Week 8 Rankings

brady_44 · #1 (**permalink**) 10-17-2005, 01:14 PM

The week 8 rankings are out and everyone's favorite, (sighs) the BCS enters the picture. Anyway rankings for teams in the Pac 10...

USC -- (AP Poll #1, USA Today Poll #1, BCS #1)
UCLA -- (AP Poll #8, USA Today Poll #9, BCS #9)
Oregon -- (AP Poll #15, USA Today Poll #16, BCS #13)
California -- (AP Poll #25, USA Today Poll #23, BCS #25)

Receiving votes outside of the Top 25...

ASU -- (AP Poll #31,USA Today Poll #32, BCS N/R)
Oregon St. -- (Ap Poll #35, USA Today Poll #37, BCS N/R)

Go-Pac · #2 (**permalink**) 10-19-2005, 08:17 PM

Ucla = Overrated!!!!!!!

Autzen Powers · #3 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 10:20 AM

could someone tell me how the BCS calculates it's poll?

or show me the site where it explains it?

brady_44 · #4 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Autzen Powers

could someone tell me how the BCS calculates it's poll?

or show me the site where it explains it?

The BCS this year is calculating its poll by combining the Harris Poll, USA Today Poll, and then the BCS computers. The BCS just takes an average of the three, turns them into percentages, and spits out the rankings.

The BCS is alright but it has changed a lot and been very controversial. I personally think it's an improvement over the old way, but I wish we could get some sort of playoff system.

I think that's about right but if you want to investigate their official site is http://www.bcsfootball.org/.

Autzen Powers · #5 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 11:07 AM

thanks, Brady. I guess it's as good a system as any. I just don't fully understand it.

Do you know why from 2006 on that BCS added an extra bowl game?

brady_44 · #6 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 12:05 PM

I actually don't mind the BCS, but many people hate it. I think overall it is better than the two human polls, because this adds an unbiased computer ranking to the mix which just crunches the numbers.

About the 5th bowl addition. I knew there were talks of adding another BCS game, but didn't know it was official. I will have to go investigate. I think they are probably doing it for more money, and a chance to get less prominant schools in major bowl games.

Autzen Powers · #7 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 06:22 PM

what's your take on adding more bowl games? does that make it less special or important for those at the top?

brady_44 · #8 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Autzen Powers

what's your take on adding more bowl games? does that make it less special or important for those at the top?

I hadn't heard they were doing that until tonight, but I think it makes sense. This way they give a chance for smaller schools and independents to get some recognition. I think so long as there are only 10 teams playing in BCS bowls it doesn't take anything away. It's still the same bowl just with the BCS label. A playoff system would be the best if they could find a way to do it.

Autzen Powers · #9 (**permalink**) 10-20-2005, 07:42 PM

okay, so let's say you're king of the BCS - how would you do a playoff system? Would you have to eliminate pre-season games to ward off injuries? I think that's the main argument against it...injuries, right? or am I off base on that one?

brady_44 · #10 (**permalink**) 10-21-2005, 03:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Autzen Powers

okay, so let's say you're king of the BCS - how would you do a playoff system? Would you have to eliminate pre-season games to ward off injuries? I think that's the main argument against it...injuries, right? or am I off base on that one?

That's a question that's beyond me. I guess I would like to see it like an NFL playoff, and have the season extended by a few weeks. Like have bowl games as normal, but playoffs for the top 8 teams for the BCS. I don't think we will see this any time real soon though.

To answer the other question, I think they don't want to do it because of the health of the players, and the time it would take. Or maybe they just don't want to mess with tradition. Anyone else have any ideas on the subject?

Go-Pac · #11 (**permalink**) 10-21-2005, 09:54 AM

The BCS sucks big giant donkey @#$?!!! Yeah it is better than before, but it is like trading your AMC Pacer for a Gremlin. Really not a lot to hoot about. Any sort of playoff system would be superior in all respects to the BCS. Use the BCS to determine who goes to a 4, 6, or 8 team playoff. Otherwise college football fans will almost always be cheated.

Go-Pac · #12 (**permalink**) 10-23-2005, 08:51 AM

All the excuses ADs and President use to poo-poo a playoff system are just excuses. A four team playoff would only affect four teams and you could still maintain the integrity of the bowls. What are the players doing between the last regular season game and their bowl game a month later, they are practicing. Injury potential there. With a 12 game schedule, conference championship game, and a bowl game, a team can play up to 14 games. If that bowl game turns out to be a playoff game and they win, that team will finish with 15 games. So what? March madness keeps the final four teams away from school for 2-3 days a week for a month. At least, most of the bowl games take place during the X-mas brake. Finally, just think about the $$$$ generated for a playoff system. Wow, it would make CBS's contract for March Madness look like your little sister's piggy bank. Sorry, I'm ranting but I'm still upset about Clemens' ankle and the fact that UO got screwed a few years ago when Nebraska was selected ahead of them to play in the Championship game.

brady_44 · #13 (**permalink**) 10-23-2005, 09:08 AM

Couldn't have said it better. I would love more than anything to see a 14 game season. I think a playoff of the top 4 or top 8 teams would be easily managable. It would be good for so many reasons, but you already hit on most of them

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode