlanta poll had South Carolina #1 last week. Hmmmmm.... Also favoring Miami -- I don't know when the last time 3 major-conference teams went undefeated for the whole season. Somehow, someway, somebody will probably get upset and it will work itself out, and all will hail the BCS as doing its job wonderfully, until next year.
