The BCS sucks!! Just ask Texas!


Ilbowman

Recommended Posts

They really need to change the BCS and I think this is how it should shake down:

All top BCS conferences should have a title game.( so that would force the ACC, BIG TEN, BIG EAST, AND PAC 10 to have one to determine the best choice for a playoff).

Then have 2 at large from the second tier conferences according to the current BCS standings..

So you would have an 8 team playoff to determine which two teams would go to the national championship game. once that is decided you go by record or rankings to determine the rest of the bcs bowl games.

I figure since they get the whole month of December pretty much off than this should make the lead up to the championship much more interesting.. what does everyone else think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real issue here is the fact that the Big 12 allowed the BCS to act as their tie breaker.

Tech, UT, and Oklahoma all have one loss, and they all have beaten each other (for the most part) so why is Oklahoma their pick to go to the conference final? It makes no sense.

They need to establish tie-breakers. Head-to-head should be the first tie-breaker (obviously that wouldn't be enough here) so they'd need to have at least another 3 or 4 steps of tie-breaking. Be it points scored vs. points allowed, road record etc...

Bottomline, the Big 12 was the BCS' puppet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real issue here is the fact that the Big 12 allowed the BCS to act as their tie breaker.

Tech, UT, and Oklahoma all have one loss, and they all have beaten each other (for the most part) so why is Oklahoma their pick to go to the conference final? It makes no sense.

They need to establish tie-breakers. Head-to-head should be the first tie-breaker (obviously that wouldn't be enough here) so they'd need to have at least another 3 or 4 steps of tie-breaking. Be it points scored vs. points allowed, road record etc...

Bottomline, the Big 12 was the BCS' puppet.

The Big 12 used the BCS ranking as the 5th tier in a tie breaker in this instance. My question is did OU have a harder SOS than the other three teams? How did they rank higher in the BCS ranking than the other two?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OU, in large part, got ahead of Texas in the rankings by running up the score on their opponents at every opportunity.

Of course, that's been a trademark of Field Marshall Stoops for years.

I'm not an OU fan, but everyone does it that can get away with it, and he learned that from Spurrier during his tenure at Florida

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The computer determined the rankings by the "style" points of each win. Texas Tech ALMOST got beat by Baylor, an unranked team. Texas whooped Texas A&M, an unranked team. OU was close but then pulled ahead to win by 20 against a ranked team. That was how the computer saw it and made up the rankings. I personally dont like the system theyve got now, I'd rather see a playoff system implemented but who knows what could happen. I am an OU fan UNLESS they are playing my OSU Cowboys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Texas (although I am a UT fan) really has no one to blame but themselves. They were clearly a better team then Tech, but UT came out and stunk up the joint in the first half and then didn't have quite enough to seal the deal in the second half. If they would have played the full game, none of this discussion happens.

As said above, I would imagine the Big 12 will look to a different tie break system instead of letting coaches, sports writers and a computer decide for them. I don't really like running the score up on your opponents as a factor either. Oh well, I got other things to worry about than this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't blame coaches for running up the score. It's what the system forces them to do, the computers look at margin of victory and place a lot of importance on that....yet another failing of said system.:rolleyes:

I have to agree with Muggs here. I am an OU fan but put aside I still think the system is flawed. I see Texas and Tech's points as well. In the meantime I'll let the guys that make the big dollars finally figure out the solution that makes sense to the common person all along............a playoff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The BCS is garbage but Oklahoma deserved to go. Out of the 3 way tie where they all beat eachother OU-UT was the first game. Most teams improve later in the year. OU proved that they had done that by stomping Tech (who beat Texas) and scoring alot of points in every game after the loss to Texas. BCS ranks on style points and you cant argue that OU had more than UT or TTU. And Texas cant play the "head to head" game because in that case they still wouldnt win the tie because Tech beat them. Oklahoma is the better team and deserved to go

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The BCS is garbage but Oklahoma deserved to go. Out of the 3 way tie where they all beat eachother OU-UT was the first game. Most teams improve later in the year. OU proved that they had done that by stomping Tech (who beat Texas) and scoring alot of points in every game after the loss to Texas. BCS ranks on style points and you cant argue that OU had more than UT or TTU. And Texas cant play the "head to head" game because in that case they still wouldnt win the tie because Tech beat them. Oklahoma is the better team and deserved to go

No bias in that statement ehh? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.