BCS Rankings 10/15

[dh86 0]

Well, the BCS paradise would be for either OSU or Michigan to run the table and then take on USC (who would somehow go unbeaten as well). That said, if either U of L or WVU goes unbeaten we could be looking at the BCS fiasco of all time. Namely a team from a major conference that is unbeaten getting beat out of the national title game in favor of a team with 1 loss.

 

Now WVU? They have had a weak schedule thus far. U of L though? Let's take a look. Should the Cards somehow go undefeated they'll have beaten Miami, WVU, Rutgers, Pitt, and a few other teams that might end up being bowl teams (K-State, USF).

big east being a major football conference nowadays is in question

[teke184 0]

Well, the BCS paradise would be for either OSU or Michigan to run the table and then take on USC (who would somehow go unbeaten as well). That said, if either U of L or WVU goes unbeaten we could be looking at the BCS fiasco of all time. Namely a team from a major conference that is unbeaten getting beat out of the national title game in favor of a team with 1 loss.

 

Now WVU? They have had a weak schedule thus far. U of L though? Let's take a look. Should the Cards somehow go undefeated they'll have beaten Miami, WVU, Rutgers, Pitt, and a few other teams that might end up being bowl teams (K-State, USF).

big east being a major football conference nowadays is in question

 

Normally I'd agree with you, but the ACC looks like total ass this year.

 

Georgia Tech looks like the only semi-competent team in the whole league.

[CanadianChris 0]

Well, the BCS paradise would be for either OSU or Michigan to run the table and then take on USC (who would somehow go unbeaten as well). That said, if either U of L or WVU goes unbeaten we could be looking at the BCS fiasco of all time. Namely a team from a major conference that is unbeaten getting beat out of the national title game in favor of a team with 1 loss.

 

Now WVU? They have had a weak schedule thus far. U of L though? Let's take a look. Should the Cards somehow go undefeated they'll have beaten Miami, WVU, Rutgers, Pitt, and a few other teams that might end up being bowl teams (K-State, USF).

big east being a major football conference nowadays is in question

Not anymore. Bringing in all the C-USA teams really helped. They're probably 5th out of 6 among the BCS conferences...maybe 4th, depending on what you think of the Big XII.

[Jorge Gorgeous 0]

USC is number #2 because they beat #13 Arkansas and #17 Nebraska. I'm sorry that we don't play Bowling Green, Vanderbilt, Middle Tennessee State or some of the other assorted trash that the other undefeateds schedule.

 

Everyone's going to lose a game anyway, so these arguments won't mean a fucking thing. By the end of the year, it's going to be a complete mess.

 

Michigan and Ohio State dont have to worry about playing in a conference with such powers as Arizona,Oregon State or Washington State either so it really evens out

 

Drop Washington State from that argument and add Stanford, Wazzu could end up playing in a bowl game.

 

And to that argument I would counter with Illinois, Minnesota and Northwestern.

 

Michigan has looked impressive, but out of conference wins against Commodores, Chippewas and... whatever Ball State is (the fightin' David Lettermans?) aren't nearly as impressive as what USC did out of conference. I'm not biased towards USC at all, I think Michigan is cool as hell, but if you're trying to cement yourself a place in this shakey BCS system, scheduling Central Michigan is a bad way to do it.

 

 

 

By the way, I know Ball State is the Cardinals.

[Fökai 0]

I'd put my life on Louisville not being BCS #2 regardless of how anyone finishes. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news for their fans.

[ANKLELOCK 0]

10. California

11. Tennessee

 

 

 

^I'm a little tired, but I'm pretty sure I'm seeing this right. The question is: how in the Hell do you explain it?

[iggymcfly 0]

10. California

11. Tennessee

 

 

 

^I'm a little tired, but I'm pretty sure I'm seeing this right. The question is: how in the Hell do you explain it?

 

It's pretty simple really. The computers aren't allowed to take margin of victory into account.

 

The computers know that Cal lost at Tennessee, and beat some good teams the rest of the season. They have no way of knowing that Tennesse had them completely dominated.

[dh86 0]

USC is number #2 because they beat #13 Arkansas and #17 Nebraska. I'm sorry that we don't play Bowling Green, Vanderbilt, Middle Tennessee State or some of the other assorted trash that the other undefeateds schedule.

 

Everyone's going to lose a game anyway, so these arguments won't mean a fucking thing. By the end of the year, it's going to be a complete mess.

 

Michigan and Ohio State dont have to worry about playing in a conference with such powers as Arizona,Oregon State or Washington State either so it really evens out

 

Drop Washington State from that argument and add Stanford, Wazzu could end up playing in a bowl game.

 

And to that argument I would counter with Illinois, Minnesota and Northwestern.

 

Michigan has looked impressive, but out of conference wins against Commodores, Chippewas and... whatever Ball State is (the fightin' David Lettermans?) aren't nearly as impressive as what USC did out of conference. I'm not biased towards USC at all, I think Michigan is cool as hell, but if you're trying to cement yourself a place in this shakey BCS system, scheduling Central Michigan is a bad way to do it.

 

 

 

By the way, I know Ball State is the Cardinals.

 

I am not sure if you knew this or not, but Notre Dame isnt in the Big 10...just wanted you to know

[dh86 0]

USC is number #2 because they beat #13 Arkansas and #17 Nebraska. I'm sorry that we don't play Bowling Green, Vanderbilt, Middle Tennessee State or some of the other assorted trash that the other undefeateds schedule.

 

Everyone's going to lose a game anyway, so these arguments won't mean a fucking thing. By the end of the year, it's going to be a complete mess.

 

Michigan and Ohio State dont have to worry about playing in a conference with such powers as Arizona,Oregon State or Washington State either so it really evens out

 

Drop Washington State from that argument and add Stanford, Wazzu could end up playing in a bowl game.

 

And to that argument I would counter with Illinois, Minnesota and Northwestern.

 

Michigan has looked impressive, but out of conference wins against Commodores, Chippewas and... whatever Ball State is (the fightin' David Lettermans?) aren't nearly as impressive as what USC did out of conference. I'm not biased towards USC at all, I think Michigan is cool as hell, but if you're trying to cement yourself a place in this shakey BCS system, scheduling Central Michigan is a bad way to do it.

 

 

 

By the way, I know Ball State is the Cardinals.

the same Minnesota and Northwestern that were bowl teams last year?.....but Lloyd Carr did not need to stack the non conference schedule like other teams have to...the Big 10 is a test as it is while the computers may not see it...the human polls are two thirds of the BCS formula so when everything comes to a head in six weeks...im sure the right teams will be at the top

[Jorge Gorgeous 0]

USC is number #2 because they beat #13 Arkansas and #17 Nebraska. I'm sorry that we don't play Bowling Green, Vanderbilt, Middle Tennessee State or some of the other assorted trash that the other undefeateds schedule.

 

Everyone's going to lose a game anyway, so these arguments won't mean a fucking thing. By the end of the year, it's going to be a complete mess.

 

Michigan and Ohio State dont have to worry about playing in a conference with such powers as Arizona,Oregon State or Washington State either so it really evens out

 

Drop Washington State from that argument and add Stanford, Wazzu could end up playing in a bowl game.

 

And to that argument I would counter with Illinois, Minnesota and Northwestern.

 

Michigan has looked impressive, but out of conference wins against Commodores, Chippewas and... whatever Ball State is (the fightin' David Lettermans?) aren't nearly as impressive as what USC did out of conference. I'm not biased towards USC at all, I think Michigan is cool as hell, but if you're trying to cement yourself a place in this shakey BCS system, scheduling Central Michigan is a bad way to do it.

 

 

 

By the way, I know Ball State is the Cardinals.

 

 

 

I am not sure if you knew this or not, but Notre Dame isnt in the Big 10...just wanted you to know

 

Of course I know Notre Dame isn't Big 10, but everyone knows Michigan played Notre Dame, I didn't feel like I needed to bring it up.

 

And Wazzu and OSU were both serious contenders for the Pac-10 title (even the national title) just a few years ago. I don't think your perception of the Pac-10 synchs up with the reality of the Pac-10.

[lomasmoney 0]

Michigan was kind of hindered in who they could play with the extra game. They ended up getting the extra game week later in the season, and they would be idiotic to play another powerhouse school in early November. They have Oregon coming next year. USC has played better out of Conference teams, but they have absolute cakewalks against squads like Stanford, and Oregon State. Michigan has played Penn State, Wisconsin who are better than any teams in the Pac-10 not named Oregon and Cal. Notre Dame is a wash, since both teams play them, and also Michigan still has a decent Iowa team, again better than anyone that USC will play in conference outside of the aforementioned teams.

On top of that Michigan has to play Ohio State at the end of the year which makes all this talk of who should be number 2 irrelevant since Michigan or OSU will get knocked out. This whole thing is going to become a mess in a few weeks, especially if USC drops a game. You would have the loser of OSU-Michigan, USC, Florida, Texas, West Virginia, Louisville, Auburn, Clemson, all with one potential loss. Its so damn hard to figure out who the second best team is. This is why I say 8-team playoff to solve all of this crap but the university presidents disagree.

[naiwf 0]

I think if Michigan and OSU are still undefeated going into their game, and Michigan wins by 4 or less you might only see OSU drop to # 2 in the BCS rankings.

[Guest]

Did you totally ignore almost all the posts in this thread that said that margin of victory does not mean anything to the computers.

[naiwf 0]

Did you totally ignore almost all the posts in this thread that said that margin of victory does not mean anything to the computers.

 

Did you totally ignore the part where it was said that the computers only make up 1/3 of the score. OSU wouldn't drop that far in the human polls if they lost a close game to Michigan. Obviously, if they get blown out they'd take a big hit.

[Guest]

Considering where Ohio State is in the computer polls, they would fall lower than #2 in the BCS, especially if Texas doesn't hold up. If they lose, they need Texas to also be a one loss team.

 

There's a reason that USC is right behind the Buckeyes in the BCS, and it's because they're tops in most of the computer polls.

[lomasmoney 0]

Its just absurd that a formula which doesn't take into account things like Cal got murdered at Tennessee and therefore under no circumstances should Cal be ranked ahead of Tennessee, that makes the whole system a joke. What if somehow wacky shit happens, and Cal ended up in the title game over a one loss Tennessee team? The more I look at years like this where there is NO clear cut number one team, that I think a playoff is needed. For all we know, Michigan and Ohio State could be the best two teams, or Auburn and Florida could be. With the polls and stuff we get a general idea which teams are the top 8 or 12, but after that there is no conclusive way to determine which teams stand out from the rest.

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Let's just see if we can't get 2 undefeateds first before calling it a jumble.

[Guest]

But it is a clusterfuck regardless.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

Its just absurd that a formula which doesn't take into account things like Cal got murdered at Tennessee and therefore under no circumstances should Cal be ranked ahead of Tennessee, that makes the whole system a joke. What if somehow wacky shit happens, and Cal ended up in the title game over a one loss Tennessee team? The more I look at years like this where there is NO clear cut number one team, that I think a playoff is needed. For all we know, Michigan and Ohio State could be the best two teams, or Auburn and Florida could be. With the polls and stuff we get a general idea which teams are the top 8 or 12, but after that there is no conclusive way to determine which teams stand out from the rest.

If Cal ended up in the title game over a one-loss Tennessee, then Cal would have beaten USC and run the table through the rest of the Pac-10. Tennessee would have beaten Cal, (at least 3-loss) LSU, (not that good) Georgia, and Auburn/Arkansas in the SEC championship. I'd say their resumes are pretty comparable and wouldn't have a problem with either being there.

 

Can we please stop griping with the "Team A beat Team B, and Team B beat team C, so they must be ranked A-B-C" thing? After the first few weeks of the season that's no longer an accurate measure of the teams. You have to take into account everything they've done. Does anyone really think Arkansas is the 6th or 7th best team in the country, having watched the rest of the season unfold so far?

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

Edwin, I don't think Arkansas is #6, but I do feel that they should be ranked ahead of Auburn and Florida, and maybe Tennessee. If that means dropping all those teams down, that's fine. But I'd rather have Arkansas ranked a little too high, then risk the prospect of West Virginia/Louisville determining a national championship contender.

 

I would hope that everyone in this thread would agree that we need a playoff. It seems like this is the time of year that we always come around to that conclusion. We should have it, and that's the end of the story.

 

With regard to the Pac-10, USC and Cal compared easily to OSU and Michigan. Oregon is better than Iowa. Washington State, Washington (with Stanback), and UCLA are equal to Penn State, Minnesota, and Wisconsin this year, and could contend with Purdue. It's a wash between Arizona, Oregon State, Arizona State, & Stanford, and Northwestern, Michigan State, Indiana, & Illinois. I'd give the Big 10 the edge right now, but they're not far and away the better conference.

 

As far as the Trojans go, like I said before we have more things to worry about than the rankings. They have a bye week, Oregon State, and Stanford to work out the kinks. And there are some kinks. They better worry about beating Oregon, Cal, and Notre Dame before they worry about their ranking.

[AboveAverage484 0]

This is why the BCS is universally hated, it rips friends and families asunder.

[naiwf 0]

Edwin, I don't think Arkansas is #6, but I do feel that they should be ranked ahead of Auburn and Florida, and maybe Tennessee. If that means dropping all those teams down, that's fine. But I'd rather have Arkansas ranked a little too high, then risk the prospect of West Virginia/Louisville determining a national championship contender.

 

I would hope that everyone in this thread would agree that we need a playoff. It seems like this is the time of year that we always come around to that conclusion. We should have it, and that's the end of the story.

 

With regard to the Pac-10, USC and Cal compared easily to OSU and Michigan. Oregon is better than Iowa. Washington State, Washington (with Stanback), and UCLA are equal to Penn State, Minnesota, and Wisconsin this year, and could contend with Purdue. It's a wash between Arizona, Oregon State, Arizona State, & Stanford, and Northwestern, Michigan State, Indiana, & Illinois. I'd give the Big 10 the edge right now, but they're not far and away the better conference.

 

As far as the Trojans go, like I said before we have more things to worry about than the rankings. They have a bye week, Oregon State, and Stanford to work out the kinks. And there are some kinks. They better worry about beating Oregon, Cal, and Notre Dame before they worry about their ranking.

 

Who cares if 3 thru 10 or 11 are equal in the Big 10 and Pac 10, when the top two in the Big 10 are the two best teams in the whole country?

[nogoodnick 0]

Arguably the best two.

[iggymcfly 0]

Edwin, I don't think Arkansas is #6, but I do feel that they should be ranked ahead of the fourth and fifth best teams in the country and maybe the sixth best team as well. If that means dropping all those teams down, that's fine. If all the legitimate national title contenders from the SEC are ranked below shitty Arkansas that only beat Alabama and Vanderbilt when those teams' kickers choked away game-winners, then that would somehow make West Virginia and Louisville less likely to play in the title game.

 

Does this make sense to anyone? I feel like I'm missing something here.

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

"Edwin, I don't think Arkansas is #6, but I do feel that they should be ranked ahead of the fourth (Auburn, WHO ARKANSAS BEAT) and fifth best (Florida, who was just beaten by Auburn, WHO ARKANSAS BEAT the week before) teams in the country and maybe the sixth best team (Tennessee, who was beaten by Florida, who was just beaten by Auburn, WHO ARKANSAS BEAT two weeks ago) as well. If that means dropping all those teams down, that's fine. If all the legitimate national title contenders from the SEC are ranked below shitty Arkansas that only beat Alabama and Vanderbilt when those teams' kickers choked away game-winners (Are you dense? ARKANSAS BEAT AUBURN, the fourth best team in the country), then that would somehow make West Virginia and Louisville less likely to play in the title game."

 

Does this make sense to anyone? I feel like I'm missing something here.

 

You are missing something. You're missing the fact that some people are prepared to validate the weak sauce schedule of either West Virginia or Louisville based solely on the fact that one of the teams, who dominated a weak sauce schedule, will beat the other, who also dominated a weak sauce schedule. There is no reason the winner of West Virginia/Louisville should be taken seriously. Because that would be that team's ONLY QUALITY WIN. There will be no other measuring stick for that game's winner. All you'll be able to say is that they beat an undefeated team, which means nothing based on their schedules.

[dh86 0]

Edwin, I don't think Arkansas is #6, but I do feel that they should be ranked ahead of Auburn and Florida, and maybe Tennessee. If that means dropping all those teams down, that's fine. But I'd rather have Arkansas ranked a little too high, then risk the prospect of West Virginia/Louisville determining a national championship contender.

 

I would hope that everyone in this thread would agree that we need a playoff. It seems like this is the time of year that we always come around to that conclusion. We should have it, and that's the end of the story.

 

With regard to the Pac-10, USC and Cal compared easily to OSU and Michigan. Oregon is better than Iowa. Washington State, Washington (with Stanback), and UCLA are equal to Penn State, Minnesota, and Wisconsin this year, and could contend with Purdue. It's a wash between Arizona, Oregon State, Arizona State, & Stanford, and Northwestern, Michigan State, Indiana, & Illinois. I'd give the Big 10 the edge right now, but they're not far and away the better conference.

 

As far as the Trojans go, like I said before we have more things to worry about than the rankings. They have a bye week, Oregon State, and Stanford to work out the kinks. And there are some kinks. They better worry about beating Oregon, Cal, and Notre Dame before they worry about their ranking.

CAL is compared easily to Michigan?...the blowout loss at Tennessee must have been stricken from your memory...truth be told...Pac 10 doesnt have another team beside USC that is top 10 caliber much less top 3 caliber and Wisconsin is easily every bit as good as Oregon or Cal and without a question better than UCLA,WSU or any of the other schools

[dh86 0]

Considering where Ohio State is in the computer polls, they would fall lower than #2 in the BCS, especially if Texas doesn't hold up. If they lose, they need Texas to also be a one loss team.

 

There's a reason that USC is right behind the Buckeyes in the BCS, and it's because they're tops in most of the computer polls.

and USC would have to hope Arkansas and Nebraska holds up...what has a better chance of happening?

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Wow, I never thunk it but this is worse than when Dama was here. All the infighting about conferences. It's pointless.

[Art Sandusky 0]

No, it's really that the people arguing are clueless because they're actually arguing about this in October.

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

Edwin, I don't think Arkansas is #6, but I do feel that they should be ranked ahead of Auburn and Florida, and maybe Tennessee. If that means dropping all those teams down, that's fine. But I'd rather have Arkansas ranked a little too high, then risk the prospect of West Virginia/Louisville determining a national championship contender.

 

I would hope that everyone in this thread would agree that we need a playoff. It seems like this is the time of year that we always come around to that conclusion. We should have it, and that's the end of the story.

 

With regard to the Pac-10, USC and Cal compared easily to OSU and Michigan. Oregon is better than Iowa. Washington State, Washington (with Stanback), and UCLA are equal to Penn State, Minnesota, and Wisconsin this year, and could contend with Purdue. It's a wash between Arizona, Oregon State, Arizona State, & Stanford, and Northwestern, Michigan State, Indiana, & Illinois. I'd give the Big 10 the edge right now, but they're not far and away the better conference.

 

As far as the Trojans go, like I said before we have more things to worry about than the rankings. They have a bye week, Oregon State, and Stanford to work out the kinks. And there are some kinks. They better worry about beating Oregon, Cal, and Notre Dame before they worry about their ranking.

CAL is compared easily to Michigan?...the blowout loss at Tennessee must have been stricken from your memory...truth be told...Pac 10 doesnt have another team beside USC that is top 10 caliber much less top 3 caliber and Wisconsin is easily every bit as good as Oregon or Cal and without a question better than UCLA,WSU or any of the other schools

I'd give the Big 10 the edge right now, but they're not far and away the better conference.