[NU Sports] Answer me this about the BCS...

[Paul Minerva]

The whole purpose of the BCS was to make money.  The clock can't be turned back but the "old" system was better.  College football is not and never should be a professional sport.  At least our school is on the side of academics and a competitive football program.  I hope we never see that attitude change.  There are a lot of casualties with programs that focus soley on the national chamionship--the price in young men's futures is too high.


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Michael Vance<mailto:michael.vance at att.net> 
  To: nwu-sports at romaine.tssi.com<mailto:nwu-sports at romaine.tssi.com> 
  Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 8:53 PM
  Subject: [NU Sports] Answer me this about the BCS...


  OK, this year we're faced with the very real possibility of three teams 
  from BCS conferences finishing the regular season undefeated, to say 
  nothing of Utah and Boise State.  So Auburn fans (and Oklahoma haters) are 
  in a tizzy because Auburn might not get a shot at a national title despite 
  a perfect record and some rather impressive performances.

  How many people have stopped to think that the whole purpose of the BCS 
  rankings was to break a tie when two (or more) teams with otherwise 
  identical records were vying for one (or both) of the slots in the national 
  title game?  Really, that's what it comes down to.  They've had to add 
  rules to deal with highly-ranked teams that didn't win their conference 
  (e.g., Cal) or that aren't from BCS conferences, but essentially, that's 
  what the rankings are for: To answer the question of who plays in the title 
  game when it's not necessarily obvious?

  It hasn't always worked in the eyes of some (Nebraska '00, Oklahoma '03), 
  but that is the point.  And it begs the question, if you're an Auburn fan 
  and you feel the Tigers are being cheated by the system (which you wouldn't 
  if your team and Oklahoma switched spots), what do you propose as an 
  alternative?  Or are you just bitching to hear yourselves bitch?  If there 
  are three 11-0 teams (or one 11-0 and two or more 10-1), only two can play 
  the NC game, and there has to be a system for deciding which ones.

  I don't want to get into a discussion of whether the BCS as a whole is an 
  unholy alliance that has sullied the grand tradition of college 
  football.  I also don't particularly want to get into whether the current 
  formula finally has the balance between polls and computer rankings right, 
  but that's a little more open.  I'm just talking about the question of, if 
  not an established pre-set formula that ranks the teams, what do you use?

  Any thoughts?

  BTW, read this week's mailbag column from NU's own Stewart Mandel for some 
  interesting info on how Auburn's non-conf schedule got so soft this year: 
  http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news;_ylc=X3oDMTBpdWp0ZTJpBF9TAzk1ODYyMzAwBHNlYwNvZQ--?slug=cnnsi-schedulingscrew&prov=cnnsi&type=lgns<http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news;_ylc=X3oDMTBpdWp0ZTJpBF9TAzk1ODYyMzAwBHNlYwNvZQ--?slug=cnnsi-schedulingscrew&prov=cnnsi&type=lgns>


  Michael, CAS '91
  mailto:michael at vance.com<mailto:michael at vance.com>

  _______________________________________________
  nwu-sports site list
  nwu-sports at tssi.com<mailto:nwu-sports at tssi.com>
  http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/nwu-sports<http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/nwu-sports>