Does ND belong in a BCS bowl?

[Terry in Crapchester]

I posted ND's BCS resume in another thread, using a format Shoalzie had devised (for the purpose of evaluating other teams, not ND, btw). Here it is:

Opponents' winning percentage (so far): .5396
Point differential: +120
Wins vs. Teams with 8 or more wins: 4 (Georgia Tech, Penn State, Purdue, Navy)
Wins vs. Teams .500 or better: 5 (See above, UCLA)
Losses: #3 Michigan (11-1), #2 USC (10-1)

I'd say that's probably BCS material.

Not to mention that under the rules currently in effect, 3 of the Top 12 teams (Wisconsin, Auburn and the loser of the Florida-Arkansas game) are eliminated from BCS consideration. Also, ND is within striking distance of the Top 8, which would make them an automatic qualifier. If Arkansas and Louisville lose, ND should finish in the Top 8, unless they're leapfrogged by Auburn (idle, but only trails ND by .0081 points, I suppose that differential could be made up by strength of schedule changes as a result of next week's games) or Oklahoma (playing Nebraska for Big 12 championship). For that matter, if either Arkansas or Louisville loses, ND possibly still could get into the Top 8 if a few human pollsters change their votes between ND and Boise State, which at this point wouldn't even penalize Boise State's BCS chances. So you never know.

The only intellectually honest option to knock ND out of a BCS bid, as a practical matter, is Louisville, and then only if both Louisville and Rutgers win. Given the difference in tradition and drawing power between the two teams, however, I don't think there's any contest between the two as a final BCS selection. The only realistic option for ND being left out of the BCS is if, as I posted in another thread, Cal winds up in the Top 14, which could happen under the right turn of events, and USC plays in the BCS championship game. In that scenario, the Rose Bowl could take Cal as its second pick, and the Sugar Bowl could take the Big East champion and gamble that the Orange Bowl will reward the Sugar's "home" conference by taking LSU over ND. If Georgia Tech wins the ACC championship game, that could be a pretty good bet, given that Georgia Tech and ND already played this year. But then the BCS would have passed over a 2-loss Notre Dame team for a 3-loss Cal team that lost to the #5 team in the SEC and an unranked mid-pack Pac-10 team, in addition to one of the teams that beat ND.

ND deserves a BCS bid, under all of the circumstances, imho.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

Not to mention that under the rules currently in effect...

Well, the rules are what the writer is taking a stand against...even moreso than ND.

He's essentially saying that the system blows, and if you toss all the rules regarding automatic qualifiers and such out the window, ND wouldn't be deserving of a spot over some of the other teams based on individual merit.

[JeffintheCuse]

I hope ND does get another BCS berth... so they can get ass-raped in said game once again. Maybe after enough of these beatings someone will do something. then again, probably not.

Everytime they've played in one of these, they've gotten killed. Sheesh, even Oregon St. smacked them in the Fiesta a few years back.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Not to mention that under the rules currently in effect...

Well, the rules are what the writer is taking a stand against...even moreso than ND.

He's essentially saying that the system blows, and if you toss all the rules regarding automatic qualifiers and such out the window, ND wouldn't be deserving of a spot over some of the other teams based on individual merit.

There's an argument to be made for that. But having said that, these are the rules that everybody agreed to beforehand. You can't just throw them out in mid-stream because you don't like the results they produce.

If you want to take a good hard look at revising the rules after this season, fine. But for this season, you have to apply the rules as they are.

[Jobocky]

No.

[Degenerate]

Since the BCS is little more than a marketing gimmick, then, yes, Notre Dame suits them to a T.

Oh, wait, you don't still think this is based on merit, do you?

[SoCalTrjn]

the BCS has always been a joke, and nothing less than a pared down Division 1, NCAA generated schedules and a playoff will ever give us a legit National Champion

[Dinsdale]

these are the rules that everybody agreed to beforehand. You can't just throw them out in mid-stream because you don't like the results they produce.

You're absolutely right, we agree 100%.

Sincerely,
USC 2003

RackityRackRackRack.

One of the pussiest whinefests in recent memory.

But wait....what's USC(fans's) response to Michigan thinking they got the shaft?

"Tough shit. Should have won your games."


Which makes the still-lingering(sup "no really, we won 3 straight!")meltdown all the more funny.

[SoCalTrjn]

USC was ranked #1 in both the AP and ESPN/USAToday Coaches poll prior to the Bowl games.
There is a huge diference between being ranked #1 and winning your bowl and being ranked #3 and winning your bowl.

And I still think Michigan should be playing in the BCS title game and USC v LSU in the Rose

[Van]

these are the rules that everybody agreed to beforehand. You can't just throw them out in mid-stream because you don't like the results they produce.

You're absolutely right, we agree 100%.

Sincerely,
USC 2003

Exactly. They did agree. They agreed that LSU won the BCS trophy and they won the much more legitimate (that year, anyway) AP trophy.

[Dinsdale]

Maybe USC fan should call up his mother and cry to her?


SoCals are pretty fucking funny, as is evident from them having no concept of why they're viewed as bitches on this matter(even thought it's been covered in this very thread).

[Van]

Dins, t'were Bitter LSU Fan and not USC Fan who brought it up...again.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

At least LSU beat a real team in their bowl game, and not some faggottty Big Ten fairy.

[SoCalTrjn]

what poll had Auburn ranked #1 prior to the bowl games in 2004? The AP? The Coaches?
There is no beef, USC was #1 in the AP poll and the Coaches poll before the Rose Bowl in 2003. After they handled Michigan in the Rose Bowl they were still #1 in the AP and would have still been #1 in the Coaches if the Coaches were not contractually obligated to vote a certain way (which sort of makes it no longer a poll)
Its pretty cut and dry, be ranked #1, win your bowl game, you're still #1, where's the controversy?

[Terry in Crapchester]

Back to the topic at hand . . .

For those who like the idea of the BCS as meritocracy, consider this: 10 teams qualify for the BCS. Under the system in use for ranking teams, ND is currently ranked #10. Therefore, if the BCS were a pure meritocracy, ND would still belong, pending the results of next week's games.

Just sayin'.

[WolverineSteve]

If you believe that ND is deserving of a top 10 ranking....you're no less a homer than Jon,Babs, and M2. You continue to base your arguements on citing "rules in place" and whatnot. How about a take on what you really think, an independent (no pun intended) thought if you will?

[Terry in Crapchester]

If you believe that ND is deserving of a top 10 ranking....you're no less a homer than Jon,Babs, and M2. You continue to base your arguements on citing "rules in place" and whatnot. How about a take on what you really think, an independent (no pun intended) thought if you will?

I would say somewhere between 8-12, so quite possibly Top 10. But what I think is ultimately irrelevant, as is what anyone else on this board happens to think, unless you have a vote on the CNN/USA Today poll, or run one of the computers involved in the BCS.

If you don't think ND belongs in the Top 10, then who, among teams not in the Top 10, would you place ahead of ND? Someone earlier mentioned Texas -- that's plainly ridiculous.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Its pretty cut and dry, be ranked #1, win your bowl game, you're still #1, where's the controversy?

Except that is not an accurate statement of the BCS rules. According to those agreed upon rules, the top two BCS teams played for the NC. In 2003, USC got left out. In 2004, Auburn got left out. Sorry, but that is how it happened.

You just crystallized the entire argument for why a playoff is necessary.

[See You Next Wednesday]

I am so confused by this LSU/USC/BCS thing that I decided to go where they surely must have this information, the NCAA website. I couldn't find anywhere on there the listing of Division I-A Football champions. Must be a poor web design or something, cuz you would think they would have that information.

[Jimmy Medalions]

Thanks for the sig.

[Van]

Well, it does get old seeing something that belongs to LSU get claimed by someone else.

OK, USC has a beef about 2003. Auburn has one about 2004.

But the facts remain that LSU won a share of the title in 2003 and USC won it outright in 2004.

Yup!

[Van]

The day that USC recognizes Auburn as the co-champ for 2004 is the day I recognize USC as the co-champ for 2003.





made my own thread go off topic

The day that Auburn was ever ranked equally with USC in '04 is...never. Again, same as in '03 and same as in every year since the dawn of time #1 went into their bowl game and when they won their bowl game they remained #1.

'03 was the only exception to this, and even then it was only by the people who were contractually obligated to vote against their consciences. Those that were allowed to follow the rules and precedents kept USC where they belonged, at #1.

[SoCalTrjn]

The top 2 teams in the BCS formulas ranking played in the BCS bowl NOT the top 2 teams.
Nobody ever agreed that the BCS's formula was the end all be all of college rankings, it was only agreed that the BCS's formula would be used to determine which 2 teams played in the BCS's title bowl game. These rules that you keep pointing to only cover the BCS champion and not the AP. What 2003 came down to was computer rankings that put LSU and Oklahoma in the title game. The Coaches and AP (which had bee the 2 tried and true ranking systems of the last 50 or so years) both had USC as the #1 team
Thus giving LSU the BCS Championship while USC won the AP National Championship.

There is a chance that again this year there can be split champions. If Ohio State were to lose their BCS Title bowl game, the AP can pick a team that didnt play in that Bowl game as their National Champion.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

You'll have a hard time finding any "source" which doesn't recognize USC as a co-national champ in 2003.

Other than the BCS website, of course.

The BCS was designed to award a BCS National Champion. But if the AP National champ differs from the BCS National champ, guess what? You have a split national champ. This is fact. Just because the BCS was designed with the intent to have the AP agree with them, doesn't mean it's going to happen 100% of the time. The AP has been awarding champions since the 30s, and will continue to do so long after the BCS dies, and likely until a playoff is instituted.

[See You Next Wednesday]

I am so confused by this LSU/USC/BCS thing that I decided to go where they surely must have this information, the NCAA website. I couldn't find anywhere on there the listing of Division I-A Football champions. Must be a poor web design or something, cuz you would think they would have that information.

You're not very good at the internet, apparently.

http://www.ncaasports.com/football/mens/history

Still looking for the NCAA champ though, can you help me out? Thanks.

[Van]

Your argument would make sense, Van, if your facts were correct. However, per the rules at the time, the top 2 teams played for the NC, and in 2003, that did not include USC. Your claim that USC won a share of the NC in 2003 is as specious as Auburn's claim that it won a share in 2004.

My facts are correct. Auburn was nobody's #1 in '04, not at any time during the year, including the conclusion of the regular season. USC was #1, wire to wire. They won their bowl game. #1, wire to wire. USC was the consensus #1 at every point throughout the '04 season. Auburn got screwed, yes, but they never had a claim since neither the BCS nor the AP nor the UPI ever had them #1, or even #2.

The only "rules" you can point to are the BCS's rules. The AP was part of the BCS but they remained an independent entity when it came time to conduct their final national championship poll. Nobody "broke" any rules. One body politic awarded their title and another awarded theirs. Difference was, one was based on an actual free and clear vote and the other was a contractual mandate that negated the ability to conduct a free and clear vote. You should feel damn fortunate for that too because if the same system were in place then that's in place now (or that was in place during most any era previous to that one small segment in time) USC would've been in the BCS title game and not LSU and you wouldn't have even that one share.

You got the one share strictly through a quirk of good timing involving a flaw in the BCS system that worked out in your favor; a flaw that was absent from the AP system, a flaw that the BCS quickly recognized and fixed that following offseason. No rules were ever broken in the awarding of the split title but the rules sure got changed after that season, and rightfully so.

[Dinsdale]

You got the one share strictly....

Oh, fuck. Tears streaming down my face, Jerry.

LSU got a share, says Trojanfan?

One of the funniest unintentionally funny lines ever. I'm not sure Sissyroo can top that.


Uhm Vannar...they didn't just get a "share"...they ate the whole fucking pie, brother...AS PER THE RULES YOUR REPRESENTATIVES AGREED TO. The pie was never yours to slice. And the grandma who baked it ain't sharing.

I love how USC wants to back out of their BINDING AGREEMENT when things didn't come out the way they wanted.

Fine way to represent a university and fanbase...by being liars.

[SoCalTrjn]

the binding agreement was to a BCS bowl system and a BCS title, LSU has the BCS title. The Associated Press title was won by USC and the AP was not bound by any contract to agree to what the BCS's computer geeks formula came up with.

[Dinsdale]

Sweet. Maybe I should start MY own championship.

I'll call it "Dinsdale's NATIONAL Championship."

I'll even have a title game, pitting the two best teams. Then, after they've duked it out on the field, I'll award the title to Oregon every year.

Sweet way to rack up championships...thanks for the idea.

And Oregon's championships will be just about as legit as USC's 2003 "title."


BTW--the fucking Associated Press also agreed to the BCS, relinquishing their "right" to award a title.


Bottom line -- in D1, teams get fucking HOSED every year. Happened to my team a few years back, happened to a few other teams along the way. It's a shame that the University of Southern California doesn't prepare its students to actually deal with reality. 2001 was Oregon's year to get fucked. 2003 was USC's. One lot of fans moved on within hours, and enjoyed looking back at a great season. The other group of fans is still fucking whining and claiming BODE 4 years later...comedy at its finest.

[Van]

Dins, what the fuck are you babbling on about?? What "binding contract" was broken by anybody?? Who broke any agreements at all??

Not LSU. Not USC. Not LSU's or LSU's fans.

Two well accepted awarding bodies...two titles awarded. Pretty fucking simple. Neither school twisted the arm of either awarding body. Each received their award, their "share", of a split national title.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

BTW--the fucking Associated Press also agreed to the BCS, relinquishing their "right" to award a title.

Making shit up, eh?

You're thinking of the contract with the Coaches Poll. The AP had no such contract.

If there was such an agreement between the two, feel free to link me up.

The AP was simply factored into the BCS formula -- by whim of the BCS. The BCS chose to factor the AP into their little math equation, without official consent from the AP. The AP simply didn't put up a fight. They really didn't have a reason to at the time. That's it. That's the only way they were conjoined. They were never obligated to vote the same way as the BCS.

[Van]

BTW--the fucking Associated Press also agreed to the BCS, relinquishing their "right" to award a title.

LINK!!!!!????

The AP agreed to no such thing. Never. All they agreed to (not that they were asked, or gave their consent, actually) was to be a component of the BCS's regular season criteria. They never agreed to abandon their own award, which in the end turned out to be the only one that managed to maintain its integrity throughout the post season voting process.

[Jimmy Medalions]

I'm looking for a way out of looking stupid here, can you help me out? Thanks.

[Dinsdale]

First, I stand correctedon th AP contract. It was in fact the Coaches' Poll I was thinking of.

Regardless, the PAC10, in their capacity as USC's representative, agreed to a system to determine the national champion. Regardless whether the system is flawed(it is...just not quite as badly as the old one), it was agreed to.

Now, USC doesn't want to honor that agreement...it's that simple.

They won the #1 AP ranking. No more, no less. But they agreed that the "champion" would be crowned in a certain way, which they were. That champion was, unfortunately, LSU.

It is only because I'm such a PAC10 homer that I really even give a shit. As PACfan, it's a great deal more important to me that "we" exhibit class, honor, and good sportsmanship than to display a trophy in a glass case.

If only USCfan held these ideals as dear...


It was a great year for them. Let it go. Because I sure the fuck won't until you do, since the USC collective(the fanbase, really) are being piss-poor representives of the greatest conference in the history of college athletics.

[montinelevin]

Dear Santa/St. Nick (Frisco),

Could you make everything LSU and U$C from the year 2003 and 2004 in college football go away? I feel it's in the world's best interest if we go back to bashing ND for sucking so much and being ranked to high for the 16th straight year...

... I really care about ND, since it's your school and stuff, and I don't want people to make fun of them for losing another bowl game they don't belong in.

I'll be waiting for this, under one of my "goyim"... friend's tree.

Thanks, your boy Ghandi

[SoCalTrjn]

The agreement was to allow the BCS's computer poll based formula set up the 2 highest ranked teams within that formula to play one another in the same bowl for the BCS National Championship, and that is what LSU won. You wont see any USC fans denying that LSU won the 2003 BCS title.

Nobody ever agreed to discount the Associated Press's votes, if there was that agreement they certainly would not have had the AP poll be any part of the BCS Formula. The fact that 3 years later you still see fuckin dolts trying to say that the AP doesnt matter is likely why the AP asked to be excluded completely from future BCS formulas.

The Bottom Line is USC was #1 in both polls before the bowl games, the Trojans won, they were still #1. #2 played #3 and the winner was awarded with the BCS trophy.

[montinelevin]

I guess some of us have to learn the hard way.

There is no Santa.

God really is Jewish.

[Van]

Pssst! Hey, Dins!

USC didn't award themselves their share of the '03 split title. USC didn't "break any agreements". They aren't "refusing to honor" anything. The AP didn't "break any agreements" either. USC was simply awarded the AP national title, which was a mere formality when they convincingly won their bowl game while ranked #1. Everybody but LSU Fan/USC Hater accepts that there was a split title in '03, and everybody including USC Fan hates that situation, but USC didn't/hasn't done anything wrong there. All they did (same as LSU) was play the games and accept the award given to them, the award the AP voted to give them.

Point of fact, the UPI coaches who ended up having to give their award to LSU actually voted USC #1 too, same as the AP, and they would've awarded USC their national championship too, same as the AP, if only they hadn't found themselves painted into a corner and contractually obligated to reverse their real vote.

If you have a problem with any of this then take it up with...

-The AP, who acknowledges the split title in '03
-The BCS, who didn't somewhat fix their hideously fucked up system until the horse was already out of the barn, but who still acknowledges the split title in '03
-The national print media, who acknowledges the split title in '03
-National sports radio, who acknowledges the split title in '03
-The national televised media, who acknowledges the split title in '03
-Just about any sports almanac you care to pick up, who all acknowledge the split title in '03
-College football, who absofuggenlutely acknowledges the split title in '03

...but don't bitch at USC about it. Both LSU and USC are blameless in all this. They didn't create the schism and they didn't deviate from the system(s). All USC and LSU did was show up when and where they were told to show up, play their games and accept the awards given to them.

[SoCalTrjn]

I guess some of us have to learn the hard way.

There is no Santa.

God really is Jewish.

How do you pretend to be educated and then still believe in god?

[See You Next Wednesday]

I'm looking for a way out of looking stupid here, can you help me out? Thanks.

Missed the point, I see.