What The New York Giants Say About The BCS

by Joel Hollingsworth on Jan 27, 2012 10:00 AM EST in Rocky Top Talking Points

Michael Conroy - AP

29 days ago: Roman numerals for Super bowl XLVI frame the Soldiers and Sailors Monument at Monument Circle as preparations continue for Super Bowl XLVI NFL football game in downtown Indianapolis, Wednesday, Jan. 25, 2012. The New England Patriots will face the New York Giants on Feb. 5. (AP Photo/Michael Conroy)

This again. Dr. Saturday takes on the most stubborn of counters to the argument that college football needs a playoff, prompted by the problem actually manifesting in the current NFL playoffs in the form of the arguably subpar New York Giants going to the Super Bowl. Matt attempts to split the difference by lowering the bar to allow "worthy" teams in but raising the bar to include only those "worthy" teams. Sounds to me, though, that although that may mitigate the "hot team" problem a bit, it doesn't eliminate it altogether. No, I think Hooper has it right. We just need to acknowledge that the two systems are designed to do different things. The BCS attempts to find the best team. Playoffs and tournaments attempt to find a champion. The latter succeeds in that a winner is clear and a champion is crowned, and as long as "champion" isn't confused with "best team," all is well. The former system is almost always going to be up for debate no matter what you do. And isn't that part of the fun?

We'd take that. Cuonzo Martin hopes that the lesson Jarnell Stokes learned at the knee of Vandy's Festus Ezeli on Tuesday will pay dividends much the same way certain turnover-happy games did for Glen Robinson back in the day.

Phoning it in? Tennessee's new special teams coordinator Charlie Coiner apparently has an app for that, which is cool because ease of installation is key this season.

Where is he now? The TFP catches up with Phillip Fulmer, who seems to be comfortable with his current station in life.

Brian's right. Attendance must be a nationwide epidemic if Duke can't sell its student tickets to basketball games.

0 recs | 22 comments

Comments

The playoff story is another good example, to me

of why a CFB playoff cannot be more than eight teams. You cannot allow the phrase “Oh well, we’ll still make the playoffs” to enter our vocabulary on fall Saturdays. Wins and losses must still mean everything every week.

Will Shelton - January 27, 2012 reply

Picture this:

the SEC has two teams in the top 4 – one in the East and one in the West. Win or lose the SECCG, both teams are in an 8-team playoff, guaranteed.

…Would you play to win the SECCG or pull starters and avoid injury risks for the playoff? (Or, similarly, would you play the SECCG as a tune-up for the playoff?) What would be the playoff payout tipping point to change the decision?

David Hooper - January 27, 2012 reply

Or:

Alabama ranked at 1 or 2. Auburn unranked. Iron Bowl weekend. Alabama doesn’t need the win and is assured a slot in the SECCG. Auburn has nothing to gain either, other than in-state pride. Assume that Auburn has a couple players in the fine Auburn tradition of Pugh and Fairley.

Do you play to avoid injuries? Is there a point where the Iron Bowl becomes less important than the SECCG and playoff hopes? Or do you roll (Tide) the dice and hope it all works out?

David Hooper - January 27, 2012 reply

ask LSU what a team in that situation would do

(answer: beat the [Fulmerized] out of Georgia)

Incipient_Senescence - January 27, 2012 reply

Well- in '09 when #1 FL lost to #2 Bama they dropped to 5th

So even assuming there’s no NFL-style homefield advantage/bye-week in the playoff first-round, there’d still be a lot to play for seeding-wise (though that year FL in a presumptive #4 vs. #5 playoff seeding would have played #4 Cincy first round, who they ended up whipping in their bowl, instead of #8 Ohio State, for whatever that’s worth)

_trey_ - January 27, 2012 reply

Home field advantage in the first round

Then a Final Four at the same location on consecutive weeks. I think that would help keep everyone honest if two elite teams met in their conference title game.

Will Shelton - January 27, 2012 reply

It can't be more than 4, IMO

kidbourbon - January 28, 2012 via iPhone app reply

Agreed

Especially if the SEC were guaranteed 2 spots in the playoff. it’s the only way to ‘fairly’ rank

falconnuke - January 29, 2012 reply

If you really want the most logical system...

… the Premiere League round-robin/points system seems to make the most sense. Add up the points at the end of the season and hand out the trophy. I’ve always thought that was lamely rational. The hubris of inventing a ridiculously self-aggrandizing game that is simultaneously the most litigious in the world (who else spends 20 minutes a game waiting on ‘booth reviews’?) and also preposterously, structurally unfair is something peculiarly American. Run with it.

_trey_ - January 27, 2012 reply

That's partly why poll championships used to be awarded prior to bowl season.

That, and bowl games were originally seen more as exhibition matches for the holiday season.

But the only real issue with a point system for college is the lack of completeness of the games played. I.e. that you have 120ish teams playing 12 games, where pro leagues have more games than teams.

David Hooper - January 27, 2012 reply

Oh, don't get me wrong

I think a point system would be awful, and totally unworkable in the FBS. My point is that the BCS and the NFL playoffs are inherently unfair, and really more about tacking a ‘thrilling conclusion’ narrative onto the regular reason than finding out who is the ‘best’ (whatever that means). Which is a great thing, in its way. So I’d say the problem with the BCS isn’t that it’s unfair (which is very true) or doesn’t award the best team (which is debatable), it’s that it doesn’t maximize the drama like the NFL playoffs/Superbowl system.

_trey_ - January 27, 2012 reply