Valhalla Legends Forums Archive | Excess of Grok | Please explain the whole Bowl picture

AuthorMessageTime
Thing
The rankings appear to be like this:
1. USC
2. LSU
3. Oklahoma
4. Michigan

except for the BCS. Because of that, LSU plays OK for the championship and USC plays Michigan to be the bridesmaid. Shouldn't #1 play #2 for the championship?
December 8, 2003, 3:21 PM
DarkMinion
The BCS rankings go:

1. Oklahoma
2. LSU
3. USC
4. Michigan

Which is why OU/LSU are playing in the Sugar Bowl. Now USC will play Michigan and Kansas State will play whoever.
December 8, 2003, 3:47 PM
Grok
Right. The AP and Coaches polls are just two components of the BCS system. Sagarin says Miami(OH) is #3 ... should we get upset that they're not in the Rose Bowl?
December 8, 2003, 4:59 PM
Thing
It is getting clearer (i think) now that I've read a few articles on it.
The BCS contract expires after 2005. Do you think it will get renewed?
December 8, 2003, 7:52 PM
DarkMinion
Maybe, they're considering having a playoff of the two top bowls next year. If that satisfies the majority of people their contract may get renewed.

It's all about the money.
December 8, 2003, 8:33 PM
Grok
Right again. Thing, don't get confused about Division I-A. There is no "championship" game regardless of what the BCS tells you. Only the NCAA can provide such a game, and they do not currently sanction the BCS championship game.

If there were a playoff, the only thing we really care about is getting the top two teams in the playoffs. There is no controversy about "but what about #5?" as some people would say if we had a 4-team playoff.

Take this year for instance, if we had a 4-team playoff, the 3 teams that legitimately think they should be in the final game would each be included. Looking at the last decade, no legitimate top-two team would've been left out of a 4-team playoff. In other words, we never ranked a contender #5 at the end of the regular season.
December 8, 2003, 10:42 PM

Search