eaglenjxn wrote:beagle wrote:Wants to stay at a 4 team playoff. Also says that UCF didn’t have the SOS.
My problem was never with the BCS ratings. I liked the ratings and rarely disagreed with the 1 vs. 2 that they gave us. The problem was that it gave us two teams.
2000 - Oklahoma vs FSU. FSU chosen over miami even though the Hurricanes had beaten FSU in the regular season.
FSU loses 13-2. Miami beats florida in the sugar.
2001 - Nebraska gets in after losing 62-36 to colorado and does not win their division
2003 - Kansas state drills OK. Somehow OK gets in to play LSU instead of USC
2005 - USC trashes OK 55-19.... Undefeated Auburn 13-0 beating 5 top 15 teams finishes #3
2007 - Lsu gets in with 2 loses over many 2 loss teams
2008 - undefeated utah does not get in
2009 - five undefeated teams enter the bowl season...."got to blow it up and start over" urban meyer was quoted regarding
the BCS.
For me, most of those are perfect examples of the problem with selecting two teams....but not with the rankings. From 2004 (when the formula was redone) through 2013, I really only had a problem with Oklahoma in 05.
And even before that, Oklahoma in 2003 was my only problem....and I kind of understood that one.
2000 - Miami won by 3 at home on a last minute TD. Not decisive. FSU played a brutal schedule and blew the doors off Clemson and Florida (both were top 10 at the time) in two of the last 3 weeks of the season. Miami was still in the Big East and was burned by a weak conference schedule. They gave Vick and VT their only loss but that was their only other notable win. Washington had as good of an argument (with a win over Miami) as Miami. Good example of the problem with having two teams.
2001 - Non-division champ playing for the title? Sounds familiar. That was a season where no one deserved to be #2 and they probably could have just handed Miami the title after the regular season.
2003 - That's the first one. But people forget what Oklahoma did to their opponents that season (e.g. beat #6 in BCS Texas by 55 at a neutral site). It was a known fact that Oklahoma would be #1 after the Big 12 title game regardless of a result...and they treated it like an exhibition. Also, people forget that USC's resume wasn't good. USC was beaten by a 6-loss Cal team and had one ranked win (Wazzou). Still, they deserved it over Oklahoma. The formula was changed after this....
2005 - Auburn had four Top 15 wins--with two over UT, who lost to a bad Notre Dame team at home late in the season. That destroyed any credibility for that win. That was a down year for the SEC. Still, they had the better resume. Oklahoma didn't really even have the style points like they did in 2003...but they had the most impressive win at the end of the regular season and shut out Vince Young.
2007-2009: Sounds more like a problem with there only being two teams than the ratings.
]]>Now available in L - 2X behind O Charley's and Sonic of Sumrall.
There is a lot going on behind that O Charley’s on Hardy....
]]>
We almost cracked the top 70 in the final CBS poll.
Now available in L - 2X behind O Charley's and Sonic of Sumrall.
]]>Lol on ucf. Bama or georgia would habe curb stomped them. Ucf beat nobody during the regular season.
I thought so, too, before the Auburn game. Auburn wasn't even really competitive.
Maybe it was just some sort of psychological letdown for Auburn not to get in? I guess you pretty much have to believe that to be OK with Bama winning it all.
For me it's not 100% about finding the "best" team. There is an aspect of deserving it or not, and of doing the things that are expected of you.
Had UGA won, I would have been more comfortable with blowing off UCF. But they didn't, and now we have a "national champion" that lost to two teams in its own conference and couldn't even win its own division.
I think it's similar to the season where the Patriots went undefeated but lost the Super Bowl. Were they the best team in the league, maybe even in history? Maybe so, but who gives a damn? They didn't take care of business.
]]>Bama ought to be called a tournament champion, nothing more.
That's all the basketball champion is as well.
]]>I watched Bama vs. UGA, Auburn vs. UGA, and Auburn vs. UCF. UCF was at least as good as any of those teams, and ultimately more deserving.
Five voters in the AP Poll, I think, seem to agree with me about that. Unfortunately, they're in the minority.
The rest of the voters either somehow convinced themselves that Bama, a team that couldn't even win a division championship, was the best team, or they just went with the tournament winner out of a sense of obligation.
Bama ought to be called a tournament champion, nothing more.
]]>beagle wrote:Wants to stay at a 4 team playoff. Also says that UCF didn’t have the SOS.
My problem was never with the BCS ratings. I liked the ratings and rarely disagreed with the 1 vs. 2 that they gave us. The problem was that it gave us two teams.
2000 - Oklahoma vs FSU. FSU chosen over miami even though the Hurricanes had beaten FSU in the regular season.
FSU loses 13-2. Miami beats florida in the sugar.
2001 - Nebraska gets in after losing 62-36 to colorado and does not win their division
2003 - Kansas state drills OK. Somehow OK gets in to play LSU instead of USC
2005 - USC trashes OK 55-19.... Undefeated Auburn 13-0 beating 5 top 15 teams finishes #3
2007 - Lsu gets in with 2 loses over many 2 loss teams
2008 - undefeated utah does not get in
2009 - five undefeated teams enter the bowl season...."got to blow it up and start over" urban meyer was quoted regarding
the BCS.
Wants to stay at a 4 team playoff. Also says that UCF didn’t have the SOS.
"We played Penn State, Nebraska, Florida, Georgia, Oklahoma State, Tennessee – all those teams."
And this is the perfect example of why the playoff committee RANKING is idiotic. While Jeff Bower was a good coach here and I appreciate the success he brought us.....what the hell business does he have ranking college football teams in 2018? It isn't 1997 anymore. You have a bunch of coaches and AD's--some who haven't been involved in college football in a decade--ranking teams?!
My problem was never with the BCS ratings. I liked the ratings and rarely disagreed with the 1 vs. 2 that they gave us. The problem was that it gave us two teams. I liked the combination of subjective and objective. Now, we get four teams (slightly better) but are relying solely on the subjective opinion of a small group of guys who may/may not be qualified--probably less qualified than most writers.
As far as the UCF argument goes, I'm annoyed with how this is being framed. The problem isn't that UCF didn't make the four-team playoff. They should not have been in the top four. The injustice is that they were NUMBER 12!! They wouldn't have even been close to making an 8-team playoff. They were behind three-loss Stanford (who lost to San Diego State!) until after championship week. There was one week where Mississippi State jumped them for beating Arkansas. That is what illustrates that a G5 team receives ZERO consideration.
]]>Bower got his chance to rub elbows with the big boys and won't speak his mind. He is a sell out to Southern Miss, CUSA, and all G-5 . To me he is a disgrace. People like him is the reason that the G-5 schools are stuck were we are. When he was a coach here he felt different, now he is on their side.
]]>EagleFWB wrote:AndreWhere wrote:The team finished #13 and #14 in the two major polls in 1999.
Yes... Unfortunately the next season we pissed ourselves at home against Lville that lead to the ongoing downward spiral.
That was the only home game I missed in 2000. I wanted to go but was cajoled into staying home by my family. The bowl game in Mobile was nice, but that team squandered a lot of potential.
And yes... it was basically all downhill from there.
cleveland wrote an article about that game years ago.
Before that game southern miss was 25-2 in conference play with 3 conference championships ( even though the
first one was a co-championship and we did NOT go to a bowl game that year )
after that game, under bower, 38-20 in conference play with 1 conference championship....
but remember the most important facts, he did not use gel in his hair and he did not lose to uab.
]]>JK was looking, looking, looking, looking looking, looking, looking (again) mode.....
One of these days Jeff will find that receiver...
]]>AndreWhere wrote:southern miss slacker wrote:I believe the highest rank a Bower team finished was #17.
The team finished #13 and #14 in the two major polls in 1999.
Yes... Unfortunately the next season we pissed ourselves at home against Lville that lead to the ongoing downward spiral.
IIRC, that was the game where Ragone tossed the same 8 yd. out the entire game and JK was in looking, looking, looking, looking looking, looking, looking (again) mode.....I think it was an interception festival....
our crew sat directly behind JK's parents for 4 years....that game was a tough one keeping my mouth shut....
#goodtimes
]]>AndreWhere wrote:southern miss slacker wrote:I believe the highest rank a Bower team finished was #17.
The team finished #13 and #14 in the two major polls in 1999.
Yes... Unfortunately the next season we pissed ourselves at home against Lville that lead to the ongoing downward spiral.
That was the only home game I missed in 2000. I wanted to go but was cajoled into staying home by my family. The bowl game in Mobile was nice, but that team squandered a lot of potential.
And yes... it was basically all downhill from there.
]]>