Gilbert Quinonez Click Here for more articles by Gilbert Quinonez
Rage against the machine! That's the NCAA’s new philosophy towards the Bowl Championship Series.
The BCS is the infamous system that Division I college football uses to provide fans with a championship game. Division I college football is the only sport in the NCAA, and the rest of the world for that matter, not to use a playoff system to determine its champion but a complex system of numbers only stat geeks like me can enjoy.
Last week, the NCAA decided to perform their yearly tinkering with the BCS formula, which is like using invisible tape to try to repair a flat tire. It’s hardly a solution.
Computer rankings make up about one-fourth of the BCS formula. Four of the eight computer rankings last year used margin of victory as a component, and they were blamed for the fiasco that occurred. Nebraska was killed by Colorado, 62-36, late last season. The Cornhusker Massacre seemingly gave Oregon a chance to play Miami in the championship game. However, Nebraska finished higher in the BCS rankings, so they got the Rose Bowl berth.
Oregon’s not playing in the Rose Bowl was blamed on the computers that had margin of victory components. The programmers of those computer rankings were asked to change their formula. Jeff Sagarin and Peter Wolfe complied; David Rothman and Herman Matthews did not. Rothman and Matthews will be replaced by the New York Times rankings.
First of all, I don’t believe margin of victory should be used to judge a team’s greatness, as I am not including margin of victory into my attempt at creating my own computer rankings. Scores aren’t always indicative of how good a team is, as Oregon’s five wins by seven points or less showed. However, as long as the human voters in the Associated Press and ESPN/USA Today coaches' polls use margin of victory to judge teams, the computers should be able to also. One of the main reasons Oregon was so highly thought of after Nebraska’s loss was the margin of victory in the Colorado-Nebraska game, was it not? Also, I’m sure many voters might look at a 51-7 Nebraska-Central Florida score and marvel at Nebraska’s excellence.
The BCS is just trying to boost its image by eliminating computer rankings. How good can a system be if it has to be altered every year due to public backlash at it? Just incorporate a playoff system already. Of course, that would cause the NCAA to turn down guaranteed billions of dollars. That won’t happen anytime soon.
I love how the NCAA excuses their stupidity and greediness (also known as the BCS) by claiming that they care about their student-athletes playing fewer games. That is why more and more teams are going from the traditional 11-game schedule to play 12, or even 13 games. Yes, the NCAA cares.
•••••
In other stat geek news tidbits:
The NCAA has banned Cal’s football team (1-10 last year) from appearing in a bowl game. Yes, the NCAA is making a big statement by banning a 1-10 team from a bowl.
Poor Matt Barnes. He was drafted and traded to the Cleveland Cavaliers. Cleveland finished 29-53 last year, 14th place in the pathetic Eastern Conference. Also, the average high in Cleveland is 40 degrees during basketball season.
The Montreal Expos acquired all-star pitcher Bartolo Colon from the Cleveland Indians in exchange for the terrible Lee Stevens and a bunch of prospects. The Expos are my new favorite team. They’re only five games out of a playoff spot, and this team was supposed to be contracted before the season started. Since when do the Expos take away good players from other teams?