Which is worse....
1. The BCS system that combines human polls and computer rankings to select #1 and #2 ... and doesn't publish it's first rankings until several weeks of the season are complete, so that a good "baseline" can be established....
or..
2. The silly "pre-season" rankings that are based on "last year" and speculation? Is this why there were so many "upsets" this year, because teams like Michigan, USC, etc. were ranked too high before ANY GAMES HAD ACTUALLY BEEN PLAYED ?
2007-12-03 08:50:04 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Wow, got a few conspiracy theories going on here, huh ??? LOL
2007-12-03 12:36:45 · update #1
GREAT question!!!
The pre-season polls are almost as rediculous as playing College Football in the 21st century w/ the BCS system...LOL!
At least they (pre-season polls) are correctable...there's roughly 13 to 14 weeks to fix it. The BCS on the other hand...is a complete farse, that can't be fixed once done.
Oh well...
2007-12-03 08:55:26 · answer #1 · answered by RacerX 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They are both bad so I would say take your pick. Football is really at a disadvantage to basketball because you can only play about once a week in Football but every night in basketball. Therefore, it is really difficult to come up with a viable playoff idea for football that will capture the imagination of the fans.
2007-12-03 08:53:40 · answer #2 · answered by Frizzer 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Instead of the BCS, we should let a group of Vegas bookies rank the teams at the end of the season. They seem to get it right every week!
2007-12-03 08:56:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
the system is rigged to always let the big monmey schools play for the NC, not the best teams.
2007-12-03 08:59:20 · answer #4 · answered by Daniel P 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
didn't the coach's and the writer vote OSU number one
2007-12-03 08:59:13 · answer #5 · answered by paulcondo 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋