Well, well, well… amazing what a loss to Stanford does to a soul. After playing in all those BCS title games of recent vintage where never was heard a discouraging word, Pete Carroll has suddenly gotten playoff religion:
It looks to me like the BCS system is one that, at the end of the process, designates the team that had the most attractive season based on who they played and what their record is at the end and all of those things that you add up. In my opinion it does not have anything to say about who the best team is at the end of the year, meaning that, who would be the team that would win if you had a playoff, and who’s playing the best football?
I’m not saying that’s us. But there are teams out there – and we’re one of them – that could arguably be able to beat any team in America when the time comes…We’re playing the game to see how far we go and how far we can take it.
[…]
The only way you get it perfect is to play ’em off…
Evidently this just dawned on him one day. I’m sure USC’s having no crack at the BCS title game the last two seasons has had nothing to do with this revelation.
I will say this, though. If you read that first paragraph of his comments carefully, it does frame the BCS/playoff debate nicely. Do we care about what the teams accomplish over the course of an entire season, or do we just care about seeing who gets hot in a playoff? Because those are radically different matters. And that’s really what the debate ought to be about.
Get The Picture 
Conference champs need only apply to the upcoming playoff system. Then, the regular season is just as meaningful – if not more so.
LikeLike
But that’s not what Carroll seems to be saying here. His argument is that a school’s more recent body of work should be the most significant factor in putting together a college football postseason.
I disagree, obviously, but from a philosophical standpoint, it’s certainly as valid a position as mine is.
I’d just have a little more respect for him saying it if he’d done so four years ago.
LikeLike
LMBO, Senator, preach all you want. THIS PARTICULAR SEASON, all we’ve seen is what two teams can do when they don’t have to play much of anyone at this point.
LikeLike
Right. Like when USC played Stanford. 😉
LikeLike
You know as well as I that if we’re judging a team’s merit over the whole season, then OSU nor WVU would be ranked where they are at right now.
I agree to a certain extent that it shouldn’t be all about getting hot at the end, but don’t try to patronize this argument by focusing on USC. What has OSU done to show you they are the third best team in the country over the whole season?
Lose to one ranked team? The fact is, their loss might be the most impressive game they’ve played all year.
LikeLike
Wait a minute. Where have I ever said OSU is the third best team in the country right now?
I’m not posting this to justify whether a particular team should be playing for the MNC right now. My point was to look at the debate that establishes the entire postseason pool for the MNC.
If you want to jump my case, at least be on topic.
LikeLike
You don’t discuss that “off topic” issue cause that dog won’t hunt for you. You know as well as I do that this system has given us three teams right now in position to play for a national title, and no one in the country believes they’d beat the three or four teams behind them straight up.
MO will get a chance to prove themselves this week after failing to the first time. I guess you could make a argument that they beat Illinois, but you’d be the last person I’d suspect that cold make that argument and not have egg all over your face.
WVU’s most impressive win is against Miss. St. Croom has done a great job there, but come on. They have beaten anyone of significance unless the other team handed it to them with a multitude of turnovers.
And the OSU??? please.
That’s what the BCS has given us this year. And it will continue to do so, because the schedules are so out of whack and the pollsters continue to vote in such a way that allows it.
And know, having the poll start halfway through the season won’t fix it. OSU would be right where they are now.
LikeLike
If you were voting on which teams to include in an eight team playoff (since you indicated elsewhere that this season would justify an extended playoff), would you have OSU and WVU as participants? What about a four team playoff?
LikeLike
In that scenario, OSU and WVU would have to prove their worth and they’d get a chance to do it.
If it were a four team I would not want OSU in it. OSU would not be in the top four on my ballot.
You again dodge the question. Do you really think WVU and OSU are the second and third best teams in the country based on “the whole season” as you put it? We’re not talking about hot endings here. Want to clarify that cause I know that’s where you’ll go next.
LikeLike
I’m old-fashioned. I prefer the playoffs method.
LikeLike