For the first time since George Washington and John Adams played a game of one-on-one in the front yard, a team (Washington) wins a major conference regular season league championship - and doesn't get into the NCAA tournament. While it is tough to argue for the Huskies inclusion based on the numbers used by the committee, it is much easier and probably intellectually right to argue that the formula, and numbers used by the committee are flawed and need to be overhauled before this all gets out of hand. Maybe it is too late.
It wouldn't be a stretch to think that Larry Scott has some brilliant mathematician fresh out of Stanford behind the curtain working on a formula to show the current RPI/SOS/RVT100, or whatever, system is out of date and flawed. Really, why should Oregon State's loss to Idaho in early December, or USC's terrible season impact whether Washington makes it to the NCAA tournament?
What ever happened to the idea that what you did in your league mattered? It HAS to matter for the viability of programs spending two million a year for head coaches and maintaining large arenas.
Just because the MLB American League West champion this year is likely to be a dog, does that mean that team shouldn't be in the playoffs? Same could be said for the NFL, NHL, or any other pro sports league on the planet. Apply the NCAA method to the MLB playoffs, and you'd have some committee with computer rankings determining who'd be in the playoffs? Fans wouldn't stand for that for even a second.
This is not a defense of the Pac-12, which would require a team of the most brilliant spin lawyers in America this year to make the case, but this is a defense of the regular league season, which is losing (has lost?) all importance. Washington's win over California should count more than their win over Yahoo State, but right now no extra weight is applied to anything a team does in their league - especially when the rest of the teams in the league play like garbage in November and December and can't change their computer ranking for the next three months..
Being a member of the six major conferences must mean something. The new CBS NCAA basketball contract doesn't pay 11 BILLION over 14 years because of the value VCU and Iona brings. They pay it because of Syracuse, Kentucky, North Carolina, et al..and even for teams that don't necessarily make it in the tournament every year, like Arizona and UCLA. So why should minor and mid major conference teams get half of the spots in the tournament? Do the rich get richer? Yes. The rich are the ones that created the money in the first place. Allowing so many mid major and minor league teams into the tournament may be fun as we look for the random upset on the opening weekend, but it is a form of sports socialism at its finest.
NCAA basketball is creating a system where the regular season is meaningless. Already, it is that way for most minor or mid major team in America as all that matters is winning the conference tournament. Since when did three games in three days become more important than 30 games in three months?
Take the top half of the teams from the six major conferences and put them in, plus allow a committee to select a few wildcards. Take the division IA teams and make them play each other to get in the big tournament. Allow a committee to seed teams, but not select more than half of the field on some formula developed by some computer hacker in his mom's basement.
Yes the tournament is fantastic, but the void in the previous four months is growing exponentially, especially when a team like Washington who won a major conference is left at home. From a revenue perspective, getting that cash from the CBS contract is great, but at what cost as attendance falls off a cliff because fans finally start to wake up and realize that every game they are going to - and spending for - doesn't really matter.
Take a page from the pro sports leagues, if the NFC West is down in any given year, too bad.. they won their division and that alone guarantees a spot in the playoffs. It's a pretty simple, so why does the NCAA have to make it all so complicated.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Fixing the BCS - It Is Within Reach
By Joe Giansante,
Joe is a former Sr. Associate Athletic Director at the University of Oregon now working in private business in San Diego. He has also spent 20-years in television sports as a manager, nightly sportscaster and play-by-play announcer for various networks. He oversaw media, tv and radio contracts, multi-media rights and merchandising contracts, as well as marketing and brand management at Oregon.
Oklahoma State 2011, meet Oregon 2001. Its simply amazing that 10 years later the same discussions, disgust and distaste are rampant with the BCS after a selection that puts a team that didn't qualify for their conference championship game in the national championship game.
How many times have we been here before?
The most egregious BCS snub of the last 10 years has to be from 2001. It is oft-forgotten, but shouldn't be as this year's calamity could have been avoided if those in charge had acted on the injustice then.
Remember? Nebraska had just been blown off the field by Colorado in a game that determined the Big-12 championship. Both polls, the coach's poll and the AP poll listed Miami #1 and Oregon #2. When the computer polls weighed in...somehow they found a way to override the results on the field and lifted Nebraska into the #2 spot despite not winning the title game. It is the first and only time a team ranked 2nd in both polls didn't play for the national title. Of course, Nebraska went on to get demolished by Miami in the Rose Bowl, as Oregon did the same to Colorado in the Fiesta Bowl.
One of the pillars of the BCS system is the mantra that "every game counts".. right now, that isn't true. The fix seems so simple to fans and others in the media, but they fail to take into consideration the longstanding relationships the bowls have with conferences, university presidents and others. ESPN has certainly applied pressure in the past, and is again to find a way to get a true national champion - which will happen. But what formula is ultimately picked is likely to bring its own set of controversy to the process.
So in an effort to look at the solution, its important to throw off the table what WON"T happen under any circumstance. Wasted time working on solutions that have too much red tape and contractual stickiness in front of it only prevents us from getting to the desired spot.
A full playoff with 32 teams WON'T happen. Too many presidents like sending their teams to bowl games, its good exposure, good for donors, and the student athletes, etc. Using the existing minor bowls won't happen either, as the sponsors have no interest in it, nor do the leagues and lower division schools that profit from these games.
A "plus one" with four seeded teams won't work either and will be dead on arrival because of the current bowl structure, as the BCS bowls that are left out certainly will not agree to it. As will an eight team seeded playoff using the four major bowls in which teams are selected using the same criteria as we have now. Several influential people at ESPN are in favor of this, including Kirk Herbstreit. Simply put, the Pac-12 and the Big 10 will not go for anything that eliminates the Rose Bowl from their mostly annual tradition. Not to mention that solution still keeps the process in the hands of computers and voters and off of the actual results on the field.
To fix the system one fundamental principle must be accepted; that being a league champion in a BCS conference is the most critical component to be selected for any "playoff". I'm not sure why that is so novel, ALL other leagues place their league and division champions in the playoffs. Here's how it should and can work:
The solution sits easily if conference commissioners can push that their league championships, like in every other sport, do in fact mean something- but this must come from the conference commissioners who wield great power. To retain a regular season that means something and to mitigate scheduling your way to the BCS, as is done now, rewarding the six major conference champions and two at-large teams with BCS games is the only way to accomplish all the goals and deliver us a champion.
In this plan, the Pac-12 champion would ALWAYS meet the Big 12 champion in the Rose Bowl. That takes care of the issue with those two conferences which should not be underestimated. The Big12 Champion plays an at-large in the Fiesta Bowl, The SEC champion plays an at-large in the Sugar Bowl , and the Big East champion plays the ACC champion in the Orange Bowl. Sounds like 1985 right? All of the traditional bowl ties have been re-established here. Conference champions, like in other sports, make the playoff. Two others who are deserving are afforded the opportunity as "wild cards" selected by the human polls.
Now, here is how you get a real champion and where the seeding comes in. AFTER these games are played, the four winners are seeded with 1 playing 4 and 2 playing 3 in a double header the next week on January 8th as a "final four" in the same location, which rotates every year. Then on January 22nd the two winners play in Dallas or a rotating site, like the Super Bowl is played, and we have a true national champion.
Three extra games. Four Teams. It is that simple.
This minimizes lost class time, and continues to keep kids on campus during school, so that argument against doesn't work The revenue generated from a final four day and a championship game should approach, or even exceed $200 million, which could be used in a variety of ways to fund scholarships, post graduate support, title ix enhancements, etc.
And here is how it potentially could save college football, and many athletic department budgets through early game payments, ticket sales, etc... It encourages teams to schedule important non-conference games that people want to see, rather than the current system or a seeded system which discourages it. (think Oregon vs. LSU this year.. where would Oregon be if they had scheduled New Mexico State instead of LSU? - maybe in the title game). A seeded 8 team playoff will ruin the entire month of September for college football with a steady stream of California vs. Cal Poly or Stanford vs. Samford.
It is simply four teams for one more week..two teams for two weeks. Right now, the championship game is on January 9th. Extending for an additional week or two fills a gap before the Super Bowl and would be fantastic.
In this scenario, everyone gets what they want. As a bonus, the big bowls which have enormous power are actually ENHANCED by the fact that they actually mean something. The traditions that are so important stay in-tact, and we get a true national champion.
Hopefully this is the direction college football moves after the current deal is done in two years, because really its the only system that serves all entities.
Would certainly enjoy hearing your thoughts or debate points, just click comment below.
Joe is a former Sr. Associate Athletic Director at the University of Oregon now working in private business in San Diego. He has also spent 20-years in television sports as a manager, nightly sportscaster and play-by-play announcer for various networks. He oversaw media, tv and radio contracts, multi-media rights and merchandising contracts, as well as marketing and brand management at Oregon.
Oklahoma State 2011, meet Oregon 2001. Its simply amazing that 10 years later the same discussions, disgust and distaste are rampant with the BCS after a selection that puts a team that didn't qualify for their conference championship game in the national championship game.
How many times have we been here before?
The most egregious BCS snub of the last 10 years has to be from 2001. It is oft-forgotten, but shouldn't be as this year's calamity could have been avoided if those in charge had acted on the injustice then.
Remember? Nebraska had just been blown off the field by Colorado in a game that determined the Big-12 championship. Both polls, the coach's poll and the AP poll listed Miami #1 and Oregon #2. When the computer polls weighed in...somehow they found a way to override the results on the field and lifted Nebraska into the #2 spot despite not winning the title game. It is the first and only time a team ranked 2nd in both polls didn't play for the national title. Of course, Nebraska went on to get demolished by Miami in the Rose Bowl, as Oregon did the same to Colorado in the Fiesta Bowl.
One of the pillars of the BCS system is the mantra that "every game counts".. right now, that isn't true. The fix seems so simple to fans and others in the media, but they fail to take into consideration the longstanding relationships the bowls have with conferences, university presidents and others. ESPN has certainly applied pressure in the past, and is again to find a way to get a true national champion - which will happen. But what formula is ultimately picked is likely to bring its own set of controversy to the process.
So in an effort to look at the solution, its important to throw off the table what WON"T happen under any circumstance. Wasted time working on solutions that have too much red tape and contractual stickiness in front of it only prevents us from getting to the desired spot.
A full playoff with 32 teams WON'T happen. Too many presidents like sending their teams to bowl games, its good exposure, good for donors, and the student athletes, etc. Using the existing minor bowls won't happen either, as the sponsors have no interest in it, nor do the leagues and lower division schools that profit from these games.
A "plus one" with four seeded teams won't work either and will be dead on arrival because of the current bowl structure, as the BCS bowls that are left out certainly will not agree to it. As will an eight team seeded playoff using the four major bowls in which teams are selected using the same criteria as we have now. Several influential people at ESPN are in favor of this, including Kirk Herbstreit. Simply put, the Pac-12 and the Big 10 will not go for anything that eliminates the Rose Bowl from their mostly annual tradition. Not to mention that solution still keeps the process in the hands of computers and voters and off of the actual results on the field.
To fix the system one fundamental principle must be accepted; that being a league champion in a BCS conference is the most critical component to be selected for any "playoff". I'm not sure why that is so novel, ALL other leagues place their league and division champions in the playoffs. Here's how it should and can work:
The solution sits easily if conference commissioners can push that their league championships, like in every other sport, do in fact mean something- but this must come from the conference commissioners who wield great power. To retain a regular season that means something and to mitigate scheduling your way to the BCS, as is done now, rewarding the six major conference champions and two at-large teams with BCS games is the only way to accomplish all the goals and deliver us a champion.
In this plan, the Pac-12 champion would ALWAYS meet the Big 12 champion in the Rose Bowl. That takes care of the issue with those two conferences which should not be underestimated. The Big12 Champion plays an at-large in the Fiesta Bowl, The SEC champion plays an at-large in the Sugar Bowl , and the Big East champion plays the ACC champion in the Orange Bowl. Sounds like 1985 right? All of the traditional bowl ties have been re-established here. Conference champions, like in other sports, make the playoff. Two others who are deserving are afforded the opportunity as "wild cards" selected by the human polls.
Now, here is how you get a real champion and where the seeding comes in. AFTER these games are played, the four winners are seeded with 1 playing 4 and 2 playing 3 in a double header the next week on January 8th as a "final four" in the same location, which rotates every year. Then on January 22nd the two winners play in Dallas or a rotating site, like the Super Bowl is played, and we have a true national champion.
Three extra games. Four Teams. It is that simple.
This minimizes lost class time, and continues to keep kids on campus during school, so that argument against doesn't work The revenue generated from a final four day and a championship game should approach, or even exceed $200 million, which could be used in a variety of ways to fund scholarships, post graduate support, title ix enhancements, etc.
And here is how it potentially could save college football, and many athletic department budgets through early game payments, ticket sales, etc... It encourages teams to schedule important non-conference games that people want to see, rather than the current system or a seeded system which discourages it. (think Oregon vs. LSU this year.. where would Oregon be if they had scheduled New Mexico State instead of LSU? - maybe in the title game). A seeded 8 team playoff will ruin the entire month of September for college football with a steady stream of California vs. Cal Poly or Stanford vs. Samford.
It is simply four teams for one more week..two teams for two weeks. Right now, the championship game is on January 9th. Extending for an additional week or two fills a gap before the Super Bowl and would be fantastic.
In this scenario, everyone gets what they want. As a bonus, the big bowls which have enormous power are actually ENHANCED by the fact that they actually mean something. The traditions that are so important stay in-tact, and we get a true national champion.
Hopefully this is the direction college football moves after the current deal is done in two years, because really its the only system that serves all entities.
Would certainly enjoy hearing your thoughts or debate points, just click comment below.
Monday, December 5, 2011
BCS Delivers Disatisfaction Again - Here's the Solution.
By Joe Giansante,
Joe is a former Sr. Associate Athletic Director at the University of Oregon now working in private business in San Diego. He has also spent 20-years in television sports as a manager, nightly sportscaster and play-by-play announcer for various networks. He oversaw media, tv and radio contracts, multi-media rights and merchandising contracts, as well as marketing and brand management at Oregon.
Oklahoma State 2011, meet Oregon 2001. Its simply amazing that 10 years later the same discussions, disgust and distaste are rampant with the BCS after a selection that puts a team that didn't qualify for their conference championship game in the national championship game.
How many times have we been here before?
The most egregious BCS snub of the last 10 years has to be from 2001. It is oft-forgotten, but shouldn't be as this year's calamity could have been avoided if those in charge had acted on the injustice then.
Remember? Nebraska had just been blown off the field by Colorado in a game that determined the Big-12 championship. Both polls, the coach's poll and the AP poll listed Miami #1 and Oregon #2. When the computer polls weighed in...somehow they found a way to override the results on the field and lifted Nebraska into the #2 spot despite not winning the title game. It is the first and only time a team ranked 2nd in both polls didn't play for the national title. Of course, Nebraska went on to get demolished by Miami in the Rose Bowl, as Oregon did the same to Colorado in the Fiesta Bowl.
One of the pillars of the BCS system is the mantra that "every game counts".. right now, that isn't true. The fix seems so simple to fans and others in the media, but they fail to take into consideration the longstanding relationships the bowls have with conferences, university presidents and others. ESPN has certainly applied pressure in the past, and is again to find a way to get a true national champion - which will happen. But what formula picked is ultimately picked is likely to bring its own set of controversy to the process.
So in an effort to look at the solution, its important to throw off the table what WON"T happen under any circumstance. Wasted time working on solutions that have too much red tape and contractual stickiness in front of it only prevents us from getting to the desired spot.
A full playoff with 32 teams WON'T happen. Too many presidents like sending their teams to bowl games, its good exposure, good for donors, and the student athletes, etc. Using the existing minor bowls won't happen either, as the sponsors have not interest in it, nor do the leagues that profit from these games.
A plus one with four seeded teams won't work either and will be dead on arrival because of the current bowl structure, as the bowls certainly will not agree to it. As will an eight team seeded playoff using the four major bowls in which teams are selected using the same criteria as we have now. Several influential people at ESPN are in favor of this. Simply put, the Pac-12 and the Big 10 will not go for anything that eliminates the Rose Bowl from their mostly annual tradition.
Here's how it should and can work:
The solution sits easily if conference commissioners can push that their league championships, like in every other sport, mean something. To retain a regular season that means something and to mitigate scheduling your way to the BCS, as is done now, rewarding the six major conference champions and two at-large teams with BCS games is the only way to accomplish all the goals and deliver us a champion.
In this plan, the Pac-12 champion would ALWAYS meet the Big 12 champion in the Rose Bowl. That takes care of the issue with those two conferences which should not be underestimated. The Big12 Champion plays an at-large in the Fiesta Bowl, The SEC champion plays an at-large in the Sugar Bowl , and the Big East champion plays the ACC champion in the Orange Bowl. Sounds like 1975 right? All of the traditional bowl ties have been re-established here. Conference champions, like in other sports, make the playoff. Two others who are deserving are afforded the opportunity. Now, here is where the seeding comes in. AFTER these games are played, the four winners are seeded with 1 playing 4 and 2 playing 3 in a double header the next week on January 8th in a final four in the same location. Then on January 22nd the two winners play in Dallas or a rotating site, like the Super Bowl is played, and we have a true national champion.
Three extra games. Four Teams.
This minimizes lost class time, and continues to keep kids on campus during school, so that argument against doesn't work The revenue generated from a final four day and a championship game should approach $200 million, which could be used in a variety of ways to fund scholarships, post graduate support, title ix enhancements, etc. It encourages teams to schedule important non-conference games that people want to see, rather than the current system or a seeded system which discourages it. (think Oregon vs. LSU this year.. where would Oregon be if they had scheduled New Mexico State instead of LSU? - maybe in the title game).
It is simply four teams for one more week..two teams for two weeks. Right now, the championship game is on January 9th. Extending for an additional week or two fills a gap before the Super Bowl and would be fantastic.
In this scenario, everyone gets what they want. As a bonus, the big bowls which have enormous power are actually ENHANCED by the fact that they actually mean something. The traditions that are so important stay in-tact, and we get a true national champion.
Hopefully this is the direction college football moves after the current deal is done in two years, because really its the only system that serves all entities.
Joe is a former Sr. Associate Athletic Director at the University of Oregon now working in private business in San Diego. He has also spent 20-years in television sports as a manager, nightly sportscaster and play-by-play announcer for various networks. He oversaw media, tv and radio contracts, multi-media rights and merchandising contracts, as well as marketing and brand management at Oregon.
Oklahoma State 2011, meet Oregon 2001. Its simply amazing that 10 years later the same discussions, disgust and distaste are rampant with the BCS after a selection that puts a team that didn't qualify for their conference championship game in the national championship game.
How many times have we been here before?
The most egregious BCS snub of the last 10 years has to be from 2001. It is oft-forgotten, but shouldn't be as this year's calamity could have been avoided if those in charge had acted on the injustice then.
Remember? Nebraska had just been blown off the field by Colorado in a game that determined the Big-12 championship. Both polls, the coach's poll and the AP poll listed Miami #1 and Oregon #2. When the computer polls weighed in...somehow they found a way to override the results on the field and lifted Nebraska into the #2 spot despite not winning the title game. It is the first and only time a team ranked 2nd in both polls didn't play for the national title. Of course, Nebraska went on to get demolished by Miami in the Rose Bowl, as Oregon did the same to Colorado in the Fiesta Bowl.
One of the pillars of the BCS system is the mantra that "every game counts".. right now, that isn't true. The fix seems so simple to fans and others in the media, but they fail to take into consideration the longstanding relationships the bowls have with conferences, university presidents and others. ESPN has certainly applied pressure in the past, and is again to find a way to get a true national champion - which will happen. But what formula picked is ultimately picked is likely to bring its own set of controversy to the process.
So in an effort to look at the solution, its important to throw off the table what WON"T happen under any circumstance. Wasted time working on solutions that have too much red tape and contractual stickiness in front of it only prevents us from getting to the desired spot.
A full playoff with 32 teams WON'T happen. Too many presidents like sending their teams to bowl games, its good exposure, good for donors, and the student athletes, etc. Using the existing minor bowls won't happen either, as the sponsors have not interest in it, nor do the leagues that profit from these games.
A plus one with four seeded teams won't work either and will be dead on arrival because of the current bowl structure, as the bowls certainly will not agree to it. As will an eight team seeded playoff using the four major bowls in which teams are selected using the same criteria as we have now. Several influential people at ESPN are in favor of this. Simply put, the Pac-12 and the Big 10 will not go for anything that eliminates the Rose Bowl from their mostly annual tradition.
Here's how it should and can work:
The solution sits easily if conference commissioners can push that their league championships, like in every other sport, mean something. To retain a regular season that means something and to mitigate scheduling your way to the BCS, as is done now, rewarding the six major conference champions and two at-large teams with BCS games is the only way to accomplish all the goals and deliver us a champion.
In this plan, the Pac-12 champion would ALWAYS meet the Big 12 champion in the Rose Bowl. That takes care of the issue with those two conferences which should not be underestimated. The Big12 Champion plays an at-large in the Fiesta Bowl, The SEC champion plays an at-large in the Sugar Bowl , and the Big East champion plays the ACC champion in the Orange Bowl. Sounds like 1975 right? All of the traditional bowl ties have been re-established here. Conference champions, like in other sports, make the playoff. Two others who are deserving are afforded the opportunity. Now, here is where the seeding comes in. AFTER these games are played, the four winners are seeded with 1 playing 4 and 2 playing 3 in a double header the next week on January 8th in a final four in the same location. Then on January 22nd the two winners play in Dallas or a rotating site, like the Super Bowl is played, and we have a true national champion.
Three extra games. Four Teams.
This minimizes lost class time, and continues to keep kids on campus during school, so that argument against doesn't work The revenue generated from a final four day and a championship game should approach $200 million, which could be used in a variety of ways to fund scholarships, post graduate support, title ix enhancements, etc. It encourages teams to schedule important non-conference games that people want to see, rather than the current system or a seeded system which discourages it. (think Oregon vs. LSU this year.. where would Oregon be if they had scheduled New Mexico State instead of LSU? - maybe in the title game).
It is simply four teams for one more week..two teams for two weeks. Right now, the championship game is on January 9th. Extending for an additional week or two fills a gap before the Super Bowl and would be fantastic.
In this scenario, everyone gets what they want. As a bonus, the big bowls which have enormous power are actually ENHANCED by the fact that they actually mean something. The traditions that are so important stay in-tact, and we get a true national champion.
Hopefully this is the direction college football moves after the current deal is done in two years, because really its the only system that serves all entities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)