Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

More BCS CrapFollow

#1 Jul 03 2004 at 4:58 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,980 posts
The BCS is running in circles.

Weiberg has said the BCS plans to put greater emphasis on the human polls and eliminate components such as bonus points for quality wins and strength of schedule.

Why did they make the BCS in the first place if they want to eliminate the non-human elemants? Didn't the system work with just the polls back in 1997?
#2 Jul 03 2004 at 5:03 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,165 posts

Didn't the system work with just the polls back in 1997?


Nope. The idea was to have a consensus National Champion. The old polls would have split champions often. The BCS is supposed to match the 1 and 2 teams to generate a single champoin.

If the dumb mothers would just go to a four team playoff it would solve all the problems and probably make them even more money.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#3 Jul 03 2004 at 5:12 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,552 posts

I hate it how people say "the BCS is bad because computers decide the winner, not humans." Well it's not like we have an AI cyborg deciding, it's just a formula devised by a HUMAN. Not to mention the fact that the human polls account for a huge chunk of the formula.

By the same logic those people use, I could say that baseball's batting title is incorrectly rewarded because the batting average is calculated by computers.
____________________________
Na Zdrowie
#4 Jul 03 2004 at 5:20 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,980 posts
Quote:
The old polls would have split champions often.


I wouldnt consider 4/21 from '77 to '97 "often". By the same logic the 1/6 since inception of the BCS is often.

I guess I probably should have stated my question a little more clearly. I know why they created the BCS an I believe in the goal, but instead of trying the play-off or some other concept, they decide to come almost full circle and put more emphasis on the polls.

So my new question is; Why would you try to fix the new system by using the old system that was deemed unfit?
#5 Jul 03 2004 at 6:15 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
29,165 posts

Why would you try to fix the new system by using the old system that was deemed unfit?


Because the old system would have avoided what happened last year. Closing the barn door after the horse escapes as it were.

And by the way, 1/6 is less than 4/21 so you could argue that it's worked better so far, and not much else. Also, considering there's only been six years it's an insignifgant sample set, it could end up being 1/10000 for all we know.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 62 All times are in CDT
Aethien, Jophiel, lolgaxe, someproteinguy, Tasera, Xsarus, Anonymous Guests (56)