Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: FSU To Big 12 'Inevitable,' According To Report

Bill Hancock puts the BS in BCS as he makes another defense of the BCS

Cant_spell_bcs_without_bs_tshirt-p235744595216858751t53h_400_mediumI get e-mails from the Big Ten media relations people that are usually alerts to weekly awards or other significant news releases from the conference.  But today I was sent a defense of the BCS by Bill Hancock.  Interesting that the director of the BCS pen an article to tell us all just how great the BCS is for not just college football, but for all of us.  I kept reading the statement thinking this was a joke, but it was not.

This is not the firs time Hancock has taken to the keyboard to defend his honorable and pefect system.  In December the USA Today gave him some space to defend the BCS.  SBN's Spencer Hall did his best to rip the indefensible defense.  It isn't hard to miss but Hancock is diverting the argument into meaningless anectdotal pats on his own back, Spencer doesn't buy it.

A meaningless bowl game would become more meaningless than already meaningless. Divide by zero: Bill Hancock has just accomplished it.

And even Jim Souhan was quick to jump on the latest Hancock propoganda calling the BCS comical.  

It is a sport unmatched for pagentry and atmosphere, for passion and unpredictability, and yet it frequently embarrasses itself.

The BCS is the greatest embarrassment of all. It arbitrarily decides national titles, excludes worthy teams with impeccable resumes, allows cheating to be punished in ways that protects its bottom line, and delays the most important game of the season until the teams playing in it are rustier than a 1976 Dodge Dart.

Hancock is like the university presidents and bowl game officials he represents and defends: He is corrupt. He is defending an indefensible system not because it is the best or most interesting or most profitable system, but because the people whose pockets are being filled do not want to lose their Sugar (Bowl) Daddy.

 

But let's disect the latest end-around by Bill Hancock...

In the past few weeks, I have received dozens of calls and e-mails from folks who have said, "Congratulations & the BCS got it right again."

Of course, they are calling because tonight's matchup is the one that folks want to see. But for me, "the BCS got it right" has a different meaning.

We had two of the three best teams in the country playing in the BCS Title game. Two outstanding offenses, two dynamic teams who gave us a very entertaining game.  But that is no defense to say that the BCS got it right.  The storyline of the high-scoring Auburn offense against the staunch TCU defense would also made for a very intriguing matchup.  But Mr. Hancock realizes this point, he goes on to tell us why the BCS really got it right.

The BCS got it right because University of Tulsa student-athletes, from my part of the country, were able to visit the USS Arizona memorial and museum. It was the first trip to Hawaii for many. For some, it will be the only time -- only because of a bowl game.

An, the BCS got it right because Kansas State students were able to visit New York City. Many for the first time and some probably for the only time. Maybe some of us take trips to Times Square for granted, and Yankee Stadium for granted, and we are wrong to do that. The BCS got it right because those students had the experience of a lifetime -- only because of a bowl game.

 

I love picking and choosing anecdotal stories that sound interesting.  Why didn't Hancock tell us about the kids from Florida International who were able to visit Detroit.  For many of them it was their first and maybe only trip to Detroit.  How thrilling it must have been for those young men to bask in the warm sun, walk the safe and clean streets, visit the historic venues gamble at the Greektown casinos -- only because of a bowl game.  He also failed to mention how valuable the experience must have been for those visiting Boise, Albuqueque and several other boring destinations to play in meaningless fooball games -- only because of a bowl game.  

What those kids enjoy is the free stuff they get for attending the bowls.  The $500 electronics gift suite shopping spree to go along with their Oakley sunglasses -- only because of a bowl game.  

And it seems that some of us have forgotten what it was like to be 19 years old. And to have someone older and wiser quietly and discreetly create an experience for us and then step back and watch us enjoy it. That's what the keepers of the game have done by preserving the bowl system.

...

I knew the BCS got it right when I saw the happiness on the faces of celebrating athletes from schools like Florida International and Syracuse and Washington and San Diego State after their bowl victories. And did you see those TCU players dancing and hugging and dashing around the field? Winning their bowl game was way more than simply a great way to end a season -- it moment that will be etched into their hearts forever.

Of course, we know that some people want something different. I appreciate their feelings. But I have to believe that most of those people don't realize they would snatch those opportunities away from the students. But please don't kid yourselves -- it would happen.

I'm starting to come around here, I think the bowl system must be working.  The Syracuse kids were happy and so were the TCU players.  Let's ask the Horned Frogs if they would rather have a chance to win the Rose Bowl and be told by "someone older and wiser" that regardless of what they've done "the keepers of the game" have told them they are at best the second best.  Or would they give up the Rose Bowl euforia for a shot at winning a national championship?  It really is compelling logic by Mr. Hancock.

Listen to Alabama quarterback Greg McElroy, on his bowl experience: "We had a blast. If they got rid of the BCS and the BCS bowls, then a lot of teams would not be able to have opportunities like we have had the last couple of years."

Once again this is rock-solid logic.  Guess what Greg (and Bill) a lot of teams already do not ahve teh opportunities like you have had the past couple of years.  You got to play for a national championship BCS Title because you play in a power conference.  If your school is not on THIS MAP, you do not have the opportunities to play for a BCS title.  And even if you are on that map there are many listed who really do not have a chance either (does anybody think if Minnesota goes undefeated next year we'll be playing in the title game?  No, but we have a better shot than Toledo).

I talked to a Fort Worth man who proudly told me that his grandfather played for SMU in the 1936 Rose Bowl. Can you imagine someone 60 years from now, telling a stranger that his granddad played in the 2025 first-round game between Troy and Wisconsin in Madison?

What a great story with a compelling question to wrap it up and prove his point.  But I have a question.  Can you imagine 60 years from now someone telling a stranger that his grandad played in the Beef 'O' Brady's Bowl?  Troy vs. Wisconsin in a first round playoff game is significantly more significant than 34 of the 35 bowl games on the schedule in 2010-11.

And, for goodness sake, what kind of corrupt cartel would create an arrangement where TCU can win the Rose Bowl? The Horned Frogs played in the Granddaddy of Them All solely BECAUSE of the BCS. And Boise State was THIS close to playing in tonight's game. The BCS is fair, and this year -- more than ever -- proves it.

Oh right.  Fair is not giving TCU the opportunity to make their undefeated season a national championship season.  If our options are old bowl system were TCU plays in the Las Vegas Bowl or the current BCS system where they get to play in the Rose Bowl then you are correct Mr. Hancock this year is more fair than it could otherwise be.  But the outcry is not to return to the old system, what we want is a third option, a TRULY FAIR option.  If you want to prove that we have a fair system then allow worthy teams the opportunity to win a real national championship.  Don't give us an end-around by saying this is way better for a school like TCU than it would have been 25 years ago.  

It is obvious that the BCS has no alterior motives and there is absolutely no coruptness at play here.  Things like significant NCAA violations on players particiapting in a BCS bowl game would never be swept under the rug until the beginning of next year's pivotal regular season (remember how the current system is the only way to preserve the integrity of the regular season).  The fact that the Sugar Bowl was paying the representative schools/conferences millions of dollars probably had nothing to do with the player suspensions being held off until next year.  Nobody should have any reason to accuse those valued "keepers of the game" of coruptness.

In conclusion, I want to ask you to remember that college football really is national treasure. We are very lucky to cover it, administer it, play it, coach it and play b-flat clarinet in its marching band.

I don't think there's anything else in the world to match the passion that we have in college football. Maybe World Cup, but maybe not.

 

I have a proposal, why have a BCS at all?  Mr. Hancock has told us over and over how valuable the bowl system is for college football.  We don't need the BCS, all it does is create division and controversy and headaches.  This BCS is B.S.

And then, in the wild party after the game, one group of athletes will hold the crystal football aloft. They will be celebrating for the sheer joy of reaching a lifetime goal.

But without even realizing it, they will be rejoicing for those other 68 groups of students who were able to savor the bowl experience this year. When they lift that crystal football, they will be symbolically lifting up the collegiate model. They will be celebrating the game of college football that is thriving in no small part because the BCS got it right.

My Gophers didn't get to participate in a bowl game this year but I'd like to thank Alabama for hoisting the trophy for us last year, what a special experience it was for all of Gopher Nation.  

Really, let us forgo the BCS Title game and the notion of having a champion at all.  Bill Hancock has convinced me that there are 70 winners in college football every year so why the charrade that one game is more important than any other?

Souhan is right the C in BCS doesn't stand for corrupt as much as it stands for comical.  The system is a joke and pretending that the BCS has "got it right" is insulting.

Comment 23 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I actually prefer going back to what we had before the BCS

With conference tie ins to bowls. And I know I am WAY in the minority.

The Daily Norseman
Off Tackle Empire
SB Nation Minnesota

"A parent's only as good as their dumbest kid. If one wins a Nobel Prize but the other gets robbed by a hooker, you failed."

by Ted Glover on Jan 12, 2011 8:29 PM CST reply actions  

No, I’m with you. We know the ‘champion’ no better now that twenty years ago, but at least then we had legitimate arguments. Bring back the, um, zombie Bowl Alliance!

by Erik T on Jan 12, 2011 10:45 PM CST up reply actions  

Completely Disagree

The BCS cartel would have the likes of Boise St and TCU playing each other every year instead of getting the chance to prove themselves against others.

I think the bowl games should be decided wholly by BCS standings (and no exceptions for Notre Dame!). The match-ups would be much better.

by rencito on Jan 13, 2011 12:05 PM CST up reply actions  

As a native of Kansas...

I really appreciate being stereotyped as a hick with no money and no ability to ever visit New York unless some football team two hours away played in a bowl game there. So thanks for that assumption dickhead, you really make people love the BCS

by KCGopher on Jan 12, 2011 9:23 PM CST reply actions  

This isn't perfect

but I sure wish we would go to a “Plus One” format. Make the Cotton Bowl a BCS game (10 teams then and all bowls retained) and after the games the two top ranked play. This year it would have been Auburn v. TCU. Everything stays the same except one additional game for two teams. I don’t get it——the money would be huge.

by Texas Gopher on Jan 13, 2011 7:40 AM CST reply actions  

+1.

Let’s cut the crap…this is really what people want. We’re already into mid-January….what’s one more game to decide once and for all? Also, maybe this would encourage pushing more games to New Year’s day and the 48-72 hours following…then we’d have a true national championship game shortly thereafter….

There are countless arguments against this…but to me, it is the only way to settle the “who’s #1 question”.

Until there are 5 undefeated teams in a season :-)

by jimipig on Jan 13, 2011 9:20 AM CST up reply actions  

What are the arguments against this?

I’ll make a much longer post on this sometime in the offseason, but a +1 game is the only form of a “playoff” college football should ever have. No more than 4 or it ruins the best regular season in all of sports.

by Jeffrick on Jan 13, 2011 9:47 AM CST up reply actions  

Logistics

lots of details and logistics of where to have it, how to handle tickets and travel plans quickly if not knowing who is in it until a week before, also watering down other bowls, too many games in a season/too long of a season, among others….

Trust me, I’m on your side on the issue, it’s the only solution that I embrace. There just happen to be a lot of responses like “trust me, you don’t know how complex it is throwing one of these events” type of bullshit replies like we’re all idiots and can’t possibly understand how difficult it is.

by jimipig on Jan 13, 2011 10:19 AM CST up reply actions  

Something's fishy when...

Is it any wonder why the BCSFootball.org page has the same layout as the ESPN page, including direct “College Football Headlines” links to ESPN sites?

by Marshmoose on Jan 13, 2011 8:48 AM CST reply actions  

I don't understand the argument for a "+1" at all

It is baffling to me. What if Oregon and Auburn were the only two undefeated teams? What the hell is the point of a plus one? The BCS makes more sense to me than a plus one (although the BCS is far from perfect).

Truthfully, I like the BCS as opposed to a full fledged playoff. When an NFL team loses in week 11 it really doesn’t matter. But every week is a playoff in college football. I think it makes the regular season so much more exciting. I can watch many random college football games, but I cannot sit down and watch a random NFL game in the regular season. It just bores me.

In general I dislike playoffs in all sports because often times the “champions” are the ones who won the right games at the right time and not necessarily the best team. Just a few examples that illustrate what I mean:

2007/08: The Patriots go undefeated in the regular season and lose the last game to a team they already beat once in the regular season. Meanwhile, the team that beat them lost 6 times that year. Why does this make the Giants the champions? The Patriots were clearly the best team that year.

2009/10: The NY Jets had no business even getting to the playoffs, because they had to win their final two games against teams that rolled over for them since they already clinched playoff spots. The Jets lost 7 games last year. If Seattle ends up winning the Super Bowl this year, do they really deserve the title of “Champions”? I vehemently say no.

In my mind, baseball has the better system since the best teams truly advance to the playoffs thanks to the large slate of games that are used to determine division champs and the fact that those champs play their division foes more often than other teams in the league. However, it is not without its flaws either since the playoffs are a 7 game crapshoot that can be between teams separated by more than 10 games in the regular season—and the fact that there are so many more off days where only the top 3 pitchers are needed.

I like the English Premier League system where there is no playoff. You just play every team twice and the team with the best record is the champion. Obviously, this isn’t possible with the sport of American football, especially in college. I guess I could see a four team playoff in NCAA football using the current system to determine the top 4 teams—but I still have problems with the polls since WHEN you lose a game is somehow important (it is overwhelmingly easier to rise back to the top after an early season loss as opposed to a late season loss).

As far as the NFL, I think a much better system would be to get rid of the divisional structures and keep just the conferences intact. Then every team could play each team in its conference once (15 games) and have each conference champion play against each other in the Super Bowl.

Sorry for the random ranting. I had to get it off my chest.

by rencito on Jan 13, 2011 11:51 AM CST reply actions  

Actually support the statement...

…the only way it REALLY makes sense is to have the +1 game optional in the event there remain 2 undefeated teams. Not 2 one-loss teams, but only if there were multiple undefeated teams.

You make good points. But I argue baseball is too restrictive (as a white sox fan!)…there are a lot of teams who come up 1 game short of the playoffs, so I’d like them to have a shot to compete in playoffs. I agree 100000% with you about the farce that is the NFL and NBA (and NHL) where everybody gets a shot seemingly, so many games become meaningless earlier in the season than they should.

The single most important attribute that must be preserved is that every college game needs to mean something. It is its finest quality. That’s why I go back to only having a +1 game if there remain two undefeated teams at the end of the bowl season. But I can’t imagine how insane the logistics are of that….so perhaps the answer is to do nothing differently.

by jimipig on Jan 13, 2011 12:22 PM CST reply actions  

i would love to see

a 6 team play-off. Keep the bowls in place.

The #1 and #2 ranked teams have a buy (therefore a reason to be #1 and #2)

The #3 through #6 would play in one of the major bowls, you could even align the bowl by conference).

I hate the idea of losing the bowls (especially the major bowls). One of my large hopes in life is to see MN in the rosebowl (i’m 35 and currently not very optimistic)

by Go Gophs on Jan 13, 2011 12:36 PM CST reply actions  

I could do a 6 team playoff

but my vote would be 8 or even 10. Basically you use the exact same system with 6 auto bids and then 4 (or 2) at-large teams. Your 6 AQs get a first round bye. You’ll always have that next team complaining that they deserved a shot but by giving your BCS conference champs a chance and then a couple at-large teams to accommodate the undefeated TCUs and Boises then you should have every team that truly deserves a chance to win it all.

Winning your conference is no easy feat and when you only play 8 conference games I do not believe that any game or any loss would lose it’s significance.

what you say here can, and will, be used against you The Daily Gopher

by GopherNation on Jan 13, 2011 12:56 PM CST reply actions  

Even at 8 teams

…you would have had two teams with two losses in your playoff scenario.

I wouldn’t like that. Reward the teams with the best regular seasons.

by rencito on Jan 13, 2011 1:03 PM CST up reply actions  

My point

is that 8 is too many.

by rencito on Jan 13, 2011 4:04 PM CST up reply actions  

The reason i pitched for 6 is

every year there are 1 or 2 teams from the “major” conferences (Especially the Big East and ACC more recently) that do not feel would deserve to be able to play for the championship even in a playoff.
So I would allow for the top 6 rated teams. Yes, a couple teams would feel left out, however, in recent memory, I can’t think of a single undefeated team that did not finishin the top 6 teams. Therefore, if you win out, you’re in

by Go Gophs on Jan 13, 2011 4:10 PM CST up reply actions  

If you're afraid to have two losses on your record

You’ll be hesitant to schedule OOC games against teams that might bet you. Hence, the crappy front end of the college football season we’ve learned to live with.

by agwbl on Jan 14, 2011 11:38 AM CST up reply actions  

But...

SOS is big component of the computer rankings—which is why I trust those rankings to the human polls, plus it doesn’t matter the timing of your loss.

by rencito on Jan 14, 2011 3:54 PM CST up reply actions  

I call BS for playing playoff games at bowl locations

Every bowl game, at least BCS bowls minus the Fiesta, are in the heart of SEC country and gives them a built in home field advantage. You’re also talking about fanbases being asked to fork over a lot of money top travel to two or three different locations. No offense, but fuck that.

You either have to keep the bowl system in place, and I say scrap the BCS and go back to the old conference tie ins, or you do a no bullshit playoff and scrap the bowls, where you have 8 or 16 teams seeded 1-16, and lower seed travels to higher seed until the championship game. I’d like to see LSU, Alabama, or Auburn deal with 20 degrees and snow. SEC speed, my ass.

The first scenario has a better chance of happening than the second. There is too much money for schools and conferences with the way the bowl system is set up, especially for the AQ conferences. The amount of money that the Big Ten gets would drop in a no kidding playoff, and that would hinder the ability to field teams in sports that don’t generate revenue.

Money drives the train. It always has, and it always will.

The Daily Norseman
Off Tackle Empire
SB Nation Minnesota

"A parent's only as good as their dumbest kid. If one wins a Nobel Prize but the other gets robbed by a hooker, you failed."

by Ted Glover on Jan 13, 2011 2:52 PM CST reply actions  

*Fiesta and Rose

The Daily Norseman
Off Tackle Empire
SB Nation Minnesota

"A parent's only as good as their dumbest kid. If one wins a Nobel Prize but the other gets robbed by a hooker, you failed."

by Ted Glover on Jan 13, 2011 2:53 PM CST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Minnesota Golden Gophers sports--Usually analytical, sometimes snarky.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

47487
B1G Conference FB schedules for 2015 and 2016 released
Daily_logo_small
What does the Vikings stadium deal mean for Gopher football?
47487
B1G Homecoming Kickoff Times announced
83217-125958-hawkeye_super_small
Gophers Host a Kegger!
47487
Big Ten announces prime-time TV schedule
47487
President Kaler announces VCU athletic director as AD finalist
Small
Hoops Season In Review
Small
Gophers Hockey Preview
Small
Frozen Four Preview
Small
Gophers 2013 Basketball Prospectus

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Mn_basketball_small GopherNation

Imagescary7xfo_small Jeffrick

Img-20101223-00043_small JDMill

Editors

Imgres_small PJS

Bigbuck_small Buck Bravo

Dsc02076_small JG2112