It's weird that for the past three weeks or so, keeping an eye on Cal, it's been like they have been an opponent for us horns. Now that we have won out, I feel sorry for them because I realized that it wasn't us vs. them, it was just a matter of which one of us was going to get screwed over this year. Of course I'm happy but I feel really bad for all of the Cal fans and players, they deserve better. I wonder how they are going to 'tweak' the BCS again this year.
I don't even care how they tweak it - it's a mess. Now that Fox bought into this ****, we're gonna have it until someone starts a rebellion. Unless you're a big school & manage to get in for the $$$ the big bowls generate, its useless. College football has become a joke.
I've been to the Rose Bowl and I have to say it is a wonderful, wonderful atmoshpere. I highly recommend the trip. If you are taking your wife or girlfriend you have to get tickets to the parade. After blowing an entire year's vacation budget on playing Pebble Beach I asked my wife what we could do the following year that would be sort of the equivelent for her, and the Rose Parade was what she came up with. So guys you can maybe go and even come out looking like a hero!
Obviously, it would have helped Cal if they had played a couple more decent teams. They say strength-of-schedule is out of the computers, but it is still in the polls.
I thought SOS was out as an independent component (for no good reason) but was still a component of the compy polls. I mean, without SOS and Victory margin, I don't know what you could base a computer poll on?
This is interesting, because the stuff I've read in the West Coast papers says that Cal actually increased its lead in the computers this week but that it was the gain that Texas made among the human voters that put Texas over the top. The conspiracy theory out west (not that I buy it), is that the anonymous Coaches Poll is the culprit. Tedford even rhetorically asked yesterday, "How many of the coaches in the coaches poll are from West of the Rockies?" Caveat: Tedford is not accusing anybody of anything. He has said that the system is what it is, and that he's excited for the Holiday Bowl. Remember, he was at Oregon when they were ranked second and didn't play for the MNC. Here's an interesting little column from the San Francisco Chronicle's Ray Ratto.
Was it just that it was reduced in importance? I recall a lot of discussion about SOS this year, but I admit that I don't follow developments in the arcane BCS logic too closely. I distinctly recall discussions about teams trying to downgrade their pre-season opponents now. Maybe some BCS specialist here can help...
Tehy use to have their own category for SOS which was a component of the formula which they took out this year. As others have said the quality of opponent and score still matter to both pollsters and computers but they don't have another separate category for SOS.
That makes sense, but it doesn't make sense why there was so much talk about watering-down preseason opponents. There must have been something which indicates a reduction in the importance of SOS.
No, chuckie is right. SOS and "quality wins" used to be an independent variable that was added in along with compy polls & human polls. Now it is only indirectly considered vis a vis the compy & humans.
Does anyone else think it would be really interesting to see every BCS formula that has existed applied to every year and see what the results would be? I would pay some money to see that. I've always wondered how much of a difference the changes make.
apparently if we had used last year's formula this year then UT would've cruised to a 4th place finish instead of sweating it out. that may have changed later in the season but that's what i remember hearing a while ago. but that would be cool to see all the formulas for each year. then i'd like to see them for past years before the BCS and who they would've matched up.
Nah, Texas led in the computer polls last week, and led this week. The computers like Texas more because they've beat good teams, whereas Cal has beat... errm... Arizona St. However, Cal did gain on Texas in the computer, but Texas still has a sizeable advantage there. Essentially, it came out to the fact that the Texas lead in the computer 1/3rd of the equation was bigger than the margins of BOTH human polls (which were 2/3rds).
Does anyone else feel like there wouldn't be ANY media outcry if Texas was shafted for the second straight year and Cal got in?
People act shocked at UT "jumping" Cal but they were at a statistical dead heat last week. Votes switch week-to-week, and the final week more than any other because that's the one where the coaches excersize their vote instead of their assistants. Cal had the opportunity to perform well on a national stage versus an inferior opponent, and didn't impress. They won by 10, sure, but they were a PAT away from a tie in the 4th quarter.
USM is an "inferior" opponent, but they're not a horrible team by any means. They would have been a Top 25 team if their starting QB hadn't gotten injured against UH in overtime, which caused them to drop a few games in the middle of the season.
Really? Because their QB only missed 2 games, one of which they won. The other game was at Alabama, which beats USM year after year. They're a decent football team, but nowhere in Cal's league.
Have any of you that ordered tickets heard whether you got them yet? I'm dying to find out if I got them, b/c I want to go ahead and reserve flights / hotels, which I notice are getting more and more expensive. Nearly all hotels near the stadium are already sold out, as I learned from several dozen calls I made today.
