BCS= Joke

[wingsfan72]

The BCS needs to concern itself with 1 vs 2 and leave the rest of the games alone. I am happy that Michigan is playing in the sugar but selecting teams based on who can fill the seats and bring in the cash vs what teams actually did on the field is absurd. K. State and Boise St. got absolutely screwed.

I have also heard Ohio St fans saying that Michigan does not deserve a BCS game but I remember Ohio St being in the same position a few times as an at-large and not complaining about it. Face it, this is the system we have. If anyone did not deserve a BCS game it's V-Tech!

[bird]

The BCS needs to concern itself with 1 vs 2 and leave the rest of the games alone. I am happy that Michigan is playing in the sugar but selecting teams based on who can fill the seats and bring in the cash vs what teams actually did on the field is absurd. K. State and Boise St. got absolutely screwed.

I have also heard Ohio St fans saying that Michigan does not deserve a BCS game but I remember Ohio St being in the same position a few times as an at-large and not complaining about it. Face it, this is the system we have. If anyone did not deserve a BCS game it's V-Tech!

Sorry but your view is completely incorrect, and I don't know how many years it will take for fans to understand.

Bowl games - BCS and otherwise - are nothing but exhibition games designed to make money for their bowl committees. That really is it. It has nothing to do with what teams deserve to be in bowl games or not.

Now, one would think that making interesting matchups between good teams would be a big factor, and it is. But if the bowl committee has to choose between a good matchup between two good teams, and a less appealing matchup between teams that will make more money for the bowl, they're going to go with option B. This happens every year. It's not news.

Its the system we have because fans still continue to make the bowls rich - despite how much they complain about it.

[14Red]

Bird, scary, but I completely agree with you.

College football is about MAKING MONEY. I'm amazed people don't understand this yet.

[shstiger73]

How can Michigan get picked for a BCS game ahead of Michigan State? MSU won the divisional title and the head-to-head matchup. MSU gets screwed for the 2nd year in a row. Boise State and Kansas State were both more worthy than VT or the team up North.

[bird]

How can Michigan get picked for a BCS game ahead of Michigan State? MSU won the divisional title and the head-to-head matchup. MSU gets screwed for the 2nd year in a row.

RRRRRGGGGHHH because Michigan has more alumni, travels better, and will make more money for the bowl.

Really folks, I don't know how you can fail to grasp this. The goal of a bowl game is not to reward teams based on their performance. It is to make money for the bowl. Period. If Team A will make more money for the bowl than Team B, the bowl is going to take Team A. If you were on the Sugar Bowl committee and could pick between Michigan and Michigan State, you would be a buffoon to pick Michigan State. It really is that simple. It has nothing to do with screwing Michigan State. It has to do with doing what is best for the bowl.

[nilesdragon]

Virginia Tech got smoked by Clemson twice, combined score of 61-13. VT is still ranked four spots higher than Clemson. VT and Michigan will be a fun game to watch but I believe Boise should be in the Sugar Bowl. It's a shame that Boise has a much smaller fan base.

[bird]

I agree, Boise deserves better. But they are never going to be picked for one of the big boy games unless it is mandatory. It's a shame they lost that game to TCU.

[east_ohio]

I agree, Boise deserves better. But they are never going to be picked for one of the big boy games unless it is mandatory. It's a shame they lost that game to TCU.

Absolutely!

[Lancer '65]

$ometime$ I really wonder whether we are teaching our kid$ the right le$$on$ with regard to the value of athletic$. Ba$ically it $eem$ that the primary le$$on being taught i$ there i$ only one thing that i$ important in $port$. If it doe$n't make money, we $haft the de$erving and elevate the better pot.

[wingsfan72]

Bird, scary, but I completely agree with you.

College football is about MAKING MONEY. I'm amazed people don't understand this yet.
That is why I don't care for college anymore. It used to be about competition and what was done on the field. Now it's all about money. I thought that was what pro sports was about?

[Michigan Legend]

Well MSU fans can cry all they want, but Michigan is more deserving of the BCS bid. If Nebraska had beaten Michigan in the regular season they would have been at Indianapolis for the title game and then a 2 loss MSU team would have been in the same position to leapfrog Nebraska if Wisconsin won. What if MSU did not get killed by Norte Dame or Nebraska the same 2 teams undeserving Michigan beat? They controlled their own destiny, lost and now are crying because Michigan is in the Sugar Bowl. Using that logic why don't we put Iowa State, Iowa, and ND in a BCS Bowl also.

[skyvue]

All Ohio State fans should be happy the Michigan made a BCS game. All the schools in the league shared the bowl money so it is good for the conference to always have 2 teams in the BCS.

[baseball_dad]

Well MSU fans can cry all they want, but Michigan is more deserving of the BCS bid. If Nebraska had beaten Michigan in the regular season they would have been at Indianapolis for the title game and then a 2 loss MSU team would have been in the same position to leapfrog Nebraska if Wisconsin won. What if MSU did not get killed by Norte Dame or Nebraska the same 2 teams undeserving Michigan beat? They controlled their own destiny, lost and now are crying because Michigan is in the Sugar Bowl. Using that logic why don't we put Iowa State, Iowa, and ND in a BCS Bowl also.

Using your logic, you could also say that mich controlled their own destiny when they got pummelled by MSU. Just sayin...

[jgord24]

Well MSU fans can cry all they want, but Michigan is more deserving of the BCS bid. .No, no their not.
MSU should have told the Big Ten is wasn't playing in the conference championship game and then they would have been in a BCS bowl game.

UCLA basically did that in the Pac 12, got a flyer from the NCAA that way when they lost they could still play in the bowl game otherwise they were not bowl elgible.

MSU beat Michigan head to head, had a better conference record and same overall record until the Big Ten title game, Michigan did not deserve the BCS bowl game over MSU in any way shape or form.

[Michigan Legend]

No, no their not.
MSU should have told the Big Ten is wasn't playing in the conference championship game and then they would have been in a BCS bowl game.

UCLA basically did that in the Pac 12, got a flyer from the NCAA that way when they lost they could still play in the bowl game otherwise they were not bowl elgible.

MSU beat Michigan head to head, had a better conference record and same overall record until the Big Ten title game, Michigan did not deserve the BCS bowl game over MSU in any way shape or form.

A team that lost 3 games (including games to 2 teams Michigan beat) deserves a BCS Bowl over a team that finished with 2 losses? Michigan State should thank Michigan for beating Nebraska or they never would have been in Indianapolis since Nebraska would have been in position to control their own destiny by going to the Rose Bowl. It has happened to teams like Kansas State in the past and teams in the SEC that played in conference title game like Georgia this past weekend...but Michigan State now has to deal with the fact that they did not get it done in the Big Ten title game. They are no exception and hope they enjoy Tampa!!

[mulligan]

Lancer '65, what better way to teach kid$ what the real world i$ all about,and regardle$$ of profe$$ion: the all mighty $$$$! Sport$ are the perfect place for the kid$ to learn that life'$ not fair. They $ure don't get tho$e kind$ of le$$on$ in the cla$$room.

[troy_boy73]

I have said for years that a 5th grade class from Omaha, Nebraska could do a better job of picking teams.

[jgord24]

A team that lost 3 games (including games to 2 teams Michigan beat) !! MSU beat Michigan, had they not gone to the Big Ten Champ game they would not have had 3 losses. I don't care who Michigan beat MSU beat them and had the same record. Again, MSU should have told the Big Ten they did not want to play in the conference title game, they would then be in a BCS game.

Michigan State should thank Michigan for beating Nebraska or they never would have been in Indianapolis since Nebraska would have been in position to control their own destiny by going to the Rose Bowl. !! Actually MSU got screwed when Michigan beat Nebraska. Had Nebraska gone to the title game and played Wisconsin, MSU would be in a BCS bowl game right now. MSU got hosed for playing in the Big Ten Title game.

2 teams got rewarded for not playing in their conference championship game, Michigan and Alabama.

[north border]

I agree, Boise deserves better. But they are never going to be picked for one of the big boy games unless it is mandatory. It's a shame they lost that game to TCU.
Out of my ignorance I don`t know how the BCS works.But what made it mandatory in past years to put a non BCS school in!

[tcjr8]

The BCS needs to concern itself with 1 vs 2 and leave the rest of the games alone. I am happy that Michigan is playing in the sugar but selecting teams based on who can fill the seats and bring in the cash vs what teams actually did on the field is absurd. K. State and Boise St. got absolutely screwed.

I have also heard Ohio St fans saying that Michigan does not deserve a BCS game but I remember Ohio St being in the same position a few times as an at-large and not complaining about it. Face it, this is the system we have. If anyone did not deserve a BCS game it's V-Tech!

OSU have never been outside of the top 10 of the BCS when selected for a BCS game.


As mentioned several times this is all about money....see OSU and Florida playing on Jan 2nd. 2 6-6 teams....thats not right to me.

[Michigan Legend]

So if MSU went past Nebraska in the BCS standings using your logic would you be complaining that Nebraska got the shaft. Only because it Michigan seems to be the reason you care. The Big Ten was projected to get two at large bids only if Michigan finished in the top 14...Sparty might not have been picked over Boise State, Virginia Tech or Baylor had they been idle this weekend. Welcome to the consquences of having a Big Ten title game.

[tcjr8]

I Don't think MSU got the shaft....see Missouri a couple years ago. They beat Kansas....lost the Big 12 champ game and then Kansas went and won their BCS game.

I do think Baylor and/or Kstate got screwed by Vatech and UM getting a bcs bid.

looking at the big ten schedule....UM could be the big ten's only bowl win.

[jgord24]

So if MSU went past Nebraska in the BCS standings using your logic would you be complaining that Nebraska got the shaft. Only because it Michigan seems to be the reason you care. In that situation Nebraska would get the shaft yes. No I don't care if its Michigan or Wyoming.

The Big Ten was projected to get two at large bids only if Michigan finished in the top 14...Sparty might not have been picked over Boise State, Virginia Tech or Baylor had they been idle this weekend. Welcome to the consquences of having a Big Ten title game. Boise St and Kansas St should be in the BCS, Michigan and Virginia Tech should be out. Oh well, watching Michigan get beat by Va Tech will have to do.

[14Red]

It's pointless to argue and complain about who plays who. Other than #1 and #2, it's all about how you travel. Since bowls are mainly in place for the fans and alumni of universities, it's all about how mnay tickets you can buy. There aren't enough team by team comparisons because so few games are played, that's it's difficult to compare teams.
I use my same argument with the teams that don't make the NCAA basketball tournament (teams #68 on up). Just win more games, and it's not an issue. Same here, MSU, don't lose to Notre Dame and you're home free. Oklahoma State, don't lose to Iowa State and you're in the title game.

[82wolve82]

Its the system we have because fans still continue to make the bowls rich - despite how much they complain about it.

In a nutshell, this is it. We won't have a playoff system until the money issue is solved.

The executives at the various bowl games pull down $500K salaries and they only have to organize one parade and one game each year. Why? Because fans allow it by spending their hard earned money and vacation time going to bowl games. And those that don't tune in to watch on TV. If you want to see the BCS disband, you need all fans to boycott the games in person and on TV. Not happening. We all want to see the games.

But beyond the money, there are 3 main benefits that the bowl system brings to schools:
1. Bowls=big money, obviously. 30+ bowls = 60+ schools getting paid.
2. An extra month of practice for bowl teams - critical for next year's team.
3. A chance to schmooze alumni in warm weather and get donations. More money.

I've seen hundreds of playoff proposals from the so-called experts, but none of them address the real issues. Here is a suggestion...

** Change the definition of "bowl eligible" so that it means "eligible to get a chunk of the TV money". Same criteria as now - 6 wins gets you there.

** Allow all teams (bowl eligible or not) the same amount of practice time following the end of the regular season.

** Set up tournament bracket for 8 teams. 5 for major conference winners (ACC, Big Ten, SEC, Pac 12, Big 12) and 3 at large. Have a committee like basketball to determine the at large teams and the seeding. It will never be perfect, team #9 will complain just like team #65 does in basketball. But it will be way better than where we are now.

** Choose 4 major bowl venues for the first round. 2 major bowl venues for the second round. 1 major bowl venue for the championship. Rotate the venues amongst the 7 best sites annually (Rose, Fiesta, Orange, Sugar, Cotton, etc.). Example, Rose Bowl might be championship game in year 1, and then first round venue the next year.

** From the remaining bowl venues, pick the best 15 and play them as the true exhibition games that they are. Dump the worthless bowl sites like Boise, Nashville, Detroit, Louisville, etc. The 15 bowls get randomly selected draft orders and get to name their match-ups from the teams not in the playoffs. Kind of like the NIT in basketball.

** Take all of the TV money and stadium revenue from the 7 playoff games and 15 bowl games and put it in one pot. Assuming there are 8 playoff teams, 30 bowl teams, and maybe 20-25 other "bowl eligible" teams, you divvy up the money:
- 8 playoff teams divvy up 32% of the pie (4% each)
- 30 bowl teams divvy up 52.5% (each get 1.75% )
- The rest of the bowl eligible teams get an equal share of the remaining 15.5%.

I realize the last part is the hard part. Start by dismantling the bowl committees that are taking so much money off the top. Even then it would take a team of accountants and auditors to make sure all of the stray revenue is accounted for and distributed.

All real sports fans want to see true playoffs, but it won't happen until the schools want it to happen, and that won't happen until we can fix the money issues.

[jgord24]

** Choose 4 major bowl venues for the first round. 2 major bowl venues for the second round. 1 major bowl venue for the championship. Rotate the venues amongst the 7 best sites annually (Rose, Fiesta, Orange, Sugar, Cotton, etc.). . This will never work. Fans aren't going to travel to 2 or 3 bowl games in a year. It's freaking ridiculously expensive to go to the 1 bowl game, let alone 2 or 3. Heck we have fan bases now that can't/won't even come close to filling the schools ticket alotment for 1 bowl game(some BCS games), there is no way you would come close to filling it for 2 or 3.

Its simple. 16 team playoff, higher seed gets home game up to the championship game at a neutral site. Its the only way a playoff will work. Division III does this and it works out perfect.

[bird]

This will never work. Fans aren't going to travel to 2 or 3 bowl games in a year. It's freaking ridiculously expensive to go to the 1 bowl game, let alone 2 or 3. Heck we have fan bases now that can't/won't even come close to filling the schools ticket alotment for 1 bowl game(some BCS games), there is no way you would come close to filling it for 2 or 3.

Its simple. 16 team playoff, higher seed gets home game up to the championship game at a neutral site. Its the only way a playoff will work. Division III does this and it works out perfect.

COMPLETELY AGREE.

Fundamental to implementing a playoff system is to forget the idea that the bowls have to somehow be incorporated into any playoff system. They do not. They are nothing but a barrier to it.

If the bowls can find a way to survive alongside the playoff, more power to them. But that is their own problem. The NCAA and the fans do not need to worry about preserving the bowls.

[o.a.b.]

Sorry but your view is completely incorrect, and I don't know how many years it will take for fans to understand.

Bowl games - BCS and otherwise - are nothing but exhibition games designed to make money for their bowl committees. That really is it. It has nothing to do with what teams deserve to be in bowl games or not.

Now, one would think that making interesting matchups between good teams would be a big factor, and it is. But if the bowl committee has to choose between a good matchup between two good teams, and a less appealing matchup between teams that will make more money for the bowl, they're going to go with option B. This happens every year. It's not news.

Its the system we have because fans still continue to make the bowls rich - despite how much they complain about it.

Wrong,Wingsfan is right and Herbstreit said as much last night.It is about $$$$ and that's the bottom line.This isn't an OSU-Michigan thing--it is about how many vacation packages can be sold--period.A TRUE BCS series would allow games to be played in Ohio or Michigan despite weather conditions,but of course,who on earth would spend $3500 to sit in 20 degree weather ? The teams that fill the seats and hotel rooms will always get preferrential treatment.In my opinion,this is why the SEC will always have the inside track on voting and placement.If your geographical area is hosting the games and your fans only have to drive 200-300 miles to see their team in a BCS game,decisions become no-brainers--money rules--especially when you actually DO have the best teams as the SEC does this year.

[hardingmavman]

It floors me with the whole Ohio State situation that in one hand they are going to punish us for uhhhh MAKING MONEY but yet its ok for the NCAA and the bowl ppl to pick teams that dont deserve a bowl game over another because uhhh they are MAKING MONEY! and they wonder were these kids get the idea about selling stuff to make money College Football has gone down like a rock since the BCS its a total money making joke....

[hardingmavman]

It floors me with the whole Ohio State situation that in one hand they are going to punish us for uhhhh MAKING MONEY but yet its ok for the NCAA and the bowl ppl to pick teams that dont deserve a bowl game over another because uhhh they are MAKING MONEY! and they wonder were these kids get the idea about selling stuff to make money College Football has gone down like a rock since the BCS its a total money making joke....

[foultip]

The best thing about Michigan in the Sugar Bowl is Brady Hoke gets to wear a new shirt with the Sugar Bowl logo. Maybe the'll throw in a new pair of pants too.

[Comet Pride]

Michigan St. did not get screwed, they had thier chance in the championship game. THEY BLEW IT, they should of won it, but a roughing the punter penalty cost them the game. All they had to do is win & they failed to do that. IT IS WHAT IT IS..... Deal with it....

[Comet Pride]

Like Ohio $t......

[Setupman]

It floors me with the whole Ohio State situation that in one hand they are going to punish us for uhhhh MAKING MONEY but yet its ok for the NCAA and the bowl ppl to pick teams that dont deserve a bowl game over another because uhhh they are MAKING MONEY! and they wonder were these kids get the idea about selling stuff to make money College Football has gone down like a rock since the BCS its a total money making joke....

Good Point

[Setupman]

The best thing about Michigan in the Sugar Bowl is Brady Hoke gets to wear a new shirt with the Sugar Bowl logo. Maybe the'll throw in a new pair of pants too.

I don't get it

[TSG]

Using your logic, you could also say that mich controlled their own destiny when they got pummelled by MSU. Just sayin...

I don't think you watched the MSU - UM game if you think they got pummelled! If you did you don't know football. UM could have very easily been undefeated this year if they got any calls in both the MSU and Iowa game. And don't pretend you don't think the same.

[wingsfan72]

One thing they could do is cut the number of bowls back down to something normal. I heard that out of the 35 bowls this year that there were an absurd number of teams at 7-5 or worse or 6-6. Even UCLA is 6-7. When was the last time you saw two 6-6 teams playing on New Yr's day. I believe that out of 72 teams that 29 or a few more had those records. Maybe the bowl eligible number needs to be 8 or less bowls.

[MPD]

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=pf-forde_rematch_right_sugar_bowl_travesty_120411

[NBCparent10]

MSU beat Michigan, had they not gone to the Big Ten Champ game they would not have had 3 losses. I don't care who Michigan beat MSU beat them and had the same record. Again, MSU should have told the Big Ten they did not want to play in the conference title game, they would then be in a BCS game.

Actually MSU got screwed when Michigan beat Nebraska. Had Nebraska gone to the title game and played Wisconsin, MSU would be in a BCS bowl game right now. MSU got hosed for playing in the Big Ten Title game.

2 teams got rewarded for not playing in their conference championship game, Michigan and Alabama.

I'm confused by your comments. Are you saying that it is better to go to the Sugar Bowl, rather than having a chance to win your League title and play in the Rose Bowl?

[gcg58]

A team that lost 3 games (including games to 2 teams Michigan beat) deserves a BCS Bowl over a team that finished with 2 losses? Michigan State should thank Michigan for beating Nebraska or they never would have been in Indianapolis since Nebraska would have been in position to control their own destiny by going to the Rose Bowl. It has happened to teams like Kansas State in the past and teams in the SEC that played in conference title game like Georgia this past weekend...but Michigan State now has to deal with the fact that they did not get it done in the Big Ten title game. They are no exception and hope they enjoy Tampa!!

No sir even many Michigan fans I know say the Sparty was hosed. IMO a total joke the way this system is setup. Why the next at large doesn't go to the next highest ranked teams without a conf title is just beyond me. Folks there's a problem when the Cotton Bowl has higher ranked teams than the Sugar Bowl

[82wolve82]

This will never work. Fans aren't going to travel to 2 or 3 bowl games in a year. It's freaking ridiculously expensive to go to the 1 bowl game, let alone 2 or 3. Heck we have fan bases now that can't/won't even come close to filling the schools ticket alotment for 1 bowl game(some BCS games), there is no way you would come close to filling it for 2 or 3.

Its simple. 16 team playoff, higher seed gets home game up to the championship game at a neutral site. Its the only way a playoff will work. Division III does this and it works out perfect.

Yours is a beautiful, simple plan, and clearly makes the most sense from a pure sports standpoint. I agree. If we were starting from scratch, that is how I would do it.

But it doesn't address the money issue, and we aren't starting from scratch. That's why it hasn't happened yet and won't happen. My idea is very complex and has lots of pitfalls, but it is trying to address the underlying issue - money.

You don't think Texas / OSU / LSU / etc. fans would travel 3 weeks in a row to see their team? The big boys have half a million or more ardent fans out there. It wouldn't be the same people going to all 3 games, but some subset of the fan base would travel each week. Have you tried to buy a final 4 ticket before? I realize we are talking 80,000 vs 20,000 seats, but I'm sure those stadiums would be full.

[creeksider]

Outside of the title game, they are merely exhibition games.

[triton]

Outside of the title game, they are merely exhibition games.

Agree 100%

[wingsfan72]

No sir even many Michigan fans I know say the Sparty was hosed. IMO a total joke the way this system is setup. Why the next at large doesn't go to the next highest ranked teams without a conf title is just beyond me. Folks there's a problem when the Cotton Bowl has higher ranked teams than the Sugar Bowl
That's what I have been trying to say all along. This is why the BCS needs to only do the national championship game and leave the rest of the bowls go by record. Sorry to say they will never go by record and go by who will travel the best. Just look at the BIG Ten. Only the outback and capital one are bound to take teams based on conference record. The rest of the bowls can pick who they want.

[bird]

You don't think Texas / OSU / LSU / etc. fans would travel 3 weeks in a row to see their team? The big boys have half a million or more ardent fans out there. It wouldn't be the same people going to all 3 games, but some subset of the fan base would travel each week. Have you tried to buy a final 4 ticket before? I realize we are talking 80,000 vs 20,000 seats, but I'm sure those stadiums would be full.

Fans of some teams might travel well, others might not (Stanford? Oregon? Virginia Tech? Kansas State?). And we're talking about three straight weeks during the holiday season.

But the point is, why should they have to? Why do you feel the need to include the bowls in the playoff? They wouldn't be bowls anymore anyway. They would just be large concrete structures with grass fields where guys run around chasing a ball.

If OSU or Michigan were a higher seed against Florida or LSU, why wouldn't you want the game to be played in Columbus or Ann Arbor instead of Miami or New Orleans? All the complaining that goes on about the southern teams having the advantage during bowl season due to weather and proximity to the bowl locations could go out the window with a playoff hosted by the higher seeded team. Yet Big TenElevenTwelve fans still feel obligated to include the bowls in the playoff system.

???

[jgord24]

You don't think Texas / OSU / LSU / etc. fans would travel 3 weeks in a row to see their team? . No they wouldn't. I am a season ticket holder I would travel to 1 bowl game a year, but no way I would even think about going to 2. I know several other season ticket holders that feel the exact same way. You give me 2-3 more home playoff games in C-Bus and I will be sitting in the shoe to watch. I don't want to spend money to travel to Arizona, then Louisiana and then Florida in back to back to back weeks, plus most of us have these things called jobs. That doesn't even factor in the playoffs being around the holidays.


You don't think Texas / OSU / LSU / etc. fans would travel 3 weeks in a row to see their team? The big boys have half a million or more ardent fans out there . That is simply not true. OSU didn't even sell out their own alotment of tickets to the Rose Bowl 2 years ago. The school had to purchase the tickets that went unsold.


But it doesn't address the money issue, and we aren't starting from scratch. That's why it hasn't happened yet and won't happen. My idea is very complex and has lots of pitfalls, but it is trying to address the underlying issue - money.. I understand your thought and plan. I orginally thought that plan would work many years ago but that plan is never going to work. The schools/presidents/bowl committees know that they would not be able to get their fan bases to travel to 2-3 bowl games. They have a hard enough time trying to get fan bases to travel to 1 bowl game. Your plan is well thought out, but its not going to ever happen. The only possible way for a playoff to happen is for the higher seeds to play home games, any other way is just not going to work.

[Altordwm]

This March, take note of all the empty seats for the first two or three rounds of the tournament. You might get some sellouts if the big name schools play close to home (e.g. if Duke plays in Greensboro). But otherwise, there's a lot of empty seats.