dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Marina Del Rey, CA
| BCS "BS" Buster
For those of you ACC/BigEast/Big10/Big12/Pac-10/SEC elitist snobs...be warned; We're coming to get ya, expose you for the frauds you are...again. 
Beware of the WAC & Mountain West. At least 2 teams (Utah, BYU, or Boisie St.) will be ranked inside of the top 10 crashing your little New Years bi*ch party next year. But by your exclusive rules, only one can gain a BCS bowl birth. It's going to look pretty stupid not to have both the #2 and #8 BCS ranked squads in the BCS bowl games isn't it?
Another dagger in this unfair good 'ol boys [can you say special treatment for ND?] rip off system. And BTW, don't gimmie that dry "those lesser conference teams don't have the strength of schedule that us big boys have" diatribe. Like the BigEast? Like the BigTen, who's conference should be renamed to the big 2 and little 8. And why is Oregon even ranked?? Just to have a second Pac-10 team i the top 25? Save it. Buncha' over-hyped, over-rated, over-ranked pansies.
Come bowl time, we will see who's talking the talk, and who is walking the walk.
Again, you have been warned.
For your review:
Automatic BCS Bowl Qualification (from your corrupt, money grubbing, BCS rule book)
1. The top two teams in the final BCS Standings shall play in the National Championship Game.
2. The champions of the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10, and Southeastern conferences will have automatic berths in one of the participating bowls after the 2006 and 2007 regular seasons.
3. The champion of Conference USA, the Mid-American Conference, the Mountain West Conference, the Sun Belt Conference, or the Western Athletic Conference will earn an automatic berth in a BCS bowl game if either:
* Such team is ranked in the top 12 of the final BCS Standings, or,
* Such team is ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS Standings and its ranking in the final BCS Standings is higher than that of a champion of a conference that has an annual automatic berth in one of the BCS bowls.
4. AKA the big rip off No more than one such team from Conference USA, the Mid-American Conference, the Mountain West Conference, the Sun Belt Conference, and the Western Athletic Conference shall earn an automatic berth in any year.
5. If two or more teams from those conferences satisfy the provisions for an automatic berth, then the team with the highest finish in the final BCS Standings will receive the automatic berth, and the remaining team or teams will be considered for at-large selection if it meets the criteria.
6. Notre Dame will have an automatic berth if it is in the top eight of the final BCS Standings. |
|
jlhugh
Premium
join:2001-09-07
Wichita Falls, TX
clubs:
 ·AT&T Southwest
| we all know that the bsc sucks. unless you have a better solution dont bitch about it. if you have a playoff system there will always be someone that gets left out and is pissed. every conference would have to have a championship game to make it work right i believe. |
|
dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Marina Del Rey, CA
| 1. Using the existing 11 D1 conferences, only conference champs advance to playoffs..
2. 1st playoff week: bottom 4 conference champs = 2 games
3. 2nd playoff week: remaining two teams = 1 game
4. Bye week
5. 3rd playoff week: Top 7 conference champs + "wildcard" winner = 4 games
6. 4th week winners advance = 2 games (Christmas Day)
7. 5th playoff week: National Championship game (New Years Day).
* seeding and tie break rules found here (same as NFL):
»home.earthlink.net/~ob1gui/nflrules.htm
* Can use rotating BCS Bowl games as is for Championship site.
* All other teams not making the playoffs are free to play in any bowl invites. And are encouraged to play in more than one bowl if invited.
* Independents must join a conference to be eligible.
* Note:
1 team may play 5 extra games max
7 teams may play 3 games max
$250 Million championship purse distributed using same formula as PGA Championship among all conference champs. All schools share 1/2 of winnings with conference.
© The dogma D1 playoff solution 2008 |
|
powerhog
Stinkin' up the joint
Premium
join:2000-12-14
Owasso, OK
edit:
October 2nd, @11:42PM
| reply to dogma
edit-
NM, I see where you force the independents to join a conference.
Couldn't we just force all the non-BCS teams to join a BCS conference? |
|
dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Marina Del Rey, CA
edit:
October 3rd, @12:13AM
| There are only four D1 Independents:
Notre Dame
Navy
Western Kentucky
Army
They all can find homes. ND can go pound sand for all I care. |
|
jlhugh
Premium
join:2001-09-07
Wichita Falls, TX
clubs:
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to powerhog
said by powerhog 
Couldn't we just force all the non-BCS teams to join a BCS conference?
[/BQUOTE :that is what needs to be done and we will really see what these teams are made of. they get one upset every now and then. let them play in a bcs conference and see what they can do. |
|
Tex Longhorn
Premium,MVM
join:2001-01-05
San Diego, CA
clubs: 
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to dogma
said by dogma :Automatic BCS Bowl Qualification (from your corrupt, money grubbing, BCS rule book) It isn't my book and it is a bit early to rank the two teams at #2 and #8.
--
One down. Two to go. |
|
KickMe
join:2001-10-03
Lancaster, OH
·Earthlink Cable Mo..
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to dogma
Fact is there will not be a good playoff system anytime soon, so I would have to agree with getting these "BCS busters" into a real conference where they have solid competition week after week.
The reason the pretenders go undefeated is that they don't have to play in a conference where if you have the all too common occasional letdown, you are subject to defeat. Indeed the singular most important facet of college football is having to play with intensity week after week. Further these pretenders could very well win a bowl game because the "big boys" are subject to taking them lightly, and it becomes easy for the media to overestimate their talent. |
|
dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Marina Del Rey, CA
| reply to jlhugh
said by jlhugh :let them play in a bcs conference and see what they can do. That's the issue, all teams can't play in the BCS conferences. My solution is to fairly share the wealth. And that's really the crux of the matter, wealth.
said by Tex Longhorn :It isn't my book and it is a bit early to rank the two teams at #2 and #8. I admit its a wish right now, but assuming BYU and Boise run the table...and...teams above them split (example: #1 Oklahoma must play #5 Texas and #7 Texas Tech or #2 Alabama play #3 LSU) so of the current 7 squads ranked above them, 4 of them will have a loss come end of season. Thus BYU moves up to at least #3.
said by KickMe :..so I would have to agree with getting these "BCS busters" into a real conference where they have solid competition week after week. The reason the pretenders go undefeated ... [snip] You mean a "real" conference like the Pac-10?
• Where BYU has beaten Washington and UCLA by 59?
• Where Utah beat Oregon St?
• Where UNLV beat Arizona St?
• Where New Mexico beat Arizona?
• Where Boise St. beat Oregon?
Oh yeah, that's a "real" conference. ... NOT.
The "real conference" PAC-10 is 5 - 6 vs. the WAC and Mountain West ... the so-called "pretenders"?
Guess it's all luck huh? The facts do not support your contention whatsoever. The facts show the "pretenders" to have a winning record over the "real conference Pac-10. Continue to live in fantasy land, but the facts are not on your side. |
|
deblin
Dark Side of the Moon
Premium,MVM
join:2001-09-01
Middletown, DE
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast Workplace
·DSL EXTREME
| Well the WAC and Mountain West should become BCS conferences. I have no idea what's involved to do that or if it's even possible. But if they were in the BCS, maybe then the people outside of these conferences will STFU about them being inferior - or vice versa, they'll get spanked regularly by other "real" conferences and admit they shouldn't be in the BCS.
Note: I don't really have an opinion either way. I agree there are some WAC and/or MW teams that are competitive with BCS teams, but at the same time, does an 11 or 12 win season mean as much in the WAC/MW as the SEC/ACC/Big Ten/Big 12? Note: I left the Pac 10 out :P The Pac 10 is kind of like the MW or WAC conference, except they're already in the BCS 
--
He who is not contented with what he has, would not be contented with what he would like to have. -Socrates |
|
KickMe
join:2001-10-03
Lancaster, OH
·Earthlink Cable Mo..
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to dogma
You don't have facts, you just cherry pick games. Gee I can too: Hawaii (12-0) 10, UGA (10-2) 41.
The actual fact is that you don't get respect nationally (and that is by most professional sports analysts) because your schedule is soft.
I guess there's lots of folks that survived the kool-aid in Guyana. |
|
jlhugh
Premium
join:2001-09-07
Wichita Falls, TX
clubs:
·AT&T Southwest
| i think they rank teams to early. they should at least let them start playing in their conference games before ranking any team. no more pre-season ranks. teams play 3-4 easy teams before they really start playing good ones. so why start ranking before those games? |
|
dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Marina Del Rey, CA
| reply to KickMe
said by KickMe :You don't have facts, you just cherry pick games. I guess there's lots of folks that survived the kool-aid in Guyana. I can cherry pick games, but I can't cheery pick the overall record this season (that's exactly why I included that fact). As we speak, it's still 5-6 Pac-10 vs. WAC/MW. This record exposes the BCS (or at least the Pac-10) for the frauds they really are. So much that the Pac-10 is choosing not to schedule in WAC/MS.
You let me know when the Big-10 wants some of this. 
Aaahhh, the Kool-aid is sweeeet! |
|
deblin
Dark Side of the Moon
Premium,MVM
join:2001-09-01
Middletown, DE
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast Workplace
·DSL EXTREME
| reply to jlhugh
said by jlhugh :i think they rank teams to early. they should at least let them start playing in their conference games before ranking any team. no more pre-season ranks. teams play 3-4 easy teams before they really start playing good ones. so why start ranking before those games? Because upsets sell.  Look at last year and so far this year (especially last week)! By ranking them prematurely (I do agree with you), they get the benefit of a bunch of upsets/etc. That means more viewers/etc. It would definitely be a whole different story if the rankings didn't happen until at least after the first conference game or two.
--
He who is not contented with what he has, would not be contented with what he would like to have. -Socrates |
|
tao
Chaos Impends
Premium
join:2000-12-03
Lansing, MI | reply to dogma
It is all chatter, the historical bowls have a vested interest that simply will not go away. |
|
eve
Premium
join:2003-01-02
Atlanta, GA
edit:
October 5th, @07:13PM
| reply to jlhugh
said by jlhugh :i think they rank teams to early. they should at least let them start playing in their conference games before ranking any team. no more pre-season ranks. teams play 3-4 easy teams before they really start playing good ones. so why start ranking before those games? Agree. A team that starts outside the Top 25 has a more difficult time getting up into the polls than a team that starts in the Top 10.. even if the team outside the poll goes on a hot streak while the team that started in the Top 10 loses one or two games. Look at Auburn. 2 losses and it's still in the top 25? Anyone who watched Auburn play in those two games has to realize they are absolutely abysmal. |
|
RockCake
Premium
join:2005-07-12
Woodbridge, VA | reply to tao
Yep, that's the problem. College football (1A) isn't run by the NCAA, it's run by 6 conference presidents, and the NCAA doesn't have the balls to say "enough!" |
|
jlhugh
Premium
join:2001-09-07
Wichita Falls, TX
clubs:
·AT&T Southwest
| i will tell you that i am a big 12 fan and i always think to myself why am i gripping about this because my team can get into the title game. why should i care about any other teams? then i think it would be cool to see a boise st come in and do what they did to OK a few years back to another team in a title game. that would be some excitement. |
|
Tex Longhorn
Premium,MVM
join:2001-01-05
San Diego, CA
clubs: | reply to dogma
That BYU pick isn't looking so good.
--
One down. Two to go. |
|
dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Marina Del Rey, CA
| said by Tex Longhorn :That BYU pick isn't looking so good. Did I say BYU? (looking up tonight's score...) ...um...I meant Utah. Yeah, Go Ute's!
BTW, My main argument remains the same. TCU (another fine Mountain West squad) has one loss...and that's to then #1 OU. |
|
