[personal] Re: [Husker] BCS - Am I alone?

[Skylar Dodds]

Hello Husker Fans,

ML> Problem is, define "best". What criteria can you use to determine who
ML> is "best", unless it's whether or not one team would beat another if
ML> they played? And how can you know if one team would beat another,
ML> unless you actually play the game? If your position is that a person
ML> can determine if team A is better than team B without an actual game
ML> involved, then we should just skip ALL the games, not just the bowls.

That's still a pretty flawed argument for a playoff though. You claim
that a playoff is the only way to determine who is the best team, well
IMHO, the ONLY way to determine who the best team would be over 14
games, not 2 or 3 in a playoff. That just determines who the 'hottest'
team is at the end of the year.

Take Pittsburgh last year. They didn't have a very good season, but
they squeaked into the playoffs and had a great final 4 games.
Especially after the way they've started this year I don't think
anyone in their right minds would call them the 'best' team last year.
They simply got hot at the end (and were helped by some phantom calls
I might add).

So adding a playoff DOES NOT get you the best team, it just gives you
a champion.  I would argue that the BCS does a better job figuring out
who the BEST team is, (even though again we're still looking at
crowning a 'champion').

Even 1 game doesn't determine which team is better.  Do you really
think KSU is better than UT?  Do you really think UCLA is better than
USC?  How about ISU when they beat NU in

The best way to determine who is the best is to see who plays the best
over a long stretch of times because you can only get lucky so much.
That's one thing I love about baseball.  NOBODY makes the playoffs in
baseball by a fluke.  There's no such thing.  Even then, they still
play 5-7 times just to make sure that the better team moves on.

Since the sport doesn't allow a best-of-series, IMHO, this is the next
best thing.

-- 
Go Skers,
 Skylar                            mailto:Sklarbodds at cox.net

ML> On 12/5/06, Rod Wellman <gobigred66 at mac.com> wrote:
>>  Can we tweak the BCS formula
>> to make sure that we are picking the best 2 teams?  Maybe.


>> Can we
>> even expand to allow 4 teams a shot?  Maybe.  In that case, I think
>> the conference championship games should be eliminated.  But the
>> current system isn't doing a bad job of deciding the MNC.  However, I
>> WOULD like to see the time between the last game of the year and the
>> MNC game shortened a bit because a 4 or 5 week layoff can really mess
>> a team up.
>>
>> BTW, didn't Blackledge make a rather eloquent argument against a
>> playoff during the OU game?

ML> I agree that the bowls are events unto themselves, unlike an NFL
ML> playoff game. However, if we are to keep the bowl system to preserve
ML> that tradition, then let's agree to STOP crowning someone a
ML> "champion". You can't know the champion without an elimation-format
ML> tournament. Without that, all you have is "guesses" and "feelings"
ML> about who a champion *would be*. If you want to crown a champion, you
ML> must have a playoff.

>> If it changes, it will be because those idiots single handedly
>> changed public opinion with their non-stop crusade.

ML> I think public opinion is largely in favor of a playoff system
ML> already, so I don't think you can blame those feelings on broadcasters
ML> ... I think you can blame those feelings on what George Patton said:
ML> "America loves a winner, and will not tolerate a loser". The average
ML> football fan is very much fixated on knowing who "the best" is, and
ML> the current system does not adequately answer that question in many
ML> cases.

ML> Aside from a relative minority of fans like yourself who do not favor
ML> a playoff, the people who aren't in favor of a playoff are the people
ML> who are currently profiting the most from the current system: the bowl
ML> commitees and their cities, the TV networks, and the presidents and
ML> AD's of schools who enjoy the large payouts that would shrink in a
ML> merit-based playoff system (unless you think all 64 teams
ML> participating in the current bowl system would also qualify for a
ML> tournament, which I don't think is what anyone is advocating).

ML> _______________________________________________
ML> husker site list
ML> husker at tssi.com
ML> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker