Showing posts with label Big 10. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Big 10. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Warp Speed, Scotty!

I’m already sick of hearing how the SEC is light-years (as in the top speed of SEC defensive linemen) better than the Big Ten because Florida beat Ohio State in the BCS Championship. The only thing that game proves is that Florida was better than Ohio State on January 8, 2007.

If people are going to point to the results of bowl games as an indicator of the relative strength of conferences, shouldn’t they include all the bowl games played between the two conferences? Including Florida’s victory, the SEC was 1-2 versus the Big 10. Yeah, they’re definitely a better conference.

It seems like the mainstream media would have us believe that kids in the South are genetically programmed to grow up faster than kids in the Midwest, and kids in the Midwest are genetically programmed to grow up bigger and stronger than kids in the South. Yes, I know that programs recruit countrywide, but these maps (HT: The Wizard of Odds) show that Florida and Ohio State, at least, get most of their talent regionally, just like the Trojans, who enroll a handful of recruits every year from across the country, but fill the vast majority of their roster with players from California and other western states. Maybe Urban Meyer is recruiting players from Alpha Centauri.

I am no partisan of either the Big 10 or the SEC. It just annoys me when the media delivers shoddy analysis and expects their audience to accept it without question.

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

I'm Ready

After watching last night’s BCS “national championship” game, and feeling very little surprise at the outcome, I’m finally ready for a playoff in NCAA Division 1-A college football.

Until now, I have not been in favor of a playoff. If I had my way, we would throw out the BCS and all related formats and return to the pre-Bowl Coalition/Alliance days. Bowls could invite whichever teams they wanted and form any deals that suited their interests with the conferences. I would be satisfied if the Trojans’ annual goal was simply to win the Pac-10 and go pummel some unlucky Big Ten team in the Rose Bowl on New Year’s Day (that’s all the Trojans have control over now anyway). Of course, that would require acknowledging that the Div. 1 national championship is truly “mythical”, something that the vast majority of college football fans seem unwilling to do. Since the likelihood of this scenario occurring is extremely low, having a playoff is a much better alternative than the ridiculous BCS.

Before bowl season started, I was relatively confident (25 of 32 confidence points, if you're interested) that Ohio State would beat Florida handily. That changed when I watched the Rose Bowl. The beat-down suffered by Michigan at the hands of USC led me to question the strength of the upper echelon of the Big 10, and therefore the superiority of Ohio State, a notion the mainstream media had presented as canon for almost the entire season. Time and again the bowls have demonstrated that a team’s performance in its conference is not predictive of its performance against teams from other conferences in bowl games. The underdog has won four of the last five BCS championship games. Hence my underwhelming surprise at Florida’s victory last night. Only a playoff system guaranteeing match-ups between different conference champions would provide a true national champion.

Limit playoff participants to the six major conference champions plus two at-large teams. Have a committee select the at-large teams and seed all eight teams using a BCS-like formula as a guide or something simpler like the college basketball ratings percentage index (RPI).

I guess you could say this change in attitude was partly provoked by selfishness. After watching how USC played against Michigan and Florida played against Ohio State, I would have loved to see USC take on Florida. The Trojans would have been tough to beat. But who knows; maybe LSU would have taken the title this year. Or Boise State. Obviously, you’d have to say Florida would be the favorites after last night.

I figure if a playoff had been in place for the last five years, the Trojans could have two more national championships. Over the past five years, USC under Pete Carroll has demonstrated a talent for performing very well in big games, especially against teams from other conferences. Aside from this year, USC was playing at the highest level in the country when they beat Iowa in the 2003 Orange Bowl. They would have made a playoff that year as an at-large team.

By the way, no way is the team that got its ass handed to it last night in the desert anywhere close to the second-best team in the country.

Congratulations Gators!

Friday, December 16, 2005

The Round Robin Rocks

I want to go on record as being very excited about the Pac-10's new conference scheduling format starting next year. The Pac-10 almost immediately approved a full round robin format after the 12-game football season was made permanent by the NCAA. For some reason, I don't think the average non-Pac-10 fan is aware of the change, as demonstrated in this letter: "I say the Big XII, SEC, and now the ACC are determining conference champions the right way. On the field. The PAC 10, and Big 10 +1 need to take notice." To credit Pete Fiutak, in his response to the letter he states he supports the Pac-10 plan. It’s not the Pac-10 that needs to take notice, but rather the 12-team mega-conferences and especially the Big 10.

In the Pac-10, there will never again be conference co-champions that did not play each other, such as Big-10 champs Iowa and Ohio State in 2002, necessitating the existence of convoluted rules to determine the conference's Rose Bowl/BCS representative. Also, the Pac-10 will have no need for a conference championship game. Every team will play nine conference games and there is no risk of crowning a team with a lesser conference record the conference champion based on one very good or bad game, á la Big 12 champs Kansas State in 2003 or ACC champs Florida State this year.

The system is good for USC because it allows the Trojans to continue their annual contest with Notre Dame, play another big-name school in non-conference play (Nebraska in 2006 and 2007, Ohio State in 2008 and 2009), and play one other relatively easier non-conference game, in addition to their nine game conference schedule.