Code Orange

Things fell out pretty much as expected:

National Championship: Ohio State vs. LSU
Sugar Bowl: Georgia vs. Hawaii
Orange Bowl: Virginia Tech vs. Kansas
Fiesta Bowl: Oklahoma vs. West Virginia
Rose Bowl: Illinois vs. Southern Cal

I guess I’m a little surprised that the Orange went with Kansas instead of West Virginia, but perhaps the Fiesta didn’t want an all-Big 12 matchup.

I think this season has shown more than any other that a playoff is needed. Sports Illustrated Online had a headline up earlier today which read “Give LSU a shot.” Well what happens if LSU takes that shot and misses? Well, sorry Oklahoma, Virginia Tech, and Georgia, LSU is the only team who is able to take that shot. Even if you ended up being the better team, tough. And of course, if LSU wins the championship, those teams won’t get their own shot at LSU.

The BCS doesn’t help itself by posting news stories which are written by people who sound like whiny children trying to defend something which they know is broken:

Now that the most compelling, entertaining and dramatic college football season in recent memory is drawing to a close, sportswriters and broadcasters are doing what they always do at this time of the year.

They’re crafting lies to convince you that major-college football is in disarray and in dire need of a playoff system to save itself.

Of course, it is ironic that this article was written before this weekend, and uses the basis that Missouri and West Virginia appeared to be a clear #1 and #2 to “prove” that the BCS works:

Right now the system has settled on MU and West Virginia. Those names are allegedly not big enough for some writers and broadcasters.

Oops. And of course, there is the usual “with a playoff, no one would care about the regular season!”:

Critics of college football won’t do that. The current, no-playoff system gives us great September and October story lines.

Of course, the problem with this is three-fold. The first is that in every sport with a playoff (i.e. every sport other than Division I-A college football), people still enjoy the regular season. Why? Because it still matters. You’re still playing to see who gets in the playoffs.

The argument for maximizing the meaning of the regular season, which is used to justify selecting two and only two teams to play for a championship, could just as easily be used to justify a system where no championship game is played at all. Heck, that’s the way to maximize the meaning of the season, isn’t it? Don’t even have a post season. Ohio State wins the title. Tough luck, LSU.

The second problem is that, ironically, in college football more than just about any other sport, the regular season gives you the least clear, most muddied picture of the landscape possible. In the NFL, for example, any given team plays 37.5% of the teams in the league. Not perfect, but at least it’s a third. Yet the NFL still puts 37.5% of the league into the playoffs, largely because, even with playing over a third of the league, you can’t necessarily declare the team with the best record champion, because they haven’t necessarily played everyone.

In college football it’s even worse. Any given team plays, at most, 10.8% of the teams, and that’s if you play a 12 game schedule, and a conference championship game, against 13 different I-A teams. No re-matches (as Missouri/Oklahoma and Virginia Tech/Boston College were) and no I-AA games (Appalachian State vs. Michigan anyone?). Most teams will play only 10% of I-A teams, and a good portion will play even a lower percentage than that.

Yet, we’re willing to select two - and only two - teams to play the championship. Teams who have played a combined 20% of Division I-A college football teams…maybe. In other words, 80% of all the teams in football have no direct say in who the national champion will be. So what’s this about the regular season being meaningful? In the current system, it is anything but meaningful. All 6 BCS Conference champions could go undefeated, and you’d still only have 2 teams who have played only 20% of all teams playing for the title. How is that even remotely fair or meaningful?

What if Division I-AA has this system? You’d probably have seen Northern Iowa vs. Montana in the championship game. It’s now the semifinals and both of those teams have been eliminated, and a third previously undefeated team, McNeese State, has lost as well. Tell Delaware, Southern Illinois, Appalachian State, and Richmond that they can’t have a chance at the national title because a team in another conference who they never even got a chance to play went undefeated against the few teams in the division that they actually play.

Third, having a playoff would eliminate the need for poll “corrections” like the ones we saw today - where all three polls felt compelled to “correct’ their rankings to make sure LSU got into the title.

What? Are you telling me that LSU really WASN’T the #7 team going into this past weekend? If not, why did you rank them there? If you never intended to put Georgia into the title game, why did you put them in a position where, if the impossible happened like it did on Saturday, they would be in line to play for the championship? If LSU was better than Georgia because they merely played in the conference title, why was LSU ranked below Georgia to start with? Or Why was Oklahoma ranked below them? Or Virginia Tech?

This is a matter of consistency for the polls, and to have the first 13 polls of the season be based on the previous poll with rewards and punishments for winning and losing, and then using the final poll as a do-over is dangerously close to scandalous in my opinion.

Do you really think that a 7-point win over a 4-loss Tennessee team who lead most of the game justifies jumping LSU 5 spots up? At least Oklahoma could theoretically argue for such a move since they convincingly defeated the #1 ranked team in the nation.

Meanwhile, Virginia Tech, who hasn’t lost to an unranked team all year and who avenged one of their losses convincingly Saturday, goes nowhere in the polls. How does this make sense other than people “deciding” that LSU was going to be #2 and that they were just going to “make it happen,” no matter how little sense it made given the current rankings.

Week after week, year after year, we hear people complaining how people vote in the polls, saying that you should vote for who you think the best team is, and not necessarily punish a team who loses but who clearly seems like the better team. Week after week, year after year, the voters ignore their own complaining and vote as they always have. That is until voting as they always have suddenly becomes inconvenient when they have a certain matchup for the championship in mind.

It would kind of like being an umpire in a baseball game who is calling balls and strikes a certain way and has called them in a consistent manner through a game. Then suddenly in the 9th inning they decide they want one of the two teams to win, but that team is trailing.  As a result they decide to change how they’re calling balls and strikes to try to ensure the team they want to win will win.

Sorry, if this is how you’ve been doing your rankings all season, it is disingenuous to suddenly decide to do a “do-over” because you put yourself into a position which would end with an undesirable result if you did your rankings like you always do.  Unfortunately there is little that anyone can do about it.

It’s the first actual BCS Human poll, and it’s looking good for LSU.  Here is the Coaches poll top 10:

1. Ohio State (46) 1,469
2. LSU (11) 1,418
3. Oklahoma (2) 1,331
4. Georgia 1,277
5. Virginia Tech 1,242
6. Southern California 1,227
7. Missouri 1,104
8. Kansas 1,099
9. West Virginia 1,010
10. Hawaii (1) 994

Once again, it’s the points that matter, not the rank, so here are the scores that will go into the BCS:

LSU:  0.945
Oklahoma: 0.887
Georgia: 0.851
Virginia Tech: 0.828
Southern Cal: 0.818

Given Oklahoma’s computer disadvantage, this will put LSU in the title game. Unless the Harris poll rebels against what the AP and Coaches poll is doing - and I doubt they will - I see no way for Georgia to make up this distance in the computer rankings.  LSU will play Ohio State for the national title.

As a result, I predict the BCS as thus:

1. Ohio State
2. LSU
3. Georgia
4. Virginia Tech
5. Oklahoma
If you’re curios, here are the changes from last week:

LSU: +5 ranks, +284 points (average +4.7 spots per ballot)
Oklahoma: +5 ranks, +205 points (average +3.4 spots per ballot)
Georgia: No rank change, +45 points, (average +0.8 spots per ballot)
Virginia Tech: No rank change, +81 points, (average +1.4 spots per ballot)
Southern Cal: +4 ranks, +154 points (average +2.6 spots per ballot)

This clearly shows a concerted effort to put Oklahoma and especially LSU into the title game. It’s interesting that LSU got a bigger per-ballot increase (4.7 spots) for defeating a 4-loss now-18th ranked Tennessee than Oklahoma got (3.4 spots) for defeating the then-#1, now-#7 ranked team Missouri.

I also think there are four damning portions to this poll:

1) Clearly there was an effort to make LSU the #2 team.  This can be seen from the fact that LSU is actually closer to #1 Ohio State than they are #3 Oklahoma.  People intentionaly put as much distance between LSU and Georgia to make computers a non-factor (knowing that Oklahoma would need to be a very strong #2 to get in despite their computer rankings)

2) Virginia Tech defeated Boston College, yet got leapfrogged by both LSU and Oklahoma, who both rose 5 spots.  Virginia Tech defeated a better team than Tennessee (and by a larger margin), yet hardly moved at all.  They only gained 1.4 spots per ballot even though 2 teams ahead of them lost.  It’s clear that, for the first and only time this year, people were voting based on who they wanted in the title game rather than how they usually vote.

If people think that polls should always show show they think should be in the title game - then they should vote that way.  LSU would have been in the top 2 all year, despite losing twice then.  If they think you should punish people for losing, and rewarding people for winning - and being consistent in those punishments and rewards - then do it every week, not just all the weeks except the final week.

3) To ensure Kansas couldn’t make it (and possibly screwing the Jayhawks out of a BCS bid), they were dropped 3 spots despite 2 teams ahead of them losing.  USC, Oklahoma, and LSU all jumpted ahead, and Virginia Tech, whom Kansas was tied with before, moved ahead, while Missouri remained ahead of Kansas despite losing.

This also goes towards the “vote the same way every week in the poll” point above.

4) There might also be an effort to squeeze Hawaii out of the BCS.  Hawaii was 12th last week in the BCS - right on the minimum rank in the BCS to get an auto-bid.  Arizona State, the 13th ranked team, actually jumped Florida in the Coaches poll to gain a position and 144 points.  Hawaii, meanwhile, only gained 38 points.

Boston College, the only team directly above Hawaii to lose, only dropped two positions and lost 244 points.  That should drop Boston College under Hawaii, leaving them 12th even if Arizona jumps over them, but it will be close.  Illinois, another team under Hawaii, also jumped up a rank and gained 100 points in the polls - though that was mostly at BC’s expense.

The AP Poll has been released, and here are the rankings:

1. Ohio State (50) 1,578
2. LSU (11) 1,519
3. Oklahoma (1) 1,423
4. Georgia (1) 1,421
5. Virginia Tech (1) 1,380
6. USC 1,346
7. Missouri 1,195
8. Kansas 1,164
9. Florida 1,071
10. Hawaii (1) 1,050

For the 2nd time this season, 6 teams get #1 votes in the AP poll (the last time it occurred before this season was 1990), and yes, someone accepted my challenge to vote Hawaii #1 (though I’m doubting my challenge influenced that decision…).

Now, this is the AP poll, so it isn’t in the BCS, but it could give us an idea of how at least the Harris poll might vote (since it seems to vote similarly to the AP Poll). Remember, the actual rank of teams doesn’t matter in the BCS, it’s the number of points that matter. So let’s see the scores all of the BCS #2 hopefuls would get if the AP poll were in the BCS:

LSU: 0.9348
Oklahoma: 0.8757
Georgia: 0.8745
Virginia Tech: 0.8492
Southern Cal: 0.8283

If these teams keep the same computer rankings from last week (I know that won’t happen, but it could simulate if the margin between them in the computers stay constant), the rankings would shake out thus:

LSU: 0.8865
Georgia: 0.8597
Virginia Tech: 0.8361
Oklahoma: 0.7671
Southern Cal: 0.7655

Since Oklahoma and Southern Cal both had double-digit computer rankings coming into the week, I would find it difficult for either of them to slip into the #2 spot. They’d have to be clear #2 in the polls and that isn’t happening. The question will become how much LSU can gain in the computers, and how many people will move them to 2nd in the polls.

Given the man juice being created over LSU last night on the TV, I find it no surprise that LSU is #2 in the AP poll. The question is where will they be in the Harris and Coaches? They jumped from 5th to 2nd in the AP, only jumping over Georgia. They’re 7th in the Coaches poll, however. (they’re also 5th in the Harris).

The other implication of all this is that Kansas may not get an automatic bid into the BCS, giving the Fiesta Bowl the option to choose Arizona State if they wish.

And just for kicks, here is the average rank of the top 6 teams on ballots:

Ohio State: 1.7 (the average rank of those who didn’t rank OSU 1st was around 4th)
LSU: 2.6 (average rank of those who didn’t rank LSU 1st was around 3rd)
Oklahoma: 4.1
Georgia: 4.1
Virginia Tech: 4.8
Southern Cal: 5.3

Interpret that as you may.

Is someone reading my blog?

About the only things we know at this point are that Ohio State will play in the BCS title and Hawaii will be in the Sugar Bowl. Past that, it’s about anyone’s guess.

This is how I think things will break down: despite the calls by TV people to jump LSU up from 7th to 2nd in the BCS (which would mean jumping both the teams who lost today, but also Georgia and 1-loss Kansas, who didn’t play, as well as Virginia Tech who won the ACC Championship game), I think Georgia will slip into the #2 slot in the BCS title game.

I think there is just too much of a hill to climb for LSU, and especially since they didn’t look all that great against Tennessee, I don’t see why pollsters would intentionally move them higher than normal in order to influence the BCS. If they did that for anyone, I would think they could do it for Oklahoma, who just beat a good Missouri team for the 2nd time this season. In any case, I think it will be Ohio State vs. Georgia, though even if it is LSU, I don’t think it will affect the BCS Bowl matchups much at all.

Assuming this, this is where teams would go based on conference championship tie-ins:

Rose: Southern Cal vs. BCS
Orange: Virginia Tech vs. BCS
Fiesta: Oklahoma vs. BCS
Sugar: LSU vs. BCS

*West Virginia has no automatic bowl tie-in

Kansas should almost certainly either be #3 in the BCS, or #4 with a BCS champion in the #3 slot. That will give Kansas an automatic berth into the BCS. Hawaii winning in conjuction with Boston College and Tennessee losing should guarantee them a spot in the top 12 and in a BCS Bowl.

After that, the remaining at-large spot can be filled by any team with 9 wins and in the top 14. My best guess is that the teams to choose from will be the following:

Arizona State, Illinois, and probably Clemson.

*Missouri and Florida are ineligible due to the 2-team per conference limit

Now, the selection process will go as thus:

Since the Rose Bowl will lose their Big 10 representative to the BCS title game, and that team will be the #1 team in the nation, the Rose Bowl will get the first pick. There was been speculation that the Rose Bowl will pick Georgia if LSU goes to the title game. Since I think Georgia will be in the title game, that scenario would go out of play, but lets say LSU is chosen instead, there are two reasons why I don’t think the Rose will pick Georgia:

1) Illinios should be eligible for the BCS, and given that the Rose Bowl gets irked whenever they can’t get their Pac 10/Big 10 matchup, I don’t see why they would pass on the opportunity to have it, and

2) This is a rather complex sounding rule so hang with me: If two bowls lose the teams with automatic conference tie-ins, which would be the case for the Rose and Sugar Bowls if the BCS title is Ohio State vs. LSU - then the first bowl can choose any team out of the at-large pool (and the at-large pool only - no other automatic tie-in teams) EXCEPT a team from the same conference as the other team in the title game without that Bowl with that conference tie-in’s permission. That means that if the Rose Bowl wanted Georgia for some reason, they would have to get the Sugar Bowl’s permission to release Georgia. I see absolutely no reason for the Sugar Bowl to do this.

So, I’m saying that regardless of how things shake out in the BCS title, the Rose Bowl will pick Illinois to face USC.

If LSU plays in the title game, the Sugar Bowl picks 2nd, and they’ll pick Georgia. If it’s Georgia in the title game, then the Orange Bowl picks 2nd, and most people seem to think that they’ll pick West Virginia to face Virginia Tech.

The next pick goes to the Fiesta Bowl. They’ll have a choice between Kansas and Hawaii - two teams who get automatic berths into the BCS. Most people believe that they’ll chose Kansas, because it creates an interesting intra-Big 12 game and they don’t want Hawaii.

The final pick would then go to the Sugar Bowl, who would be left with Hawaii.

That means here is how I project the BCS Bowls:

BCS Championship: Ohio State vs. Georgia
Rose Bowl: Illinois vs. Southern California
Fiesta Bowl: Kansas vs. Oklahoma
Sugar Bowl: Hawaii vs. LSU
Orange Bowl: West Virginia vs. Virginia Tech

If Hawaii for some reason doesn’t make the top 12 of the BCS, the Fiesta Bowl could go with Arizona State. If they stick with Kansas, the Sugar could go with Arizona State or possibly Clemson if they’re in the top 14.