ESPN: Football Final Four moves closer to reality

Donate To GopherHole

Plus one....Use the BCS format. 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3, in the current bcs bowls, winners play one more game. If You finish #5 in the bcs poll, too bad.
 

Brian Bennett said:
I live in Louisville
Click to expand...

Way to reinforce the fact that you're a Big Ten writer not living in Big Ten country, Brian. I am continually befuddled as to why he was hired to cover the Big Ten. He is a terrible writer who had no personal or professional affiliation to the conference before his hire. And not only that, but neither he nor ESPN can be bothered to have him move to a Big Ten market (preferably Chicago) so he can maybe learn something about it (as opposed to the nothing he knows now) and be there to cover the issues.

Anyone know - does CNN station their London correspondent in Paris?
 

dpodoll68 said:
Anyone know - does CNN station their London correspondent in Paris?
Click to expand...

If their responsibilities were similar to ESPN's Big Ten blogger and they were covering London, Munich, Berlin, Minsk, Belgrade, Oslo, Prague, Vienna, Zurich, Rome, Athens and Barcelona, then they could probably live in Paris.

P.S. What could he learn about the Big Ten in Chicago that he couldn't learn in Louisville? Jim Delaney's personal beat writer, daily face-to-face meetings with the commish?
 

Maximus said:
If their responsibilities were similar to ESPN's Big Ten blogger and they were covering London, Munich, Berlin, Minsk, Belgrade, Oslo, Prague, Vienna, Zurich, Rome, Athens and Barcelona, then they could probably live in Paris.

P.S. What could he learn about the Big Ten in Chicago that he couldn't learn in Louisville? Jim Delaney's personal beat writer, daily face-to-face meetings with the commish?
Click to expand...
Living in Big Ten country he could actually go and talk to people in the Big Ten. Or watch practice. Or go to a game. Or see the stadium. Or realize that in Minnesota, it is not -22F in March (hasn't said it but he probably thinks it)
 


zambam said:
Living in Big Ten country he could actually go and talk to people in the Big Ten. Or watch practice. Or go to a game. Or see the stadium. Or realize that in Minnesota, it is not -22F in March (hasn't said it but he probably thinks it)
Click to expand...

If he lived across the river in Indiana then he'd technically be in B1G country. It's not like he is in Siberia. He travels to practices in the Spring and Fall already. Being in Chicago means he might see a few more Northwestern practices, but that's about it (unless his bosses are planning to pay for a lot of midweek road trips during the season, something I doubt). Heck, Rittenburg lives in Chicago and he doesn't really travel for practices outside of the Spring and Fall. Both of them travel to cover various games. Chicago has 4 B1G schools within approx 185 miles. Louisville has 3 within approx 200 miles.

Bennett sucks as a columnist because he just plain sucks at understanding the B1G not because he lives in Louisville. If he bothered, he could learn plenty where he is.
 

popeyoung5 said:
Plus one....Use the BCS format. 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3, in the current bcs bowls, winners play one more game. If You finish #5 in the bcs poll, too bad.
Click to expand...

I still think the Voting BCS rankings blow, so they need a change (to what, I'm not sure).. but the 1v4/2v3 in a +1 format playoff is the ONLY playoff I'll be ok with in FBS football.
 

Formo said:
I still think the Voting BCS rankings blow, so they need a change (to what, I'm not sure)..
Click to expand...

3 easy changes that would make it better (or at least, more transparent):
1) No preseason polls. No polls at all until at least week 4.
2) All poll votes are completely public every week.
3) All computer voter formulas are published.
 

GoAUpher said:
3 easy changes that would make it better (or at least, more transparent):
1) No preseason polls. No polls at all until at least week 4.
2) All poll votes are completely public every week.
3) All computer voter formulas are published.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I think the pole votes absolutely should be public every week. That or just abolish them completely. Which is harsh, I know.. but then we'll know for SURE that teams won't be held down/propped up from voters who like/dislike them.

Then the BSU/TCU's of the college football world can't complain about being 'held back' from top 4 rankings.
 



Formo said:
but then we'll know for SURE that teams won't be held down/propped up from voters who like/dislike them.

Then the BSU/TCU's of the college football world can't complain about being 'held back' from top 4 rankings.
Click to expand...
Well, to be fair this can still happen. It just becomes less likely to happen or won't be so egregiously bad when it does. All depends on how much public pressure is brought to bear on the offenders.
 

Following the BCS system for a four team playoff would force the NC wannabees to stop scheduling cupcakes in their non-conference games. Nothing wrong with that.
 

I've always liked the idea of a final four ("plus one"); but not anything beyond that. But number 1 should play no. 3, no. 2 should play no. 4, probably in bowl games. The important thing is for the Big Ten to have the brains and guts to go to an East/West set-up. Michigan would play Ohio State for the East title rather than playing them two or even three times. Wisconsin should be in the West, obviously. With Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State and Ohio State in the east and Nebraska, Wisconsin and Iowa in the west, there is rough parity - with the possibility of either Minnesota or Illinois moving up near the top in the West. That is what it should have been in the first place.
 

GoAUpher said:
3 easy changes that would make it better (or at least, more transparent):
1) No preseason polls. No polls at all until at least week 4.
2) All poll votes are completely public every week.
3) All computer voter formulas are published.
Click to expand...

:clap: Hate the preseason polls. They absolutely influence the rankings later in the season.
 



popeyoung5 said:
Plus one....Use the BCS format. 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3, in the current bcs bowls, winners play one more game. If You finish #5 in the bcs poll, too bad.
Click to expand...

I agree with using the four major bowls to conduct the playoff. I'd prefer an 8-team playoff using those 4-bowl games. That said, a 4-team playoff is much better than the current system.
 

GophersInIowa said:
:clap: Hate the preseason polls. They absolutely influence the rankings later in the season.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more. let the talking heads come up with the preseason polls. they shouldn't have influence on the season. The Boise's of the world get screwed in this because even if they are undefeated starting out at #10 they can't jump the big boys 1-3. They started this year off really high, but still got screwed.
 

CrocShots said:
I couldn't agree more. let the talking heads come up with the preseason polls. they shouldn't have influence on the season. The Boise's of the world get screwed in this because even if they are undefeated starting out at #10 they can't jump the big boys 1-3. They started this year off really high, but still got screwed.
Click to expand...

Even if there are no pre-season polls, the voters are still drawing up a poll in their heads every week. One question is whether or not they are influenced by the other polls that are out there. Another question is whether or not they are biased in following polls to justify their earlier votes. But that could happen at any point.
 

Great Plains Gopher said:
...But number 1 should play no. 3, no. 2 should play no. 4...
Click to expand...

Wha? Why is that fair? The #2 team plays an arguably easier opponent? I am confused. This ain't the ABA (you'll have to look this one up).

GophersInIowa said:
:clap: Hate the preseason polls. They absolutely influence the rankings later in the season.
Click to expand...

No preseason polls would be fabulous, I like the first poll after week three, usually everyone has played a road game and likely another BCS opponent.
 

Given the scheduled opponents most teams play any ranking before week 5 is silly. Why should we have a ranking before week 5?
Only to pacify SEC fans. Everyone else could get used to rational thinking.
 

corcoran1 said:
Given the scheduled opponents most teams play any ranking before week 5 is silly. Why should we have a ranking before week 5?
Only to pacify SEC fans. Everyone else could get used to rational thinking.
Click to expand...

I just felt three was a good compromise. FYI, the SEC already has several conference games under its belt after three weeks, no one else matches that...
 

GoAUpher said:
3 easy changes that would make it better (or at least, more transparent):
1) No preseason polls. No polls at all until at least week 4.
2) All poll votes are completely public every week.
3) All computer voter formulas are published.
Click to expand...

The BCS does not have a preseason poll nor a poll at all until week 7 or 8. They do not control the AP, Coaches' Poll, etc.
 

Lakeville Goldy said:
The BCS does not have a preseason poll nor a poll at all until week 7 or 8. They do not control the AP, Coaches' Poll, etc.
Click to expand...

The Coach's Poll is part of the formula. Thus, the BCS has a poll that starts in the preseason. You are right that the Harris Poll waits, though not 7-8 weeks (it comes out after week 5). If they wanted the Coach's Poll to change, all they'd have to do is tell the CP that they won't be part of the formula unless they change the setup.
 

I've been pulling for the 4-team playoff for years. It only takes two consecutive weekends, and as someone mentioned above, if you didn't make it into the Top 4 in the BCS by the end of the year, try harder next year.
 

I can get on board with a 4 team playoff, but they still need to answer some questions, mostly regarding where they would play the semis. For all those saying "just rotate them amongst the BCS bowls," I ask if you've ever traveled to a bowl game, much less a BCS bowl game. I've been to many Gopher mid-tier bowl games and traveling costs a decent amount of money plus time required to take off of every day life. Also, BCS tickets are extremely expensive. Telling fans to do it two weeks in a row or two times in a three week span is going to be a very tough thing.

I do like that they're exploring all options and airing all concerns about proposed ideas. And I like that 8 & 16 team playoffs are pretty much dead on arrival....
 

It's going to be interesting to see how things shake out with the semis. It's likely about $3500-$7000 for an average fan to go to a major bowl game and a NCG. What's the % of the fans attending both games???

2011-12 College Football Bowls average ticket price incl. ticket services--
Tostitos BCS National Championship Game : Auburn Tigers vs. Oregon Ducks: $1185

Rose Bowl Game presented by Vizio : TCU Horned Frogs vs. Wisconsin Badgers: $521
AT&T Cotton Bowl Classic : Texas A&M Aggies vs. LSU Tigers: $425
Allstate Sugar Bowl : Ohio State Buckeyes vs. Arkansas Razorbacks: $370
Discover Orange Bowl : Stanford Cardinal vs. Virginia Tech Hokies: $238
Tostitos Fiesta Bowl : Oklahoma Sooners vs. Connecticut Huskies: $213
Ave for these five "other major bowls": $353

Add in $1500 for two separate flights and $1200 for six nights in a hotel (because that's what they charge for even crappy hotels), let alone food, cars, etc.
 

Eight-team playoff: the six BCS conference champions plus two. It's one week longer than a four-team playoff.

You earn your way there by winning your league. Think of what could've been the scenario last season if Georgia had beaten LSU in the SEC championship game. A team (Alabama) potentially goes to the national championship game without even qualifying for its conference championship game, while the conference champion (and possibly LSU, who beat Alabama at home to keep them out of the championship game) is out of the mix. Bama was better than Georgia, but how can you play in a national championship game when you can't win your league? And LSU is potentially hurt by qualifying for the conference championship while Bama is rewarded for sitting not making it.

In this case, Bama still would've made the eight-team playoff. But at least the SEC champion (in this made up scenario) would've been there, too.
 


GoAUpher said:
The Coach's Poll is part of the formula. Thus, the BCS has a poll that starts in the preseason. You are right that the Harris Poll waits, though not 7-8 weeks (it comes out after week 5). If they wanted the Coach's Poll to change, all they'd have to do is tell the CP that they won't be part of the formula unless they change the setup.
Click to expand...

Just for the record, the BCS itself only comes out with a rating at week 7 (Oct 16 last year).

http://www.footballfoundation.org/s...hort_release_10.16.11_week_1_kajefbialwnd.pdf

So you're saying because one piece of the BCS is around in the preseason that means it is a full fledged BCS ranking? Especially considering how common it is that the two don't match up, that makes no sense.

The BCS is a combination of Coaches', Harris and computer polls. Part of the reason the formulae for the computer polls aren't published is to prevent early statements of BCS ranking.

And yes, the BCS could theoretically quit using the Coaches' Poll, but then what would they use that would have the same credibility? And since ESPN owns the Coaches' Poll and pays the BCS millions of dollars for broadcast rights, I don't think the BCS can really push ESPN to quit publishing the rankings. And even if they did, there's still the AP and I'm sure if the Coaches' Poll waited until week 7 some other poll would come into existance to fill the void.

I really think the BCS has done enough by saying it will not issue a ranking until week 7.
 

Lakeville Goldy said:
Just for the record, the BCS itself only comes out with a rating at week 7 (Oct 16 last year).

http://www.footballfoundation.org/s...hort_release_10.16.11_week_1_kajefbialwnd.pdf
Click to expand...
Ah, misunderstood you comment and thought you were referring to the Harris Poll (when you meant the BCS rankings). Your use of the world poll instead of rankings confused me. :)

Lakeville Goldy said:
So you're saying because one piece of the BCS is around in the preseason that means it is a full fledged BCS ranking? Especially considering how common it is that the two don't match up, that makes no sense.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying that the Coaches Poll is the same as the BCS Rankings. As I said, my comments were based on a misunderstanding of your intent.

Lakeville Goldy said:
The BCS is a combination of Coaches', Harris and computer polls.
Click to expand...
That's my point though. 1/3rd of the ranking is based on a poll that includes a worthless preseason ranking that stacks the deck against any school that doesn't start the season in the Top 10. Since this annual preseason ranking is often flawed, making it difficult or impossible to overcome that Top 10 burden should be avoided. There is a reason they delay the Harris Poll until week 5.

Lakeville Goldy said:
Part of the reason the formulae for the computer polls aren't published is to prevent early statements of BCS ranking.
Click to expand...
That already happens. There are several websites that are able to pretty accurately forecast the BCS rankings early in the season. Making the ratings formula transparent won't change the fact that there is only 1 official ranking. It's not like these are nuclear launch codes.

Lakeville Goldy said:
And yes, the BCS could theoretically quit using the Coaches' Poll, but then what would they use that would have the same credibility?
Click to expand...
It could do several things, but the most likely would simply be to tweak the formula to account for just the Harris Poll. Perhaps this would force them to pick Harris voters who aren't idiots.

Lakeville Goldy said:
And since ESPN owns the Coaches' Poll and pays the BCS millions of dollars for broadcast rights, I don't think the BCS can really push ESPN to quit publishing the rankings. And even if they did, there's still the AP and I'm sure if the Coaches' Poll waited until week 7 some other poll would come into existance to fill the void.
Click to expand...
Um no. ESPN dropped out of it's co-sponsorsip (with USA Today) of the Coaches' Poll in 2005. It's just the USA Today Coaches' Poll now. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coaches'_Poll#College_football

Lakeville Goldy said:
I really think the BCS has done enough by saying it will not issue a ranking until week 7.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to disagree.
 

Lakeville Goldy said:
And even if they did, there's still the AP and I'm sure if the Coaches' Poll waited until week 7 some other poll would come into existance to fill the void.
Click to expand...
Wanted to expand on this point because I realized I didn't respond to the end of your comment here. I'm not saying having the Coaches' Poll wait 4 or 5 weeks to publish is a silver bullet solution. Obviously there is still an AP poll coming out, the Blog Nation polls, ESPN Power Rankings, etc. But it's pretty clear that there is a "follow the conventional wisdom" effect that takes place in how many rankings/polls get created. If you wait until week 4 or 5 to release a poll you at least give the possibility of voters thinking things through somewhat independently a chance rather than sticking with currently flawed system. And if it changes nothing then waiting until week 4 hasn't hurt anything either. It's not like fans won't have any preseason/early season rankings to debate with the CP holding off. And if it does improve things, even a little, then that's a good thing.

Unless you have another negative you can see that comes with holding off on the poll.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom