Big 12 voters' freezeout of NIU fails

[DFWJC]

Sounds like a group effort took place by Big 12 voters in the Coach's poll.:laugh1:


"Among the 59 voters in the coaches poll, Oklahoma's Bob Stoops, Baylor's Art Briles, Iowa State's Paul Rhoads and West Virginia's Dana Holgorsen all either voted the Sooners No. 6 and/or the Mid-American Conference champion Huskies No. 24 in Sunday's final regular-season balloting. Stoops did both.
No other voter had Oklahoma higher than eighth, and only one, Michigan State's Mark Dantonio, had the Sooners that high ."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...-poll-votes-big-12-northern-illinois/1740711/




The dollars involved are big, so you can see where there is room for real fraud here. In this case, it wasn't all that out of line, but you cansee the potential.

Too me, the team that hosed is Georgia. Apples and apples, if they don't have to play Bama in a conf title game, they end up #3 at worst.
They need to figure out a way to balance thsi thing out--either every league have a title game or none have it. The former is more likely.

 

[joseephuss]

The only solution is to go to superconferences and a playoff system. Having 120 or so teams is too many. Cut that in half. Sure many schools will get ticked off, but the reality is that many schools don't have a true chance of ever winning a national championship. Get rid of them. We all know which schools those are.

 

[DFWJC]

The only solution is to go to superconferences and a playoff system. Having 120 or so teams is too many. Cut that in half. Sure many schools will get ticked off, but the reality is that many schools don't have a true chance of ever winning a national championship. Get rid of them. We all know which schools those are.

The safe bet is that YOUR team almost 100% for sure is one of the ones included in the 60.
Am I right?
Sure I am. Notice how it always works that way?

The odd thing is, that just a few years ago schools like Baylor and TCU and others would be on that "no chance" list. In Baylor's case, the benefit of being in a BCS conference gave them that extra advantage to at least have a chance. Place about 1/3 of the programs currently in the "power conferenes" outside of said conference, and they would be right there with the SMUs of the world---the same schools you are saying to kick to the curb. Put K State in the MAC and they do not compete for national titles. Have BYU and Baylor trade places and the circustances would flip flop as well.

It is a circular problem. Exclude those already excluded on the basis of them not belonging when in fact if they were included they may very well belong.

 

[joseephuss]

Haves and have nots. It is reality. Someone is going to be left out. I don't think they will go to these extremes, so we will end up with some halfminded playoff solution. It won't be perfect, but will be better than the current system.

No, my team(s) probably wouldn't be the ones left out. They all have some influence and power. I will use teams like Duke and Kansas as great examples of teams that will realistically never be in contention. Even Baylor. They are having great success right now and still finishing at best 3rd in the conference. They are at the top of their curve and will eventually cycle down.

They could also borrow from soccer although I know that thought could be considered blasphemy. Install a relegation system. Two tiers of teams. If you finish in the bottom 10 of the top tier then you get demoted to the lower tier fo the next season. If you finish in the top 10 of the lower tier, you get promoted to the top tier for the next season. I know, logistically it sounds like a nightmare.

There are no true easy solutions. I do think there are too many teams. The NFL is too big at 32 teams. The NCAA has more.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

SEC has been voting there own for years. Heck, I would imagine that all conferences do this. I don't really see the big deal. If you play a team and they beat you up, guess what, your probably going to vote for them in the polls.

I know that I would certainly vote for a team that I have already played and have seen for myself, up close and personal, over a team I have not played.

That's only logical IMO.

 

[DFWJC]

SEC has been voting there own for years. Heck, I would imagine that all conferences do this. I don't really see the big deal. If you play a team and they beat you up, guess what, your probably going to vote for them in the polls.

I know that I would certainly vote for a team that I have already played and have seen for myself, up close and personal, over a team I have not played.

That's only logical IMO.

I agree.

But I think often people vote conference members higher to get the revenue--and not because they actually think they are the better team. If they just did the latter, that would be an honest vote. That happens sometimes, but there are occassions where it's clear that the vote is dishonest and all about the conf getting extra dollars and visability.

And I also agree that no way the Big 12 is any worse than the SEC.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I agree.

But I think often people vote conference members higher to get the revenue--and not because they actually think they are the better team. If they just did the latter, that would be an honest vote. That happens sometimes, but there are occassions where it's clear that the vote is dishonest and all about the conf getting extra dollars and visability.

And I also agree that no way the Big 12 is any worse than the SEC.

I suspect you are 100% right on your last. I also believe that it has been going on since the advent of the coaches polls and really, before that. We have seen numerous cases of certain writers voting for certain teams within a certain Geo while ignoring other teams. Utah and Boise St. come to mind in 08 and 09. TCU in 2010.

 

[Aikbach]

In fairness I've seen UT fans on shaggybevo get riled up for how Briles voted about them back in 08, they feel his vote kept them out of a higher ranking that year.

 

[joseephuss]

In fairness I've seen UT fans on shaggybevo get riled up for how Briles voted about them back in 08, they feel his vote kept them out of a higher ranking that year.

Probably. Texas also may have benefited from votes over Cal in 2004, which landed them in the Rose Bowl that year.

It is a bad system not because this stuff happens, but because it is constructed in a manner that allows it to happen. Even with a playoff system, there is going to be some of this stuff happening.

 

[Cythim]

Keep in mind the new system in 2014 is being picked by a selection committee. Two extra spots will be added and the Big East AQ slot will be shared with all of the non-AQ schools. Under the new system Louisville would be out and Georgia and LSU would likely be in. The final spot would be a toss up between South Carolina, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, and Clemson. Oh, and Wisconsin would be replaced by a no longer sanctioned Ohio State. Change is coming, we just need to wait two years before we can start complaining about it again.

 

[jterrell]

title games are going to stay for large conferences but have them or not is meaningless in the end.

northen illinois has zero business in a BCS game but that's the breaks. they are no where near the 16th best team in the country.

when the bowl games are over we'll see the big 12 dominate again as they did last year.


it is well beyond time to have a real 16 game playoff and deliver us a true champ and a lot of quality late season football.

watching kent state or northen illinois play in a BCS game is like watching a train wreck.

 

[jterrell]

no need to look overseas at soccer for handling this.

simply follow the ncaa basketball model.

have two 16 team brackets at the end of the year. 1 is BCS, the other some version of the NIT.

end of the day teams either have funds and resources to compete or they do not. TCU and Boise have proven BCS busters but who else in a decade?

and really there is no reason boise and tcu won't be in the 4 mega-confs.