BCS Stupidity
 

Here is yet another reason why the current system is terrible. If anything is inaccurate, let me know.

There are 10 BCS teams. Making a few assumptions (Hawaii beats Washington, USC beats UCLA, West Virginia beats Pittsburgh, ASU beats Arizona, etc.), the teams look like this:

ACC winner - BC/VA Tech (loser has 3 losses and does not make BCS)
Big East winner - West Virginia
Big Ten winner - Ohio State
Big 12 winner - OU/Mizzou
Pac Ten winner - USC
SEC winner - LSU/Tennessee (loser has 3/4 losses and does not make BCS)

At large - Hawaii
At large - Georgia
At large - Arizona State/Big Ten team (Big Ten team only gets in if OSU makes the NC, sending the Big Ten team to the Rose Bowl)
At large - Kansas/Mizzou? (see below)

The dumbest part of all this is that Mizzou is screwed if they lose. Any type of loss, even a last second instant classic one, probably leaves them out of the BCS. They'd have two losses, but both to the same team (OU, a BCS team). Meanwhile, Kansas replaces them because they have one loss...to Mizzou. Basically, Mizzou is penalized for making the Big 12 Championship, as well as having OU on their regular season schedule (which is no fault of their own). Even though Mizzou beat Kansas, Kansas would get in over Mizzou because losses > anything else in the BCS.

Also, a Mizzou loss screws them over in any other at large spot. Because their loss would put OSU in the NC, the Rose Bowl will invite another Big Ten team in. Whether it's Michigan or Illinois, this sticks a 3/4 loss team in the BCS ahead of Mizzou, who would have two losses (both against OU...again, they're penalized for having to play OU twice). Also, keep in mind that Mizzou beat Illinois. If the Illini make the Rose Bowl, Mizzou would be left out in favor of a team with 1) more losses, 2) an easier schedule, and 3) a head-to-head loss. What sense does that make?

So a Mizzou loss screws them...but how about Georgia? In a weird way, not making the SEC Championship is going to HELP them. Because they finish 10-2, they will finish second in the SEC (in terms of the BCS rankings). The LSU/Tennessee winner gets in as the SEC champ, but the loser finishes with either 3 or 4 losses, 1 or 2 more than Georgia. Had Tennessee lost today, Georgia would actually have been in worse shape to make the BCS...a loss to LSU would have put them at 3 losses, leaving them in a 46-team battle for the 10th BCS spot. Instead, they sit on their couch next Saturday, and though they can't win the SEC, they're all but guaranteed a BCS berth (something that would not have been true had they lost to LSU in the SEC Championship).

Because the BCS revolves around losses more than anything else, Georgia benefits from not playing next week, and Mizzou is basically in a National-Championship-or-Cotton-Bowl situation. Kansas also isn't hurt too much by the loss to Mizzou because they never had to play OU, and the Rose Bowl's boner for a Big Ten/Pac Ten matchup potentially screws over Mizzou in favor of a team with a far inferior resume.

This system sucks, and we need changes. It should be impossible for Mizzou to finish behind Kansas, and it should be impossible for Georgia to finish ahead of Tennessee (even though I think they're better than the Vols). So here's an idea: don't count the conference championships in anybody's record. Some conferences don't even have them, so they get by playing 12 games instead of 13. A conference championship game should simply determine who wins the conference, and the loser should not be penalized.

Re: BCS Stupidity
 

It would be pretty trivial to come up with new and exciting unfair anomalies under your system.

Re: BCS Stupidity
 

Wait, the system sucks? I had no idea!

Seriously though, good post OP. In an already unbalanced world, having some conferences with divisions and championship games and some conferences without divisions and championship games makes things even worse.

Also, I thought they were changing it so that they would play all the bowl games, and then select the teams for the NCG. So the NCG would be bowl game #2 for those two teams. What happened to that?

Re: BCS Stupidity
 

[ QUOTE ]
I thought they were changing it so that they would play all the bowl games, and then select the teams for the NCG. So the NCG would be bowl game #2 for those two teams. What happened to that?

[/ QUOTE ]

First I've heard about that. I think that's a variation of the Plus One System, something that has simply been a suggestion. AFAIK, they're still selecting the top two teams (via BCS rankings) and sending them to the NC as their bowl game.

Re: BCS Stupidity
 

While I agree with the post, the bottom line is that without a playoff system set up in college football the only game that really matters is the championship game. So to say Mizzou gets screwed by making the Big 12 championship game isn't totally true, since if they beat Oklahoma they'll be playing for a national championship. However, the basic fact that the system sucks is duly noted.

Re: BCS Stupidity
 

Didnt Boise State beating OU prove that non-power confernece teams need a shot too. Hawaii should at least get a BCS Bowl game. At least they play Florida next year and the score will probably be 110-75 UF.

Re: BCS Stupidity
 

Random question that I don't think deserves its own thread so I'll post it here:

Say that Mizzou and WVU lose. Would you rather tOSU play Hawaii or a 2 loss team in the NT?

89,854 and counting

Re: BCS Stupidity
 

How is this any different than any pre BCS seasons? The options are:

1) Writers and coaches decide.
2) BCS.
3) Playoff.

Options 1 and 2 are both going to have the same negative scenarios as you described in your OP, with option 1 slightly worse, and option 3 would suck really really hard.

So what is your solution?

Re: BCS Stupidity
 

[ QUOTE ]


In an already unbalanced world, having some conferences with divisions and championship games and some conferences without divisions and championship games makes things even worse.



[/ QUOTE ]

Double edged sword. You can benefit greatly in the BCS by winning a conference championship game. I agree that ideally every major conference *should* play one but it is not that huge of a deal in my book.

Re: BCS Stupidity
 

The purpose of the BCS is to keep as much money in the BCS' conferences as possible. That's why it was created.

Your fallacy is actually believing that the purpose is to crown a national champion. It's all about the greenbacks and has nothing to do with sport.