OT: Buckeyes move up to #2 in BCS standings, TCU drops to #8 [Archive]

Solecismic

11-17-2003, 06:47 PM

I'm still wondering why TCU is even this high. Was it the impressive South Florida victory? Or Navy? Or that 62-55 victory over Houston, which lost to Michigan 50-3? Or maybe it was Louisville?

Apart from those four, they haven't played a single winning team. And none of those four are ranked.

Including Southern Mississippi (7-3) and the season-ender against Southern Methodist (0-11), TCU's opponents have a combined .398 winning percentage.

Don't we skewer major conference teams for playing a non-conference schedule with a combined 10-33 record (.233)? And they don't have to face tough in-conference opponents.

Look at Ohio State, which might get bumped out of the BCS in TCU's favor if they lose to Michigan and people get their wish...

Four wins already over ranked teams. Opponents' combined winning percentage of .565. Non-conference opponents with a 25-18 record (.581). But a loss to 7-4 Wisconsin, which would be a good bowl matchup for TCU.

TCU has earned a bowl bid, no question about it. But the Frogs just haven't shown anything top-eight worthy.

Eaglesfan27

11-17-2003, 07:10 PM

I know margin of victory has been removed. However, I feel USC is the superior team over Ohio State at this point. USC has been playing the most dominant football besides Oklahoma in the country the last few weeks. I'm just very frustrated that their strong play might go unrewarded.

11-17-2003, 08:12 PM

Interesting that Arizona players say LSU is better than USC and Alabama players say LSU is better than OU. LSU deserves the same consideration for the #2 spot as OSU and USC. And LSU has a tough remaining schedule, facing Ole Miss at Ole Miss (Ole Miss goes to the SEC Championship Game if it wins, and it is Eli Manning's last home game.), Arkansas at home, and then, if LSU wins those games, the SEC title game in Atlanta. Most likely not enough to raise LSU up to #2 in the BCS. It is unfortunate that LSU had two opponents drop LSU before the start of the season, Marshal being one, replaced at the last minute by Western Illinois. That and the other switch really hurt their ratings in the BCS. UL-Monroe was also an addition after another team dropped out. (The habit continues; the cowards at Va. Tech have dropped a game that had been schedule at LSU early next season, so LSU is currently scrambling to find another home opponent.) LSU may lose next week, but right now they are playing as well as anyone in the nation.

Noop

11-17-2003, 08:25 PM

Now this is a big what if but... What if Oklahoma, Ohio State, USC, LSU, Georgia, Tennessse all lost? Would TCU play Michigan for the National Title or would Oklahoma still get in? Also if OU gets in and loses to Michigan will TCU get a share of the title?

kcchief19

11-17-2003, 08:29 PM

Personally, I don't want TCU to finish in the top 6 and get the automatic BCS bid, because if they do it means we will continue to be subjected to this horrific crime of nature that is college's football postseason.

The complaint of TCU and other non-BCS teams is that the system is not designed to let them in. It's easy to say TCU should play a tougher schedule. But they played Arizona and Vanderbilt. Do you think USC or Georgia wants to play TCU? If if TCU had the foresight four years ago to schedule Nebraksa this year, we all know Nebraska would look at last year's record and the team coming back and whip out their checkbook and get out of the game. As a result, the non-BCS schools can't design a schedule that will get them in the game.

Looking at the numbers, it's easy to prove that TCU barely belongs on the field with Iowa State much less Oklahoma. But I think that regardless of the schedule you play, going undefeated is hard to do and should get you something better than a bid in the HappyFunBall.com Bowl. I think seeing TCU in a BCS bowl and giving them a shot would be a lot more fun than watching LSU and Miami play in a what for them is a consolation game.

The best hope for the BCS bashers like myself is this: TCU gets left out and the No. 2 remains muddled like it is now and the eventual choice seems like it is drawn completely at random. It would really help if Oklahoma was stunned in the Big XII title game and the national championship ended up with something like USC vs. Texas. :)

Craptacular

11-17-2003, 08:50 PM

Assuming LSU wins their last two regular season games, the potential rematch with Georgia has an interesting twist. Beating Ole Miss and Arkansas would give them a nice boost in the computers and SOS, to the point where they should be a solid #4 or maybe #3 in the computers. They are currently behind Texas, TCU, and Tennessee in some of the computers, but all of those teams finish with weak opponents (at least TCU plays Southern Miss, but SMU will kill their ratings). It could be close enough in the BCS rankings that quality win points might play a big role. LSU needs Georgia to keep a high ranking, but then they have to BEAT Georgia again, consequently knocking them down and lessening the QW points. Of course, LSU would not get double points for beating Georgia twice. LSU may already be at their "ceiling" in the computers before the SEC title game, so a win over Georgia might not affect their other ratings enough to offset the loss of QW points.

So what should LSU be rooting for (besides winning out, and losses by OSU and USC of course)?? Well, they need Tennessee to lose, so Florida would win the SEC East by virtue of their win over Georgia. It would also help if Florida beat FSU, to further help LSU's SOS and computer rankings. Then Georgia needs to win out. So, you could have a highly ranked Georgia team that does not have to risk a loss in the SEC title game.

I like the BCS, if for no other reason, because it gives me something to do when I'm bored. :)

ScottVib

11-17-2003, 09:00 PM

Remember they removed margin of victory because that was what put Nebraska in the National Title Game a couple of years ago... without that now TCU's 3 point overtime squeeker looks the same to the computers as the 45 point whipping USC put on them.

If USC gets bumped out the National Title Game I wonder if people start clamoring to put margin of victory (with a certain cutoff) back in?

USC's great crime was of course playing Arizona, because Arizona stinks USC's strength of schedule went down and Ohio State moved up. That's the same reason why TCU wouldn't have held onto the #6 after playing an 0-11 SMU club.

Scoobz0202

11-17-2003, 09:24 PM

Yeah. OSU only gained what? .21 points with the victory. Only reason they went ahead was due to the SOS hit that USC took.

Craptacular

11-17-2003, 09:37 PM

Originally posted by Noop
Now this is a big what if but... What if Oklahoma, Ohio State, USC, LSU, Georgia, Tennessse all lost? Would TCU play Michigan for the National Title or would Oklahoma still get in? Also if OU gets in and loses to Michigan will TCU get a share of the title?

I think OU would likely stay in the top 2 with a loss, unless they got creamed by Texas Tech and the voters dropped them down quite a bit. I don't know the computer formulas well enough to know for sure though.

It is possible for TCU to gain a share of the title without playing in the Sugar Bowl. The coaches poll must declare the winner of the BCS title game the champion, but the AP voters are free to choose any team they want.

stkelly52

11-17-2003, 10:25 PM

To me, no one, not even Oklahoma has proven that they can beat TCU. Sure I believe that Oklahoma would win. But until someone can prove that they can beat TCU they are at least tied for the best team in the country

hollmt

11-17-2003, 10:32 PM

Originally posted by stkelly52
To me, no one, not even Oklahoma has proven that they can beat TCU. Sure I believe that Oklahoma would win. But until someone can prove that they can beat TCU they are at least tied for the best team in the country

but when ohio state wins 18 in a row over the course of a season and a half they arent the best team in the country?

its pretty hard to PROVE you can beat someone unless two teams line up and actually play it out now isnt it? and even then there are arguments that the refs blew some call or some excuse.

i think it is funny how this season TCU is undefeated and they are receiving all this praise, yet OSU does it last season and they get slapped with lucky this, or the refs did that.

hollmt

11-17-2003, 10:38 PM

one more thing...isnt TCU doing the same thing that OSU did last season? they have won 6 games by a touchdown or less this year, and even more than that, they have won 5 of those 6 by 3 points!

i am in no way bashing TCUs accomplishments, because the bottom line is they are winning, and that is the greatest stat of all...not offensive output, defensive output, who they play. none of that matters. they are undefeated and you should praise that. just that when other teams *cough* OHIO STATE *cough* does it, they get bashed as being lucky and dont get the praise when they put up a nice 18 game win streak.

BishopMVP

11-17-2003, 11:08 PM

Originally posted by hollmt
one more thing...isnt TCU doing the same thing that OSU did last season? they have won 6 games by a touchdown or less this year, and even more than that, they have won 5 of those 6 by 3 points!

Yes, but Ohio State got the chance to prove those doubters wrong and TCU won't.

I for one thought Ohio State was lucky all last season and would lose in the Fiesta Bowl. I for one think TCU has been lucky this season and would lose in a BCS game. I was wrong last year but I'm not going to find out if I'm wrong this year, because if TCU wins out they will be playing December 31st against Utah in the Liberty Bowl, not January 1st against Texas or some comparable team. That is what is wrong with the system (not just the BCS).

JeeberD

11-17-2003, 11:35 PM

Originally posted by Solecismic
I'm still wondering why TCU is even this high.

...the Frogs just haven't shown anything top-eight worthy.

http://www.digitalstar.com/JeeberD/images/194059.JPG

Hmmmm, looks like someone needs to do some tweaking to their rankings program.... :D :p

tucker342

11-17-2003, 11:36 PM

Of course they should put margin of victory back in the BCS, maybe it shouldn't be a big factor, but it should be there. If OSU gets in to the NC game over USC or LSU, it will be a travesty(sp?). I'm sorry OSU fans but when your team can only beat Penn State by 1 point(I think that's how much they won by), then you don't deserve to play in the NC game, plain and simple!

Of course this will all by trivial when Michigan crushes them:D

hollmt

11-17-2003, 11:49 PM

I disagree on the margin of victory needing to be put back in the BCS formula. if you beat a team, you beat a team, you dont need to hang your hat on the fact that you beat them by 1 pt or 77 points.

a win is a win is a win, no matter how you do it...call it luck (which i also totally disagree with) or call it bad calls by the refs. and this whole luck thing needs to be tossed out the window also. both teams are on the field playing ball and just cause a team makes a mistake and it helps another team win doesnt mean the victor is lucky.

in saturdays game vs. Purdue everone was on the wagon again on how OSU was lucky to win the game. Excuse me? Im sorry the Purdue kicker couldnt make a field goal...and he shanked it wide cause he couldnt handle the pressure. If im not mistaken Nugent (OSUs kicker) had his kick blocked and there was no lucky comment made there. In fact im sure if the roles had been reversed and Purdue made their kick and OSU had missed, there would of been no talk of how lucky Purdue got to win the game.

eh..the same argument week in and week out. im gonna say this too though. if OSU wins out and so does USC, im sorry to all the Buckeye haters and USC fans out there, but the fact that OSU is defending champs and played a tougher schedule all season long, especially down the stretch, gives them the right to play for it all to PROVE if they can beat OU or not. and even then, if they win...im sure the refs will do something stupid and help the Luckeyes out.

sterlingice

11-18-2003, 12:26 AM

Someone want to pass me some of what the New York Times poll is smoking?

2-loss Texas at 3
3-loss Florida at 4
USC behind them at 5
Mississippi at 8
LSU all the way down at 11 (I mean, really, I'm really critical of them and their schedule but they should be 4th)
TCU coming in at... 25

SI

ISiddiqui

11-18-2003, 12:33 AM

And it's the NY Times poll that ultimately moved USC down to 3. A poll that nutty should not decide who moves where in the BCS.

hollmt

11-18-2003, 12:47 AM

Originally posted by ISiddiqui
And it's the NY Times poll that ultimately moved USC down to 3. A poll that nutty should not decide who moves where in the BCS.

actually if you want to get technical about it, lets say the NY times computer poll gave USC a 3 (and im being generous and not saying a 4 like 3 of the other computers gave them) instead of a 5. So that is 23 points across the 7 polls. 23 divided by 7 equals 3.28 rounded to the nearest and they would still be at 3.33. and in the same spot they are in now. where it is now they are at 25 across the 7 polls which is 3.58 rounded down to 3.33, when it probably should of been rounded up to 3.67. So you could even round the 3.28 to a 3.17 and USC would still be at 7.55 and still below OSU in the polls. So it isnt just the NY times poll that is hurting them.

as a side note does anyone know the rules on the rounding they do for the computer polls?

hollmt

11-18-2003, 01:01 AM

ah..nevermind all that above..I did the reading on the explanation and found that they drop the lowest (worst) of the computer polls.

so more math then!

Lets say the NYC gave them a 3 (again benefit of the doubt) and that you drop one of the 4s on the computer poll. that is 19 points divided by 6 polls which is still a 3.17 and USC is still .03 behind OSU...as they should be!

hollmt

11-18-2003, 01:10 AM

and now to continue talking and responding to myself since it is so late and all, i think the BCS should do what gymnatics do, and drop the lowest (worst) and the highest (best) of the puter polls.

then OSU would be even further ahead of USC cause they would lose that 2 ranking that Jeff Sagarin gave them.

mckerney

11-18-2003, 01:13 AM

Or give more weight to voter polls than computer polls, as the voters obviously seem to have a better understanding than the computers.

That said, it won't matter after the weekend.

hollmt

11-18-2003, 01:20 AM

actually the voters are more biased than the computers. the computers just weigh numbers and dont "judge" anything but numbers.

the more you let humans control anything the more suspect it is.

i know it may be a lame example, but just look at boxing, ice skating, gymnastics...anything where judges decide the winner. its biased and based on certain little things.

sometimes i think the WWE is more real than some of those other sports cause at least they come right out and tell you it is fake and fixed.

mckerney

11-18-2003, 01:27 AM

Originally posted by hollmt
actually the voters are more biased than the computers. the computers just weigh numbers and dont "judge" anything but numbers.

the more you let humans control anything the more suspect it is.

i know it may be a lame example, but just look at boxing, ice skating, gymnastics...anything where judges decide the winner. its biased and based on certain little things.

sometimes i think the WWE is more real than some of those other sports cause at least they come right out and tell you it is fake and fixed.

Yes, and anything you do with computers will most likely give you an incomplete result.

That said, I'd rather have people decide it rather than computers.

hollmt

11-18-2003, 01:31 AM

yeah id rather have people decide things too...cause i can slip them a bill or two to sway their vote (and dont think it doesnt happen in any sport), the human factor is way screwed up and biased.

but now this is evolving into a whole new beast/discussion. you can say computers give incomplete results, and i can say people are biased and easily influenced but in the end it doesnt really matter i guess.

Honolulu_Blue

11-18-2003, 02:56 AM

This whole debate ends Saturday.

BishopMVP

11-18-2003, 03:30 AM

Originally posted by JeeberD
[img]Hmmmm, looks like someone needs to do some tweaking to their rankings program.... :D :p

It seems there are quite a few issues here. I mean, there's no way that Miami should be ahead of Miami :p

Rich1033

11-18-2003, 03:58 AM

Originally posted by tucker342
Of course they should put margin of victory back in the BCS, maybe it shouldn't be a big factor, but it should be there. If OSU gets in to the NC game over USC or LSU, it will be a travesty(sp?). I'm sorry OSU fans but when your team can only beat Penn State by 1 point(I think that's how much they won by), then you don't deserve to play in the NC game, plain and simple!

Of course this will all by trivial when Michigan crushes them:D

This seems to be the opinion of a lot of people and I just dont understand.

First let me say that Im a huge Michigan fan, so I have no love at all for OSU. But what kind of a reason is "they only beat Penn State by 1 point"? At least OSU lost to a decent team, USC lost to Cal. The way I look at it, if they both have the same record, then I go and look at who played the tougher schedule. Advantage OSU. Add in the fact that they are the defending champs, I just cant say they do not deserve a shot at defending their title.

I have already bet money that UM will beat OSU by at least 10 points. If Ohio State somehow manages to go to Michigan and win there should be no doubt that they deserve to be the number 2 team in the country.

IMetTrentGreen

11-18-2003, 08:13 AM

anyone want to flame me again for saying tcu won't make it in?

KWhit

11-18-2003, 09:42 AM

The point here should be that you can make a very good case for OSU or USC (or even LSU, IMO) to be the 2nd best team in the nation.

The fact that one of these teams will get the chance at the ultimate prize while the other two will not is a joke. They are so close to being equal in my mind that it isn't fair to reward one and not the others.

In other words: Gimme a playoff!

RendeR

11-18-2003, 10:19 AM

TCU doesn't deserve to be in the BCS top 6, maybe 7 or 8 because they are undefeated, but based on that schedule, and their final game being against a winless and hapless opponent, they don't deserve that shot.

They'll get a bowl game, but don't come after me when they get there and get killed.

RendeR

11-18-2003, 10:22 AM

And along the playoff lines, I like the idea of keeping the BCS system in place. Keep the weighting of the polls and the computers the same *since there are two polls and 7 computers the polls already have a large advantage in weight* take the top 8 teams at the end of the scoring and have 3 weeks of playoffs. Simple as that. 7 games, 1 champion that everyone might possibly agree on.

And TONS of money for all of them, so the money issue won't matter.

Glengoyne

11-18-2003, 12:04 PM

Originally posted by kcchief19
...

The complaint of TCU and other non-BCS teams is that the system is not designed to let them in. It's easy to say TCU should play a tougher schedule. But they played Arizona and Vanderbilt. Do you think USC or Georgia wants to play TCU? If if TCU had the foresight four years ago to schedule Nebraksa this year, we all know Nebraska would look at last year's record and the team coming back and whip out their checkbook and get out of the game. As a result, the non-BCS schools can't design a schedule that will get them in the game....

Actually Fresno State scheduled to get let in three seasons ago. The only thing is they couldn't hold up their end of the deal and lost a couple of WAC games, after beating Wisconson, Colorado, Oregon State, and Colorado State. Boy, wasn't that frustrating.

GrantDawg

11-18-2003, 12:44 PM

I'll say this. My Bulldogs are a good team, but they are over-rated right now.

Butter

11-18-2003, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by Glengoyne
Actually Fresno State scheduled to get let in three seasons ago. The only thing is they couldn't hold up their end of the deal and lost a couple of WAC games, after beating Wisconson, Colorado, Oregon State, and Colorado State. Boy, wasn't that frustrating.

It was. I remember that. There was talk they should play for the title after the first few games.... UW and Oreg. St. finished up below .500, but Colorado almost passed Nebraska to play for the national title even with 2 losses. It's hard to schedule up that far in advance too, because it's very hard to predict who will be good. You can schedule perennial powers, but even they can go through bad patches.

hollmt

11-18-2003, 06:17 PM

Originally posted by RendeR
And along the playoff lines, I like the idea of keeping the BCS system in place. Keep the weighting of the polls and the computers the same *since there are two polls and 7 computers the polls already have a large advantage in weight* take the top 8 teams at the end of the scoring and have 3 weeks of playoffs. Simple as that. 7 games, 1 champion that everyone might possibly agree on.

And TONS of money for all of them, so the money issue won't matter.

i love the idea of a playoff with either 8 or 16 teams from the top of the list on the BCS. the only problem with that then is ther is no longer and argument as to who is #1 and #2 but rather who is number #8, #9, and #10 (for 8 team playoff) and #16, #17, #18 and so on (for 16 team playoff).

no longer would we argue who the top teams are but rather who the middle of the pack teams are and why the #18 team in the nation deserves a shot at the playoff etc. etc.

hollmt

11-18-2003, 06:18 PM

Originally posted by hollmt
i love the idea of a playoff with either 8 or 16 teams from the top of the list on the BCS. the only problem with that then is there is no longer an argument as to who is #1 and #2 but rather who is number #8, #9, and #10 (for 8 team playoff) and #16, #17, #18 and so on (for 16 team playoff).

no longer would we argue who the top teams are but rather who the middle of the pack teams are and why the #18 team in the nation deserves a shot at the playoff etc. etc.

Craptacular

11-18-2003, 08:04 PM

OK, I'm bored again, so let me throw out a few scenarios that would really be fun to watch. All of these hinge on Michigan beating Ohio St, but they don't move up past all of the other 2-loss teams currently ahead of them in the BCS (Texas, Georgia, Tennessee), and USC losing one or both of their two games and falling out of the title picture. It could be very close. Anyway ...

Oklahoma beats A&M, but loses the Big 12 title game.
Tennessee loses (or Florida beats FSU and moves ahead of them in BCS and within 5 places of Georgia).
Georgia wins last two regular season games.
Florida beats LSU in SEC title game.
Oklahoma remains #1 in the BCS, but Georgia and Texas finish #2-#3 (or #3-#2).

If Texas is #2, can they play in the Sugar Bowl? Both BCS at-large teams are not allowed to come from the same conference. I'm guessing the #1 vs. #2 rule overrides this, and #3 Georgia gets left out, but Florida is in.

If Georgia is #2, then Texas gets left out, even though the #3 team is supposed to be guaranteed a BCS slot.
What if TCU is in the top 6? I think they get left out as well in either of those scenarios. Both at-large spots would be filled by the #1 and #2 team.

I think it might also be possible for two SEC teams (out of LSU, Georgia, and maybe Tennessee) to finish #1 and #2, while either Florida or Ole Miss wins the SEC title. This would not only require Michigan to win (possibly in a horrible game that the voters take into account) and USC to lose, but two losses by Oklahoma, and probably a loss by Texas. I still don't think TCU would move ahead of all those 2-loss teams!

We thought it was bad for Nebraska to play for the championship without winning their conference. What if BOTH teams were not conference champions??

edit: Sorry, I think I confused myself a little. :)

digamma

11-18-2003, 08:29 PM

If Texas and Oklahoma are 1 and 2 in the BCS, then they would play for the national championship. If this happens AND Oklahoma loses the Big 12 Championship game, as I understand it, the winner of the Big 12 Championship would get bumped from the BCS--I am not sure if the rule is that only two teams from a conference can go to the BCS or if it is that if two teams from a conference are playing for the national title and they aren't the conference champ, then the conference champ gets bumped. However it is written, the result is the same. The Big 12 North Champ would be going to the Cotton or Holiday Bowl despite having won the Big 12. Confusing for sure.

Craptacular

11-18-2003, 09:23 PM

The only rule I could find said that both at-large teams cannot be from the same conference. So who knows if the conference winner gets bumped, or if they just have the six conference champions and no at-large teams. It would be an interesting situation.

Butter

11-19-2003, 08:00 AM

Being the Luckeyes is better than being the Suckeyes.

And while I agree that the best way to settle this at least would be some sort of playoff system, I don't know how you can say that if Ohio State wins on Saturday, they don't deserve to play for the title. OSU will have beaten 5+ teams in the top-25. USC will have beaten maybe 2. And OSU's loss was to a higher quality opponent, both of them on the road.

You can say that USC would give OU a better game... but everyone said that OSU had no shot against Miami last year as well.

Let's all just hope that they can work out some sort of playoff system. 4 teams wouldn't be that great, 8 teams would be better, 16 would be terrific!

Oh, and Tucker342... you can give it a rest with the Buckeye bashing, OSU proved it was a better team than Iowa on the field this year... the same Iowa team that took down Michigan.

Kawiki

11-19-2003, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by Vegas Vic
Assuming OU makes it to the Sugar Bowl, I honestly think that USC has the best chance to knock them off. They match up more favorably than OSU, plus they have better team speed and athleticism. I don't think that OSU would score an offensive touchdown against OU.

OSU may not score an offensive TD but they would end up winning the game. Like they have done at least twice this year.

Remember, defensive wins championships and running up the score on someone loses respect.

As long as OSU beats the team that will not be named from the north they deserve to go.

:)

TroyF

11-19-2003, 01:14 PM

You can say that USC would give OU a better game... but everyone said that OSU had no shot against Miami last year as well.

Everyone? Nope, not everyone. :)

I think USC is better than Ohio State this year. I don't think the Buckeyes will win against Michigan. . . but I figured they'd lose to Purdue as well.

People complaining about USC not being there, however, need to stop. If Ohio State were to beat Michigan on Saturday, that would mean they had played 7 games against teams ranked in the top 25 (at the time they played them) and they went 6-1 in those games. That would include three teams in the top 10 at the time OSU played them, all coming late in the season when the polls mean a little something.

USC has played two teams ranked in the top 25 all year. (again, this is a team being ranked at the time USC played them) Auburn and Washington State.

We can whine all we want about HOW Ohio State keeps winning. . . the fact is they do. I was a believer in that team last year. I'm not this year. I could [b]spend all day explaining why I feel that way. I think last year the TOOK games away more often than not. I think this year they are being given games. It's a subtle difference and it goes to the eye of the beholder.

Regardless, they beat Michigan on Saturday, they'll be there because they deserve to be there, not because of the NY Times poll or margain of victory being weighed in. (SOS should always outweigh MOV)

TroyF

cthomer5000

11-19-2003, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by Craptacular
The only rule I could find said that both at-large teams cannot be from the same conference. So who knows if the conference winner gets bumped, or if they just have the six conference champions and no at-large teams. It would be an interesting situation.

What if: Texas wins out
LSU loses to Ole Miss
Ohio State loses to Michigan
USC loses a game
OU loses the Big 12 title game

If all that happened (not out of the question), then we'd probably have a 1-2 title game, with 2 teams from the same conference, where neither team was conference champ!

digamma

11-19-2003, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by cthomer5000
What if: Texas wins out
LSU loses to Ole Miss
Ohio State loses to Michigan
USC loses a game
OU loses the Big 12 title game

If all that happened (not out of the question), then we'd probably have a 1-2 title game, with 2 teams from the same conference, where neither team was conference champ!

That is the scenario we are talking about. In that case, Texas and OU play in the national championship game and Kansas Sate or Nebraska or Missouri (whoever wins the Big 12 North) would get bumped from the BCS because of the exception to the rule Craptacular quoted--a conference may send two at large teams to the BCS if they are 1-2, but in that case the conference champ is dumped.

cthomer5000

11-19-2003, 02:36 PM

Originally posted by digamma
That is the scenario we are talking about. In that case, Texas and OU play in the national championship game and Kansas Sate or Nebraska or Missouri (whoever wins the Big 12 North) would get bumped from the BCS because of the exception to the rule Craptacular quoted--a conference may send two at large teams to the BCS if they are 1-2, but in that case the conference champ is dumped.

Personally, I would love to see a rule stating that if a team isn't a conference champ, they aren't eligible for the national title.

Craptacular

11-19-2003, 08:13 PM

Originally posted by cthomer5000
Personally, I would love to see a rule stating that if a team isn't a conference champ, they aren't eligible for the national title.

Remember when this happened with Nebraska a couple of years ago? Now imagine the outrage when both teams in the game are not conference champs, and one of them is guaranteed at least a split of the crown.