It would be a shame if I didn't stop to praise the Michigan men's basketball squad for their great win over the weekend. Not only did they top #4 ranked Duke, but this marks the 2nd win against a top 5 opponent this season. The other victory coming against UCLA a few weeks ago. I watched the whole game Saturday afternoon...which is an accomplishment for me since I rarely get into basketball.
But the scene and excitement at Crisler Arena was palpable. That was maybe the best that arena has looked in years. They surely took advantage of the national spotlight. Michigan was the focus of the whole ESPN broadcast. From the pre-game locker room speech, to the focus on Michigan players throughout the game...it was clear ESPN was very happy to see a Michigan team be competitive again. As I'm sure Michigan fans were as well. What a great win for this squad.
Maybe this game is a sign of things to come for this guy and his program that plays in the stadium next door???Speaking of college football...
Did anyone notice Texas get royally screwed this weekend? I'm not a college football expert, and I'm surely not a pollster. But if I were, Texas would've got my vote for the BCS title game against Florida.
Actually, let me think. If it were up to me, I probably wouldn't have picked Florida either.
Texas finished the season 11-1. Oklahoma finished 11-1. They both had the same conference record. How does it make any sense that Texas beat Oklahoma straight up, head-to-head, and Oklahoma gets the nod to play in the Big 12 Championship? Can someone please explain this to me.
I'm a pretty smart person. And I am consistently dumbfounded by the BCS system. To me, all the BCS does is make the other bowl games irrelevant. It doesn't provide a better way of deciding who's #1 and who's #2. The bowl coalition that was done away with in 1998 wasn't any better, but at least the other bowls had meaning. At this point, who cares that Penn State is going to play USC in the Rose Bowl. That game is totally meaningless in the BCS system.
And to me, that is a shame. It's like having a NCAA basketball tournament with 64 teams, but only game really matters.
We need a playoff. We need it now. If for no other reason that I can legitimately see maybe 6 teams that could make a run at the title.
Here's how an MBN playoff system would work...
8 teams. 1-8 seeds. Keep the bowl games intact, and use them as sites for the first and second rounds.
December 25, 2008
Capital One Bowl (#1 vs. #8): Oklahoma vs. Penn State
Sugar Bowl (#4 vs. #5): Alabama vs. USC
December 26, 2008
Orange Bowl (#3 vs. #6): Texas vs. Utah
Cotton Bowl (#2 vs. #7): Florida vs. Texas Tech
January 1, 2009
Rose Bowl (1/8 winner vs. 4/5 winner)
Fiesta (3/6 winner vs. 2/7 winner)
January 8, 2009
BCS Championship (Rose winner vs. Fiesta winner)
How hard is that? I think those first round games look a helluva lot better to me that anything we have to look forward to this bowl season.
The key to this system is keeping the existing bowls in-tact, and make them meaningful again. Dates could be adjusted, but I like the idea of having as many bowl games as possible on holidays. I'm just like that I guess.
More to come soon, including a look at how bad the Big Ten will do this year in their bowl games.
Here's your explanation: Texas beat Oklahoma early in the year. Texas lost to Texas Tech three weeks ago, by one point. One week later, Oklahoma scored more than 60 points on Texas Tech and beat them by more than 40. A week later, Oklahoma beat Oklahoma State by a large margin, again scoring over 60 and winning by 20. Actually, Oklahoma has scored 60 or more in there last five games. Texas just hasn't shown as much domination offensively or defensively.
ReplyDeleteIt definitely, is a close call, but if you've watched the Oklahoma the last few weeks, you can not deny they belong in the championship game.
Ahh, but yes I can. Texas beat then #1 Oklahoma 45-35 on a neutral field.
ReplyDeleteI've never subscribed to the argument...
team A beats team B
team B beats team C
team C beats team A
...and now all of the sudden team B is now magically better than team A. It's doesn't work like that.
Head-to-head matchups are how college football should be governed. Not this mythical math that somehow there can be an equation that says Oklahoma is better than Texas.
They're not. I watched it. The scoreboard said 45-35.
Now, can someone else please explain this to me?