Legends poll should be added to BCS

 

I’ve got some advice for our friends at the BCS. In 2010 you will begin a new four-year contract with ESPN. If you’re going to keep the same format and selection process, and the contract says you will, how about an upgrade of the human polls that currently make up two-thirds of your formula?

Currently you have 59 coaches voting in the USA Today Coaches poll. We don’t have enough space, not even on the internet, for me to point out all of the inconsistencies in that poll. The coaches will readily admit that they don’t see very much college football other than their own team and their opponent each week.  Their poll reflects that. The ballots are also secret until the very last one. Secrecy should not be a part of the BCS process.

The Harris Interactive Poll voters are an interesting collection of former players, administrators and current media. There have been some interesting votes there are well.

The Associated Press media poll, the granddaddy of all polls, is the most credible of the group but decided, rightfully so, that it needed to get out of the BCS business to maintain that credibility.

 

Let’s face it. After USC finished No. 1 in both human polls in 2003 but did not get into the BCS championship, the powers that be changed the formula so that two thirds of it would rely on the human polls. The reality is that the two teams  at the top of the human polls at the end of the season are pretty much going to be the two teams who play for the national championship. The computer polls, which account for only one third of the formula, would have to be wildly different to change that outcome.

So if the human polls are going to mean that much, why not try to make them the best they can be? Why not call on people who know the game of football better than anybody? Why not get people who actually have time to watch a lot of football every week?

I present to you the Legends Poll. The poll is made up of 17 of the best former coaches in the country. The list includes Vince Dooley, Pat Dye, R.C. Slocum, Terry Donahue,  John Robinson, John Cooper, and R.C. Slocum, just to name a few.

 

Each coach is assigned a couple of teams to follow closely and they receive DVDs of many games from around the country. After studying the video, the coaches meet on a conference call to discuss those teams in great detail. Then collectively they file their ballots and release their poll. All ballots are public. The results are posted each week by our friends at The Sporting News.

http://www.sportingnews.com/college-football/article/2009-11-15/legends-poll-who-comes-after-big-3

 

I had the opportunity to listen in on the conference call this week. Trust me when I tell you that these guys know their stuff.

“It’s an interesting process and a very thorough process,” said Dooley, the Hall of Fame coach from Georgia. “A coach looks at video with a careful eye. By the time we finish our discussion, we feel like we’ve given all the teams a very honest assessment.”

The Legends poll began several years ago under the title of the Master Coaches Survey. Andy Curtin, who is the administrator of the poll, has been lobbying the BCS to include the poll in its formula.

“These coaches know the game better than anybody and they have the time and the skill to really dig deep and analyze these teams,” said Curtin. “We’ve been very clear. We believe they should be a part of the BCS process.”

 

As the BCS moves forward into the next four-year cycle, I’m suggesting this is something the conference commissioners should consider.  What would be wrong with adding a fourth element to the formula? Collectively, these men have 369 years of head coaching experience. Wouldn’t it make sense to take advantage of that experience?  It seems to me that it is an untapped resource that would help the credibility of a process that still remains the subject of much debate and scorn among college football fans.

 

Please follow me on Twitter:

http://twitter.com/MrCFB

283 comments Add your comment

Otto

November 17th, 2009
11:46 am

Huh!? Yes UGA picked up Az St, Okie St, L’ville, Oregon and traveled west of the Miss. River for the first time in how long to get in the top 2?

Texas played Ohio St to get over the edge. Ohio St. played USC to get in the Top 2.

How many would you have if every conf champ makes the playoff?

Billy

November 17th, 2009
11:47 am

I wish that people would get it through their heads: THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE A PLAYOFF! It gets so old listening to the whining year after year. Get over it! If you don’t like it, quit watching!

panhandle buzz

November 17th, 2009
11:51 am

The Legends Poll is a farce, too. In yesterday’s Sporting News, one of the voters, John Ralston, didn’t even have Georgia Tech listed in his top 10. If you look closely, I think you can see his oatmeal dripping off his chin, he must completely out of it.

GT4EVER

November 17th, 2009
12:10 pm

“Four tickets, four hot dogs, four cokes” … and 4 National Championships.

egeagle

November 17th, 2009
12:16 pm

Otto, it may never happen, but it would work out just fine. Use the conference champions and a few (2 or 3) at -large teams. Get your top 16, use minor bowls as early round games or have early round games on higher-ranked teams’ home fields. It seems that many college fans would rather argue than have issues settled on the field. I know that money and regional politics are hard to change. I know that these major teams are better, but the FCS champion is just that–a true champion.

Muck Fike Adams

November 17th, 2009
12:19 pm

GT4EVER – How can you say 4 National Championships? None of those were unanimous. You aren’t really a champion unless you won a playoff. There was no playoff 1917 or 1928. There were about 90% of the fans that fill your stadium back then though.

Thomas

November 17th, 2009
12:21 pm

Broken. How is it not broken when a team like tcu doesn’t get a chance to play for the title? That is the worst possible thing out there. You have these pollsters who put the teams they think are the best without it being settled on the field. You make excuses like, oh the toll it takes. Give me a break. They said the same thing before we moved to the 12 game season. And then they added the conf champ to make it 13. Then the bowl. Enough with the excuses. The integrity of the game is crap because we don’t crown a champion fairly. It’s that simple. And as for your retarded they won’t be fresh…then give the top 4 seeds a bye and have 5-12 play each other and the winners then play 1-4. Would that be fresh enough for you. Probably not.

StraightJacket

November 17th, 2009
12:21 pm

Tony, it must be heresy for you to think it, but using words like “AP poll” and “credible” in the same thought is non-sequitur.

Objectivity should be the goal. Objectively, I think TCU is the best team I’ve seen (and I’ve watched the entire Top 10 for at least 2 games each), and I’m not even agonizing over it. It just seems “clear” to me. But, I’m just ONE person. And that makes it SUBJECTIVE.

To make College Football OBJECTIVE, do ONE of TWO things, or just start over. Either (1) Give the Computer rankings MORE leverage (computers aren’t politically motivated by popularity contests) or (2) Have a playoff.

If you do NEITHER (1) or (2), then let’s just start over. Here’s how:

Let the powers that be at SEcSPiN use their influence to slant the championship to the SEC. Texas? TCU? Cincy? GT? Nah,… they can’t compete. So, why pretend?

In fact, the reality THIS year is that the SEC is only about 4 teams anyway. I mean, how EARLY did UF and ‘Bama clinch their divisions? Yeah. So much for “SEC Depth, Toughness, and Beating each other up”. Two undefeated teams in the conference. Anyway,.. here’s what SEcSPiN should do: Have a short round-robin season with UF, Bama, LSU, and Tennesse. Seed UF & Bama 1 & 2. If LSU or Tennessee can beat Bama or UF TWICE in one season (WITH SEC REFS!), then they can be BCS Champs that year. Otherwise, we just crown the UF – Bama Winner on December 5 as BCS Champs every year and move on to basketball.

The OTHER 116 teams join the FCS, and we have an 8 team playoff. SEcSPiN won’t bid for it, but I bet Fox would. We’ll FINALLY have a place for TCU to have their say, and I’m willing the bet that fans would LOVE it, and prove it with TV ratings.

Thats’ my solution, Tony. You can have your subjective nonsense and BCS.

-SJ

Honestly

November 17th, 2009
12:22 pm

Coaches should not have a vote! They are biased and self serving!!!!!

jumbeauxtiger

November 17th, 2009
12:25 pm

Colleges would never accept going back to 11 regular season games. Programs need the 12th game because of dollars.

LSU’s athletic department is fully self-supporting and receives no tax dollars from the State. Football funds all sports in full except baseball and basketball and could not support these programs if there was one less home game.

Tuck Fech 4Ever

November 17th, 2009
12:25 pm

If you only want to count unanimous national championships then Georgia Tech has ZERO!
Every single one of theirs is disputed (shared/co-champion)
LMAO

wreckbone

November 17th, 2009
12:33 pm

The system will suck until a playoff is in place. I know you guys say it will take forever, but the government changed daylight savings which had been in place for over 100 years in less than a year. So it can be done if people just dont stand for the same 4-6 teams getting a better shot than the rest. I’m sure you guys don’t care as the SEC gets those teams. But lets face it when UGA ended up out of the title game and 2 or 3 for the year not so long ago, they wanted a playoff system too. Even took time in the state senate (dont know what that will do) to talk about it.

Tide4u2c

November 17th, 2009
12:33 pm

Why can’t people just like college football? If you don’t like it stop watching it.College football has been around all of this time and it is its own thing.The traditions of it rivalries,bowls,etc make it great.Playoffs jeopardizes this and changes what we have loved for all of these years.And like I said playoffs will not change who wins the NC so why change it and ruin it?The BCS may not be perfect and could use some tweaking to improve it but it does not need such a drastic change that will not change who wins the NC.Besides who wants to see Bama vs Utah, or Florida vs TCU? It would be a ratings killer compared to Bama vs USC or Florida vs Texas,etc. I was glad Bama mae it to the sugar bowl last year but was dissapointed that Bama was rewarded by getting to play Utah, USC or Texas would’ve been a much bigger and better game.

Thomas

November 17th, 2009
12:37 pm

tide
Man you are clueless. First what kind of comment is this? playoffs will not change who wins the NC so why change it and ruin it

Huh? So the top 2 teams in the bcs are the best teams every year and no other team could ever beat them. Yeah riiiiight. Tell that to auburn in 2004. Or Ga in 2007. I would bet you everything I had that if you did a playoff, the 1’s and 2’s would not win more than 50% of the time. And a playoff would not take away from rivalries. You excuse making losers suck. Of course you want it this way. So you can play your crap schedule and only have to win one game to make it to the champ. yeah that’s such a great system.

wreckbone

November 17th, 2009
12:44 pm

Playoffs are the only way. Everything else is just a half measure. Even your might UGA wanted one when it suited them. What you guys afraid to play the likes of TCU and other cofnerence champs in playoff matchups?

StraightJacket

November 17th, 2009
12:50 pm

Tide4u2c, thank you for making my point, albeit unintentionally.

When our system assigns bowl game assignments based on avoiding “ratings killer” match-ups, then ALL objectivity has left the building.

Tide, like I said in my earlier post, Bama, UF, LSU, and Tennessee can stay in the BCS. We’ll crown your winner every December 5 in Atlanta.

The other 116 teams will join the FCS, have an 8 team playoff using the traditional bowls, and have an OBJECTIVE winner … based on who the BEST team is … not who the best “TV ratings matchups” will be.

The irony of it all? I bet our TV ratings will be higher than yours.

-SJ

Grant Teaff

November 17th, 2009
12:51 pm

I’m insulted you did include me in your list, except, perhaps, as an “among others.”

Steve

November 17th, 2009
12:52 pm

Thomas, did I say that the SEC CG and the BCS began at the same time? I don’t think so, in fact I remember the first SEC CG game played in 1992 in Birmingham. Also, I will never forget the first BCS NC game as my Vols beat FSU for the title in 1998. I mentioned the two in order to show how both have changed college football for the better. The BCS still isn’t perfect, but it works better than the old way which if we still had today would present a huge cluster, especially if two teams from the same conference were undefeated and did not play one another. As for TCU, if they win out and Clemson wins the ACC, then they should get some votes. Texas is overrated and really has had an easy schedule if you ask me.

Tide4u2c

November 17th, 2009
12:58 pm

Thomas,

You have playoffs in college basketball and who wins the NC? It is the big named schools(North Carolina) not the little named schools that might get in but lose in the end.We see this consistently sure it is possible for the little named teams to win but it almost never happens.And I do believe the two best teams are determined pretty accurately with this BSC system.Like I said the BSC is not perfect and could use some tweaking but I do not see why we need a playoff.

20 wins in a row

November 17th, 2009
12:58 pm

A one loss Texas, Bama, or Florida, well two of them deserve to play in the National Title Game over TCU, Cincinnati, and Boise State. Boise State’s schedule is a total joke so going undefeated after beating the one good team they played, Oregon is not that impressive. TCU comes from a very poor conference. Their two next games are against powerhouse Wyoming who is 5-5 and then the always tough New Mexico who is 0-10. Three or Four of the teams they have played this year already have 7 losses, another one 6 losses. Beating two maybe three good teams and coming from a horrible conference undefeated or not doesn’t deserve to be in the Title Game. Cincinnati isn’t that good either and I hope to see them lose to Pitt.

Huh?!

November 17th, 2009
1:08 pm

Tide4u2c — with that kind of logic the players would be still wearing leather helmets (if any).

Tide4u2c

November 17th, 2009
1:11 pm

Straight Jacket,

It does’nt sound logical from a business standpoint to put together games that are going to be “rating killers”. I mean you can ty to force your product on to your customers but they won’t like it.Like I said I was dissapointed that Bama got to play Utah last year in the Sugr bowk insead of Texas or USC and it was not as big of a game than if it had’ve been Bama vs USC in the Sugar bowl and the ratings would’ve been so much better. I say this because it seems that people want o push a playoff on college football just so we can watch the little named teams get beat.I’m talking about teams like Boise St and TCU,etc who might get in but would lose just like in college basketball.

Huh?!

November 17th, 2009
1:17 pm

Thomas — you missed the point. You’ve got Tony and a handful bloggers saying several teams (e.g., Florida, Alabama) schedule OOC cream puffs basically because they have everything to lose and nothing to gain when it comes to the idea of scheduling tougher opponents. If that’s true (and I’m not saying it is), then arguements about a playoff leading to this type of behavior are not valid (because the practice would already exist). I’m actually in favor of a playoff.

Honest Abe

November 17th, 2009
1:24 pm

P-man, conference realignment is an interesting idea. Some old rivalries could be maintained and some new ones created. Unfortunately, this has even less chance of happening than the playoff concept itself.

Thomas

November 17th, 2009
1:24 pm

Tide you are either dumb or ignorant.
First, the UNC’s don’t win every year. Go back and look. There have been 2 3 4 5 6 seeds that won the thing. Every now and then a 1 does make it. In fact most of the time, only one or two 1 seeds make it to the final 4. i beleive last year was the first time ever. So that comment is pure bs. No the best two teams AREN”T decided by the bcs and this year is solid proof. The hoirrible officiating is one issue. Then you get the fact that a tcu would possibly still be behind a one loss bama fla or tex from the idiots who vote. The ONLY solution is a playoff. Just like EVERY OTHER SPORT. Every major collegiate sport has a playoff except for football. It’s a joke.

ummmhmmmm

November 17th, 2009
1:27 pm

4 tickets , 4 hotdogs , 4 cokes
watching Jonathan Dwyer, Paul Johnson, Josh Nesbitt, Derrick Morgan, In the oldest on campus DIV I stadium in america where John Heisman Coached and Booby Dodd coached, With downtown Atlanta backdrop?

HELL YESS what a great deal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Otto

November 17th, 2009
1:28 pm

egeagle,

The system does create more talk than solutions to finding a national champion. The powers that see the checks know this and talk generates money. What you suggest would reduce the money that comes in for both the big and little guys.

Thomas, It is not broken because little TCU does not get a shot. They did not play a schedule like, Bama, Texas etc.

Please at UVA, Texas State, SMU, at Air Force, UNLV, Sann Diego St, Wyoming and New Mexico should not lead to a BCS title.

Tide4u2c

November 17th, 2009
1:29 pm

Huh,

Going to playoffs in college football would’nt make the schedules stronger.It would allow teams like TCU and Boise S with easy schedules to get in but lose to teams like Bama,Florida,Texas you get the idea.And schedules in the SEC rotate which is why Bama had the schedule they did but you can’t fault Saban for desiring easy schedules he has made it clear that he desires to see Bama play atleast 1 marquee OOC opponent every year.Florida St(ACC)Clemson(ACC)Virginia Tech(ACC) and next two years Penn St(Big 10) in a home and home because he believes it prepares the team for big games.So you can’t fault Bama for desiring a weak schedule this idea you have to load up and play 12 ranked teams or something is just silly.The SEC is a very competetive conference and it is good to have a few breather games and playoffs would’nt change it.It would just allow the teams that are in weak conferences and play weak schedules to get in but lose.

REALITY

November 17th, 2009
1:30 pm

UGA GLORY YEARS= JAN KEMP

Thomas

November 17th, 2009
1:31 pm

Huh
I don’t understand what you were saying at all. Fla and bama play cupcakes because they know all they have to do is beat 5 other teams in their conf, get to the sec champ game, win that and 99% of the time they are in the Nat champ game. That’s the major flaw with the system. Everyone remembers lsu two years ago with 2 losses. Yeah they were the best team. nope. Right now there are what 6 undefeated teams with 5 likely by the end of the season. 5 teams. And people say this okay? It’s these dunderheads that make CF such a bummer. Everyone knows a playoff would be amazing.

Otto

November 17th, 2009
1:31 pm

The ONLY solution is a playoff. Just like EVERY OTHER SPORT.

Yet Football makes more money. What do you think matters to the ADs and School admin?

Football in many instances supports these other programs and bussing them around on their noble quest for a true national champ.

Otto

November 17th, 2009
1:32 pm

Everyone knows a playoff would be amazing.

No we know what a great thing it would destroy.

Joe Bob Thibodaux

November 17th, 2009
1:33 pm

Tony, perhaps we should play college football for 52 weeks.
No, that is another bad idea, just like the “legends” concept.
I’m ok if there is some controversy at the end of the season over
who is number one. Its always been that way. The non finality of
the fans opinion is healthy for the game.

Thomas

November 17th, 2009
1:37 pm

Imagine a Friday and Saturday with these games on with a playoff. Yeah this just sucks.

1 fla vs 16 wisconsin
2 Texas vs 15 Va Tech
3 Bama Vs 14 Penn St
4 Tcu vs 13 Iowa
5 Cincy vs Ok State
6 Boise Oregon
7 Gt vs Ohio St
8 Lsu vs 9 Pitt

Oh wow. What awful games. No one would be watching!!! Everyone would turn it off. No one would be excited to fill out the brackets. Espn wouldn’t even talk about the mathcups. It would all be on pay per view tv. What a lame scenario.

Instead we get meaningless bowl games beginning in mid december against 6-6 teams leading up to boring bowl matchups. What really makes me laugh is all these people still wanting it the “old outdated way” and look how much they’ve changed the dates of bowl games and new years day bowl games are a joke now. Only one bcs game now and it’s the boring rose bowl. Yeah there;s your tradition.

Tide4u2c

November 17th, 2009
1:37 pm

Thomas,

You are wrong. If Bama loses a game they could be out of the NCpicture just like any other team but they have’nt lost. Imagina if Bama loses to Auburn in the Iron Bowl, the point is you can’t lose.Virginia Tech would be in the NC picture if they had’nt have started losing but they did.

VR Jacket

November 17th, 2009
1:39 pm

Why can’t we have our cake and eat it too?
A week after conf. championships, take the top 8 teams.
8 goes to 1 house, 7 to 2, 6 to 3, 5 to4.
next week,re-seed. 4 to 1 and 3 to 2.

Then stop.

the 6 that lost will still go to a bcs bowl(just like they would have anyway)and the two winners will play in the NC.

Simple.

Otto

November 17th, 2009
1:42 pm

Thomas, Ratings would fall just as they did in Basketball. Why? becuase the system gives more chance to next year.

Further what about the MAC, Sunbelt, and Conf USA teams that now get cut from a 16 team playoff? Where is their cut? They have bowls as it stands and an 8 or 16 team playoff would take much away from those bowls.

Joe Bob Thibodaux

November 17th, 2009
1:43 pm

After 10 weeks of continuous playoffs after the regular season, Hiawatha High School could beat most of the broken bodies teams remaining. But then, if we gave every school 200 football scholarships, then perhaps, just perhaps, we could achieve what I would call, the meaningless champion.

Thomas

November 17th, 2009
1:45 pm

They would make even more $ if there was a playoff. Exciting games and anticipation for great games is what brings in viewers. In fact, ratings on bowl games are not nearly as high as they have been except for the nat champ game cause that’s the only game that matters. Having 8 games that matter–then 4 then 2 then 1. Yeah no money and interest there.

Thomas

November 17th, 2009
1:47 pm

Otto

November 17th, 2009
1:47 pm

Joe Bob Thibodaux, 200 scholarships?

Don’t forget this age of parity is relatively new and scholarship levels were reduced to 85 in the 90s. Bump it back up to 95 and the TCUs, Boise Stats, and Utah of the world become much more rare. I would be all for it.

Steve

November 17th, 2009
1:47 pm

Guys:

Texas played Wyoming too. They also played Louisiana-Monroe, UTEP, and UCF. Their most impressive win is at Oklahoma State (which TCU can equal that with their win at Clemson). Texas has a weak conference schedule: Kansas (5-5 and currently unranked), Colorado (3-7 and currently unranked), Texas A&M (5-5 and currently unranked), Texas Tech (6-4 and currently unranked), Baylor (4-6 and currently unranked) and Oklahoma (6-4 and currently unranked).

TCU has beaten Clemson, BYU, Utah, SMU and Air Force. Each of these teams have winning records and we all know what Utah did to Alabama last year. So, saying that TCU has a weaker schedule than Texas doesn’t hold much weight with me.

Tony saw TCU play and said they were for real…..if so, vote them in ahead of Texas and let them play the SEC champion…..if that happens and the “big schools” get left out then things might change.

Delbert D.

November 17th, 2009
1:51 pm

Notre Dame got a vote? That shows that the “Legends” poll is not unbiased.

Thomas

November 17th, 2009
1:52 pm

tide
nope. i’ve listened to several media guys and they’ve said both fla and bama have their mulligan. if one or both were to lose their last game and then win the sec champ, they would still be in the nat champ game. and you know they would. that’s why you want this bs system. cause if you lost in the playoffs, you go home. it’s a joke.

Joe Bob Thibodaux

November 17th, 2009
1:54 pm

Otto, I was just attempting to make a point after. I can’t see a play off
system working unless it began the first week of the season, and that means
a sudden death system, “WIN EVERY GAME, or your out. Teams that get
better every week would already be eliminated and those with an easy draw
would be called the champion.

Tide4u2c

November 17th, 2009
1:57 pm

Playoffs is about giving teams who lose another chance because now as things are every games matters and teams that have lost desire another chance.With a playoff you could still get in if you slipped up and lost.It is also about allowing the little teams to get in but lose to the big named schools.The BCS could be tweaked alittle and improved but right now the bottom line is don’t lose.

Otto

November 17th, 2009
1:58 pm

Thomas, Nice of you to reply to the ratings.

They are up 7 percent over last year which was rather dismal, big deal. They are also up because a President was filling out his brackets and traditional pwoers were in the running such as Michigan St, UNC, and Duke. Just a few years ago the Tournament was all but a non event thanks to Parity. It took UNC and Duke to reverse the trend at all. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123742373482279229.html

Eventually the US will get a President that cares more about the economy than filling out his brackets, there will not be a matchup of traditional powers and the slide will continue in place of going up small perecentage points at the bottom of a steep decline.

So if Basketball is so great where is the big TV contract?

Voice of Reason

November 17th, 2009
1:59 pm

Dr. Frankenstein: “Egor, come in here for a moment!”
Egor: “Yesss, Dr. Frankenstein”
Dr. Frankenstein: “We have some more verk to be done on the monster”
Egor: “Yesss, Dr. Frankenstein. Vat vould you like me to do?”
Dr. Frankenstein: “Egor, hand me that wrench. Ahhh, that will just about do it”
Egor: “Yes, Dr. Frankenstein, Yesss, you’ve done it!!”

Thomas

November 17th, 2009
2:05 pm

tide
has cincy or tcu lost? don’t think so? what about auburn in 04? this system is not set up for 2 undefeated teams because that happening is a rarity. what is more likely is a bunch of 1 loss teams and one undefeated team OR like this year with 6 undefeated teams going forward. a playoff solves this problem and a playoff is not to reward teams that lost. a playoff, which every team sport in the world has, determines who is the best ON THE FIELD and not by some dicks sitting around writing articles on who they like the most and who is the most popular. get it?

Delbert D.

November 17th, 2009
2:05 pm

For a start:
Cut the conferences to traditional 10 teams, forget about conference championship games. Play all other 9 teams in-conference and 3 out of conference. The PAC 10 does this now.

Then have bowl play-in games between conferences in December.

Maybe this can lead to a playoff system if TV, sponsors, bowl people and Big 10 Luddites can all agree.