Miami Canes' No. 10 BCS Ranking is a Slap in the Face to College Football
The first edition of the BCS Standings were released Sunday and it's apparent that strength of schedule holds no weight in the confusing world of the BCS. The Miami Hurricanes opened up the season by playing four straight Top 25 opponents, going 3-1 over this stretch.
Their only blemish was to a tough Virginia Tech team in Blacksburg, where they were ambushed by bad weather and a tough Hokies defense. The U also accomplished this feat with one of the youngest and most talented teams in college football. It's hard to imagine that an ACC team with a 5-1 record and a strong strength of schedule would open up their BCS journey at the No. 10 spot but that is exactly what happened.
Boise State and Cincinnati came in at the No. 4 and No. 5 spots respectively but in my opinion neither of their schedules warrant them being ranked over the Hurricanes. Boise State's only Top 25 opponent so far this season has been Oregon, who was ranked No. 8 at the time. Not to mention they recently struggled to pull out a victory over an unranked Tulsa team.
Cincinnati's only top 25 opponent has been South Florida, who at the time was ranked No. 21. The Bearcats 34-17 victory came against a Bulls team that was without its starting quarterback Matt Grothe, who is lost for the season. Although both Boise State and Cincinnati are undefeated, their lackluster strength of schedule has protected them from being truly challenged.
It will be interesting to see what happens from here on because it appears the Canes will not play anymore ranked opponents. The U's schedule was stacked at the beginning of the year instead of towards the end, which may prove to be costly.
The U will need a few teams to falter in order to even crack the top five, especially with LSU, TCU, USC, and Iowa ahead of them. All of those teams play in respectable conferences and have schedules that are up to par, elements that a deserving top five BCS team should have.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?