Much Ado About Nothing: The 2009 BCS
So, our "championship game" is set; Texas vs. Alabama.
They mercilessly navigated the best teams in the land and settled it on the field. Defeated all comers...
Yeah, that's about as far as I can get before I start laughing.
At the end of "the most important regular season in sports" (as it is claimed by BCS fat cats), we had five undefeated teams... three of which never had a chance because the other two simply never slipped up.
Perhaps they should change the motto to "the most important pre-season poll in sports?"
To the TCU Horned Frogs, let's be perfectly honest. You fellows were never going to the "championship game," even if Texas lost.
Forget all the fabricated speculation of how it would go the fractions if Texas were upset. The Horned Frogs weren't going.
Yes, I know, TCU beat more ranked teams than Texas.
Yes, I know, TCU had more "quality wins."
Yes, I know, Texas looked like absolute garbage against a team that couldn't move the rock with a bulldozer.
Yes, I know, TCU is probably the better team head to head. In one game between TCU and the Longhorns, I'd bet the Horned Frogs straight up over Texas.
But let me explain something about the BCS, it's not about putting the two best teams into the national championship.
This is a system that has passed over the consensus No.1 team in the past.
This is a system that sent a team that didn't even win its own conference to the "title game."
This is a system that has passed over undefeated teams for teams with one or even two losses.
The BCS is about saving itself and preserving a fictional power structure. There would have been absolutely no way a team like TCU gets the nod for the national championship game.
What happens if a "mid-major" team actually wins such a game?
You know, like they have at a 75% clip against "power conference" schools in BCS games?
The entire landscape of college football would change. The "power conferences" wouldn't have a leg to stand on, and they know it.
You don't think the big bowl fat cats aren't heaving a massive sigh of relief that the referee of the Big 12 Championship decided that there really was one more second at the end of that game?
Hell, having seen the finagling this system has done to get the pre-conceived results they wanted, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that the BCS commissioner himself was screaming into the replay headset.
Even if Texas had lost, and I think deep down everyone in Fort Worth knows this, Cincinnati would have been vaulted over them. And if Cinci wasn't impressive enough (they didn't look all that good in their last game either), we'd be looking at an Alabama/Florida rematch.
But ya know what... no.
Let's drop the conspiracy theories.
I don't need them to prove that once again, the NCAA should demand the BCS drop the C for the sake of academic accuracy.
The proof that the BCS doesn't work, hasn't worked, and never will work, is sitting right on your morning paper (or morning webpage, I suppose... who reads print newspapers anymore?)...
Boise State 13-0
Three of those teams will never get a chance to be national champion, and that isn't right.
Meanwhile, in the snow blown fields in Allendale, Michigan; my alma mater, Grand Valley State University, is getting ready to go to the Division II national championship game.
But they didn't get there by voters.
Nor did they get there by computers.
They got there by beating all comers, most recently by virtue of a 41-27 win over Carson-Newman, in the semi-final of the Division II play-off .
Make no mistake, a play-off system doesn't solve everything. It's not perfect. There's still "what ifs" and "coulda beens" and "if onlys"...
... but at least those talk about events on the field of play. No one can say they didn't get their chance.
Someone try to tell that to TCU and Cincinnati right now.
In the end, its much ado about nothing... because that's all the BCS truly decides.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?