NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Tue Sep 16, 2014 8:30 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 12:47 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2685
Location: Phoenix Arizona
This response and analogy from Mr Ouija is precisely why we need to replace the BCS with a 16 team playoff that includes all division 1A conference champions.

This way the Oregan would have a chance with 5 at large bids and the games championship would be decided on the field and not by voting biases.

Is Texas really better than Auburn or Ohio State at the end of the season. We will never know until they replace this bias BCS system with a 16 team playoff.

At the time WVU faced Va Tech in the early season, the QB situation was very transitional with a freshman leading the way alternating with another freshmen QB.

If WVU and Va Tech faced each other at season end, we may be blaming the BCS for having three undefeated teams not having the opportunity to play for the national title.



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:01 pm 
Yeah, Mr. Ouija, if you start the transitivity thing, I can argue for almost any team with one win to be ranked #3 (above anybody but undefeated Texas and USC).

But what you said speaks volumes ! It's all conjecture.... only the outcome between whoever is chosen #1 and whoever is chosen #2 is settled on the field. Lets quit arguing - throw in everyone that has a [non-ridiculous] claim to being on top (I think a 16-team field would be sufficient) and have a play-off.

Wouldn't you rather see that ?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:07 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 11:14 pm
Posts: 1016
Location: Ciales-Manatí-Bayamón, Puerto Rico

Quote:
"The conferences whose champions have a guaranteed annual berth in one of the BCS bowls are subject to review and possible loss of that guaranteed annual berth should the conference champion not have an average ranking of 12 or higher over a four-year period."
http://www.bcsfootball.org/index.cfm?page=eligibility

This is taken from the "Final" BCS Ranking, which is after the conference championships, but before any bowl games.

Since 1998 the following are the "worst" rankings for a champion from each conference:

BIG TEN:
1998 - Wisconsin #9 (Ohio St was #4 but was at-large selection to Sugar Bowl, Wisconsin played in Rose Bowl as Big Ten Champ; not sure how this would affect the 4-yr rule).
1999 - Wisconsin #7
2000 - Purdue Not Ranked in Final BCS Top 15. (3-way tie with Michigan & Northwestern, but Purdue got the Rose Bowl bid)
2001 - Illinois #8

This is hard to calculate and I haven't found any information regarding the 1998 situation or how Purdue's unranked status as Big Ten rep to Rose Bowl affects the 12th place average rule. If anyone has a BCS ranking that extends beyond the top 15 published on the BCS website, please share it. It would have taken a BCS ranking of 24 for Purdue in 2000 to give the BIG TEN a 4-yr average of 12 (assuming that Wisc's 98 ranking is used not Ohio State's).

PAC TEN:
1998 - UCLA #4
1999 - Stanford Not Ranked
2000 - Washington #4
2001 - Oregon #4

Obviously the same situation with the "unranked" team in the equation, but it would have taken a BCS ranking of 36 for Stanford in 1999 to put the PAC TEN's 4-yr average at 12.

ACC:
2001 - Maryland #10
2002 - Florida State #14
2003 - Florida State #7
2004 - Virginia Tech #8

This gives the ACC a "worst" 4-yr average of 9.75, meaning that a BCS ranking of 19 or worse in 2005 would result in a 12 average for '02-'05 period.

SEC:
1999 - Alabama #4
2000 - Florida #7
2001 - LSU #13
2002 - Georgia #3

This gives the SEC a "worst" 4-yr average of 6.75 for the period of '99-02.

BIG EAST:
2001 - Miami #1
2002 - Miami #1
2003 - Miami #9
2004 - Louisville #10 (Louisville's 2004 BCS ranking has been allowed by the BCS to calculate their 4-yr average, rather than Pitt's 21st rank).

This gives the Big East a 4-yr average of 5.25, requiring a 28th place ranking or worse in 2005 to arrive at a 12.

BIG XII:
1999 - Nebraska #3
2000 - Oklahoma #1
2001 - Colorado #3
2002 - Oklahoma #7

The "worst" 4-yr period in BCS history for the BIG XII is an average of 3.5 from '99-'02.

Others:

Mountain West:
2003 - Utah #22
2004 - Utah #6

The MWC would need a future 2-yr average of 10th place in the BCS rankings to garner the 12 average for its champion and an automatic BCS bid.

WAC:
2003 - Boise State #17
2004 - Boise State #9

The WAC would only need a future 2-yr average of 11th place in the BCS rankings get the 12 needed for an automatic BCS bid.

Can anyone help me with the questions listed above? Any additional thoughts/comments would be helpful as well.


What about the MAC, the Sun Belt and the C-USA?

_________________
Florida State Seminoles fan for life (mostly on football, basketball and baseball)! 2013 ACC football Atlantic Division champions; 2013 ACC football regular season champions; 2013 ACC football conference bowl tournament champions; 2014 NCAA D-I FBS BCS national champions!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:09 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon May 05, 2003 10:30 am
Posts: 1370
Location: Baltimore, MD

Quote:
This response and analogy from Mr Ouija is precisely why we need to replace the BCS with a 16 team playoff that includes all division 1A conference champions.

This way the Oregan would have a chance with 5 at large bids and the games championship would be decided on the field and not by voting biases.

Is Texas really better than Auburn or Ohio State at the end of the season. We will never know until they replace this bias BCS system with a 16 team playoff.

At the time WVU faced Va Tech in the early season, the QB situation was very transitional with a freshman leading the way alternating with another freshmen QB.

If WVU and Va Tech faced each other at season end, we may be blaming the BCS for having three undefeated teams not having the opportunity to play for the national title.



I actually find myself agreeing with you here, Lash. Make the conference races paramount and encourage schools to schedule stronger OOC opponents without fear of missing the playoffs with losses in such games.

The problems would seem to be where to put the first round games and what happens to the other bowls. A game between #1 USC and say #16 North Texas (did they win the SB?) would not be likely to draw many at a neutral site. Play the first round on campuses?

Then, do you try to fill the other bowls with first (and second) round losers? Again not too marketable.

That's why my preference would be an 8 team playoff. Maybe 12.


Last edited by westwolf on Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group