And the BCS runner-up goes to...
Poll
 | 3 votes (33.33%) | ||
| | 2 votes (22.22%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 2 votes (22.22%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 2 votes (22.22%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| No votes (0%) |
9 members have voted
LSU is most likely going to get to the game. Even with a loss in the SEC title game, it's hard to believe that they won't get to the BCS National Championship game. The question is who should get to play them... before voting remember a few things.
Alabama lost to LSU IN TUSCALOOSA, in a defensive showdown that was decided 9-6 in OT... but in November.
Oregon lost to LSU in Dallas, the first week of the season, but by a larger margin.
Oklahoma and Oklahoma State are the only two candidates in the running for the Big 12, but both have confounding losses to less than stellar teams.
Houston is undefeated, in Conference USA, and currently is only ranked 11th in the BCS. Assuming they win out in the toughest part of their schedule of course.
The ACC Title Game, which is shaping up to be a match up of VA Tech and Clemson, both with only one loss.
The Big Ten Title Game, which won't have any title contenders so a vote here is basically voting for Jerry Logan.
Georgia/Arkansas, if Arkansas can beat LSU, or Georgia if they can in the SEC Title Game.
Any "others" should be legit contenders, so please give reasoning behind it.
My vote goes to Houston. Conference USA is a tougher conference this year than in other years. It might be at the same level as the Mountain West, and COULD be argued that it's better than the Big East. Case Keenum is having a wild year, and although the numbers may be a bit skewed since the defenses are non-existent, he is still a prolific passer.
Should Houston win out, and that's a BIG should right now, they will have defeated a ranked Southern Miss team, a UCLA team that COULD play in the Pac-12 Title Game, and some other stronger than average teams (SMU, Tulsa). And staying unbeaten is a feat into itself. If Boise State would have won out, they should be in the mix, but alas, the loss to TCU takes them out. And while I agree that Big Six schools are generally better, Houston has to compete with much larger schools for talent. This is tough...
Quote: TiltpoulLSU is most likely going to get to the game. Even with a loss in the SEC title game, it's hard to believe that they won't get to the BCS National Championship game. The question is who should get to play them... before voting remember a few things.
Alabama lost to LSU IN TUSCALOOSA, in a defensive showdown that was decided 9-6 in OT... but in November.
. . .
Georgia/Arkansas, if Arkansas can beat LSU, or Georgia if they can in the SEC Title Game.
If LSU gets to the National Championship game, then neither Alabama, Arkansas, or Georgia can play them. BCS rules state that a team has to win their conference in order to play in the National Championship game. I think the team that would most likely play them is Oregon, assuming they win out and win the PAC 12 championship game. If they don't, I think it'll be Oklahoma if they get past Ok State. Possibly the ACC Champion might sneak in. Houston is a long shot IMHO.
Quote: Toes14BCS rules state that a team has to win their conference in order to play in the National Championship game.
LoL... not at all... that rule does not exist. We can go back a few years and see that Nebraska didn't even play for the Big 12 Title game and yet they got into the championship. The BCS is a totally messed up system. All it states is that the top 2 in the final standings released on December 4 or 11 (I can't remember how late it goes this year) gets to the title game.
Quote: TiltpoulI prefer to keep my personal opinions separate from my main posts... so here's MY response.
My vote goes to Houston. Conference USA is a tougher conference this year than in other years. It might be at the same level as the Mountain West, and COULD be argued that it's better than the Big East. Case Keenum is having a wild year, and although the numbers may be a bit skewed since the defenses are non-existent, he is still a prolific passer.
Should Houston win out, and that's a BIG should right now, they will have defeated a ranked Southern Miss team, a UCLA team that COULD play in the Pac-12 Title Game, and some other stronger than average teams (SMU, Tulsa). And staying unbeaten is a feat into itself. If Boise State would have won out, they should be in the mix, but alas, the loss to TCU takes them out. And while I agree that Big Six schools are generally better, Houston has to compete with much larger schools for talent. This is tough...
I agree with your choice, but maybe not for the best reasons. I simply am curious about the outcome. If Houston gets blown out, that's OK with me. At least, there would exist a high level of interest for me. And did not the lowly Jets and Joe Namath create a great giant killer moment way back when?
So...my vote "stands" as is...I am picking Alabama vs. LSU for the National Championship. There are a lot of things standing in the way, of course. They both have to "win out" first. I also am assuming that the voters will continue to vote Alabama ahead of all other one loss teams and that Houston will not get significant votes or enough computer "points" (however that formula works) to move up to #2 in the final BCS standings.
I have heard all of the arguments for/against a playoff and I am "for" a playoff system that includes the top 8-16 teams. It is done in most NCAA sports (including other divisions in football!!) and it would be an opportunity to make more bowls valuable to the championship process. The first week's games could be some of the mid-level bowls and the remaining rounds the major BCS bowls. More bowl games would sell out, the TV interest would be tremendous, some of the crappy bowls would fail (do 6-5 teams belong in a bowl????), and we'd be able to include teams like Houston and Boise State more easily...then they would either put up or shut up by having to win four games against traditional power houses.
Quote: RonCThat thing about the rule barring anyone but a conference champion already caused me to extend an apology to my son--I stated it as fact (dumb move--I should have done research first) and he disagreed. I ate crow, of course. Another lesson in believing everything you read on the internet!!
So...my vote "stands" as is...I am picking Alabama vs. LSU for the National Championship. There are a lot of things standing in the way, of course. They both have to "win out" first. I also am assuming that the voters will continue to vote Alabama ahead of all other one loss teams and that Houston will not get significant votes or enough computer "points" (however that formula works) to move up to #2 in the final BCS standings.
I have heard all of the arguments for/against a playoff and I am "for" a playoff system that includes the top 8-16 teams. It is done in most NCAA sports (including other divisions in football!!) and it would be an opportunity to make more bowls valuable to the championship process. The first week's games could be some of the mid-level bowls and the remaining rounds the major BCS bowls. More bowl games would sell out, the TV interest would be tremendous, some of the crappy bowls would fail (do 6-5 teams belong in a bowl????), and we'd be able to include teams like Houston and Boise State more easily...then they would either put up or shut up by having to win four games against traditional power houses.
RIDICULOUS! So, if Ala were to beat LSU in the national title game, they are national champions? Ever heard of best 2 of 3? How
could 1-1 decisions mean Ala is the better team. Lsu beat them at home. Shouldn't LSU get a chance at a third game at their house?
Maybe LSU all had severe diarrhea on championship day.
Quote: RonCI have heard all of the arguments for/against a playoff and I am "for" a playoff system that includes the top 8-16 teams. It is done in most NCAA sports (including other divisions in football!!) and it would be an opportunity to make more bowls valuable to the championship process. The first week's games could be some of the mid-level bowls and the remaining rounds the major BCS bowls. More bowl games would sell out, the TV interest would be tremendous, some of the crappy bowls would fail (do 6-5 teams belong in a bowl????), and we'd be able to include teams like Houston and Boise State more easily...then they would either put up or shut up by having to win four games against traditional power houses.
An absolute must-read for college foot ball fans is "Death to the BCS" by Dan Wetzel et. al from Yahoo! Sports. If you can read that book and believe that the BCS is a good system, you must be on some fantastic drug and I want your doctor's info. A playoff is the only fair way to decide who the national champion is.
My Hawkeyes aren't even in the running at all, so I have no horse in this matter this year.
Quote: dmRIDICULOUS! So, if Ala were to beat LSU in the national title game, they are national champions? Ever heard of best 2 of 3? How
could 1-1 decisions mean Ala is the better team. Lsu beat them at home. Shouldn't LSU get a chance at a third game at their house?
Maybe LSU all had severe diarrhea on championship day.
I made my pick based on the way things are at this moment; not because I like the answer I have come up with.
It isn't ridiculous at all. If Green Bay lost to any AFC team in the regular season and then played that same team in the Super Bowl, they'd still be the Super Bowl Champions. If Alabama and LSU are 1-2, they'll play again and everyone we realize that the winner is the National Champion even if they are 1-1 head to head. LSU will be able to say they beat them once, of course, but they would go home without the trophy.
Even if they went to a playoff, the same thing could happen. There would surely be match-ups of teams that had played each other in the play-off bracket and, if they were seeded as they stand now, they would still be a possible match for a championship game.
All of the teams that have lost one game brought this upon themselves by losing. If there was just one other BCS college that was undefeated, no one would be talking about an Alabama-LSU rematch.
Think about it a different way...if Alabama lost to #1 by a field goal and Oklahoma lost to #unrated (my team, Texas Tech!!, who has won nothing since and has been beaten badly every week since beating Oklahoma), who deserves the shot at the title? Go through each one loss team, analyze it that way, and it still comes up Alabama at this point...
Anything could change after this week's action...
Quote: RonCI made my pick based on the way things are at this moment; not because I like the answer I have come up with.
It isn't ridiculous at all. If Green Bay lost to any AFC team in the regular season and then played that same team in the Super Bowl, they'd still be the Super Bowl Champions. If Alabama and LSU are 1-2, they'll play again and everyone we realize that the winner is the National Champion even if they are 1-1 head to head. LSU will be able to say they beat them once, of course, but they would go home without the trophy.
Even if they went to a playoff, the same thing could happen. There would surely be match-ups of teams that had played each other in the play-off bracket and, if they were seeded as they stand now, they would still be a possible match for a championship game.
All of the teams that have lost one game brought this upon themselves by losing. If there was just one other BCS college that was undefeated, no one would be talking about an Alabama-LSU rematch.
Think about it a different way...if Alabama lost to #1 by a field goal and Oklahoma lost to #unrated (my team, Texas Tech!!, who has won nothing since and has been beaten badly every week since beating Oklahoma), who deserves the shot at the title? Go through each one loss team, analyze it that way, and it still comes up Alabama at this point...
Anything could change after this week's action...
I don't consider the first game as just a ho-hum, get it out of the way it doesn't really mean anything. At the end of the pro season, many games become unimportant, and losing a game doesn't signify that the winner was the best team on that given day. Plus, there is the very real concept that the losing team in a rematch has an advantage. I say LSU won a big one fair and square, to my knowledge, and I don't care to see any rematches. But you have a defensible position, for sure.
This is playing out a little like the pros (mentioned in the above comment)--Alabama's loss to LSU, which seemed like the most important game of their season, is becoming more and more just a loss as the others fall around them. If LSU had abused Alabama it would be a lot different...my feeling at the end of that game was that LSU escaped more than anything. Let's not mince words--Alabama was beaten--but it wasn't a convincing win at all. That also plays into the equation.
We'll see how it sorts out...
None of my teams will be anywhere near the BCS championship. Oh well. Maybe next time!!
Quote: dmReflecting my indifference to the whole BCS BS, would a win by Ala against LSU in the next big one automatically make them champion? Is it still subject to a final vote? Wonder why they don't just play a single game to decide the World Series? Don't be ridiculous and say money. I thought I heard reference to Ala's win this week as being non-impressive. I have no idea what Ole Miss has this year, but their loss to the more southern guys was extremely impressive. I can't look at the paper because I have all the President's Cup recorded
I believe the BCS trophy is automatically awarded to the winner of the championship game. I think they do take final votes on the polls but I'm not sure whether or not they are bound to select the winner as #1. If not, there is the possibility of someone other than the BCS champion being #1 in another poll.
It is all about money and control. Every other sport has a playoff and the winner, though they might have been beaten by others in the bracket, has to win a number of games against top teams to be crowned champion. The BCS schools don't want that because there is apparently too much money in the way they have it organized now. They are the "big boys" and have made it as hard as they can for others to find their way into the bigger bowl games. It isn't "money" as much as it is "who gets the money"...I think a tournament would bring in more money but they'd likely have to split it with more teams.
There is a reason Texas started "The Longhorn Network"...big boys want to dominate all the dough.
Alabama's win was not impressive; that could be their downfall...but I don't think so. LSU was much more impressive but Ole Miss stinks and they've already announced a coaching change. Turmoil is not good for a team in most cases.
Again, I don't like the potential outcome that seems most likely today...but it is what I see happening at this point.
Quote: RonCI believe the BCS trophy is automatically awarded to the winner of the championship game. I think they do take final votes on the polls but I'm not sure whether or not they are bound to select the winner as #1. If not, there is the possibility of someone other than the BCS champion being #1 in another poll.
It is all about money and control. Every other sport has a playoff and the winner, though they might have been beaten by others in the bracket, has to win a number of games against top teams to be crowned champion. The BCS schools don't want that because there is apparently too much money in the way they have it organized now. They are the "big boys" and have made it as hard as they can for others to find their way into the bigger bowl games. It isn't "money" as much as it is "who gets the money"...I think a tournament would bring in more money but they'd likely have to split it with more teams.
There is a reason Texas started "The Longhorn Network"...big boys want to dominate all the dough.
Alabama's win was not impressive; that could be their downfall...but I don't think so. LSU was much more impressive but Ole Miss stinks and they've already announced a coaching change. Turmoil is not good for a team in most cases.
Again, I don't like the potential outcome that seems most likely today...but it is what I see happening at this point.
Turmoil didn't hammer the PSU football team that badly. Have to admire them, and I still do admire the program, even admiring almost none of the people running it. Not too many thugs that I associate with PS, but I may be wrong on that. I thought there was a situation a couple of years ago, when there were several "deserving teams," maybe Boise, Auburn.....where there was a lot of speculation about an impressive winner in big game #2 being voted number 1 over the winner of big game #1. In other words more people thought the outcome of game 2 should decide the Natl Champ because they were the best teams. Has there ever been a year where most everyone thought the best 2 teams were getting to match up? I will be anxiously watching the evolution of the poll to see how many more votes OR picks up. Can anyone out-cheap-shot that? Faygo? Frank?
Quote: RonCI believe the BCS trophy is automatically awarded to the winner of the championship game. I think they do take final votes on the polls but I'm not sure whether or not they are bound to select the winner as #1. If not, there is the possibility of someone other than the BCS champion being #1 in another poll.
The "BCS Trophy" is actually the American Football Coaches Association (AFCA) trophy, and while "technically" it is awarded to the AFCA's "national college football champion," the coaches in the poll are required to vote the BCS Championship Game winner as their #1 team. (IIRC, a few years ago, when USC was both AP and the coaches' #1 team but was #3 in BCS, three coaches still voted USC #1 in the final poll; presumably, they were replaced in the poll the following year.)
Quote: Toes14BCS rules state that a team has to win their conference in order to play in the National Championship game.
Not only do they not state that, but they do state rules for a situation where neither team in the BCS Championship Game is a conference champion. The rule is, the #1 and #2-ranked teams in the final BCS poll (there is no "post-bowls" BCS poll as (a) there is no need for one, and (b) there is no post-bowls Harris poll) go to the BCS Championship Game. (The bit about neither the #1 nor #2 teams being conference champions is in a rule specifying the one case where a conference can have three teams in BCS bowl games; some people are claiming there is a chance that LSU can lose the SEC Championship Game to Georgia and still end up #2 in the BCS poll behind Alabama, which would result in Alabama and LSU in the BCS Championship Game and Georgia being in a BCS bowl as well.)
Quote: ThatDonGuyThe "BCS Trophy" is actually the American Football Coaches Association (AFCA) trophy, and while "technically" it is awarded to the AFCA's "national college football champion," the coaches in the poll are required to vote the BCS Championship Game winner as their #1 team. (IIRC, a few years ago, when USC was both AP and the coaches' #1 team but was #3 in BCS, three coaches still voted USC #1 in the final poll; presumably, they were replaced in the poll the following year.)
Required to vote a certain way? Then they are not voting at all-someone else voted for them. If you are bound to vote a certain way, why would they ever know someone didn't? Dumbest thing I ever heard, why exactly ties them with about a million other ideas.
Quote: dmQuote: ThatDonGuyThe "BCS Trophy" is actually the American Football Coaches Association (AFCA) trophy, and while "technically" it is awarded to the AFCA's "national college football champion," the coaches in the poll are required to vote the BCS Championship Game winner as their #1 team. (IIRC, a few years ago, when USC was both AP and the coaches' #1 team but was #3 in BCS, three coaches still voted USC #1 in the final poll; presumably, they were replaced in the poll the following year.)
Required to vote a certain way? Then they are not voting at all-someone else voted for them. If you are bound to vote a certain way, why would they ever know someone didn't? Dumbest thing I ever heard, why exactly ties them with about a million other ideas.
They have to do it this way because otherwise the BCS Championship Game would, for all intents and purposes, be meaningless.
By a strict reading of the NCAA Bylaws, only "the National Coaches Association" in that sport or "a national wire-service poll" can name a national champion that allows the named school to give its players championship awards (i.e. rings) above and beyond anything else they may receive. The BCS organization is neither of these things, and, as far as the NCAA is concerned, has no authority to give the players anything (other than, say, "BCS Championship Game Participation" rings/awards - although, as far as I know, there is no rule against the BCS putting "BCS National Champions" on the winning team's "participation" rings, so long as the other team gets rings as well).
The BCS gets around this without having to change the bylaws (which, if you ask me, is what should happen - I'm pretty sure BCS already resulted in one bylaw (that specifically said that the NCAA recognizes (only) the coaches' poll and "national wire service poll" champions as "unofficial national champions") being removed) by making sure the coaches' poll national champion is the BCS national champion as well.
