ADVERTISEMENT

AAC commissioner wants BCS back

B

Buckaineer

All-Conference
Sep 3, 2001
7,294
652
333
Excerpt:
AAC commissioner says 'deck is stacked' against Group of 5 college football teams
6:36 PM ET

  • Mark SchlabachESPN Senior Writer
American Athletic Conference commissioner Michael Aresco strongly criticized the College Football Playoff selection committee for dropping undefeated Cincinnati another spot in its rankings -- behind three two-loss teams.
During an interview Wednesday on SEC Network's The Paul Finebaum Show, Aresco said the CFP selection committee needs to do some "soul searching" and is "undermining its credibility with rankings that defy logic and common sense and fairness."
"I never thought I'd say it, but if this continues, bring back the BCS and the computers because it would be a fairer system than what I'm seeing now," Aresco said. "This is the seventh year [of the CFP], and it does appear the deck is stacked against us and against other [Group of 5 teams]."
The No. 9 Bearcats (8-0) dropped one spot in each of the past two rankings released by the committee. In the latest rankings released Tuesday, Cincinnati fell behind three two-loss teams: No. 6 Iowa State, No. 7 Florida and No. 8 Georgia.
The Bearcats haven't played since a 36-33 victory at UCF on Nov. 21. Their road game at Temple the next week was canceled because of COVID-19 issues within both programs, and a Dec. 12 game at Tulsa was canceled because of problems in the Cincinnati program.
Cincinnati is scheduled to play No. 23 Tulsa in Saturday's AAC championship game (8 p.m. ET/ABC).
Aresco took exception to Cincinnati's seemingly being penalized for not playing while other teams, such as No. 4 Ohio State, haven't been dropped in the rankings for playing fewer games than other contenders.

www.espn.com

AAC boss: 'Bring back BCS ... deck is stacked'

AAC commissioner Michael Aresco said the College Football Playoff selection committee needs to do some "soul searching" and is "undermining its credibility with rankings that defy logic and common sense and fairness."
www.espn.com www.espn.com

He kinda has a point. The b.s. moves the committee makes show without a doubt the fix is in for who can and can't compete in college football--about as un-American as it can get at this point.
 
Strangely the BCS Calculator Formula was actually Excellent.
But nobody understood the BCS Formula and they Sht Canned it.

On my daily compute into the city, the local paper had the BCS Formula explained.
...
And this year, obviously Ohio State only playing 5 games - the system was unfair and Rigged.
 
mofo said:
Strangely the BCS Calculator Formula was actually Excellent.
But nobody understood the BCS Formula and they Sht Canned it.

On my daily compute into the city, the local paper had the BCS Formula explained.
...
And this year, obviously Ohio State only playing 5 games - the system was unfair and Rigged.
Click to expand...
The BCS system wasn't excellent. It had 3 components: the AP/Harris poll, the Coaches' poll, and the average of 6 computer polls. The AP and Coaches' have the same top 4 as the CFP does now. So far, if you went back and used the BCS formula for the last five years, all the same teams still would have made the playoffs.
 
topdecktiger said:
The BCS system wasn't excellent. It had 3 components: the AP/Harris poll, the Coaches' poll, and the average of 6 computer polls. The AP and Coaches' have the same top 4 as the CFP does now. So far, if you went back and used the BCS formula for the last five years, all the same teams still would have made the playoffs.
Click to expand...

The Harris Poll, Computer Poll, + Coaches Poll.

Computer poll would not allowed
Ohio State, this year.
Computer poll had many Facsits - and (to me) seemed realistic.

Which we are comparing - why was Ohio State allowed IN, in 2020,
(because not enough games played)?
The computer poll would have
stopped OSU this year - until Disney/ESPN bitched.

Coaches poll is/was usually ok (or fair).

Anyway, I'll look into that more and think about your response.

But at the time,
I thought BCS was fair.

Ps...thought the AP "Opted Out" .
 
Last edited:
Problem with the playoffs is they simply make up whatever they want to each year to justify allowing teams in that aren't qualified but that they want, and excluding qualified teams they don't want.

To me, seeing what a Cincinnati could do against the field is more interesting than hand gifting teams like Ohio State and Clemson that are maybe challenged and thats a maybe in 1 game each year, but are gifted spots. Now its extremely ridiculous as the espn contracted ACC and SEC are the only teams really hyped all year, showcased all year, and they push them for playoffs endlessly.

This year look at their site--you have a top ten matchup in the BIG 12 championship--barely mentioned. But they are hyping the SEC and ACC championships and pushing two teams from the ACC regardless of losses and of course the SEC champ and a 5 win B10 champ, ignoring actual accomplishments not just of the Cincinnati's, but BIG 12 schools too.

And once again they just make up whatever they want to try to explain it away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mofo
mofo said:
The Harris Poll, Computer Poll, + Coaches Poll.

Computer poll would not allowed
Ohio State, this year.
Computer poll had many Facsits - and (to me) seemed realistic.

Which we are comparing - why was Ohio State allowed IN, in 2020,
(because not enough games played)?
The computer poll would have
stopped OSU this year - until Disney/ESPN bitched.

Coaches poll is/was usually ok (or fair).

Anyway, I'll look into that more and think about your response.

But at the time,
I thought BCS was fair.

Ps...thought the AP "Opted Out" .
Click to expand...
The computers would not have stopped Ohio St. For example, as we speak, Sagarin has the top 4 as: Alabama, Clemson, Ohio St., Georgia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tOSUGrad90
There should not be a playoff when the people picking are using only bias, who has what contract with who and make up rules constantly to alter what they changed last time to get in who they want in rather than who has earned a spot.

Stop with the committee b.s., let more schools play in a real playoff rather than a selection tournament.
 
topdecktiger said:
The computers would not have stopped Ohio St. For example, as we speak, Sagarin has the top 4 as: Alabama, Clemson, Ohio St., Georgia.
Click to expand...


Could be,
but Sagarin is Just One Poll (1).
BCS was an Conclomeration of 6 Polls.

BCS was "Bad mouthed" because no one, meaning No One (at the Time) Understood the BCS Formula.
And certainly no one attempted to understand the BCS.

The only reason I am debating today, is that the BCS was Probably (or certainly), better than the existing system.
 
Last edited:
Bottom Line. SEC, Big 10 did not like the BCS formula because it gave a fair advantage to Big East. Just because you go to 8 team playoff doesn't mean the advantage still would still not be favored toward the SEC. Say it's a normal 12 game regular season it very possibly could have 2 or 3 SEC teams in the playoffs. ACC, Big 12, PAC and Big 10 would have 1 each, that's 7 teams. That leaves ND or Cincinnati. I will give you one guess who the committee would choose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mofo
mofo said:
Could be,
but Sagarin is Just One Poll (1).
BCS was an Conclomeration of 6 Polls.

BCS was "Bad mouthed" because no one, meaning No One (at the Time) Understood the BCS Formula.
And certainly no one attempted to understand the BCS.

The only reason I am debating today, is that the BCS was Probably (or certainly), better than the existing system.
Click to expand...
There isn't much to understand about the BCS. They took the two human polls, plus the average of 6 computer polls. Of those 6, their current ranking are:

Sagarin: Alabama,Ohio St, Clemson, Georgia.

Anderson Hester: Alabama,Ohis St, Notre Dame, Coastal Carolina.

Billingsley: Alabama, Ohio St., Notre dame, Clemson.

Massey: Alabama, Ohio St., Clemson, Notre dame.

Colley: Alabama, Coastal Carolina, Cincinnati, Notre dame.

Wolfe: No rankings.

So, only one of the computer rankings currently has Ohio St outside the top 4. If the BCS still existed, Ohio St would still be in at this point.

Regarding the BCS in general, if you applied the formula each year from 2015 to 2019, you would still get the same top for as thr CFP chose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tOSUGrad90
Doesn't matter.
Justin Fields struggled today,
and Ohio State won - anyway.

But no matter, 6 game attrition ain't enough to justify top 4 - when ever other team played 9 - 10 games.

Drink that Up.
 
The CFP Committee is laughing at you, MofoTard, and so am I. We had two of our best receivers and 20 other players out with the 'rona. So, what does a good team do in this situation? It runs the ball down the throat of its opponent. Trey Sermon rushed for 331 yards today, and I hope that you enjoyed the show. Enjoy a tall glass of STFU yourself, jealous idiot.
 
Ohio State's participation TAINTED.

B10 Chicken Sht for NOT PLAYING
Full schedule and expecting preferential treatment.

Some Folks may feel wounded, here.
 
Last edited:
The CFP Committee will break your hate-filled heart, FoTard, and I will be here to laugh in your stupid face when it happens.
 
Some folks are extra sensitive, and covers this attribute by exchanging little league Insults every sentence.
 
Be sure to be on here tomorrow night, as I want to lap up your crocodile tears, mofo. Your jealousy is palpable.
 
Sensitive...

Some folks are so Sensitive that they exchange insults randomly.
 
The players play the game. The fans show up to cheer, purchase tickets, gear, etc. Everyone else is just making money of the players and fans. I dont give a fk what systm it is, but we should have one that puts those two groups first. Thats all i feel on this topic.
 
Folks can exchange insults, BUT that doesn't excuse or does that change that Ohio State played only 6 full games.


Tainted
 
There is strength of schedule
component in the BCS.

And if you only play 6 games,
The strength of schedule would be vetted, Ultimately.

Black and White.
 
mofo said:
There is strength of schedule
component in the BCS.

And if you only play 6 games,
The strength of schedule would be vetted, Ultimately.

Black and White.
Click to expand...
There wasn't a stand alone strength of schedule to the BCS. Again, it was only AP/Harris + Coaches' + computer average. The computer polls did use strength of schedule in their calculations, but that's also part of the current rankings I gave you earlier. The BCS simply didn't work the way you think it did.
 
topdecktiger said:
There wasn't a stand alone strength of schedule to the BCS. Again, it was only AP/Harris + Coaches' + computer average. The computer polls did use strength of schedule in their calculations, but that's also part of the current rankings I gave you earlier. The BCS simply didn't work the way you think it did.
Click to expand...

Strength of Schedule was a BCS Component, as you stated above.

A team that only played 6 games would NOT have made top teams.
 
topdecktiger said:
No, that's not what I stated.
Click to expand...

Yes you did.

TopDeck or tOsu
(or whoever you represent)
- the BCS had 6 polls, And computer tabulation poll.

Of those 6++ polls,
"Strength of Schedule"
was/is a major component.

A Six (6) win team,
would NOT be allowed to play a
11 win SEC team - per BCS.

And especially
while Fields "dropped out"
of the Heisman.


That is That
 
Last edited:
mofo said:
Yes you did.

TopDeck or tOsu
(or whoever you represent)
- the BCS had 6 polls, And computer tabulation poll.

Of those 6++ polls,
"Strength of Schedule"
was/is a major component.

A Six (6) win team,
would NOT be allowed to play a
11 win SEC team - per BCS.

And especially
while Fields "dropped out"
of the Heisman.


That is That
Click to expand...
No, I didnt say strength of schedule was a major component. I said it was already included in the formula for the computer polls.

What I did say is that that the computer rankings, as we speak, have Ohio St included in the top 4. They are factoring strength of schedule in already.

There is no mystery to this. The BCS results can be reconstructed. They would give the same results as the CFP. You and the other posters are simply making up things.
 
topdecktiger said:
No, I didnt say strength of schedule was a major component. I said it was already included in the formula for the computer polls.

What I did say is that that the computer rankings, as we speak, have Ohio St included in the top 4. They are factoring strength of schedule in already.

There is no mystery to this. The BCS results can be reconstructed. They would give the same results as the CFP. You and the other posters are simply making up things.
Click to expand...

Nope incorrect assumption.

Bottom line;
No matter how much you debate,
no matter how much you argue,
no matter how much discuss,

6 B10 games
do not match 11 SEC GAMES.



MSU nope
RUTGERS nope
Northwestern nope

On and on, and BCS would have addressed even the games OSU actually played.

Sorry....
Rigged

RIGGED
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Vernon

WVU Release WVU Women's Basketball - West Virginia Slips to No. 15 in AP Poll

Replies
0
Views
219
Mountaineer Message Board
Vernon
Vernon
Vernon

WVU Release WVU and Baylor Game to be Televised on ESPN2 at 4 p.m.

Replies
1
Views
218
Mountaineer Message Board
WVU_Dave
WVU_Dave
Vernon

WVU Release WVU Women's Basketball - West Virginia Slips to No. 15 in AP Poll

Replies
1
Views
211
The Blue Lot
NJMountie
NJMountie
Vernon

WVU Release WVU's Wyatt Milum Named Semifinalist for Outland Trophy

Replies
0
Views
117
Mountaineer Message Board
Vernon
Vernon
Keenan Cummings

WVU Release WVU Posts Record-High Graduation Success Rate Score Once Again

Replies
0
Views
208
Mountaineer Message Board
Keenan Cummings
Keenan Cummings
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back