There is no perfect system?

[CJHawkeyes]

What exactly do people mean by this? I certainly suspect that there is no system that will satisfy everyone, but what does a system need in order to be perfect. As long as a system allows all teams to control their own destiny, treats all teams and conferences equally, guarantees that all wins are greater than all losses, and ranks teams most to least successful according to a fixed objective standard, what more is required? "There is no perfect system" line seems like a copout, but from what I'm not sure.

[jeff4bucks]

The BCS, to an extent, allows teams to control their own destiny. Doesn't always help though (Auburn 2004). BCS certainly doesn't treat all teams and conferences equally, I'm not even sure the NCAA Tourney does either.
"a fixed objective standard..."...quality wins, level of competition, margin of victory/defeat...thats the comlicated part.

[CJHawkeyes]

The BCS, to an extent, allows teams to control their own destiny. Doesn't always help though (Auburn 2004). BCS certainly doesn't treat all teams and conferences equally, I'm not even sure the NCAA Tourney does either.
"a fixed objective standard..."...quality wins, level of competition, margin of victory/defeat...thats the comlicated part.


I would argue that the BCS does not allow teams to control their own destiny precisely because an unbeaten season does not guarantee a playoff berth. In fact, major college football is the only sport does not allow its teams to control their destiny. Perhaps worse than that are the arbitrary, unaccountable, and non-transparent rules that prevent anyone from adopting a strategy that maximizes their chances of qualifying should they go unbeaten. That said, I would agree that the BCS is not equitable and while the NCAA tournament is better, it still suffers major conference bias. The fixed objective standard is actually the easy part. The problem are people that have been brainwashed by years of opinion polls into thinking the standings should equal best to worst team and subsequently dismiss any objective standard that contradicts their idea of best to worst.

[Bucky]

I would argue that the BCS does not allow teams to control their own destiny precisely because an unbeaten season does not guarantee a playoff berth. In fact, major college football is the only sport does not allow its teams to control their destiny. Perhaps worse than that are the arbitrary, unaccountable, and non-transparent rules that prevent anyone from adopting a strategy that maximizes their chances of qualifying should they go unbeaten. That said, I would agree that the BCS is not equitable and while the NCAA tournament is better, it still suffers major conference bias. The fixed objective standard is actually the easy part. The problem are people that have been brainwashed by years of opinion polls into thinking the standings should equal best to worst team and subsequently dismiss any objective standard that contradicts their idea of best to worst.



The college basketball championship determines the two hottest teams who successfully navigated totally seperate regions and opponents of the NCAA tournament.

The flawed BCS system does it best to objectively determine which two teams played the best during the entire regular season.

College basketball's regular season is virtually meaningless for any team that is talented enough to get hot and run the table in March. There is plenty of time in the season for sloppy, error prone play. Teams can have multiple "off" days and still be in prime postion to get hot in March.

College football's regular season begins with week 1 and doesn't stop until the last conference championship. There is no room for error. If a team has an off day, they are virtually eliminated from national championship contention.



I prefer the drama and the passion of college football, but to each his own.

[Blue Hen]

I agree with CJH. If there is a sports championship system that absolutely DOES NOT allow teams to control their own destiny, it's the BCS. Voted perceptions, based on name brand recognition, controls the destiny moreso than actual team performance.

[CJHawkeyes]

The college basketball championship determines the two hottest teams who successfully navigated totally seperate regions and opponents of the NCAA tournament.

The flawed BCS system does it best to objectively determine which two teams played the best during the entire regular season.

College basketball's regular season is virtually meaningless for any team that is talented enough to get hot and run the table in March. There is plenty of time in the season for sloppy, error prone play. Teams can have multiple "off" days and still be in prime postion to get hot in March.

College football's regular season begins with week 1 and doesn't stop until the last conference championship. There is no room for error. If a team has an off day, they are virtually eliminated from national championship contention.



I prefer the drama and the passion of college football, but to each his own.

I would agree that college basketball's regular season is not as meaningful and dramatic as it could be but that is not a byproduct of the tournament. BB's regular season is diminished by a system that is heavily biased in favor the same six conferences that run football. There are 31 BB conferences and six gain more than half of the berths annually. BCS schools get too much credit for being BCS schools in BB too. My own system would have placed seven more mid-majors in the tournament. As such, that would create less room for error for BCS schools. Another problem with the tournament is that higher seeds are not rewarded enough for their seasons. If, for example, homecourt advantage were awarded to the top 16 seeds for the first two rounds, this would create more drama for the regular season as teams pursue this advantage. The point is that the regular season is not diminished by the existence of a the NCAA tournament, but rather by the fact that it is too easy for members of six conferences to qualify and due to ever increasing parity, being a higher seed is not worth as much without some homecourt advantage.

As for the BCS, it does not objectively determine anything. Even with computers involved, the end result is arbitrary due to the use of subjective polls. The fact that the same exact game results plus the same rules can produce more than one title matchup makes the entire system inherently worthless. Finally, while I can appreciate your preference for a system that leaves no room for error, the BCS eliminates 54 schools before a down is played and does not allow teams to control their own destiny. An unbeaten season without a playoff berth at the end is indefensible.

[H.I.]

I would agree that college basketball's regular season is not as meaningful and dramatic as it could be but that is not a byproduct of the tournament. BB's regular season is diminished by a system that is heavily biased in favor the same six conferences that run football. There are 31 BB conferences and six gain more than half of the berths annually. BCS schools get too much credit for being BCS schools in BB too. My own system would have placed seven more mid-majors in the tournament. As such, that would create less room for error for BCS schools. Another problem with the tournament is that higher seeds are not rewarded enough for their seasons. If, for example, homecourt advantage were awarded to the top 16 seeds for the first two rounds, this would create more drama for the regular season as teams pursue this advantage. The point is that the regular season is not diminished by the existence of a the NCAA tournament, but rather by the fact that it is too easy for members of six conferences to qualify and due to ever increasing parity, being a higher seed is not worth as much without some homecourt advantage.

As for the BCS, it does not objectively determine anything. Even with computers involved, the end result is arbitrary due to the use of subjective polls. The fact that the same exact game results plus the same rules can produce more than one title matchup makes the entire system inherently worthless. Finally, while I can appreciate your preference for a system that leaves no room for error, the BCS eliminates 54 schools before a down is played and does not allow teams to control their own destiny. An unbeaten season without a playoff berth at the end is indefensible.

bucky would feel differently if his beloved undefeated 2002 buckeyes got left out of the national championship game. the problem is he doesn't care that undefeated auburn and boise state got left out of that game 2 of the past 3 season. i got a feeling that if anybody watch the two bowl games this season in arizona, one wouldn't have a hard time telling you who the best team was out of boise state or ohio state. funny thing is the best team played a week earlier and beat the best team either one had to face all season - the other one got the to get embarrassed in the national championship game by a 1 loss team.

[EvilVodka]

I would agree that college basketball's regular season is not as meaningful and dramatic as it could be but that is not a byproduct of the tournament. BB's regular season is diminished by a system that is heavily biased in favor the same six conferences that run football. There are 31 BB conferences and six gain more than half of the berths annually. BCS schools get too much credit for being BCS schools in BB too.

well, the NCAA selects them, not the BCS....and doesn't this really support Bucky's point, that undeserving teams get a chance to play for it all?

Thats also what you'd get with a 16 team playoff in football, when the 7-4 Sun Belt champ gets in each year

[EvilVodka]

bucky would feel differently if his beloved undefeated 2002 buckeyes got left out of the national championship game. the problem is he doesn't care that undefeated auburn and boise state got left out of that game 2 of the past 3 season. i got a feeling that if anybody watch the two bowl games this season in arizona, one wouldn't have a hard time telling you who the best team was out of boise state or ohio state. funny thing is the best team played a week earlier and beat the best team either one had to face all season - the other one got the to get embarrassed in the national championship game by a 1 loss team.

you've got a good point, but we are only talking a handful of teams here....

there's always 1-2 teams that get left out each year (and there's a long list in college football), so IMO we should go to a 4 or 6 team playoff, not a 16 team playoff

I also agree with CJ's point that teams should be allowed to control their own destiny...if you go undefeated, you should have a shot at the national championship

[CJHawkeyes]

well, the NCAA selects them, not the BCS....and doesn't this really support Bucky's point, that undeserving teams get a chance to play for it all?

Thats also what you'd get with a 16 team playoff in football, when the 7-4 Sun Belt champ gets in each year


BCS schools run the NCAA and have a habit of favoring their own teams at selection time. Besides, I wasn't aware that Bucky's point was that undeserving teams make the tournament but rather that the regular season is anticlimatic and that the tournament was to blame. I think I have demonstrated that the tournament is not responsible. That said, I don't concern myself with "undeserving" teams making a 16 team football playoff. Under my preferred a format, a 7-4 Sun Belt Champ would likely have to beat the top four seeds in a row to win it all. I don't think the Sun Belt race, no matter how weak the league may be, would make the regular season anticlimatic nor do I think it diminishes the regular season because a 7-4 conference champion earns the opportunity to beat the top four seeds. Of course, this presumes that the Sun Belt cannot improve greatly with an auto bid at their disposal.

[EvilVodka]

Besides, I wasn't aware that Bucky's point was that undeserving teams make the tournament but rather that the regular season is anticlimatic and that the tournament was to blame.

when undeserving teams are allowed into the tournament, you make the season anticlimatic

[CJHawkeyes]

when undeserving teams are allowed into the tournament, you make the season anticlimatic


Undeserving is subjective. Besides that, college football's regular season is anticlimatic when only a handful of teams are in contention by November. I fail to see how Sun Belt teams competing amongst each other for an auto berth is anticlimatic just because some might label them "undeserving".

[Bucky]

bucky would feel differently if his beloved undefeated 2002 buckeyes got left out of the national championship game. the problem is he doesn't care that undefeated auburn and boise state got left out of that game 2 of the past 3 season. i got a feeling that if anybody watch the two bowl games this season in arizona, one wouldn't have a hard time telling you who the best team was out of boise state or ohio state. funny thing is the best team played a week earlier and beat the best team either one had to face all season - the other one got the to get embarrassed in the national championship game by a 1 loss team.


Whether OSU plays in the toilet bowl or not has no impact on which sport and season I love more.

College Basketball rewards the team that is the hottest in March and has the easiest road to the final four. College basketball has the most exciting playoff in all of sport. But I have news for you incredibly obtuse fans.....March Madness works because basketball is an entirely different sport. Each game has the chance to come down to the final play, which is what makes the tournament exciting to 90% of fans who watch 0 basketball pre-March. College football is not a sport with such high drama. Rarely do games come down to the final play.

A college football tournament would have a totally different dynamic.

I am by no means claiming that the BCS is perfect or is anywhere near objective, it is a flawed system. But it does it's best to reward the two best teams from the ENTIRE regular season. Every week matters.

As I have stated a gazillion times. College football needs the BCS to be tweaked and to add a +1 game in the case of an undisputed champion.

Creating a 8, 12, or 16 team playoff completely changes the fundamental's which make major college football so exciting.

[Blue Hen]

Excellent point

[Blue Hen]

Regarding the 'meaningfulness' of college basketball's regular season : I , too think the playoff field is too bloated - way too many 'at large' entries....However, the regular season, including the conference tournaments, do indeed eliminate 271 of the 336 D1 teams fron national title opportunities.........so it's not completely 'meaningless', as commonly perceived. And remember , a much higher % of college football teams advance to post season play than college basketball teams do......so which sport has the the most meaningful regular seasons can be arguable.