Bill Hancock’s “jes’ folks”

Flashing the low-key bullshit that’s endeared him to millions, the BCS Director spins the current battle over playoff formats like so (h/t One Foot Down):

“… But generally, there’s up sides and down sides to everything. Obviously if you have 1, 2, 3 and 4, you’ve got a pure bracket: 1 versus 4 and 2 versus 3. But if you take the conference champions — the top four ranked conference champions — then the regular season, which is the best in sports anyway, may mean even more. But then you would have a question about, ‘Well, what about No. 2 Alabama?’ This year, if it had been the conference champions, it would’ve been teams ranked 1, 3, 5 and 10. And is that what the public wants to see? I really don’t know. From what I’ve heard, folks are about divided 50/50 on it.”

“Folks”.  You.  Me.  Jim Delany.  Mike Slive.  Yeah, that’s it – we’re all getting together tonight after work to discuss this stuff over a few beers.  (Maybe we can reach a consensus, although Jim said he couldn’t stay late… said he had some shopping to do, although I always thought he was big on re-gifting.  But I digress.)

Who’s kidding who here?  The folks who think it would have been swell to have the tenth-ranked team dropped in to a playoff ahead of six teams ranked higher are Delany and the people to whom he would have cut those postseason checks.

Bill Hancock really should get out more.  Or blather less.

About these ads

2 Comments

Filed under BCS/Playoffs

2 responses to “Bill Hancock’s “jes’ folks”

  1. AusDawg85

    Just create a new Poll that automatically ranks conference champs in the top 4. That’s as stup….errr….valid as any other poll.

    /#mummepoll!

    • Cojones

      They will probably try to make the polls even more subjective this year where you are brain dead by the time they “select” the top four. The select four is no different than selecting two, only more angst will now be spread as ammo for the writers. Everyone will discover that this selection method, with twice the teams, will be twice as bad. Onward backwards.