The BcS and the MWC

[DirtyHippieUTE]

Tonight on CB we've been going round and round about the Utah 2004 team vs. BYU 1984.

Here is my question... If BYU were to go 11-0 in 2006 against a weak MWC schedule and a not so spectacular out of conference schedule... Where would they rank? What if (unlike 2004) there were no other unbeaten teams?

Would the Y get the national championship nod vs. a 10-1 USC, ND, and Florida State? Or would the BcS stick them in a 2nd class game against a Big Least "also ran?"

I honestly wonder. What would the BCS computer do? If you had several teams from "big" conferences with extremely good SOS rankings... Would they screw the team from the MWC?

I've heard talk over the past couple of years that the BcS has "dodged a bullet" because so far they haven't had that scenario (higer ranked 10-1 vs. lower ranked undefeated).

Anybody know what the BcS has said about this?

[El Guapo]

Originally Posted by DirtyHippieUTE

Tonight on CB we've been going round and round about the Utah 2004 team vs. BYU 1984.

Here is my question... If BYU were to go 11-0 in 2006 against a weak MWC schedule and a not so spectacular out of conference schedule... Where would they rank? What if (unlike 2004) there were no other unbeaten teams?

Would the Y get the national championship nod vs. a 10-1 USC, ND, and Florida State? Or would the BcS stick them in a 2nd class game against a Big Least "also ran?"

I honestly wonder. What would the BCS computer do? If you had several teams from "big" conferences with extremely good SOS rankings... Would they screw the team from the MWC?

I've heard talk over the past couple of years that the BcS has "dodged a bullet" because so far they haven't had that scenario (higer ranked 10-1 vs. lower ranked undefeated).

Anybody know what the BcS has said about this?

I don't think they have said anything. I doubt an unbeaten non-BCS school could rank higher than BCS schools absent extraordinary circumstances (like beating 3 top 25 BCS schools- and probably among them 1 or 2 top 10 BCS schools in non-conference, along with beating 1 or 2 top 25 conference teams). My guess would be that the non-BCS school normally would be ranked from 3-5 and 2 BCS schools would be in the top slots. With a BCS extra game, though, even 3-5 might allow a non-BCS team to play for the title.

[myboynoah]

I don't know. I guess the question is how much losses and rankings play into the BSC formula. If things break favorably, like they did for BYU in 1984 (like strategic late season losses by schools above BYU in the rankings allowing it to move up to #1), I could see an unbeaten non-BSC school playing for the NC. In the end the formula would have to be followed. Being the only unbeaten and ranked number one in both polls could clinch it. Unlikey yes, but 1984 is in the record books.

[DirtyHippieUTE]

I guess this is why I wonder....
In 2004 there were 4 undefeated teams before the BCS.
After the BCS was over there were only 3 undefeated teams.

You would think that the Utes would have secured a #4 spot and #3 spot at least... Right?

Somehow the BCS ranked a 12-1 Oklahoma above a 13-0 Utah.

Take USC and Auburn out of the picture and your top two teams are 1- OK, 2- UT.

Now jump back to 1984. If they applied the BCS formulas to that season there were NO other undefeated teams. However, some polls ranked BYU behind Florida or Washington (not a majority but follow me here).

Let's just create the perfect storm... Suppose the BCS supercomputer spits out Florida # 1, Washington # 2, BYU # 3 based on SOS. What would the BCS do? Would they stick by their formula? Would the nation put up with it?

IMHO the folks in the big conferences would try to convince us that any MWC team belongs at the "kids table" and that the rankings are accurate.

This is what I wonder... I hate the BCS.

[myboynoah]

Was Utah ranked above Oklahoma in 2004? Also, to whom did Oklahoma lose? That may explain why they ended up above Utah.

In 1984, all the major polls that mattered ranked BYU #1 going into the bowl games. I'm not a BCS formula expert, but being the only undefeated team and ranked number one in the major polls I think would have secured a spot in the NC game, which all BYU Fans wanted. But, had Florida and Washington been given the nod over BYU, I'm sure BYU Fans would have squealed as much as Ute Fans did when they got Pitt in the Fiesta Bowl. In the end, it wouldn't have mattered since the popular wisdom is that non-BCS schools are all pretenders.

Utah got shafted in 2004, much like BYU got shafted in 1984 and 1996. It would have been nice to at least have seen how good we (collectively) really were. The powers that be made sure that didn't happen. Yes, I too hate the BSC.

[il Padrino Ute]

Computers do what they're told to do. I'm convinced that the BCS cartel would have manipulated the data to prevent the 1984 BYU team from getting a shot at their alleged championship game. Utah was ranked 6th in the BCS poll, which, uncoincidently IMO, was the lowest acceptable ranking for a non-BCS team to be able to participate in one of the BCS bowls. 2 teams ranked ahead of Utah were not undefeated (though I can't think of who they were at the moment.)

Was BYU the only undefeated team in the country after the regular season ws finished? I really don't know because I was on my misison when this happened, but I believe that because both Utah and BYU had similar schedules - as far as strength goes - BYU would have been placed in the non-championship game against the weakest of the BCS teams to qualify.

The BCS will never allow someone on the outside to play for their fake championship. It would defeat the purpose of their little game, which is to horde all the tv money for itself. The BCS is about the money, not finding a true champion of college football.

[Mormon Red Death]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Utah was ranked 6th in the BCS poll, which, uncoincidently IMO, was the lowest acceptable ranking for a non-BCS team to be able to participate in one of the BCS bowls. 2 teams ranked ahead of Utah were not undefeated (though I can't think of who they were at the moment.)

Cal and Texas...

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Was BYU the only undefeated team in the country after the regular season ws finished?

Yes, they were.

In the end they did manipulate it so BYU ended up playing a 6-5 Michigan in 1984, very frustrating for CougarNation. Washington, ranked #2 with one loss could have come and played BYU in San Diego for the NC, but opted to go play OK in the Orange for #2. Everybody else went elsewhere leaving the Holiday Bowl to ask Michigan to come.

While I know it's not the same thing, Washington did come to Provo the next year where BYU promptly kicked Husky ass all over the field.

A similar thing happened to a #5 BYU team in 1996. Aced out of the big bowls we had to settle for the Cotton Bowl. That's when I realized it was all about the money.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

Yes, they were.

In the end they did manipulate it so BYU ended up playing a 6-5 Michigan in 1984, very frustrating for CougarNation. Washington, ranked #2 with one loss could have come and played BYU in San Diego for the NC, but opted to go play OK in the Orange for #2. Everybody else went elsewhere leaving the Holiday Bowl to ask Michigan to come.

While I know it's not the same thing, Washington did come to Provo the next year where BYU promptly Husky ass all over the field.

A similar thing happened to a #5 BYU team in 1996. Aced out of the big bowls we had to settle for the Cotton Bowl. That's when I realized it was all about the money.

The Holiday Bowl itself deserves some blame for what happened. They easily could have gotten a decent opponent for BYU (an 8-3 team perhaps) but they held out too long thinking they could land a top 5 team. When that didn't pan out their last hope was that the NCAA would allow 9-1-1 Florida who had just been slapped with NCAA violations but hadn't been punished yet. The NCAA decided to allow them to play in a bowl in 1984 but the SEC then yanked that rug out from under them and they had to stay home. By then every bowl had its matchup set and the Holiday was stuck with a five loss Michigan team.

[El Guapo]

Originally Posted by DirtyHippieUTE

I guess this is why I wonder....
In 2004 there were 4 undefeated teams before the BCS.
After the BCS was over there were only 3 undefeated teams.

You would think that the Utes would have secured a #4 spot and #3 spot at least... Right?

Somehow the BCS ranked a 12-1 Oklahoma above a 13-0 Utah.

Take USC and Auburn out of the picture and your top two teams are 1- OK, 2- UT.

Now jump back to 1984. If they applied the BCS formulas to that season there were NO other undefeated teams. However, some polls ranked BYU behind Florida or Washington (not a majority but follow me here).

Let's just create the perfect storm... Suppose the BCS supercomputer spits out Florida # 1, Washington # 2, BYU # 3 based on SOS. What would the BCS do? Would they stick by their formula? Would the nation put up with it?

IMHO the folks in the big conferences would try to convince us that any MWC team belongs at the "kids table" and that the rankings are accurate.

This is what I wonder... I hate the BCS.

I think it also matters how the team did in previous years. BYU in 1984 was following up an amazing year in 1983 and very good years prior to that. They were more likely to rise higher in the rankings because, like it or not, the rankings look at teams more favorably once they are used to those teams being good. Utah had some decent years before their BCS year, and those years probably got them into the BCS. If they followed up the BCS year with another undefeated year, they could have been more seriously discussed for a national championship.