Question for BYU and Utah fans.

[Top Ute]

While I agree that the computers themselves are unbiased, they only do what they are told to do. They can be manipulated to produce any results that are wanted.

I will not dispute that. Richard Billingsley has his computer rankings included in the BCS component, and his are no more than a glorified AP voter's ballot, and he's even said as much.

For me, the bible of computer rankings is Sagarin. Some computer rankings are certainly better than others. But if the BCS put together a final rankings after the bowls in 2008, Utah would have come out No. 1 in the computers, and a dead-cinch lock for No. 2 overall. In a plus-one system, Utah would've been all but assured to play Florida in a winner-take all title game. For a (then) non-BCS school like Utah, more is gained than lost by including the computers in the BCS formulas.

[Solon]

BYU fans, assume BYU gets in the big 12. How much would you complain about the BCS if BYU were in a BCS league? Would you care about non BCS teams getting more access? Would you are about seeing a playoff? Would you really care about the unfair nature of the BCS?

Utah fans, same questions to you.

http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showthread.php?t=1520

The BCS has been good to Utah.

[jay santos]

You think that Utah would have gone to THE SUGAR BOWL in 1988?

Also your graph shows that money for non-AQ teams was basically dead prior to the inception of the Alliance and then BCS, since that time it has been steady growth.

So what exactly are your "Bull Shitting"?

Agree. It looks like non BCS is not only way up but it might be up in terms % of total.

[jay santos]

While I agree that the computers themselves are unbiased, they only do what they are told to do. They can be manipulated to produce any results that are wanted.

Ignorant

[jay santos]

I will not dispute that. Richard Billingsley has his computer rankings included in the BCS component, and his are no more than a glorified AP voter's ballot, and he's even said as much.

For me, the bible of computer rankings is Sagarin. Some computer rankings are certainly better than others. But if the BCS put together a final rankings after the bowls in 2008, Utah would have come out No. 1 in the computers, and a dead-cinch lock for No. 2 overall. In a plus-one system, Utah would've been all but assured to play Florida in a winner-take all title game. For a (then) non-BCS school like Utah, more is gained than lost by including the computers in the BCS formulas.

Only in models with no MOV component.

[il Padrino Ute]

Ignorant

Are you saying that computers can think for themselves?

[Top Ute]

Only in models with no MOV component.

You're absolutely right there. But since MOV was eliminated to help certain BCS schools (it was eliminated from the BCS computers' formula after Oregon got the shaft for the BCS title game in 2002, IIRC), I have no qualms with 2008 Utah (or any subsequent non-BCS team) coming out looking better in a computer component where MOV isn't a factor.

[Top Ute]

http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showthread.php?t=1520

The BCS has been good to Utah.

It has been good to Utah, but it has hurt in other aspects. As I posted earlier, I can't get over the BCS/non-BCS separation that started cropping up in the sports media in the early 2000s.

How many teams have been the only undefeated team in the country, had two (or more) wins against Top 10 opposition and won its bowl game by two TDs or more, and not won the national title? Without research, I'll grant that it's happened one other time, but I can't fathom it happening more often than that.

[Portland Ute]

You think that Utah would have gone to THE SUGAR BOWL in 1988?

Also your graph shows that money for non-AQ teams was basically dead prior to the inception of the Alliance and then BCS, since that time it has been steady growth.

So what exactly are your "Bull Shitting"?

Bowl game revenue for non-AQ teams in 2008 was about exactly what it was in 1988. Look at the graph.

Then, look at the disparity between non AQs and BCS games. See how that disparity has growing? Notice that? Okay.

That is NOT good for non-AQ programs. It sucks.

As to your point about the Sugar bowl, no, I don't suppose Utah would have played in the Sugar Bowl, but the Cotton or Fiesta bowls would have been a possibility...or going to the Holiday bowl and winning a "national championship" would have been a possibility in either 2004 or 2008. It's been done before, right?

So, yeah, I'm "bull shitting" the notion that the BCS has been good for non-AQ teams.

Ah, $#(^*)# it! Utah's part of the party now. What do I care? I don't have split loyalties like you do with BYU and Oregon one being a "have not" and the other being the "have".

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

Bowl game revenue for non-AQ teams in 2008 was about exactly what it was in 1988. Look at the graph.

Then, look at the disparity between non AQs and BCS games. See how that disparity has growing? Notice that? Okay.

That is NOT good for non-AQ programs. It sucks.

As to your point about the Sugar bowl, no, I don't suppose Utah would have played in the Sugar Bowl, but the Cotton or Fiesta bowls would have been a possibility...or going to the Holiday bowl and winning a "national championship" would have been a possibility in either 2004 or 2008. It's been done before, right?

So, yeah, I'm "bull shitting" the notion that the BCS has been good for non-AQ teams.

Ah, $#(^*)# it! Utah's part of the party now. What do I care? I don't have split loyalties like you do with BYU and Oregon one being a "have not" and the other being the "have".

You are all over the place in your arguments here. I have split loyalties, but I am not the one attacking the BCS, the revenue isn't there for non-AQs even though it has been brought from the dead in 1995, you take a swipe at BYU's national championship for no reason, you claim that Utah would have gone to the Cotton or Fiesta in 1988 based on...well I don't know what.

You seem confused.

[Portland Ute]

You are all over the place in your arguments here. I have split loyalties, but I am not the one attacking the BCS, the revenue isn't there for non-AQs even though it has been brought from the dead in 1995, you take a swipe at BYU's national championship for no reason, you claim that Utah would have gone to the Cotton or Fiesta in 1988 based on...well I don't know what.

You seem confused.

Utah wouldn't have gone to a bigger bowl, at least the Holiday, as I mentioned, with a 11-0 or 12-0 record in 2004 or 2008 respectively? Why not? BYU did it regularly with 1 or more losses in a season.

It's laughable that you think Utah would not have ended up in a major bowl game with the 2004 or 2008 team in a pre-BCS world. Would it have been the Sugar? Nope. But I never claimed that.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

Utah wouldn't have gone to a bigger bowl, at least the Holiday, as I mentioned, with a 11-0 or 12-0 record in 2004 or 2008 respectively? Why not? BYU did it regularly with 1 or more losses in a season.

It's laughable that you think Utah would not have ended up in a major bowl game with the 2004 or 2008 team in a pre-BCS world. Would it have been the Sugar? Nope. But I never claimed that.

Why would Utah have when BYU didn't?

Also now you are putting the Holiday on par with the Fiesta/Cotton? I guess 2004 wasn't that special of year for the Utah.

[Portland Ute]

Why would Utah have when BYU didn't?

Also now you are putting the Holiday on par with the Fiesta/Cotton? I guess 2004 wasn't that special of year for the Utah.

You win. I'm convinced. I love the BCS!

It wasn't even hard to convince me!

[Top Ute]

Why would Utah have when BYU didn't?

Also now you are putting the Holiday on par with the Fiesta/Cotton? I guess 2004 wasn't that special of year for the Utah.

Part of me wants to say an undefeated Utah team would've gone to a Sugar/Fiesta/Cotton bowl in the 1980s in any year. But AFA went 11-1 in 1985, started off 10-0, beat Notre Dame and lost to the defending national champs by just a TD on the road ... and went to the Bluebonnet Bowl, beating Texas (which went 8-4 that year and lost big to every team of note it played that year).

UNM went 10-1 in 1982, losing big to BYU, but beat Texas Tech (4-7) and didn't even go to a bowl.

We can easily see that one-loss WAC teams got very little in terms of attention from the Big Boy bowls. Would BYU in 1984 have been able to do better had it gotten out of the Holiday Bowl?

Unless that answer is a resounding yes, it's tough to argue an undefeated Utah team getting into a major New Year's Day bowl game in any year in the 1980s.

Obviously, a one-loss Utah team would've done no better than a Holiday Bowl invite, enjoying the same fate of several of BYU's teams in 1970s-80s.

Sorry I couldn't help you out, Port.

[il Padrino Ute]

There is no way Utah would have gone to any bowl other than the Holiday Bowl had it gone undefeated in the 80s, as that was the bowl for the WAC champs. However, the odds of winning a MNC in the 80s were far greater for a non-BCS team in those days no matter the bowl they played in.

The only reason BYU went to the Cotton Bowl in '96 was because the Bowl Alliance screwed them over, the reason being that BYU was not in one of the self-proclaimed power conferences.

The BCS sucks. Always has and always will. Only a playoff that gives all Division I teams a chance to win that playoff will ever determine a true national champion.