Boycott The BCS

[GP1]

Interesting article in Slate about what the statistical problems are with the BCS. My favorite part is the advocation of a top tier of college football populated by a few schools....I've been advocating this for a while on this board now.Enjoy the read.

[Z.I.P.]

Interesting article in Slate about what the statistical problems are with the BCS. My favorite part is the advocation of a top tier of college football populated by a few schools....I've been advocating this for a while on this board now.Enjoy the read.

Great One,I always expect an interesting read, and often am not disappointed by your analyses of collegiate sports -- American football in particular. But I always end up asking myself: ("Self...") why does GP-1 continuously refer to the Mid American Conference, and those leagues near it in ability, as essentially second, or third-rate crap -- and yet he continues to watch and extemporaneously opine on the continuing crappiness of these less-than-mediocre schools and teams? I wonder if the Great GP-1 has some sort of self-hatred complex that requires him watch that which is truly excruciating for him to observe. Concur?

[GP1]

Interesting article in Slate about what the statistical problems are with the BCS. My favorite part is the advocation of a top tier of college football populated by a few schools....I've been advocating this for a while on this board now.Enjoy the read.

Great One,I always expect an interesting read, and often am not disappointed by your analyses of collegiate sports -- American football in particular. But I always end up asking myself: ("Self...") why does GP-1 continuously refer to the Mid American Conference, and those leagues near it in ability, as essentially second, or third-rate crap -- and yet he continues to watch and extemporaneously opine on the continuing crappiness of these less-than-mediocre schools and teams? I wonder if the Great GP-1 has some sort of self-hatred complex that requires him watch that which is truly excruciating for him to observe. Concur?

Somewhat. Loyalty also makes people act irrationally.Reality is difficult to hide from. Even the players playing at MAC schools know it is a second rate league if not third rate. That doesn't make them stupid, it actually makes them obervant and smart. Nobody says it publically, but deep down inside they know it and talk about it to themselves. Players can't walk into a home game at The Big Phone Booth and see 15,000 and not connect the dots that there is a difference between that and what they see at BCS level schools. I read this week that Texas has a $90 million budget for athletics and we have something like $14.....the dots don't connect. Even if you read the posts on this board, most posters know deep down inside that the league is below the ability of other leagues. Heck, I think Captain Kangaroo sees the league the same way I do, but he expresses his displeasure and disgust differently.I also don't think there is anything wrong with making fun of the league. The league does some pretty stupid things and if you don't laugh at it, you will cry. For crying out loud, it has been around since the 1940s and it still stinks, which is both sad and funny. Things are what they are. Who is more insane, the person calling a cat a dog or the person calling a cat a cat then laughs at the cat dressed up as a dog? You can dress the cat up as a dog, but it is still a funny looking cat. You can dress the MAC up as a D-IA league and call it a D-IA league, but once you look closely at it, it is a I-AA league. I think the league (and a lot of other leagues and schools) would be better off if they went I-AA. The structure of the NCAA is such that the rewards for BCS level teams are too great for the lesser conferences to overcome. The BCS is also starting to make it so many of the same teams show up in the BCS yearly which needs to change as well. The NCAA really needs to move to another level of college football and treat it as a professional league....it's that anyhow...the cat is the cat.There is an old saying that if you took all of the money in the US and distributed it equally, within five years the rich would become righ again, the middle would remain about the same and the poor would be poor. The rich know how to get rich. If you split the BCS money among all schools, the BCS schools would still remain at the top because they know what it takes to get there and they have the support to get there. What good would it do to distribute the money if the non-BCS schools would just pour it into their operating budget since most operate at a loss? They have lesser ability to improve their programs. The bigger schools are evolving at a faster rate than the smaller schools because they know how to. 100,000 seat stadiums didn't just pop up all fo the sudden. It took decades of hard work and investment for those schools to get to that point. Why punish the bigger schools for their success. Let them evolve into something separate from the pack and have their own league. The evolution might be good for everyone.

[g-mann17]

Interesting article in Slate about what the statistical problems are with the BCS. My favorite part is the advocation of a top tier of college football populated by a few schools....I've been advocating this for a while on this board now.Enjoy the read.

Great One,I always expect an interesting read, and often am not disappointed by your analyses of collegiate sports -- American football in particular. But I always end up asking myself: ("Self...") why does GP-1 continuously refer to the Mid American Conference, and those leagues near it in ability, as essentially second, or third-rate crap -- and yet he continues to watch and extemporaneously opine on the continuing crappiness of these less-than-mediocre schools and teams? I wonder if the Great GP-1 has some sort of self-hatred complex that requires him watch that which is truly excruciating for him to observe. Concur?

Somewhat. Loyalty also makes people act irrationally.Reality is difficult to hide from. Even the players playing at MAC schools know it is a second rate league if not third rate. That doesn't make them stupid, it actually makes them obervant and smart. Nobody says it publically, but deep down inside they know it and talk about it to themselves. Players can't walk into a home game at The Big Phone Booth and see 15,000 and not connect the dots that there is a difference between that and what they see at BCS level schools. I read this week that Texas has a $90 million budget for athletics and we have something like $14.....the dots don't connect. Even if you read the posts on this board, most posters know deep down inside that the league is below the ability of other leagues. Heck, I think Captain Kangaroo sees the league the same way I do, but he expresses his displeasure and disgust differently.I also don't think there is anything wrong with making fun of the league. The league does some pretty stupid things and if you don't laugh at it, you will cry. For crying out loud, it has been around since the 1940s and it still stinks, which is both sad and funny. Things are what they are. Who is more insane, the person calling a cat a dog or the person calling a cat a cat then laughs at the cat dressed up as a dog? You can dress the cat up as a dog, but it is still a funny looking cat. You can dress the MAC up as a D-IA league and call it a D-IA league, but once you look closely at it, it is a I-AA league. I think the league (and a lot of other leagues and schools) would be better off if they went I-AA. The structure of the NCAA is such that the rewards for BCS level teams are too great for the lesser conferences to overcome. The BCS is also starting to make it so many of the same teams show up in the BCS yearly which needs to change as well. The NCAA really needs to move to another level of college football and treat it as a professional league....it's that anyhow...the cat is the cat.There is an old saying that if you took all of the money in the US and distributed it equally, within five years the rich would become righ again, the middle would remain about the same and the poor would be poor. The rich know how to get rich. If you split the BCS money among all schools, the BCS schools would still remain at the top because they know what it takes to get there and they have the support to get there. What good would it do to distribute the money if the non-BCS schools would just pour it into their operating budget since most operate at a loss? They have lesser ability to improve their programs. The bigger schools are evolving at a faster rate than the smaller schools because they know how to. 100,000 seat stadiums didn't just pop up all fo the sudden. It took decades of hard work and investment for those schools to get to that point. Why punish the bigger schools for their success. Let them evolve into something separate from the pack and have their own league. The evolution might be good for everyone.

The key you fail to realize is that their success (Big schools all 16 of them) have been on the backs of the other 104 Division 1-A schools. Their success comes from kicking the crap out of the other 104 schools.I'm sure you will ask "Who are these 16 schools? Their are more than that in the BCS conferences". Yes every BCS school has a bigger budget then a MAC, SBC, MWC, or WAC school. But bottom line is that only 16 of the those BCS schools ever have a shot (Florida, Alabama, Miami, FSU, OSU, Penn State, Nebraska, Oregon, Texas, USC, Michigan, Wisconsin, LSU, Tennessee, Georgia, and Oklahoma). Other school have great records (10 win seasons) but never stand any chance of National Championship. And the bottom line is that if not for the other 104 schools, the 16 schools wouldn't get 10 win seasons and be able to sell 100,000 seat stadiums. Ohio State and Michigan got big by beating up on Toledo, Ohio Northern, Akron, Northern Michigan. The success of FBS is because of the other 104 schools not the top 16.But then you also say that low budget schools have no chance, yet BYU, TCU, Utah, and Boise State have made a name for themselves starting off with what? Incredibly small budgets. But to say that the MAC is a 1-AA conference is to say that Michigan is a 1-AA school. Michigan has one of the largest budgets and biggest backings in the country and they have lost to Appalachian State, Toledo (a very bad Toledo by the way) in back to back seasons. I appreciate your incredibly low self esteem. Which is why you have such a self defecating look on where you come from, and such a huge over compensation for your meakness, but you need to start working on comprehension of perspectives other than your own.

[GP1]

Interesting article in Slate about what the statistical problems are with the BCS. My favorite part is the advocation of a top tier of college football populated by a few schools....I've been advocating this for a while on this board now.Enjoy the read.

Great One,I always expect an interesting read, and often am not disappointed by your analyses of collegiate sports -- American football in particular. But I always end up asking myself: ("Self...") why does GP-1 continuously refer to the Mid American Conference, and those leagues near it in ability, as essentially second, or third-rate crap -- and yet he continues to watch and extemporaneously opine on the continuing crappiness of these less-than-mediocre schools and teams? I wonder if the Great GP-1 has some sort of self-hatred complex that requires him watch that which is truly excruciating for him to observe. Concur?

Somewhat. Loyalty also makes people act irrationally.Reality is difficult to hide from. Even the players playing at MAC schools know it is a second rate league if not third rate. That doesn't make them stupid, it actually makes them obervant and smart. Nobody says it publically, but deep down inside they know it and talk about it to themselves. Players can't walk into a home game at The Big Phone Booth and see 15,000 and not connect the dots that there is a difference between that and what they see at BCS level schools. I read this week that Texas has a $90 million budget for athletics and we have something like $14.....the dots don't connect. Even if you read the posts on this board, most posters know deep down inside that the league is below the ability of other leagues. Heck, I think Captain Kangaroo sees the league the same way I do, but he expresses his displeasure and disgust differently.I also don't think there is anything wrong with making fun of the league. The league does some pretty stupid things and if you don't laugh at it, you will cry. For crying out loud, it has been around since the 1940s and it still stinks, which is both sad and funny. Things are what they are. Who is more insane, the person calling a cat a dog or the person calling a cat a cat then laughs at the cat dressed up as a dog? You can dress the cat up as a dog, but it is still a funny looking cat. You can dress the MAC up as a D-IA league and call it a D-IA league, but once you look closely at it, it is a I-AA league. I think the league (and a lot of other leagues and schools) would be better off if they went I-AA. The structure of the NCAA is such that the rewards for BCS level teams are too great for the lesser conferences to overcome. The BCS is also starting to make it so many of the same teams show up in the BCS yearly which needs to change as well. The NCAA really needs to move to another level of college football and treat it as a professional league....it's that anyhow...the cat is the cat.There is an old saying that if you took all of the money in the US and distributed it equally, within five years the rich would become righ again, the middle would remain about the same and the poor would be poor. The rich know how to get rich. If you split the BCS money among all schools, the BCS schools would still remain at the top because they know what it takes to get there and they have the support to get there. What good would it do to distribute the money if the non-BCS schools would just pour it into their operating budget since most operate at a loss? They have lesser ability to improve their programs. The bigger schools are evolving at a faster rate than the smaller schools because they know how to. 100,000 seat stadiums didn't just pop up all fo the sudden. It took decades of hard work and investment for those schools to get to that point. Why punish the bigger schools for their success. Let them evolve into something separate from the pack and have their own league. The evolution might be good for everyone.

The key you fail to realize is that their success (Big schools all 16 of them) have been on the backs of the other 104 Division 1-A schools. Their success comes from kicking the crap out of the other 104 schools.But then you also say that low budget schools have no chance, yet BYU, TCU, Utah, and Boise State have made a name for themselves starting off with what? Incredibly small budgets. But to say that the MAC is a 1-AA conference is to say that Michigan is a 1-AA school. Michigan has one of the largest budgets and biggest backings in the country and they have lost to Appalachian State, Toledo (a very bad Toledo by the way) in back to back seasons.

Nobody is holding a gun to the heads of the non-BCS teams to play BCS teams. They know they are going to get their asses kicked and they do it willingly. If they NCAA wanted true reform, they would require a 40 team, top tier league, that only is allowed to play within itself. If it is really about competition (it isn't because it is about the BCS...so take the BCS out of it), the NCAA would increase competition by promoting teams of the same ability to play one another only. What is the divisional ranking system for anyhow? The BCS schools would make even more money and they could pay the players. Would someone pay more to see tOSU play OU or Texas? tOSU charges something like $65 to the OU game and they could charge $250 for the Texas game....probably more.In a meaningful game, BYU, TCU, Utah and Boise State would get burried by a top level BCS school. "But GP1, Oklahoma lost to one of these schools." I know, the game was meaningless. UF kicked the crap out of Cincy because it meant something to the school because of their coach and Tebow's last game. Cincy had no business being on the field with them. In a game for all the marbles, teams come more than prepared to play and they don't treat it as a bowl game full of amusement park rides, alumni pep rallies and trips to the beach. Does anyone notice how out of shape some of the players look in meaningless bowl games. Of course they are? They have been getting drunk everyday since the last game, the coaches leash is longer because they aren't around as much, overeating and having sex as often as possible.I understand the thinking. "Someone put up a brick wall so we have to run through it in order to 'grow' our program." This person runs into the wall and dislocates shoulder. Wouldn't it be better to just go around the wall? Why do we have to keep running into the wall? One big victory every 10 years? Is that really worth the losing?My father was a really smart country doctor. In a small town, doctors have an interesting insight into human behavior because they spend a lot more time with their patients and get to know them better. He probably saw all of my high school girlfriends naked before I did because he delivered them. He used to say about people when they made the same mistake over and over again, "If a human and a cat run into a glass door, the cat will never run into it again. At some point, the human will walk into it again. We never learn our lesson." I'm tired of running into brick walls and glass doors with the MAC.