What Would've Happened In 1996?

[donovan]

We need a kickoff

[billybud]

Florida would not have played for the NC in 1996 under the BCS provisions...they lost to FSU in FSU's last game of the season. FSU was undefeated and #1 while Florida fell to 3rd in the AP.. The BCS would not have rematched these teams in the next game.

Why? Because Florida wasn't the #2 team, they were ranked #3.

On the last AP poll before the bowls (December 9, 1996)..Arizona St., with one loss, was #2 and would have been matched with #1 FSU.

One really can't recreate or even guess what the computers would have done...nor what the Harris might have done.....I am guessing that they would pretty much track the AP poll and that FSU would have played #2 Arizona St.

#2 Arizona State, instead played #4 Ohio State while #3 Florida played #1 FSU....

It would have been Arizona State vs FSU for the NC....

[billybud]

And..I tried to actually answer the proposed question...(CLF take notice).

CLF...if you want to know why you get grief...you put words in peoples mouths and lecture like like a scolding old woman.

The original poster only asked if the BCS methodology was in place in 1996, would Florida have played for the NC. I went to the trouble to research and attempt to answer the question...it beats a snide scold.

[WoVeU]

I thnk BB has the 96 NC game right. And I think that would have been huge for FSU. It is very hard to beat a good team twice!

[Derek]

Florida would not have played for the NC in 1996 under the BCS provisions...they lost to FSU in FSU's last game of the season. FSU was undefeated and #1 while Florida fell to 3rd in the AP.. The BCS would not have rematched these teams in the next game.

Why? Because Florida wasn't the #2 team, they were ranked #3.

On the last AP poll before the bowls (December 9, 1996)..Arizona St., with one loss, was #2 and would have been matched with #1 FSU.

One really can't recreate or even guess what the computers would have done...nor what the Harris might have done.....I am guessing that they would pretty much track the AP poll and that FSU would have played #2 Arizona St.

#2 Arizona State, instead played #4 Ohio State while #3 Florida played #1 FSU....

It would have been Arizona State vs FSU for the NC....

While I agree with your reasoning, I think the computers might have paired FSU & Florida. Look at Oklahoma losing their CCG and still going to the NC game.

I can't help but think that the SOS in play for even the early formulas would have put Florida ahead of a Pac 10 opponent like ASU.

Just conjecture on my part.

[CFP Admin]

For whatever it's worth to the subject, CCR had FSU #1 and ASU #2 at the end of the regular season. As they were the only remaining undefeated teams, I would expect both major polls would have them ranked the same way. The computers, therefore, would likely not be able to change the matchup but, since the CCR had those teams ranked 1-2, it is fairly logical to expect that at least some of the other computers would have had the same ranking. Conclusion: Had the BCS been in place in 1996, the title game matchup would have been FSU-ASU. BTW, the CCR would have had FSU favored by around 6 points based on their power #'s at the end of the regular season.

[Spence]

I don't believe we should every have a rematch of a regular season game in a the championship game.

[RazorHawk]

..

[RazorHawk]

The Holiday bowl was quite low in the pecking order, so getting a top match for the Cougars was not an easy chore. It did however pave their way to a National Championship.

[billybud]

I believe it was implicit in how you phrased the question

.

I was about to blast this poster but had a thought. He has consistently shown that he can not read a simple statement without bending the original posters intent, without stating that the poster is saying something that he is not. But maybe I should be more tolerant. There may be an underlying cause which would deserve tolerance for this constant lack of comprehension.

Reading is a complex cognitive process of decoding symbols for the intention of deriving meaning and/or constructing meaning. This poster displays that he has difficulty constructing meaning. Children who have had a severe closed head injury (traumatic brain injury), particularly if it occurs before six years of age, sometimes do not develop accomplished decoding skills. Difficulty with text comprehension is a hallmark of childhood head injury.

Maybe, when I have been thinking, "someone dropped CLF on his head", I have been hitting close to home.

I am chastened. Some folks are challenged by events that were not of their making and deserve to fully participate in society, including recreational message boards, without being derided.

I will attempt to be more understanding of these posts.