College Football - Championship Week

[Mephistopheles]

Just add Notre Dame and be done with it. Notre Dame should not be in the Big East.

 

I think there are 2 major stumbling blocks. The NBC TV package and some joint academic stuff that may be against Notre Dame's beliefs. I think the Big Ten would take them in a heartbeat, but they want to TV money shared. I am sure the academic stuff could be worked out if the NBC thing got worked out.

 

there is zero financial incentive for ND to join a conference. PSU only joined because they needed a conference to prop up the 26 non-football sports programs

 

There will be when their football program continues to suck for the next ten years.

[Derwood]

Just add Notre Dame and be done with it. Notre Dame should not be in the Big East.

 

I think there are 2 major stumbling blocks. The NBC TV package and some joint academic stuff that may be against Notre Dame's beliefs. I think the Big Ten would take them in a heartbeat, but they want to TV money shared. I am sure the academic stuff could be worked out if the NBC thing got worked out.

 

there is zero financial incentive for ND to join a conference. PSU only joined because they needed a conference to prop up the 26 non-football sports programs

 

There will be when their football program continues to suck for the next ten years.

 

i don't foresee NBC pulling out of that deal anytime soon

[fiver]

 

It was OK? I thought it was Nebraska but you're probably right. If Georgia played LSU I'd have less of an issue with it but they didn't.

 

You are also correct, Cuse. It's happened twice in recent years...Nebraska in '02 and OK the following year I believe.

 

http://www.chron.org/tools/viewart.php?artid=1080

[CuseCubFan69]

 

It was OK? I thought it was Nebraska but you're probably right. If Georgia played LSU I'd have less of an issue with it but they didn't.

 

You are also correct, Cuse. It's happened twice in recent years...Nebraska in '02 and OK the following year I believe.

 

http://www.chron.org/tools/viewart.php?artid=1080

 

Ah, thanks Fiver. I see that Nebraska did it the possible Georgia way in as CCP said.

 

I don't see an outstanding team this year either and what a perfect time to have had a playoff.

[NCCubFan]

The conference map for the Big East is hilarious.

True, but no more so than the NFL thinking Dallas is in the east (and previously thinking Atlanta was in the west). Or when Northern Illinois temporarily left the MAC for one of the western conferences.

[Andy]

Just add Notre Dame and be done with it. Notre Dame should not be in the Big East.

 

I think there are 2 major stumbling blocks. The NBC TV package and some joint academic stuff that may be against Notre Dame's beliefs. I think the Big Ten would take them in a heartbeat, but they want to TV money shared. I am sure the academic stuff could be worked out if the NBC thing got worked out.

 

there is zero financial incentive for ND to join a conference. PSU only joined because they needed a conference to prop up the 26 non-football sports programs

 

There will be when their football program continues to suck for the next ten years.

 

i don't foresee NBC pulling out of that deal anytime soon

The deal expires after the 2010 season, and I wouldn't be shocked to see NBC pull out of it after that. They don't seem to care that much about ND as it is - even the last two years when they were good, their coverage left a lot to be desired.

 

Anyway, ND is not joining the Big Ten. There's a lot on both sides that will prevent that from happening.

[CuseCubFan69]

Just add Notre Dame and be done with it. Notre Dame should not be in the Big East.

 

I think there are 2 major stumbling blocks. The NBC TV package and some joint academic stuff that may be against Notre Dame's beliefs. I think the Big Ten would take them in a heartbeat, but they want to TV money shared. I am sure the academic stuff could be worked out if the NBC thing got worked out.

 

there is zero financial incentive for ND to join a conference. PSU only joined because they needed a conference to prop up the 26 non-football sports programs

 

There will be when their football program continues to suck for the next ten years.

 

i don't foresee NBC pulling out of that deal anytime soon

The deal expires after the 2010 season, and I wouldn't be shocked to see NBC pull out of it after that. They don't seem to care that much about ND as it is - even the last two years when they were good, their coverage left a lot to be desired.

 

Anyway, ND is not joining the Big Ten. There's a lot on both sides that will prevent that from happening.

 

Probably the same type of garbage that Penn State and the BE went through. These guys in charge can get into quite the pee-pee contests.

[bukie]

Teams do not have to win their conference to play for the national championship. See Oklahoma several years ago.

 

It was OK? I thought it was Nebraska but you're probably right. If Georgia played LSU I'd have less of an issue with it but they didn't.

 

It was both. And it was almost Michigan last year.

 

I know it happened in the past, but last year the voters specifically voted Florida into the #2 to prevent it from happening again last year, and I could definitely see the exact same thing happening again this year.

[CuseCubFan69]

So, BCS bowl picture:

 

- Championship game: Simply put, if Missouri and WV win, they are in the championship game. If one of them lose, Ohio State is in the championship game. If both lose, all hell breaks loose. Ohio State will play somebody, and it'll basically be whoever the voters decide. Georgia is currently 4th, but aren't playing in their own conference championship game. Kansas is 5th, with the same dilemma. So, I would imagine the most likely participants would be Virginia Tech, LSU or USC, if they win. However, should all those teams lose (we're talking WVU, Missouri, Virginia Tech, LSU AND USC), the voters may actually jump Oklahoma all the way into the championship game. If they don't, all kinds of problems would be created with a game involving Georgia or Kansas.

 

At this point, though, if everything goes according to form, the only team with a semi-legitimate gripe at not having a shot at the championship would be OSU.

 

- BCS teams overall:

 

Auto bids:

- Ohio State

- West Virginia

- Virginia Tech/BC winner

- Missouri/Oklahoma winner

- USC if they win, USC/ASU/UCLA if they lose

- LSU/Tennessee winner

 

Up for grabs:

1. Georgia, since they will likely stay in the top 4 no matter which scenario plays out

2. Hawaii if they win will get an automatic bid (since they will stay in the top 12)

3. Kansas if they somehow sneak into the top 4 (I could see Missouri losing and staying ahead of Kansas, and still having one of the other conf. championship winners jumping both of them)

4. Take your pick of Arizona State, Illinois, or a favored BCS championship loser (Missouri, Virginia Tech, USC)

 

I do agree, though, that if Ohio State sneaks into the BCS championship and Illinois sneaks into the top 14 of the BCS, the Rose Bowl will likely take Illinois.

 

Teams do not have to win their conference to play for the national championship. See Oklahoma several years ago.

 

It was OK? I thought it was Nebraska but you're probably right. If Georgia played LSU I'd have less of an issue with it but they didn't.

 

It was both. And it was almost Michigan last year.

 

Yeah that really annoyed me last year.

[SouthSideRyan]

Derwood, you bring up this fantasy conference scenario at least once a month, and once a month I tell you how you can't force a conference to take in teams it doesn't want. Who is the Big East supposed to add just to appease your 12 teams per conference rule? Conferences go beyond football, and go beyond athletics as well. Forcing member schools to admit other members that aren't up to par is unfair to everyone.

 

A Pac 10 with Boise and BYU is not good for the other 10 schools.

 

A Big East with Memphis, UCF, Army, and Navy is not better off.

[UMFan83]

Man could you imagine in a year like this how awesome a playoff would be? There is clearly no dominant 1-2 teams this year...there is probably about 9-10 teams of a similar skill level that are in there, and its the teams that have lost the longest ago that are in there for the title game. I think its absoultely insane that an SEC team will not be playing for the championship simply because there is so much talent spread across the conference. Look at some of the first round matchups for a 16 team playoff taken off their current BCS rank. Obviously a real playoff would probably seed conference champions first and then at large but still, you get the picture.

 

1. Missouri

16. Clemson

 

8. USC

9. Oklahoma

 

4. Georgia

13. Arizona State

 

5. Kansas

12. Hawaii

 

3. Ohio State

14. Tennessee

 

6. Virginia Tech

11. Boston College

 

7. LSU

10. Florida

 

2. West Virginia

15. Illinois

 

I see the potential for 5-6 upsets in that first round. Even an 8 team playoff wouldnt be that bad

 

1. Missouri

8. USC

 

4. Georgia

5. Kansas

 

3. Ohio State

6. Virginia Tech

 

2. West Virginia

7. LSU

[bukie]

I don't really like the objective models for College Football, mostly because there just isn't enough data to make a truly accurate predictive model. There are only 12 games per team, and on average 2/3 of those are among the same group of teams, so only 4 games are really used to connect teams across conferences. Because of that, a single result affects the results much more than it should.

 

Schedule strength is difficult to accurately predict or manage in college football, because you have no control over at least 2/3 of your schedule, and the rest of it is made up several years ahead of time. Take for example Illinois' schedule this year. Five years ago, you make a schedule that includes Missouri and Syracuse. Back then, who had a guess that Missouri is the #1 team and Syracuse one of the worst BCS teams? This is primarily why I think that college football, more than anything else, needs to lend itself to subjective analysis.

 

However, the way the BCS does it is just dumb. Having a public vote count for 1/3 of the rating? The public are, on the whole, poorly informed and hopelessly biased. It's a popularity contest. The coaches vote counts for 1/3 of the rating? How many teams you think coaches watch that aren't on their schedule in a year? How many coaches actually fill out the ballot? It's largely political posturing among the coaches vote.

 

So, the BCS counts 1/3 of its rating on a poorly informed, hopelessly biased poll. 1/3 of the rating is on a narrow-sighted, political posturing poll. And 1/3 of the rating is based on a severely limited (only winning and losing matters) objective analysis on very limited empirical data. The system is never going to work. This sport, above any other, needs a playoff system.

[Flames24Rulz]

Joe Novak is going to announce his retirement as coach of Northern Illinois. Please hire Larry Coker.

 

And I can't wait for our playoff game against UMass on Saturday. What a day that's going to be. A trip to the I-AA Final Four on the line in the afternoon followed by the basketball game between SIU and Indiana.

[CuseCubFan69]

I don't really like the objective models for College Football, mostly because there just isn't enough data to make a truly accurate predictive model. There are only 12 games per team, and on average 2/3 of those are among the same group of teams, so only 4 games are really used to connect teams across conferences. Because of that, a single result affects the results much more than it should.

 

Schedule strength is difficult to accurately predict or manage in college football, because you have no control over at least 2/3 of your schedule, and the rest of it is made up several years ahead of time. Take for example Illinois' schedule this year. Five years ago, you make a schedule that includes Missouri and Syracuse. Back then, who had a guess that Missouri is the #1 team and Syracuse one of the worst BCS teams? This is primarily why I think that college football, more than anything else, needs to lend itself to subjective analysis.

 

However, the way the BCS does it is just dumb. Having a public vote count for 1/3 of the rating? The public are, on the whole, poorly informed and hopelessly biased. It's a popularity contest. The coaches vote counts for 1/3 of the rating? How many teams you think coaches watch that aren't on their schedule in a year? How many coaches actually fill out the ballot? It's largely political posturing among the coaches vote.

 

So, the BCS counts 1/3 of its rating on a poorly informed, hopelessly biased poll. 1/3 of the rating is on a narrow-sighted, political posturing poll. And 1/3 of the rating is based on a severely limited (only winning and losing matters) objective analysis on very limited empirical data. The system is never going to work. This sport, above any other, needs a playoff system.

 

The problem is that the Coaches determine the teams in the playoff unless you go to Conference winners only including a MAC and the like as the other 2. I know I'm a homer but to see my conference have 2 teams in the Top 25 makes me peeved and as you said, having these clowns even determine who is in bugs me. But, who is qualified to vote?

[bukie]

The problem is that the Coaches determine the teams in the playoff unless you go to Conference winners only including a MAC and the like as the other 2. I know I'm a homer but to see my conference have 2 teams in the Top 25 makes me peeved and as you said, having these clowns even determine who is in bugs me. But, who is qualified to vote?

 

I'd hate to say it, but only the people who actually watch and track every game should be qualified to vote. And that, largely, is the "statgeek" crowd.

 

Ideally, it shouldn't come down to a vote, unless they are voting for which teams should be the 11th through 16th invited for the playoff.

[fiver]

I think its absoultely insane that an SEC team will not be playing for the championship simply because there is so much talent spread across the conference.

 

If West Virginia and Missouri win their conference title games, I'm not going to have a problem with them playing for the national championship.

[CuseCubFan69]

The problem is that the Coaches determine the teams in the playoff unless you go to Conference winners only including a MAC and the like as the other 2. I know I'm a homer but to see my conference have 2 teams in the Top 25 makes me peeved and as you said, having these clowns even determine who is in bugs me. But, who is qualified to vote?

 

I'd hate to say it, but only the people who actually watch and track every game should be qualified to vote. And that, largely, is the "statgeek" crowd.

 

Ideally, it shouldn't come down to a vote, unless they are voting for which teams should be the 11th through 16th invited for the playoff.

 

Those are key votes though as is the top 8 too. IMO, any team 1-16 could have won this year.

 

Now for the "stat-geeks". I don't have a problem with anyone like this as long as they spend the time and watch the games as well.

[Jon]

I read on a different board that the officiating crew for the Hawaii/Boise State game was made up of 3 officials from the Big 12, 2 from the WAC, and 2 from the Mountain West conference. Apparently, there's a lot of speculation that over the next decade, college football will transition from crews from one conference to crews from three different conferences, or regional crews. Each crew will not see the same team twice and will officiate four games in each of the associated conferences.

 

Maybe someone will be willing to play in Hawai'i again. But that sounds like a great idea.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

And Mizzou would be getting robbed if they get passed over for an at-large at this point.

 

If this happens I'm going to have to take up hunting, because breaking inanimate objects just won't cut it for how pissed off I would be.

[bukie]

And Mizzou would be getting robbed if they get passed over for an at-large at this point.

 

If this happens I'm going to have to take up hunting, because breaking inanimate objects just won't cut it for how pissed off I would be.

 

The only way I see this happening is if Mizzou loses, drops out of the top 4 of the BCS, and Illinois jumps into the top 14, so the Rose Bowl takes Illinois or Kansas over Missouri.

 

I would imagine either option would result in a serious killing spree for any reasonable Mizzou fan.

[Derwood]

Derwood, you bring up this fantasy conference scenario at least once a month, and once a month I tell you how you can't force a conference to take in teams it doesn't want. Who is the Big East supposed to add just to appease your 12 teams per conference rule? Conferences go beyond football, and go beyond athletics as well. Forcing member schools to admit other members that aren't up to par is unfair to everyone.

 

A Pac 10 with Boise and BYU is not good for the other 10 schools.

 

A Big East with Memphis, UCF, Army, and Navy is not better off.

 

yeah, i know it's a fantasy, but that's because the system is so broken

[SouthSideRyan]

Think how angry you'll be TT when it's a team you beat(though you shouldn't have) that gets the BCS spot over you :)

[Mephistopheles]

you may think the sample size is too small for objective models, but theyre still more accurate than the subjective polls... they are not final and absolute, but they tell more than everything else.

[bukie]

you may think the sample size is too small for objective models, but theyre still more accurate than the subjective polls... they are not final and absolute, but they tell more than everything else.

 

Very true, and I suppose, indirectly, an objective model reinforces the idea that every game has significant meaning in a college football season, as it truly does.

[Mephistopheles]

honestly you'd get a better accuracy if you also use a *bit* of the previous season. sure team turnover rate is abnormally high in the sport, but you gain much needed interconference play.