NCAA BCS Exec. Dir. tries to defend the bowl system - WOW!

[stevebydac]

Radio host Dan Patrick of Sports Illustrated tortured Bill Hancock, the NCAA's BCS Executive Director, as Hancock tried to defend the current Div 1-A bowl system. It is unbelievable listening to Hancock.
Here is the story: BCS' Bill Hancock has horrible job: defending an indefensible system

Here's the audio - it's worth a listen: Dan Patrick.com


.

[canadiancreed]

Does this have a risk of being infected with stupid if I listen to this?

[RchW]

Originally Posted by canadiancreed

Does this have a risk of being infected with stupid if I listen to this?

Didn't you get the vaccine?

[Erik W.]

It's pretty transparent why they're making a major PR push for the BSC (including someone starting a pro-BCS Twitter campaign explaining why it's the best system). It's shaping up for there to be three mid-major undefeated teams that won't have a chance at the national championship, instead of the usual one.

[Cryomaniac]

f- the BCS, it's by far the most unfair system in all of sports.

[jaxmagicman]

I think the BCS is by far the fairest of all the systems in all of sports. Playoffs are nothing more than a crapshoot. At least with this you get to see meaningful games all the time.

Imagine if there was a playoff system, you think Alabama or Texas or Florida would be playing their best players right now? No. They would sit them and we would be left with boring rivalry games this weekend.

Matter of fact, Florida and Alabama have had their part of the conference championship rapped up for a few weeks. Their games would have been meaningless if not for the BCS.

[Erik W.]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

I think the BCS is by far the fairest of all the systems in all of sports. Playoffs are nothing more than a crapshoot. At least with this you get to see meaningful games all the time.

Imagine if there was a playoff system, you think Alabama or Texas or Florida would be playing their best players right now? No. They would sit them and we would be left with boring rivalry games this weekend.

Matter of fact, Florida and Alabama have had their part of the conference championship rapped up for a few weeks. Their games would have been meaningless if not for the BCS.

Your post has two very different points in it:

1. That BCS is the "fairest" system. Ha! Ask Cincinnati, Boise State, and TCU how fair it is in a couple weeks.

2. That it makes every game meaningful. Sure, but that's a high price for leaving teams out of the running just because their conference didn't join the BC$.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by Erik W.

Your post has two very different points in it:

1. That BCS is the "fairest" system. Ha! Ask Cincinnati, Boise State, and TCU how fair it is in a couple weeks.

2. That it makes every game meaningful. Sure, but that's a high price for leaving teams out of the running just because their conference didn't join the BC$.

1. When TCU, and Boise State have to play teams like Arkansas, South Carolina, LSU, Texas A&M, Miami, Florida State, Ohio State, Penn State, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Ole Miss, Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri... I can go on and on... EVERY WEEK then they can complain. When your biggest win is 4 points over Clemson and Week 1 against the Ducks, you cannot complain. You need to be in a better conference. Hell Clemson had to play TCU sandwhiced between BC and Maryland. TCU had SMU and Texas State.

When they start playing the big boys every week and not just once a year, then they can complain.

As for Cincinatti, take care of Pittsburg befor you start crying.

[Erik W.]

So, your definition of fairness only extends to the five largest conferences. That's an odd interpretation of the word.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by Erik W.

So, your definition of fairness only extends to the five largest conferences. That's an odd interpretation of the word.

My interpretation of fairness is the best team should play for the National Title. TCU and Boise have both played the total of 1 team that could be considered strong. I am willing to bet, any team in the SEC, ACC, Big 10(+1) or Big 12 could go undefeated with a schedule like TCU's.

[Erik W.]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

My interpretation of fairness is the best team should play for the National Title. TCU and Boise have both played the total of 1 team that could be considered strong. I am willing to bet, any team in the SEC, ACC, Big 10(+1) or Big 12 could go undefeated with a schedule like TCU's.

So the fairest way to crown a champion is based on nothing but assumption of who other possible contenders could and couldn't have beaten just because they're in a weak conference?

[stevebydac]

Originally Posted by jaxmagicman

I think the BCS is by far the fairest of all the systems in all of sports. Playoffs are nothing more than a crapshoot. At least with this you get to see meaningful games all the time.

Imagine if there was a playoff system, you think Alabama or Texas or Florida would be playing their best players right now? No. They would sit them and we would be left with boring rivalry games this weekend.

Matter of fact, Florida and Alabama have had their part of the conference championship rapped up for a few weeks. Their games would have been meaningless if not for the BCS.

"...Since that argument seems to be, let's call it a little bit problematic, they have also tried the argument mentioned above about how meaningful the college football regular season is thanks to the BCS. Hmmm. Are they saying the basketball season, where every game played the last three weeks of the season seems to change the tournament bracket and its seedings, has no meaning? Or that the regular season in the college football championship (interesting word, no?) subdivision (formerly I-AA) has no meaning when teams are fighting for automatic bids and at-large bids to the 16 team tournament?..."

My interpretation of fairness is the best team should play for the National Title. TCU and Boise have both played the total of 1 team that could be considered strong. I am willing to bet, any team in the SEC, ACC, Big 10(+1) or Big 12 could go undefeated with a schedule like TCU's.

"...That one also seems to be having trouble holding water even though some ESPN anchor tried to tell us recently that the playoffs have already begun in college football. Really? Exactly when does TCU get its playoff shot at Florida, Alabama or Texas? When is that quarterfinal game between Boise State and Penn State? Those will be fun, won't they? Oh wait, they're not on the schedule.

There's also this one: TCU or Boise State would finish in the middle of the pack in the SEC, Big 12 or Pac-10. Maybe, maybe not. How would Utah have done in the SEC last year? The point is those schools deserve the chance to prove their worth. Sort of like George Mason, Gonzaga and Davidson in men's basketball, to name a few. Notice you don't hear too many people claiming lately that those schools wouldn't do well in the ACC, Big East or Big Ten..."

Source: John Feinstein - BCS is busy trying to fix its image, but nothing else - washingtonpost.com



.

[stevebydac]

The NCAA says that the BCS is better than playoffs, yet:

• The FCS (formerly 1-AA) has a 16 team playoff system
• Division 2 has a playoff system
• Division 3 has a playoff system
• virtually every other NCAA team sport (maybe all???) have playoffs

So if a bowl system is best, why is the NCAA treating all of its other football divisions so poorly by making them suffer through a playoff system? This is about $$$$$$ for the big conferences, not about fairness or "meaningful games" or caring about the students' studies.

Heck, Holy Cross is in the FCS playoffs. It's considered a far more difficult school for studies than any of the BCS powers left in the hunt. Yet Holy Cross football players, if they luck out and advance to the FCS title game, will have played FOUR playoff games! If the Patriot League can justify putting its elite academic schools (like Holy Cross) in a playoff system, I think Big State U can manage too.

[TribeFanInNC]

I don't think I would take the 'BCS is fair' approach to the argument. Nothing is really that fair with the small sample size of 12 games and there is a lot of things that are not fair in college football. Even in a playoff, somebody is going to get screwed (teams #9 and #10, the team that has to play a playoff game near the other school, etc...).

I'm more in the camp of 'it makes the regular season more meaningful' and the 'it creates more interest in the sport'. I like the BCS, though I don't love it and I think the humans have too much say in it. I would just assume have the computers figure it out. At least then it is based on what you have done, not on perception.

[Cryomaniac]

Originally Posted by stevebydac

• virtually every other NCAA team sport (maybe all???) have playoffs

I think rowing is the only other one without an official championship.

[rudel.dietrich]

When TCU, Boise State and Cincinatti want to garner NC hopes they need to join conferences that are worth a damn.

Or pretty much what Jax said. If you want to play in an inferior conference and rack up wins then you have to run the risk of not getting invited to play in the NC game.
Boise State for half a decade now has amassed a huge win total by being the best team in an inferior conference.
One close win against Oklahoma 3 years ago does not entitle you to any future considerations.

They need to petition to join the Pac-10 if they want to start being taken seriously.
TCU is also a team in this position. They could ask to join the Big XII south.

However, neither team will probably ever do this that would probably mean 2-4 losses a year or more.


The truth is that mid major team have perhaps more to lose by going to a playoff system or joining better conferences. As it is they can rack up undefeated seasons and win bids to BCS games with huge cash pay outs whether they win or not.
There really is no incentive for them to risk playing a higher quality schedule with a much higher risk for more losses.

[Skipaway]

I think the fairest system is where you shut out all non-BCS conferences from BCS bowls. That way kids going to those schools would know going in they don't have a chance. You also ban games between BCS conference and non-BCS conference teams.

That way you force the pool of teams to be smaller, and the teams play each other more within the pool.

That way, no matter what system you use in the end to decide championship, it would be much better than what it is now. Also the competition level of games would be higher overall.

[stevebydac]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

Boise State for half a decade now has amassed a huge win total by being the best team in an inferior conference.
One close win against Oklahoma 3 years ago does not entitle you to any future considerations.

They need to petition to join the Pac-10 if they want to start being taken seriously.

Boise State convincingly beat #8 Oregon 19-7 this year. Oregon is 3-0 against the other top 25 teams it played - all Pac 10 teams, but they couldn't beat Bosie St.

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

TCU is also a team in this position. They could ask to join the Big XII south. However, neither team will probably ever do this that would probably mean 2-4 losses a year or more. The truth is that mid major team have perhaps more to lose by going to a playoff system or joining better conferences. As it is they can rack up undefeated seasons and win bids to BCS games with huge cash pay outs whether they win or not.
There really is no incentive for them to risk playing a higher quality schedule with a much higher risk for more losses.

TCU was not invited to go to the Big 12 when it formed and got stuck with the WAC (although it probably could have gone to the equally crappy Conference USA). TCU is in a crappy conference due to the dissolution of the Southwest Conference.

"...The beginning of the end was when Arkansas announced it would leave for the Southeastern Conference in 1990. The death blow came in 1993 when Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, and Baylor accepted invitations to join with the members of the Big Eight Conference to form the Big 12 Conference. Soon afterward, SMU, TCU and Rice accepted invitations to join the Western Athletic Conference, while Houston joined Conference USA."


And you also think Boise State can just raise its hand and just join the Pac 10??? The Pac 10 has to invite it. It hasn't. Bosie St. has nowhere to go, and can't get many big teams to play it in OOC games.

[jazzrack]

Originally Posted by stevebydac

Boise State convincingly beat #8 Oregon 19-7 this year. Oregon is 3-0 against the other top 25 teams it played - all Pac 10 teams, but they couldn't beat Bosie St.


TCU was not invited to go to the Big 12 when it formed and got stuck with the WAC (although it probably could have gone to the equally crappy Conference USA). TCU is in a crappy conference due to the dissolution of the Southwest Conference.

"...The beginning of the end was when Arkansas announced it would leave for the Southeastern Conference in 1990. The death blow came in 1993 when Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, and Baylor accepted invitations to join with the members of the Big Eight Conference to form the Big 12 Conference. Soon afterward, SMU, TCU and Rice accepted invitations to join the Western Athletic Conference, while Houston joined Conference USA."


And you also think Boise State can just raise its hand and just join the Pac 10??? The Pac 10 has to invite it. It hasn't. Bosie St. has nowhere to go, and can't get many big teams to play it in OOC games.

you could get Boise, TCU, Fresno, Utah, BYU ect. put them in their own conference and that same people would still complain about the schedule. these teams are as good as anybody but get no respect & the only reason i can think of is because they don't take the time to watch.

[His Own Bad Self]

Here we [bleep]ing go again.