Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lister]

I hope this season is another nail in the coffin for the preseason polls.

Seriously, they're based on no information whatsoever and determine the national championship.

I guess it's just idiotic of me to expect better from a system where the national championship is determined by a vote.

[littlefallsmets]

They will never get rid of the preseason polls because those rankings are what they sell the first few weeks of television coverage to the viewing audience with.

Since college football is so much large and amorphous, early-season rankings are basically the only way to sell the game to the casual fan on a national scale. Otherwise, only total junkies would watch early season games that didn't involve their regional teams.

It is wrong but it is also what we're stuck with because television revenue runs the NCAA.

There's a much better chance of fixing things at the backend, with a playoff, than at the front end.

Mainly because the teevee execs could at least FATHOM the idea of making as much off a playoff system as they make off the large bowls.

But no preseason rankings, no way to sell the game nationally for the first month and a half.

[Golfhaus]

Well, we're halfway there. The first BCS rankings are out, and if the season ended, it would be Ohio State and South Florida playing for the shiny glass football thingy. South Carolina is 6th, and would make an excellent replacement for OSU.

[AlohaDawg]

From 1936-1992, the No. 1 and 2 teams in the country as ranked by the Associated Press met eight times in bowl games. In the past nine years of the BCS system, the AP's top two teams have played six times. That's not to say there isn't a better, untried option, but the BCS definitely improved on the old bowl system.

As for the BCS formula, well, you have to base it on something. The 'Human' polls are 2/3 of the formula, the other third is an average of a bunch of computer picks. For instance, this week, Ohio State was tied for fifth in the computer rankings, but was first in AP and USA Today. If their schedule had been a little weaker, they may not have had first, and even winning out could lose first place to a winning team, highly regarded by journalists and coaches, with a stronger schedule. Short of a playoff, which is not likely to happen in Division I, this is a reasonable way to choose the teams that should face off in the BCS bowl games.

[AugustWest]

From 1936-1992, the No. 1 and 2 teams in the country as ranked by the Associated Press met eight times in bowl games. In the past nine years of the BCS system, the AP's top two teams have played six times.

OK, but you're assuming the AP rankings are somehow independent and unbiased.  To what extent are the AP's #1 & 2 there because they're #1&2 in the BCS?

That's not to say there isn't a better, untried option, but the BCS definitely improved on the old bowl system.

Absolutely true.  Prior to the mid-80s, I don't remember anybody talking about a "National Championship" of NCAA football.  Somebody won the Rose Bowl, somebody won the Sugar Bowl, somebody won the Cotton Bowl and so on.  Of course, this led to endless arguments about who was in fact the truly best team in the land (the more things change...)

Personally, I think a football "Final Four" would work.  This year will looks like an exception, but in most years there are two or three or four teams that are head and shoulders above the rest.  Play a semi-final game Christmas week and a championship game New Years week.

Even if we kept the current corrupt BCS system wherein some conferences are favored and others almost guaranteed to be excluded, this would be an improvement.  You'd have the flexibility to throw an undefeated non-BCS school into the mix while still retaining the revenue for the major players.

Also, this is why the March Madness is the greatest thing in the cosmos. 

[melack]

Also, this is why the March Madness is the greatest thing in the cosmos. 

It also has a little to do with basketball being the superior sport.

[KeithHernandez]

It also has a little to do with basketball being the superior sport.

HAHAHA.  (wait just between this and football???  is baseball involved?)

[jaydub]

It also has a little to do with basketball being the superior sport.

Er.  Not.

[littlefallsmets]

Basketball is pretty much the most boring of the major team sports.

Every game is either a blowout or comes down to a foul-shot competition.

The reason why the March Madness is awesome is that... like... rooting for underdogs is fun, rooting against big powers is fun and for the first few days, there's pretty much always something going on and so... like... the odds dictate out that there's always gonna be something exciting happening over those days.

It is not as boring as soccer but soccer is not a major sport and the one thing that's good about America slowly turning into an obscene empire-type thing is that when our warlords take over the world, they will force everyone to stop pretending soccer is interesting just because it is the only game in town.

Hockey at least has lots of fights and each scoring play means something significant in the game... and there's something interesting about a sport played on ice, something visceral.

I think it goes something like:

9. Soccer
8. Water Polo
7. Lacrosse
6. Beer Pong
5. Ultimate Frisbee
4. Basketball
3. Hockey
2. Football
1. Baseball

Those were all the team sports I could think of in a minute.

[jaydub]

I'd swap baseball and lacrosse in your list, but otherwise concur.

[CortJstr]

So, how about that big rugby game?

[melack]

I know. I'm a bad American.

[Golfhaus]

So, how about that big rugby game?

It was a great game... sit-occasionallys were packed!

I love sports that are oddball sports from the perspective of the football-and-NASCAR American. Australian Rules Football, rugby, team handball, luge/bobsled... man, good stuff.

[CortJstr]

It was a great game... sit-occasionallys were packed!

I love sports that are oddball sports from the perspective of the football-and-NASCAR American. Australian Rules Football, rugby, team handball, luge/bobsled... man, good stuff.

The rugby I've seen has convinced me that it's what American football was supposed to be. But I still haven't found a non-scripted sport that interests me enough to watch more than highlights.

[V-Adore]

I've always wanted to watch more lacrosse. I played it a little in middle-school gym, and the sheer difficulty of the activity impressed itself on me. (Both in the mental sense and in the "being hit repeatedly by lacrosse balls" sense.)