i think the BCS has some merit. i don't think we'll see a playoff system because the bowl system has so much money at stake and any playoff system would be hard to enact because the major conferences would only participate if they could get mucho deniros...and, they'd all want a piece of the pie even if they aren't represented, etc. here's the deal...OU lost to Kansas State, a 3-loss team ranked #10 in the coaches’ poll, on a neutral field -- and K-State has played extremely well late in the season. LSU lost to Florida, a 4-loss team ranked #17 in the coaches’ poll, at HOME. USC lost at 7-6 Cal. add to this that OU played the 11th most difficult schedule in the country (compared to 29 and 37 for LSU and USC respectively) and it seems pretty clear to me that OU is the most deserving team to play in the sugar bowl.<br><br>the BCS was put into place to minimize the human bias and reward the team(s) that had achieved the most over their entire body of work (i don't like the idea of "the entire body of work" but that's how it goes in college football). then, when it produces exactly what it was intended to, everyone complains that it doesn't match up with their biased views...it works better than the previous system that was just two polls and we had no mechanism for trying to get the two best teams matched up against each other. am i a fan? not really, but i don't see any viable alternative that is better. there's just too much money at stake for a playoff system to get worked out any time soon and things were downright goofy prior to the BCS.<br><br>
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>when it produces exactly what it was intended to, everyone complains that it doesn't match up with their biased views<p><hr></blockquote><p>That's the problem Sean... I don't think anyone is offering biased views... we simply want #1 to play #2 for the Championship (no matter what teams they may be) - which is not happening. We didn't make USC #1, the pollsters did. Therefore, USC SHOULD be playing in the SugarBowl, or they should be ranked #3 - one or the other.<br><br> What?<br>Visit Me!
_________________________ The Graphic Mac- Tips, reviews & more on all things OSX & graphic design.
The Big 12 is a good conference, particularly with the pigskin, but not quite so much in other NCAA sports.<br><br>There is no doubt that men's football and basketball are the most "important" college sports with regard to fan base and income. Certainly my two favorites as well. <br><br>But if you include the other NCAA team sports (i.e. baseball, softball, tennis, etc.) or individual sports then NO other conference can compare to the Pac-10. It has more championships than any other league (nearly doubling the Big12). Unfortunately this doesn't help my poor, really terrible Arizona football team at all. USC actually lost some serious BCS points when it crushed Arizona 45-0 <br><br><br><br><br>
Loc: Beautiful Southern California
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>i don't see any viable alternative that is better. there's just too much money at stake for a playoff system to get worked out any time soon and things were downright goofy prior to the BCS.<p><hr></blockquote><p>There ARE alternatives, there will always be an alternative, and several have been mentioned by analysts, sportscaster, and writers in the past. I agree that money (and greed from the bowl committees) have alot to do with a legitimate playoff system ever being manifested.<br>And yes, prior to the BCS, the bowl system was not working in terms of a true champion, BUT, by no means can anyone in there right mind even say that that BCS is a clear cut solution. That system has some serious holes in it, that need to be corrected.<br><br>Two years ago it rewarded Nebraska after the Cornhuskers gave up 62 points to Colorado. Three years ago it plucked Florida State over Miami after Florida State had lost to Miami.<br><br>No, I think this system is definitely not the solution.<br><br><br>
the big 12 is a very new conference in the grand scheme of things, but they are good in the sports that make money (football and basketball). people are saying that the big 12 is the best basketball school in the country and having 2 teams in the final 4 the last 2 years is pretty good evidence to back that up. they have 3 teams in the top 6 this year already. <br><br>i agree that they aren't a strong conference when the whole athletic program is viewed, but nobody views lacross, crew, and softball. the big 12 is strong in football and basketball. then again, i only care about hoops. <br><br>
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.