In the 2007 game, USC handled Michigan 32-18, and while Michigan did not show up for the game, they did deserve to play in a BCS game, as their only loss that year came at the runner-up Ohio State Buckeyes.
The 2008 game was different story, though, as "The Committee" insisted on a Big Ten/ PAC-10 showdown, and the game was not even close. USC trounced an over matched and undeserving Illinois squad 49-17. Illinois certainly should not have played in that game, as the Illini (9-3 entering that game) had lost in their opener to a Missouri team that went 11-2 in the regular season and lost in the Big 12 title game.
Such scenarios represent the Rose Bowl committee's stubborn refusal to sacrifice its conference ties for the best game possible.
As if these weren't enough reasons to criticize the BCS, the likelihood of such a change seems small just because the NCAA already missed its best opportunity to change the system.
Remember back in the 2004 season when Oklahoma, USC, and Auburn all finished the year undefeated?
Auburn got snubbed by the BCS system and was left playing Virginia Tech in the Sugar Bowl. Most people forget that season's events as an example of the system's flaws, because USC drubbed Oklahoma 55-19 in the Orange Bowl, and Auburn only defeated the Hokies 16-13. Still, the Tigers went undefeated and deserved some sort of shot at winning the national championship, even if they would likely have been over matched against such a talented Trojans squad.
Another issue is the egregious number of bowl games already in order. Remember when going to a bowl was actually a privilege? That's not the case anymore.
Last season there were 32 bowl games, and two more have been added to the schedule this year for a total of 34. 68 teams will be needed to fill these slots, and last year there were "only" 71 bowl-eligible teams.
Consider this relative to 1995, when there were just 18 bowl games and thus only 36 teams went to bowls. Those were the days when playing in a bowl game actually carried some merit.
Still, as large as this number has become, don't expect it to drastically shrink, if it even does at all. The schools have too much to gain by playing in these games, and thus the number is not likely to fall.
Certainly NCAA football is one of the most entertaining organized sports in the nation, but come post-season time the excitement does not reach its maximum potential. The current system is flawed in a number of ways, as noted above, but the financial benefit for the schools and conferences continues to out-weigh the flaws.
And as long as we fans continue to watch these games, what's to stop the NCAA and its components—schools, conferences, and TV networks—from continuing to operate with this system? Not much, considering the NCAA is still profiting from this flawed system.
7 Comments
Loading more comments...
This comment and all replies have been deleted This comment has been deleted Undo delete