Clicking here will get you a PDF of the team-by-team rankings by voter.
Posted at 09:37 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Orange Bowl: VT vs. Cincinatti
Sugar Bowl: Alabama vs. Utah
Rose Bowl: Penn State vs. USC
Fiesta Bowl: Ohio State vs. Texas
National Championship: Oklahoma vs. Florida
Posted at 07:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
Here's how each coach voted in the final poll of the regular season.
Posted at 05:48 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Anyone else notice the announcers suddenly quit using the term "mess" to describe the BCS? It's almost as if the network folks have been asked to quit bashing the current system. Hmmmmmm.
Posted at 12:29 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Here is the coach's poll.It's tough to argue against Florida and Oklahoma, but how do you say, at the very least, that Texas and Alabama don't belong in the mix, too? And what about Penn State and USC? Or Utah? Or Texas Tech. Or . . .
Posted at 12:18 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
The season's not too long. The students are able to keep up with their studies. The fans are able to watch. And the NCAA can host a real tournament, where rankings matter but playing well matters more. Here's a printable tournament bracket for the 2008 NCAA basketball tournament.
Posted at 11:09 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Two quick points:
* The NFL chooses its champion on the field. Too bad college football's best team is not crowned the same way.
* Any commercial that includes Justin Timberlake getting the crap beat out of him gets an automatic five star rating.
Posted at 06:50 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
According to Berry Tramel's article (newsok.com), it's because the schools don't want to jeopardize attendance during the regular season games, and the post-season revenue couldn't offset the loss of regular season revenue. Really. The article does remind us that while the NCAA controls college basketball, college football is controlled by the university presidents. But the piece doesn't explain how a small (4-to-8 team) playoff would ruin the regular season any more than the current roster of 32 bowls games does. Or could do any more damage to the sport and its revenues than is done by have the champion crowned by a vote of panelists rather than earned on the field.
Posted at 11:57 AM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
AP sports columnist Jim Litke explores the "real reason for college football's" bowl season here, concluding with this gem:
Worst of all, at the end of the whole "silly season," we could still be left with a half-dozen, two-loss teams jabbing their index fingers into the air — "We're No. 1" — and a computer could wind up picking among them. If that doesn't sound like a scam somebody cooked up to make money, well ...
Posted at 11:30 AM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
NCAA president Myles Brand sure sounds arrogant when he describes the current BCS mess:
"Certainly, the media is unhappy and a number of the avid fans are unhappy, and they express it. But their unhappiness is not translating to a lack of interest. So I don't think it's as major a problem as some people think it is."Huh? Brand suggests that because there's some interest in college football, it's not possible to have MORE interest in college football by fixing the post-season nonsense called the BCS. And even if you buy his argument, you're saying it's okay that fans are unhappy and that the national championship is decided by a vote rather than on the field. M'kay, so we'll stay tuned for Brand's next big statement:
"Let them eat cake."
Posted at 09:01 AM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
In case the BCS system wasn't ripe enough for shenanigans, here's a lovely story about the Orange Bowl match-up that could've been, derailed for unknown reasons, denying us a chance to see #3 play #4. Could it be this was done to keep us from having a split national championship? Wasn't the BCS suppose to help ENCOURAGE top-ranked match-ups? Hmmmmm. Well, you won't get an answer from Mike Slive, as he won't even say who blocked the game or why it was blocked.
Posted at 08:12 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
James Carville rants about the BCS. He's nuts. But he's correct. And he gets extra credit for using the term "mental midgets."
Posted at 11:38 AM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Don't tell anyone, but it appears that the notion that a playoff would automatically kill all of the bowls is hogwash, according to this CNNMoney.com commentary by Chris Isidore. While he's primarily focused on the impact of a "plus-one" model, we know that there are other options, too, that take advantage of the weeks of idle time between the regular season and the January bowls, and the open home fields of top teams.
Posted at 11:30 AM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
I was going to post this yesterday, but was laughing so hard I couldn't keep my fingers from shaking. Without a smiley face icon or anything of the sort, USA TODAY has a headline that reads: Man behind creation of BCS pleased with results. No kidding!
In related news, historians have discovered Lincoln's last words were: I'm pretty pleased with the security tonight here at the theatre.
So, in the story, BCS godfather Roy Kramer said: "I might be a little prejudiced, but I thought this was a tremendous year for college football. One issue we talked about when the BCS started was making every game important, and I think that played out this year." Kramer continued, "The fact that the bowl season is again irrelevant and we won't finish the post season with any better idea of who the best team is, well, that's not my problem."
Okay, so I made up that last part.
Posted at 11:22 AM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
VegasInsider.com handicappers take a crack at identifying the top two teams in college football. Hint: They suggest the BCS didn't get it right.
Posted at 10:23 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Kevin of thebandisoutonthefield.com has this to say about the current system for the Football Bowl Subdivision. Key question:
What is the BCS trying to answer? I don't know. You don't know. They don't know.
Posted at 08:44 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Tony Barnhart of ajc.com gives us his perspective on the latest coaches poll.
(EDIT: Sorry, link broken. Fixed now.)
Posted at 08:36 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
SportingNews.com runs down their top 10 most interesting votes in the latest coaches' poll.
Posted at 08:32 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Associated Press national sports columnist Jim Litke takes it directly to BCS coordinator Mike Slive, who once expressed a willingness to consider a "plus one" format, but when asked recently, said, "We have to put this one in the mix and look at it. If you go to a plus-one, you're going to have years in which it is just very, very appropriate. You're going to have years where it may not be so appropriate. ... The only way to solve that is to have a flexible format and just make sure that we look at the standings and then decide how to finish the year."
Says Jim:
Translation: We ain't changing any time soon. We like things exactly the way they are and as long as we have the TV rights and the backing of the university presidents from the power conferences, we'll keep making it up as we go along.If the truth-in-advertising laws applied to college football this season, the BCS would just go-ahead and cancel the title game.
Worth a read.
Posted at 08:28 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Dan Steinberg of washingtonpost.com posts this blog report, taking a peek inside the coaches' poll. Wackiness, bias, ignorance, agendas -- all the stuff you want most from your college football rankings!
Posted at 08:20 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Here's a link to show you how every coach voted over the weekend.
Posted at 08:01 AM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
The AndersonSports computer poll, which is part of the BCS computer rankings, can be seen here. They've managed to rank as follows:
1. Ohio State
2. Missouri
3. Kansas
4. Virginia Tech
5. LSU
6. Georgia
7. Arizona State
8. Oklahoma
9. USC
10. West Virginia
VT, which handily lost to LSU (48-7), is ranked ahead of LSU?
Even though LSU is ranked 2 by the coaches and 2 in the Harris Poll and 2 in the total computer rankings, AndersonSports gives 'em a 5?
They put Missouri at 2, even though they were just spanked, FOR A SECOND TIME, by Big 12 Champion Oklahoma, which they've ranked at 8?
Oh, the lack of humanity!
Posted at 07:57 AM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Gene Wojciechowski (ESPN.com) once again makes the obvious point: the current system is broken, a new system is possible, and this season underscores the problem at hand. Gene writes about the absurdity of Mike Slive's "NFL-style playoff" tome, and drills into the statement that they are looking "very, very hard" (copyright, BCS talking points) at tweaking the broken system we currently have.
The regular season is over. Dead. Done. Gone. Meaningless from this point on. And, from this point on, we know that half of the bowl teams will be winners and half will be losers and none of us will know which team was the best.
Posted at 10:43 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Okay, so Missouri beats Kansas, and then Oklahoma beats Missouri. Kansas only lost to Missouri this season. Missouri's only losses this season were to Big 12 Champion Oklahoma.
How do you rank these three BCS teams? If you're AP voter B.G. Brooks of the Rocky Mountain News, you rank 'em like this:
6. Kansas
7. Oklahoma
8. Missouri
Over in Iowa, Steve Batterson of the Quad City Times voted this way:
2. Kansas
6. Oklahoma
8. Missouri
And just for fun, here's how Neal McCready (Mobile (AL) Press-Register) answered the same question:
5. Oklahoma
6. Kansas
9. Missouri
The fun continues with AP voter Joe Person at The State (Columbia, SC), where he ranks the three teams like this:
3. Kansas
6. Oklahoma
8. Missouri
And not to be outdone, Tommy Trujillo of The New Mexican voted this way:
7. Kansas
8. Oklahoma
9. Missouri
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you "the voters!" Let their whims be your guide to choosing a national champion!
(EDIT: Yes, we know the AP poll is not part of the BCS. You think those polls are less foolish? Less political? Less ignorant? Less corrupt? You think the eventual AP champion won't have a trophy in their athletic offices? As long as we let voters decide our champions instead of letting the teams earn it on the field, we'll continue to deserve this kind of nonsense.)
(EDIT AGAIN: The computers didn't do any better. They have Oklahoma ranked behind Missouri and Kansas.)
Posted at 08:34 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Looks like LSU opens as a six-point favorite for the upcoming title game.
(EDIT: Maybe less.)
Posted at 08:03 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Rose: USC - Illinois
Fiesta: OU - West Virginia
Orange: VT - Kansas
Sugar: Hawaii - Georgia
Title Game: OSU - LSU
Posted at 07:21 PM in Sports | Permalink | TrackBack (0)