Computers derail run for the roses | CNET News.com — Why doesn’t anyone just say it like it is. This is a crock of shit. And it’s not just because Cal, one of the most interesting teams in the country with astonishing numbers and ranked number 4 will go to a third tier Bowl game to play an unranked team, but because Auburn is also sidelined to play a team ranked 8!! Why isn’t Auburn playing Cal?
Meanwhile, number 6 Utah gets into the big money BCS bowl game with a coach who just quit!! This is beyond a piece of shit. It’s unbelieveable. These BCS people should be taken out and shot — Texas style — since they seem to favor Texas so much. Over-rated crybaby Texas (the coach moaned and groaned about his teams ranking all year long) plays in the big money Rose bowl. And Cal gets stuck with unranked Texas Tech. Meanwhile the 21st ranked Pitt gets into the big money Fiesta Bowl against the Utah team. Pitt nearly lost to a 1-AA team and went 8-3. 4th ranked Cal 10-1 goes to the Holiday bowl. This stinks. What is the point of all these rankings if a bunch of crummy teams are matched up at the end? There seems to be no problem bringing a Texas team into Pasadena, but you can’t put Auburn against Cal for some good football. Who wants to see number 3 play number 8 when there is number 4, 5, 6 and 7 out there? And number 4 is playing an unranked team! How is this system benefitting anyone?
The worst thing is that Cal got downgraded by the computers because they didn’t kick the crap out of Southern Misssissippi in the last game of the season. This was a make-up game that was poorly officiated. In fact, in a mark of sportsmanship the Cal team, ahead 26-16, took a knee to end the game. Now it”s apparent that they are going to have to run up all the scores and humiliate the other team to get anywhere. This is great for the game, eh?
From CNET:
At least when it comes to college football. On Sunday, a computer decided my alma mater was unfit for its first trip to the Rose Bowl in 46 years, despite what many humans said.
This year my favorite college football team, Cal, was battling Texas to play in the Rose Bowl. Collage coaches, in their poll, placed the California Golden Bears fourth in the country, and Texas was fifth. Sports writers also ranked Cal fourth and Texas fifth. But that wasn’t enough: nowadays computer polls decide who wins.
And the computers chose the Texas Longhorns. So despite being ranked ahead of Texas for weeks–even in the computer-based Bowl Championship Series ranking–and suffering its only loss of the season to No. 1-ranked USC, Cal lost out in its run for the roses on Sunday night.
From the BCS Bowl Website
The BCS was established to determine the national champion for college football while maintaining and enhancing the bowl system that’s nearly 100 years old. The BCS has quickly become a showcase for the sport, matching the best teams at the end of the season.
The BCS, which runs through the 2005 regular season and 2006 bowl season, consists of the Rose Bowl, Nokia Sugar Bowl, FedEx Orange Bowl and the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl. Before the start of the 1998 season, those bowls joined with the Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big 12, Big Ten, Pacific-10 and Southeastern Conferences and the University of Notre Dame to form the BCS. Conference USA also signed on to the agreement.
Until the early 1990s the selection process for major bowl matchups with affiliated conference champions was totally disorganized and in many cases resulted in a chaotic situation. Some bowls would effectively make selections after seven or eight games. The BCS has worked to develop a system that not only allows the selection process to be completed at the end of the regular season and creates better matchups.
Creates better matchups? Oh really? Then why is number 3 playing number 8? Why is number 6 playing number 21? Why is number 4 playing an unranked team?? These are “better matchups? On what planet?
The bowl promoters should go out like promoters and match up the best teams themselves — competitively. Bidding for the best. Being capitalists. The BCS soviet-style system is obviously corrupt and suspect. There is no other explanation. It needs to be killed. Texas style
Hey!
as an aside, I believe it was Southern Mississippi that Cal played, not Mississippi State. Trust me, us bulldog fans had a hard enough year this year, without having to take on Cal.
Love the blog!
The REAL question to be answered here is why overrated, loved-by-the-media USC isn’t playing Cal in the Holiday Bowl.
Texas A&M would have gone undefeated against those wussy Pac-10 schedules.
Cal 10-1? Oy. Reminds me of that “mighty” BYU team that won a championship in 1984 against several teams from Wyoming.
John, I seriously feel for you. I’m an SC fan, but was rooting for a Cal-SC rematch in the Orange Bowl. In terms of pet peeves, right next to teaching creationism as science is the BCS. How is it that every college sport determines it champion in a playoff except Division IA college football? How is it that schools of higher learning cannot figure out that a playoff is the only equitable way to determine a champion? The entire BCS is a big, fat load of steaming crap. Its primary purpose is to reward the “old-boy” network of big schools (like Texas). (Arguably SC is one of those schools I’ll grant you). By the way, the comment about the bowls being 100 years old is a perfect example of doing something wrong simply because you have been doing it for a long time. (“It’s tradition now ;->). I’ll leave it to you to figure out what else sounds like that. Many people have suggested 8 or even 16 team playoffs, but supposedly the various Athletic Directors (at the old boy schools) do not want that.
Learn about something before you bash it. The computers do not take into account margin of victory, it’s the coaches and media voters who pay attention to such things, and they gave Cal 4th place. As for the rest, the whole reason for the conferences to agree to break from their traditional contracts(Rose Bowl gets Big 10 and Pac 10, eg) is for the overall money coming in, but the champs are assured of getting a spot.
What does BCS stand for? Bull Crap Slingers?
I live in Southeast Michigan and I can tell you no one here wants to fly all the way out to California to watch Michigan play Texas. I thought it was a joke when I saw it…so much for tradition. I thought the Rose wasn’t supposed to change unless it was it’s turn to host #1 & #2.
It’s all my fault. I stayed away as long as I could, then tuned into the USM game to see the bogus Clipping call that rolled-back Arrington’s ~25 yard TD run. J.J. Arrington is awesome, and together with Rodgers, more responsible for Cal’s performance this year than the benighted Tedford. JJ, Rodgers, and Cal would have packed the Rose Bowl to the brim.
Meanwhile, I don’t think it was computers that screwed Cal. All the computers do is average or weight the other polls, and maybe take the teams’ records and who-beat-who into account. I specifically heard on ESPN College Game Day that (1) The BCS doesn’t take margin of victory into account, and (2) Of course every “sports journalists” on the show with a poll ballot was keeping Cal in 4th, but they suspected others would move Texas up, and all it would take is 3 or 4 to change the results and screw Cal. So it’s because Cal didn’t impress people, not computers, that they got screwed. People with bias towards the mid-west and east coast teams.
Also, the reason for all the ranking mismatches in the bowls is because despite the BCS, the bowls still try to maintain their historic legacy of matching certain conference champions against each other. All BCS is meant to do it pit the #1 team against the #2 team, by highjacking one of the most prestigious bowls to showcase that game. I think the other 3 bowls that aren’t slated to host the championship game still have some leeway as to who they will pick.
But not much, as this flies in the face of the Rose Bowl committee picking Texas instead of Cal. I think it’s the Rose Bowl people who screwed Cal, but I’m pretty sure they did it with a heavy heart.
The BCS is messing with 100+ years of tradition, and it’s a total disaster. They should keep the Bowl games as is, and have a separate, short series of playoffs among the top 8 teams. Maybe get rid of some of the more retarded bowls in the process. I’m not wasting good money to see Cal in the Holiday Bowl, after they ‘bin robbed.
The BCS is messed up because of money.
USA Today explains the BCS
The NCAA/BCS conferences say that this would be bad because the kids would have to play too many games. The real reason is that 6 conferences are heavily favored to play a BCS game. BCS games == big money. The cries for student’s academics are obviously hollow. College sports is a big business. There is nothing wrong with that, but call a spade a spade.
If those two at large teams place in the top 6.
If there was a playoff system, it would be much more likely for teams not in the 6 conferences to play for big money games. The big 6 conferences don’t want this.
The best playoff system I have heard of maintains traditional bowl games. Every playoff game would have a traditional bowl game name and sponsorship, (the round 1 Humanitarian Bowl). The championship game could still be the Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl… This system could make every bowl game more valueable. It would be much more interesting to watch a 1st round game which could have the eveantual national champion playing in it than a game between two unranked teams.
Yawn (I couldn’t care less about football nor professional sports in general).
Joe … Then don’t post in threads that don’t interest, you llama.
Btw, Joe, college football isn’t a professional sport, brainwave.
Extending Paddy’s idea, if they had an 8 team playoff, you would have four games, 2 games then a final game. You could play the first 8 games on Jan 1 in four of the major bowls. Then have a lottery for the location of the last three games. With a 16 team playoff, you would play the first round in September at the various toilet bowls. A team that went all the way would get 3 or 4 games on national TV along with all of the associated revenue. That could easily be more money than they get for going to the bowls now.
It really comes down to the conferences not wanting to share money with non-BCS schools.
(oh, and Joe, what an ideal place to tell people you care less about sports. ;->)
And to add insult to injury, ESPN HD (High Definition) broadcast the game in Standard Definition. Bullshit! At least Tedford is coming back for more.
Complaining about the BCS and the NCAA won’t do any good. People need to complain to the sponsors of the BCS bowl games. They aren’t getting the best deal for their sponsorship money. People would rather watch a meaningful national championship game than a game between two ringer teams submitted by a crooked sanctioning body.
Yeah I was a little irked by ESPN HD being standard definition too. That really blows. Cheap bastards.
Welcome to the party, John. Oregon fans got screwed in 2001 when they should have played Miami for the National Championship – and instead had to beat the crap out of Colorado and settle for second place without playing the number one team. Then there is USC and their number 2 spot in the BCS last year. Basically, the only thing the BCS is good for is screwing the PAC-10.
–Monty
> Basically, the only thing the BCS is good for is screwing the
> PAC-10.
And yet the PAC-10 is in the BCS. Why don’t they fight back?
BCS is a conspiracy by fly-over country folks to hijack our Bowl. Together with the Rose Parade, the Rose Bowl is the oldest and most cultural of events that goes beyond football.
Why does the Tournament of Roses take it up the ass?
The little old lady from Pasadena needs to stand up for her rights.
Actually, T.C., the Big Ten sits in “flyover” country and many of us flyover country Big-Ten fans would like to see the Rose Bowl (and with it, of course, the Big Ten and Pac-10) leave the BCS and give us the game we all want to see.
I am in agreeement with you that the current BCS system leaves a lot to be desired, but
I agree with you that the current BCS system leaves a lot to be desired, but Texas Tech – 45, Cal – 31 doesn’t lend much credence to your argument about the Pac 10 being screwed. With the exception of one or two teams each season (e.g. USC this year) I don’t believe the Pac 10 consistently puts out a conference full of teams that are legitimate competitiors at the highest NCAA level like the Big 10 and Big 12. Just my thoughts on the subject.
Yes, well in retrospect it’s obvious that Cal having lost ALL it’s wide receivers except a couple of hopeless freshman were simply out gunned and should not have gone to the Rose Bowl. Why wait all those years to lose there??!!
That said, I’ve noticed all season that the Cal defense seemed to have trouble stopping the pass while being a dominant run stopper. It was a foregone conclusion once I saw how those clunky Texas Tech receivers lumbered along and easily got wide open all night! Cal would not have been 10-1 if other teams had seem this flaw early in the season. If the defense had done its job the Bears still could have won with a pure running game. Even at the end it made no sense for Cal to pass the ball. Bad bad bad game. The Pac-1o had better hope USC does a number on Oklahoma or we’ll never hear the end of it.
I was at the Holiday Bowl yesterday.
I live in San Diego County and attend every year, because it is a San Diego tradition. A group of 100 of us have a block of seats on the 45-50 yard line.
We don’t ever really care who wins. We have a tailgate and then go in to watch the game and then come back out into the parking lot and watch the line up of cars leave while we eat leftovers, have some hot cider and hot turkey soup (if theperson who brings it remembers his propane) and then go home.
This year the Cal fans were particularly obnoxious toward the Texas fans and toword the BCS and way too overconfident and “too good” to be at this piddly ass bowl game. The tone of your rant above reflects that. Your comment above has given you a repreive in my mind.
I happen to be an alum of the U of M and will be going to the Rose Bowl tomorrow. It would have been sweet to have seen Cal beat there, just as it was to see it happen right here.
I don’t ever really care about who plays in the Holiday Bowl and am happy for both teams that get to attend. The plethora of “F*ck the BCS” t-shirts and fans screaming it out was made all the sweeter when some of them saw we were wearing what appearred to be Cal colors but had “Michigan” embroidered on the lapel. When some Cal fans were leaving early and screaming out ‘what happened?: I had to hold my tounge to scream out “the BCS was right”.
If Cal was not so damn cocky and condescending (they even booed the Texas Tech band when they got on the field) I would not have been so happy to see the Bears loose in such a manner.
The razzing begins..deservedly so. Perhaps the Bear fans will now join the real world. The good news is that the University now has a real coach. So Michigan will have its shot at a real team sometime soon. Good luck beating Texas.
Oh well. It was a great game and I suppose Texas deserved the win. Could not have been a better match up. Lots of Cal fans there, must have been those who bought tickets early. Had to stay until the end, so it was a bitch getting out of the muddy parking area.
I was kind of happy for Texas, just because they got there. UofM was not at its high point…and the season was ruined by losing to Ohio State anyhow….
It just was not a time for any Blue States to win anything.
I was tremendously disappointed that Michigan couldn’t win when they got up by 10. Texas wasn’t that great. Both the Pac-10 and the Big 10 are going to have to rethink pre-season opponents. Both these groups should be taking on some SEC and Big 12 teams more often. I wonder who is fearful the most though? With the BCS you can’t lose some wacky pre-conference game and expect to go all the way. The system sucks. Nobody learns anything.
Let’s look at the BCS record since it started and which PAC-10 teams it has screwed over:
2000 – Washington:
Beat Miami that year and should have played for the National Championship instead of Miami.
2001 – Oregon:
Ranked 2nd in the nation, and should have played the first place team for the national championship.
2003 – USC:
Ranked 1st, and should have played for the national championship.
2004 – California:
Ranked fourth, and we left out of the four BCS games entirely.
2005 – Oregon?:
It is looking as though Notre Dame, who has two losses, including a loss to an unranked Michigan State, and almost losing Saturday to an unranked Stanford, will be picked instead of Oregon who has only one loss (to first place USC). Ignoring the fact that Oregon should be ranked third or fourth in the country, at the very least it should play in one of the 8 BCS slots since it is ranked in the top 8.
If Oregon is left out this year, the PAC-10 needs to just excuse itself from the whole BCS picture. If the PAC-10 refuses to be part of the equation, then the BCS will fold since it will lose an important part of college athletics. We can go back to the old bowl system, or move on to a playoff system instead.
got news for you buddy Texas Tech is playing Alabama- if your going to whine get your teams straight-
this may be out of being stupied but why are these bowl games on school night for families what happen to being seen over the holidays and i still don’t know what bsc stands for thanks sandy