This year has been quite an anomaly in college football. TCU and Boise State have been making noise for a few years and everybody seems to keep hoping that they'll finally make the coveted step into the National Championship Game.
Coming from what are considered the weaker conferences of the Mountain West and the WAC, these two teams' undefeated records never carry them very far on their own. They've done everything in their power to get more challenging games on the schedule and have succeeded to some extent, but the impressive, early non-conference wins lose their luster as the conference schedules begin.
Every week it seems TCU and Boise State win 50-something to less than 10. Are people bored with these blowouts? Do they find them continually unimpressive?
I think there has never been enough credit given to teams who make their first games of the season the most challenging. Instead of scheduling a game they are sure to win just so they can work some kinks out, TCU and Boise State both scheduled games against teams that entered the season ranked in the top 25.
Other than their opponents, Oregon State and Virginia Tech, how many other teams had this challenge? Not very many; LSU defeated North Carolina, who was ranked No. 18 at the time and fell off the map completely. That was the only other pairing of top 25 teams in Week 1. It's probably of little surprise that only four teams from the top 25 lost in Week 1, the fourth being Pittsburgh who lost to Utah, who has spent every week other than Week 1 unranked.
TCU is set. After defeated perennial cinderella sister Utah and surviving the scare of San Diego State in their last two games, the Horned Frogs need only to beat a dismal New Mexico team to be assured of a BCS bowl game.
Boise State doesn't have it so easy. They play at the No. 18 Nevada Wolf Pack this coming week and while a win might boost them over TCU in the BCS standings, a loss will most unfortunately mean they'll have no chance at a BCS bowl game and that is just plain sad.
Ohio State lost to Wisconsin. Wisconsin lost to Michigan State. Michigan State lost to Iowa and all of these teams have a legitimate shot at the Rose Bowl or another BCS bowl game, having one loss to a ranked opponent. Why would Boise State not receive consideration despite one loss?
The problem for Boise State and TCU, however, is not the Big Ten; it is the Big East. Come to think of it, the problem for the three one-loss Big Ten teams is the Big East, as well.
The Big East has no teams ranked in the top 25 in any ranking system. West Virginia boasts its best record at 7-3. It looks as though either West Virginia or Pittsburgh will end up representing the Big East in a BCS game against an opponent that will most likely destroy them.
I realized that it is possible in the Big East for a school to win the conference, but not be bowl eligible. They play seven conference games and five non-conference games with no conference championship game. Upon going 0-5 in non-conference games and 5-2 in conference games, a 5-7 team could feasibly win the Big East. What trumps what in this scenario, bowl eligibility or the automatic BCS bid for winning the conference? No information seems to be available on this scenario. If you find some, do enlighten me.
So who is going to make it into the BCS bowl games with one slot of what are supposed to be the top 10 teams in the country goes to the underachieving Big East.
Oregon still has to defeat No. 22 Arizona and Oregon State, neither of which will be cake walks, to attain its No. 1 status and enter into the National Championship Game.
Auburn has an even tougher road, playing at No. 11 Alabama and vs. No. 17 South Carolina at a neutral site.
The breakdown, I believe will be like so:
Pac-10 — Oregon and/or Stanford
Big Ten — Wisconsin and/or Ohio State or Michigan State
Big 12 — Oklahoma State or Oklahoma or Nebraska or Missouri
SEC — Auburn and/or LSU or South Carolina
ACC — Virginia Tech or Florida State or North Carolina State
Big East — West Virginia or Pittsburgh
Mountain West — TCU
WAC — Boise State
Decision makers are going to have a hell of a time deciding who is in and who is out. The Big Ten is already a debacle with three good one-loss teams and only two from a conference can go, so we're very likely looking at a one-loss power conference school that won't be in a BCS game. Reminds me of Missouri a few years back.
Not only that, if Oregon, Auburn TCU and Boise State all win out, we're not only face with one Big Ten one-loss team being left out, but potentially two.
The six conferences will have their automatic bids. TCU and Boise State will have the first at-large bids given to them, then there are only two spots left for four potential one-loss teams, Stanford, LSU, and the two Big Ten teams that didn't win the conference.
What a mess! In some years, one loss schools like Wisconsin, Stanford, LSU, Ohio State, or Michigan State would be considered for the National Championship Game, but this year, they'll be left out of the BCS system completely.
The automatic bid system needs to be reworked. I've pleaded for consistency for conference championship games in the past and it seems like the Pac-10 (soon to be 12) and the Big Ten (really 11, soon to be more) are heading in that direction, but the Big East is still a problem.
A team that wins its conference and has four losses is a team that doesn't necessarily deserve to be a team playing in one of the five premier bowl games.
I think there should be an immediate implementation of a clause that says, "Automatic Bid Conferences that cannot produce a team with three or fewer losses will lose their automatic bid." Perhaps that number should even be changed to two.
November 23, 2010
Anthony Brancato:
About 30 years ago my parents went on vacation to Hawaii. One day they were on a tour bus that was driving through Hilo; during the trip the tour guide was imparting various information about Hawaii’s history, including, among other things, how virtually all of its elected officials since acquiring statehood have been Democrats. At one point the bus went through a poor neighborhood, and the tour guide said something to the effect that this area had been poor for a long time, and asked, rhetorically and aloud, what could be done about its poverty - whereupon my politically-conservative father couldn’t resist blurting out: “Get rid of the Democrats.”
In a similar vein, how does one go about resolving the problem of who deserves an automatic bid in the BCS?
The answer couldn’t be easier: Get rid of the BCS!
November 23, 2010
Andrew Jones:
Anthony-Your example has something which can replace the thing being removed.
What are we replacing the BCS with? As many would argue the republicans that would replace said democrats may not improve the situation or would create new problems. The same is true of the BCS, but any replacement comes with its own snags and problems.