BCS
 

1. Alabama
2. Oklahoma
3. Texas
4. Florida
5. USC
6. Utah

My prediction in bold.

Scenario #1: Alabama and Oklahoma both win their conference championships and then play for the national title.

Scenario #2: Alabama loses and Oklahoma wins. Oklahoma would play Florida in the title game because Florida would jump over Texas and into the #2 spot.

Scenario #3: Alabama wins and Oklahoma loses. Alabama would play Texas for the title.

Scenario #4: Alabama and Oklahoma both lose. Texas and Florida would play for the title.

Scenario #5: Alabama loses and Oklahoma wins but Texas stays ahead of Florida (very unlikely should Florida beat Alabama) and then Oklahoma and Texas play for the title.

Under no circumstances will USC or Utah be in the title game.

Another question is who will be the three at-large teams for the BCS? The six conference winners are in and so is Utah. So that's seven. That leaves three open spots. Texas is 99.999 assured of getting one of them. So that leaves two. I believe that the loser of the Alabama/Florida game will get a spot. That leaves one spot. Texas Tech can't go because a conference can't have more than two teams unless those they have the #1 and #2 teams. So that would basically take it down to Ohio St. or Boise St. for the final spot. I'd say if the Fiesta Bowl has the choice, they would go with Boise St. but any other bowl would chose Ohio St.

The biggest travesty in this whole thing is of course TExas Tech not playing in the Big 12 championship game. Oklahoma of course insisted on Texas Tech playing in this game by explaining that head to head means absolutely nothing as they beat Texas Tech and Texas didn't. Their circularity of course meant that Oklahoma and Stoops felt T Tech was the deserving big 12 south champion. Texas Tech beat Texas and Oklahoma didn't...plus Texas Tech beat Oklahoma State prettier than Oklahoma did. Therefore, according to the Oklahoma publicity machine the Texas Tech/Oklahoma matchup really meant nothing. Oklahoma tosses Texas game in favor of the Texas Tech game, therefore Texas Tech can toss the Oklahoma game in favor of the Texas game putting them ahead of Oklahoma obviously according to the Oklahoma argument. Their own logic and argument placed them below Texas Tech.

And of course Texas was also arguing for Texas Tech as they claimed they beat Oklahoma straight up...meaning their straight up loss to Texas Tech was the decider. Their own logic and argument placed them below Texas Tech.

And of course MIke Leach brought up the graduation rates as well. So all 3 big 12 South schools argued for Texas Tech as the champion of the conference to no success. The pollsters have it all wrong.

Texas Tech...the true Big 12 south champion.

the Sugar Bowl has already stated that IF Bama loses to fla. they want the Tide in NOLA. i would think the same for fla. Sugar Bowls problem who they get stuck with to play the SEC team. winner of the ACC or Cincinnati? actually i think the Bearcats have a nice team but the fans don't travel.

Texas logic is that they lost to Tech on Tech's home field on the last play.
(after a freshman dropped a lollypop interception to seal the game) and beat Oklahoma cleanly on a neutral field. Tech barely sneaking by Baylor sealed their coffin. Any team that gets beat as bad as Tech did... They are just not that good. They got Texas on a very bad game and barely won.

Unlike most Texas fans, it does not bother me that Oklahoma went over us. You play your best and live with the results. We know the system has its drawbacks. No use to continually beating your head against a wall.

The one thing I can make sense of is that out of those 3 Big 12 teams, Tech is cearly the NOT the best. Good teams dont get 65 or whatever points put up on them. Tech away from Lubbock can lose to any decent team.

I think the King's scenario seems correct. Except I think Ohio St. has a good chance to replace Boise. Ohio St. has a huge following. And it does matter.

Hey..I'm not a bcs fan because it's so phony.



But Ohio State or any other team like them.....check the schedules for whoever that team could be ...and then look at Boise.

Humanitarian Bowl wants Boise and Ball St. Ball wants no parts of Boise on the blue rug. Ball has no objections to Boise as long as it's a neutral site.

They do travel but ther are only about 100 of them so they are hard to notice

How 'bout this ? A play off system. Has anyone thought of that yet?
8 teams, the 4 BCS bowl games for the first round and....wait....have I heard this before? Well whatever.....just so everyone knows that it was MY idea.....
:zz:

8 team playoff
Penn st
FL
ALA
Tex
Ok
USC
Utah
Boise St/Texas Tech

Boise-Texas Tech/Utah fiesta
USC/OKl Rose
Penn st/ALA Sugar
Tex/Fl Orange

Fiesta winner vs Rose winner
Sugar vs Orange

I think any bowl besides the Fiesta would chose Ohio St. The Fiesta might too but they would probably consider Boise for two reasons:

1) Idaho's close proximity to Arizona. I think in this economy, the fact that they are so close and travel expenses would be a lot lower for not only the team but the fans, that could play a role.

2) Boise's very successful visit the last time they played in the game, against Oklahoma.

8 teams
Jan 1
Outback or Capital One 1-8
Cotton 2-7
Rose 3-6
Sugar 4-5

Jan 8
Orange 1-4
Fiesta 2-3

Jan 15
BCS Bowl 1-2

or 4 teams

Jan 1 (Rotating the 4 BCS bowls every year)
Orange 1-4
Fiesta 2-3

Jan 8
BCS Bowl 1-2

I think it also depends on who is the other representative. If Texas gets the Fiesta, you are going to get many more requests for tickets from Texas fans if Ohio St. is the pick. It may not be fair... but this is how I see it. Texas and Ohio St. fans will travel in very large numbers. You are talking about the two top schools in the nation for revenue from sports. Huge Alumni numbers.

Should be interesting.

Idaho isnt real close to AZ

Boise to Phoenix is under 1000 miles and it's half the distance of Columbus to Phoenix.

Boise to Pheonix is farther than Chicago to NY. It is real hard to make a case that proximity is a reason to choose Boise. Maybe they think Boise's fans are more apt to make the trip being that they are new to the big bowl game thing?

What does Chicago to NY have to do with anything? Why is it hard to make a case for Boise based on proximity? They are less than 1000 miles away and Ohio St. fans would have to travel twice as far to get to Phoenix as Boise fans. Also, Boise played in the Fiesta Bowl just a couple of years ago and put on a great show when they beat Oklahoma. They'd make the trip to Phoenix. When they played in the 2007 game, the stadium was packed to capacity.

It's probably a moot point though. Ohio St. would be the bigger TV draw even if they wouldn't be a bigger draw attendance wise and as I said earlier, the only chance Boise would have of getting selected is if the selection belongs to the Fiesta. Any other would automatically chose Ohio St.

you're raised some interesting arguments in favor of boise state but completely ignored the fact they play on a blue field.

nice try.

What does it have to do with it? Your theory that Idaho is somehow close enough to Phoenix to merit being a factor in who get selected is laughable. Saying that someone in Chicago would be close enough in proximity to NY to be a factor in selecting a team would get laughed at because everyone knows that they arent close yet they are closer than Boise to Phoenix. I'm not convinced that Ohio State would be a much bigger tv draw after the last few years of OSU bowl games.

pretty good idea just bump back your dates: 8 teams, start the second weekedend in Dec and finish the first weekend in Jan.
4 teams play third weekend in Dec. and the first weekend in Jan. that would be a week off between conference championships and a week off before the NCG.

speaking from experience, Idaho is close to absolutely nothing. A 500 mile drive out here is considered pretty much nothing. I think KGs point is pretty valid and the Fiesta has had great success with both Utah and Boise State in recent history. And considering the amount of driving required in the Rocky Mountain States to get somewhere, Phoenix is a pretty easy destination from both Salt Lake and Boise.

my quaint attempts at humor again for naught!

with regard to your bolded portion...at what limit do you draw the points allowed to be a good team limit?? Obviously good teams can give up 45 in your opinion...or 41...but not 65?? What is the magic value where a team becomes not good?? 47?? or can you give up 90 as long as you win??

I was attempting to be funny as I clearly don't think Texas Tech is the best team in the big 12 south...but I found great humor in the Texas and Oklahoma people's attempt at justification. In the end they were clearly making circular arguments is all I was saying. When 3 teams all beat each other, that makes any attempt at justification to clearly make one of those teams the best...circular in nature. Just as anyone can make the claim for Texas and Oklahoma, I thought I'd do the same for Tech as noone else did.

In my opinion, of all the one loss teams, Florida is the least deserving of a spot in the title game. They are the only one who lost at home. All the others lost on the road or at neutral fields. I hope they lose to Alabama.

!!!!OOOOOOOOOO!!!!

While I very much agree with you on point #1, note that Ohio State beat exactly one good team this year (@ Michigan State) and lost to the two other legitimate teams they played. Normally I'd give credit for a good win @ Camp Randall, but not this year.

Boise's win at Oregon is just as good, if not better, than Ohio State's at Michigan State- and they absolutely manhandled everybody else on their schedule except a decent Nevada team. They deserve to go over a two-loss Ohio State team.

We know they won't, since money matters of course as Phil :D stated.

If there was a bowl in NY and they were chosing from two teams, one in Chicago and one in Seattle, the closer proximity of the Chicago team would absolutely come into play.

Honest..wasn't a plug for us.


Wish someone else was battling them. I just think strength of sched should matter. Look at their whole sched.....it sucks.They wouldn't finish in the top 5 or 6 in the BT..in my noodle.



Think of BYU being the only undefeated team in the country several years ago. They won the polls nc.........didn't deserve it. I do think 2 and 3 loss teams can be better than unbeaten teams.

I agree with the talk about Texas Tech. No, I don't think they are as good as Oklahoma and yes, it did take a near miracle for them to beat Texas......but they DID beat Texas. Even if that guy would have intercepted that pass a couple of plays before or if the db could have deflected that last td pass and Texas would have held on, the fact that Tech would have still been in the game until the final plays shows they weren't outclassed on the day. Since those things DIDN'T happen and Tech DID win the game, they deserve to be in the conversation. The Texas coaches have the weakest argument of all when continuously trying to bring up the head-to-head since using that tiebreaker, they lose out to Tech. It would have been hilarious if Oklahoma had lost to Ok St and the tiebreaker had come down to h-2-h because then Tech would be in the conference title game and all the Texas talk about how they deserve it over Oklahoma would have been moot.

Philski..I might add I do hate Nosiy because of the blue field and blue home uniforms.



Like it's a coincidence.

I know it wasn't a plug. Just playing the other side of the argument.

I think they'd finish 3rd in the Big Ten this year, or 2nd in the Pac-10. Their wide open style would play better in that league. I love the blue field, by the way- best homefield advantage in the country with the all-blue unis!

Is a 2 loss Ohio State team better than Ball State? Without a DOUBT. Hell, a 5 loss Oregon State team is better than them...

You do know Purdue and NW have run a wide open spread here for years?


I don't know what they run...a spread I guess?

I hate that gooofy gimmick offense.


I just can't see them finishing in front of SP,OSU,Iowa,MSU....and even maybe NW,MINN and Illinois.

Sure, but NW finished 4th and Purdue just sucks... I had them behind State Penn and Hang On Sloopy, but ahead of Idowa and MiSt(ake), which I guess is debatable although I'll take the Smurfs on a neutral field against those two. Like I said I think they'd do better in the no-defense Pac-10 than the BT where teams would just run it down their throat.

^^^^Does the callers voices on ATR.



:)

other than $$, why can't they just have a 16 team playoff like every other division of collegiate football?
11 conf champs and 5 at large?
bowls games already take chump teams (my UK wildcats), they can keep them.
give us a playoff!!

this is the way it Should be.

16 teams is too many... too many games for college football IMO... too much possibility for for injury and also finals are usually in December - these boys need time to be students not just athletes.

8 teams is plenty

12 at most (NFL style with top 4 bcs rates get byes)

the other divisions play 16 teams! they miss way less time that basketball players. they'd start playoffs the second weekend in dec after the conference championships and in 4 weeks they'd be done the first or second weekend in jan. cut the regular season back to 10 or 11 games. that would get those terrible out of conference games and 1AA teams off the schedule. the ncaa would make a FREAKING Mint!!! just like march madness. it's just not that tough!:zz: :wf

3rd week in Dec to 2nd week in January would work. Finals done by middle or end of next week.

i guess that could work... but do you really feel 16 teams makes sense? I think 8 teams will definatly give you the best team in college fb.

I also dont see how more than 8 teams deserve to play for a National Championship. I also dont agree with the winners of each conf.. there are some REAL bad conf's out there.

Amen to eliminating the creampuff filler. Cut the season shorter.

no doubt the creampuffs who depend on those games to make their budget would appreciate the cut.

and comparing football to other sports doesn't make much sense. pro football plays 16 games a year, you expect college kids to do the same? how many basketball games are there in the pros? you can't compare them, everyone knows football is a killer on the body.
hey, i can see having the top teams play for #1-but they need to limit it to the top four, or top eight at most. as for the money, how many bowls are there? how much revenue? like i said this time last year when it all came up, if the schools and ncaa thought that a playoff system would make them more money then the current bowl system, they'd change-so obviously it's not comparable.

:rolleyes:

Those creampuffs will have to tighten their budget and play each other like the schools do in every lower division (II, III, NAIA or whatever they are called these days).