BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

[MavHockey14]

You realize how bad the Washington program was when he took over, right? He's turned it around significantly, just hasn't been able to break through with a 10 win season. He'll get better players at USC and should win more games. Orgeron deserves a lot of credit for what he did, but I can't fault an AD with second thoughts on a coach who did so horribly at Ole Miss.

***************************
Everyone knows the BCS is flawed. What I don't like is the way too simplistic argument that "Team A won all of its games. Team B lost a game. Thus, team A is more deserving of a title shot. That is such a cop out. Complete nonsense to make it so simple. Ohio State's resume of wins is not as impressive as some other teams in the mix. Their toughest road game was at a very mediocre Michigan team. Their best home win was against Wisconsin. A team with a mediocre QB who just lost at home to a mediocre Penn State team. If I were a voter, I would take everything into consideration and not just that 12-0 is better than 11-1. That's dumb.

So Mizzou lost to an average South Carolina team. Auburn lost to an average LSU team. Bama lost to that Auburn team. The undefeated record may not have as many marquee wins, but they played the cards their dealt and didn't have any mishaps. Keep in mind OSU will add a win over MSU if they get in.

[RaceBoarder]

Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

And yet NIU gets told that they have no business being within 50 miles of the BCS discussion... And I do believe that they would likely win against UCF or any other team from the American Conference...

Gotta love the mess that Football is sometimes

[J.D.]

Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

So then if #1 loses in the bb or hockey tournament, they get another shot then?

You can say the same thing about those tournaments.

Again, many times, one can say that the best teams don't even make the ff's. This is no different.

There is no comparison between the sports. Those are actual postseason tournaments played in "neutral" locations. We haven't reached the postseason in college football yet. The job is to vote who you think the best teams are. That is, take everything into consideration.

So Mizzou lost to an average South Carolina team. Auburn lost to an average LSU team. Bama lost to that Auburn team. The undefeated record may not have as many marquee wins, but they played the cards their dealt and didn't have any mishaps. Keep in mind OSU will add a win over MSU if they get in.

Sorry, I don't think 10-2 South Carolina and 9-3 LSU are "average" football teams. That's completely false. The point here is to vote who you think is a better team, not just to look at who has a better record. Hey, if voters think Ohio State is better than team X, fine. But you can't just base it on record when you're comparing teams from different conferences. I know you love the Big Ten, but it's simply not as good as the SEC.

[J.D.]

Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

And I'm not even an SEC fan. I just hate the people who hate the SEC and can't accept that it is the best conference and has been for quite some time.

[alfablue]

And I'm not even an SEC fan. I just hate the people who hate the SEC and can't accept that it is the best conference and has been for quite some time.

I don't hate the sec, but it bugs me that people can't accept that they did not do what was required (so far) to play the last game.

For FB, the entire season is the tournament. Always has been.

[J.D.]

Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

There is no "requirement". As someone else said, if the only requirement was winning every game, NIU would be right up there. The human element of voting has a significant impact on what two teams will play in the game. Throughout the season, teams are never ranked solely on their record. Sometimes a two loss team is ranked ahead of a one loss team. It happens all the time. Yes, the college football regular season feels like a tournament at times, but there's still more to it. Your charge as a voter is to vote who you think are the top two teams. Right now, there are plenty of people who think Auburn (and even Bama) are better than Ohio State.

[LynahFan]

Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

I don't hate the sec, but it bugs me that people can't accept that they did not do what was required (so far) to play the last game.

For FB, the entire season is the tournament. Always has been.

If OSU or FSU loses this weekend, then you'd better be on here arguing this vociferously for NIU to be in the title game; otherwise it'll be obvious that your argument is based on the teams involved and not the principle involved.

[alfablue]

Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

There are conferences that are automatically part of the bcs. NIu and bsu are not part of that. Though.

Last time I checked acc b1g b12 p12 sec and Norte dame are part. So the best of those conferences know what is required. They all have cupcake non conference schedules. They all play each other. It's not osu's fault that the rest of the b1g sucks, they just won. Auburn did not. Missouri did not. Alabama did not. Deal with it. Previous years they were capable of doing that, alas not this season (so far).

Heck one season they met the requirements with a team that didn't even make its conference championship. They can deal with this just like the rest of the teams.

[J.D.]

Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

Again, there is no "requirement". Please stop saying that. No voter is required to vote Ohio State #2 just because they haven't lost. No, it's not Ohio State's fault that their schedule wasn't as tough as other teams in the mix. Nobody is saying that is their fault. But it's still a valid factor in determining who you think the better football team is. As I already stated, teams with better records are routinely ranked lower than other teams throughout the season. It happens all the time.

[MavHockey14]

There is no comparison between the sports. Those are actual postseason tournaments played in "neutral" locations. We haven't reached the postseason in college football yet. The job is to vote who you think the best teams are. That is, take everything into consideration.



Sorry, I don't think 10-2 South Carolina and 9-3 LSU are "average" football teams. That's completely false. The point here is to vote who you think is a better team, not just to look at who has a better record. Hey, if voters think Ohio State is better than team X, fine. But you can't just base it on record when you're comparing teams from different conferences. I know you love the Big Ten, but it's simply not as good as the SEC.

I'm not arguing that the Big Ten is better than the SEC; it's not. This season though, the SEC hasn't been anything special. Alabama is elite. Auburn and Mizzouri have made fairly strong cases to be in the level as well, but also have head scratching losses. LSU, AM, SC, MISS, MSU, and GA all have had average at best seasons. Maybe take SC as above average, but still, losing at Tennesee? Oregon won there by 49. The perception of how good the SEC is this year is based on the last few years. I just don't see how the conference has been so dominant this year.

[alfablue]

Again, there is no "requirement". Please stop saying that. No voter is required to vote Ohio State #2 just because they haven't lost. No, it's not Ohio State's fault that their schedule wasn't as tough as other teams in the mix. Nobody is saying that is their fault. But it's still a valid factor in determining who you think the better football team is. As I already stated, teams with better records are routinely ranked lower than other teams throughout the season. It happens all the time.

There is a requirement. Finish 1 and 2 in a bcs conference and you get to play the game.

The only reason we think the sec is so great is because we think so. Their non conference schedule is no better than anyone else's, so it's a comparison of bad teams. Auburn needed a miracle to beat a team that lost to Vanderbilt and beat a bad tam team that should have been great. Big deal. The only special team they have beat has been bama which also took a miracle. The other top team they played was a loss.

Not that they suck, but that does not fulfill the requirement to finish in the top two.

[jerphisch]

Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

I would rather see Alabama in the NC game than Auburn. This put Auburn above OSU is just stupid. Everyone keeps saying that voters should put the best team in, and I dont see how Auburn can be in the discussion. Lets be honest, they are pretty much a 9-3 team that has an enourmous horseshoe shoved up its ***.

[J.D.]

Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

I'm not arguing that the Big Ten is better than the SEC; it's not. This season though, the SEC hasn't been anything special. Alabama is elite. Auburn and Mizzouri have made fairly strong cases to be in the level as well, but also have head scratching losses. LSU, AM, SC, MISS, MSU, and GA all have had average at best seasons. Maybe take SC as above average, but still, losing at Tennesee? Oregon won there by 49. The perception of how good the SEC is this year is based on the last few years. I just don't see how the conference has been so dominant this year.

Auburn lost at LSU and Missouri lost to South Carolina. Those are not head scratching losses. To me, "average at best" fits what Michigan did this year. An SEC equivalent would be Miss State.

The only real problem I have in all this is the notion (maybe not your opinion) that just because Ohio State went 12-0, they deserve to be in the game. That's too simplistic.

[Hammer]

Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

How about this:

Duke beats Florida State by a point on a last second field goal. Say, 24-23.
Ohio State drops one to MSU by a touchdown, 24-17
Auburn beats Mizzou.

Alabama-Auburn national championship game.

[J.D.]

Re: BCS 2013-14: This space for rent

as an SEC hater hater, I'd love to see that!