In the 10 years of the BCS, we all have come to see many things. We've seen deserving teams left out of the BCS, undeserving teams admitted to the games, or coaches lobbying for poll position towards the end of November.
Many things are certain in college football. One team may beat another, and one team may be the best in the nation. But the BCS has the power to keep that team in or out by computer numbers (as well as other human poll factors).
The thing that is becoming more and more common is a team, trying to make ground in the polls, running up the score on its opponent.
For example, this year's Florida team has been absolutely dominating teams, and the reward has been a six-spot jump since the initial BCS polls came out. This team may not need lobbying to get play in the BCS title game, but it could never hurt.
Also, USC has struggled at times but shows no mercy when everything clicks (see victories against Washington and Washington State). Yes, I know these teams share one win between them (against Portland State...who?), but it's sad they couldn't score even a field goal.
Show No Mercy!
Oklahoma has tried as well to make up ground by pouring on the points (averaging 64 in two past two games). They put up 62 against a decent Nebraska team in three quarters and then put up 66 against a Texas A&M team in three quarters as well.
This may be more an argument of dominance though, since Bob Stoops has enough class to not put up scores in the fourth quarter of an ugly game. Or maybe his second team just can't put those points up.
- B/R Ticket Guide
For a huge argument against the BCS, just look at Boise State, the hailed Cinderella of all BCS games.
In all but one of Boise State's wins, the margin of victory has been more than 17 points. That game was against Oregon early in the season. It is a shame that a team that has been proven in the recent years still has to blaze over teams in such a fashion to get a chance at an at-large bid.
Of course, I know Boise State is a non-BCS school, but where is the fairness in that?
These are just four teams that may have to run up the score (whether because of flat-out talent or for making a point) and kill all that was once known to college football just to get in the BCS.
Obviously, some teams in rivalries like to run the score up a bit if last year's loss was painful (see Georgia/Florida this year).
Whatever happened to sportsmanship though?
Through the 10 years of the BCS, more people are recognizing completely unneeded blowouts. Teams and coaches are becoming bitter. Miami is a great example—Randy Shannon complained that Florida was trying to run up the score with a late field goal. Absurd? Yes.
This thought of running up the score is very much linked to Steve Spurrier, who was the mastermind of running the score up in Florida during the 1990s.
So where did it go, my friends? What happened?
I think the BCS has completely taken away a main part of college football. The focus now is on the BCS and how a team can move up the rankings, or how a team can be ranked third in the AP poll and ranked fifth in the BCS?
Hopefully my claims to this era of declining sportsmanship are correct. Honestly, in my eyes, this system seems to be a catalyst for unsportsmanlike games and play calling. The blowouts are becoming more frequent and by bigger margins.
How can we get away from this system?
I don't think anyone knows the answer to this question. There are many opinions that say a playoff is the way to solve it. However, the playoff gets complicated because it could cut into traditional rivalry games by slimming down the regular season. Also, you'd have a debate on how many teams should be in a playoff.
As for myself, I do not have the answer. I just think the BCS has created an atmosphere that is killing all sportsmanship because of the jockeying to regain title position or solidify title position. For non-BCS schools, they must try to get in by blowing out opponents.
All I know is that I miss my early and middle teen years style of football, where people would kneel down instead of take the scoreboard to the limits. I want those days back. I want a system of fairness and the rebuilding of sportsmanship across college football.
What do you think?
comments (30) write a comment »
write a new comment
about 1 month ago
I definitely agree. The California Golden Bears at a tremendous team and should have gone to a BCS game. The Bears only loss was to USC that year who won the championship. The Bears lost to a Texas Tech team in the Holiday Bowl.
Some would argue that it was for the fact that they didn't belong in a BCS bowl game because of the 45-31 loss, but in reality it had more to do that they were pissed off about the fact they weren't included in the BCS. The Bears were set to go to the Rose Bowl.
The reason the Bears weren't invited to a BCS Bowl Game it is because of Mack Brown. Brown was begging for votes for his Texas team.
Here's a quote from Aaron Rodgers about it.
"I guess we didn't run up the score at the end, or beg for votes after the game. I thought it was (wrong) for coach Brown to beg for votes (on television) after the A&M game."
On a side note the Bears had a chance to run the score up but instead took a knee on the final play of the game.
Rodgers is continues with this quote with stating "Would Bob Stoops (of Oklahoma) or Mack Brown have gone for the score there?" Yes, but coach Tedford is a classy guy. He isn't going to beg for votes, ever."
So, even though the Bears didn't get a chance at the Rose Bowl in 2004. At least Cal Bears fans can state that their coach has more class than the pathetic Mack Brown.
from about 1 month ago
Great supplement point! Thank you for the read and the in depth supplement. A lot of things happen in the BCS and the class acts always seem to get screwed.
from about 1 month ago
Steven-
Your Cal bears had no reason to be upset for not getting into a BCS game.
To say the reason they didn't win in their lesser bowl was because they were "upset".......
Thats just homosexual, or girly. I think they lost because they didn't play well, thats the mature manly excuse.
Their loss to Texas Tech does exactly what "they" claim, it proves that Cal didn't deserve a BCS bid, at all.
If the Bears would have went out and slaughtered or even beat the Red Raiders, that would have somewhat sent a message that they were deserving of more, but they didn't, and they obviously weren't.
By the way, if you don't recall, Tech lost to Texas by 30 points, then Tech beat your bears by 2 TDs.
Say whatever you want about Mack Brown(and im not a UT fan at all), they faced a much tougher schedule in 04',05' than did Cal(UT faced 5 teams in the top #25). Furthermore they WON the Rose bowl(it was actually in 2005, not 2004) with one of the best Rose Bowl finishes of all time......
But i see your river of tears is still-a-flowing.
from about 1 month ago
Wait a minute. Mack Brown's lobbying for an at-large BCS bid was based on the fact that his team had three consecutive 10 win seasons but had not received a BCS bowl bid. Like it or not, it was a valid argument.
And what was he supposed to do, not speak up? Coaches have always complained about rankings late in the season. From beloved Joe Pa in the 70's and 80's complaining because voters didn't consider PSU's annual cream-puff schedule to warrant a #1 ranking to Les Miles' "total body of work" argument for LSU last year to Pete Carrol's complaining this year, coaches lobby on behalf of their school - it's part of their job.
Pathetic Mack Brown? His record is great 112-26, 7-3 in bowls in 10 years. No real scandles and a high graduation rate. He has handled problems with class and character. Players love him. He holds his assistants accountable and rewards them for success.
What is pathetic is making excuses for losing "set to go to the Rose bowl."
about 1 month ago
Very good article. In Lloyd Carr's interview after he retired he said that we've become so obsessed with not just beating the other team, but embarassing them etc. I think he was spot on, and this coincides with your article.
Good work.
about 1 month ago
I don't see what you're talking about. This isn't pro football. College football is very volatile. A team can be up 36-0 at halftime and lose the game. Ask Troy.
College coaches have an obligation to keep trying to score as long as they can. It doesn't make any sense to keep your first string in if you are up by 4 or 5 scores in the 4th quarter, and they all take them out.
When you put your second string in, they are going to play as hard as they can no matter what you tell them. Is it your fault if the other team can't stop your subs?
You are totally overreacting.
from about 1 month ago
I don't know I think I have to agree with Jeff (above) and say that college football has become more about embarrassing the other team than about just winning the game in general. I have to disagree with you, but that's what keeps the world of sports interesting. I guess we just have to agree to disagree.
about 1 month ago
I'm not sure. I can understand if running up the score really correllated to higher BCS rankings but if you compare teams with large margins of victory in the human polls vs. the computer rankings (which don't factor in margin of victory at all), there's not a huge difference.
Also, there have always been large margins of victory. Spurrier's Florida teams regularly blew everyone out, only to be blown out in a NC game by Nebraska. And the largest margin of victory to date, 222-0, was by Heisman himself well before the BCS era. Granted, it is never fun to be on the receiving end of a blowout, but this is one of the few things we can't blame the BCS for.
from about 1 month ago
Exactly. If you're going to forward a theory like that, please back it up with some kind of evidence. College football has always had blowouts.
Also, if this was the case, there would be all kinds of examples of coaches jamming the ball in for 6 points with the clock expiring.
Like I said, I don't recall a game where the starters have been left in during the final minutes of a blowout. Coaches are trying to get their freshman valuable live playing experience.
Then Justin appears to have the intelligence to realize that starting a playoff is not a simple matter. Why pile on the BCS for something it isn't even responsible for?
from about 1 month ago
Lou,
Take a look at the box score of last week's Florida/South Carolina game.
Tim Tebow threw a TD pass in the 4th quarter with Florida already up 42-6. The Gamecocks weren't going to stage a 36 point comeback in the 4th quarter to upset Florida. They had 173 TOTAL yards! The game was completely out of reach.
Why was Tebow in the game at that point other than to stage a humiliating defeat for South Carolina and to increase his stats for the Heisman?
from about 1 month ago
It was a long Gator drive that extended barely into the 4th quarter. It was a 3rd quarter drive with a 4th quarter touchdown.
about 1 month ago
great read,
tom osbourne at nebraska ran up th e score just as much as spurrier. but in a way that was the NCAA's fault for making margin of victory part of the BCS formula (it was the 1st thing removed from the formula as well and rightly so).
the problem is even if we had a playoff system, coaches would still run up the score because the BCS and a playoff system would be based on the voters mostly and not every one of them watches all the games so like it or not, margin of victory plays a part in swaying voters whether or not its actually part of the BCS formula anymore.
sucks, but it's the way it is.
from about 1 month ago
Thanks for the read and input!
about 1 month ago
I think the teams do it because that is what is necessary to get up in the rankings. If margin of victory was taken out of the formula, I would hope head coaches would pull there starters out as soon as they had a comfortable lead as to minimize injuries to 1st string players.
But I agree, sportsmanship is slowly fading away from college football.
Teams that run the score up are viewed as dominant while teams that barely win are viewed as weak and suffer the consequences.
A team can be dominant without scoring 70 points. What about a team that holds an opponent to 200 total yards and wins 14-0? Why is that not considered to be a dominant victory?
Florida keeping its first string in during the 4th quarter last week against South Carolina was totally uncalled for. That game was totally out of reach.
from about 1 month ago
But I will say this. If a coach puts his second and third strings into the game and they continue to score...so be it. I have no problems with the young guys getting live game experience. If the opponent can't stop the second and third strings then that team has a big problem.
But keeping your starters in the game in the 4th quarter when the score is 60-0 is totally classless.
from about 1 month ago
Good points about the second and third string teams scoring. I completely agree. If you're team can't stop the second and third teams so be it.
from about 1 month ago
You name any year in the past 20, and I can come up with cases of "running up the score" which are just as obvious as this year's. Its apart of sports and its been going on since the pre-1900s between the Ivy leagues.
""A team can be dominant without scoring 70 points. What about a team that holds an opponent to 200 total yards and wins 14-0? Why is that not considered to be a dominant victory?""
Do you watch every single college football game on..?
What would you say if you didn't catch a game(like UF vs. The Citadel) because it not aired due to a probable blowout.....which is suppose to happen....now what would you think if you saw the final score and it was 14-0 gators?
How would the BCS compute this? Exactly.....the computers, aswell as every college football fan, would sense weakness......and maybe even drop UF below Texas...very possible. Understand?
""Florida keeping its first string in during the 4th quarter last week against South Carolina was totally uncalled for. That game was totally out of reach.""
The last 6 games the gators have played have been totally out of reach....should the gators just not play Tebow in the second half like they did against Vandy?
......the starters would like to play....its not their fault they dominate the other top teams in the country and they shouldn't be benched because of it.... they need the experience.
Regardless of how they play..the gators are young, they only have a handful of seniors on offense and not even 1 on defense!!!!
Let them play and ready themselves for Bama and beyond...duh.
from about 1 month ago
Carson,
When I made the statement about how 14-0 can be a dominant win, I wasn't implying that it be a game between a D-II school. Of course a 14-0 win over the Citadel would look suspicious.
But what if it was 14-0 Florida over #1 Bama in which Florida held the Tide to 175 total yards?
Wouldn't that be seen as a dominant performance by Florida, even without running up the score? I think it would be.
The BCS shouldn't compute margin of victory. A win should just be a win...regardless of the score. What's the difference?
Florida is trying to cover up their home loss to unranked Ole Miss by embarressing opponents. As long as margin of victory is still a factor, you can't blame them.
I just think it is a little unsportsmanlike.
I didn't say they shouldn't play Tebow in the second half, but when its the 4th quarter and you are up 42-6, does he really need to be in there?
Like I said, what if he had gotten hurt during that quarter and was out for the rest of the season? You don't think Gator fans everywhere would be questioning why he was even out there in the first place?
from about 1 month ago
Kent-
I can bring up tons of teams in the past which blew teams out, rarely took out their starters, and got higher bowl bids for demolishing those opponents(see the championship USC teams of recent).
You have to impress "the computers" to get into the big ones, in order to do that, you score as many points as possible while hold the opposing offense to as few....
Florida is doing this..........its football.....cry me a river.
about 1 month ago
There is no such thing as running up the score! What would you have a team do, slack, stop, let the other team score to keep a game close??? This is the real world. People lose in sporting competitions. I think a team should never stop till the game is over. Where do you draw the line with a "come-back?"
Teams have come back to overcome a 30 point deficit. So how can you say quit, or slow down, or stop scoring????
I don't have the answer to the BCS but, I think the team scoring should stay at it. Running up the score is realitive to a teams dominance.
from about 1 month ago
But is there a time to slow down a bit? I mean come on, there are lots of reasons for a running up of the score, but it's becoming all too familiar and spiraling downward because teams are trying to make up for lost ground.
from about 1 month ago
Steve,
If a team has a comfortable lead, like Florida did against South Carolina last week, they should pull out their starters and let the 2nd and 3rd string players get into the game and get some real playing time. If those guys happen to score then good for them. It will be good experience for them as they begin their maturation.
But keeping Tebow in during the 4th quarter last week with Florida already up 42-6 makes you scratch your head. Did Urban Meyer really believe South Carolina was going to suddenly jump to life and rack up 36 points in one quarter? I highly doubt it. South Carolina was held to under 150 yards going into the 4th quarter. The game was completely over by that time. Then Tebow throws a TD pass.
What if Tebow had his leg or arm broken in the 4th quarter of that game? I bet you would be singing a different tune right now.
It is all about style points and coaches know it. They should do away with the whole margin of victory aspect in the BCS.
about 1 month ago
Good article, my friend.
The BCS doesn't always get it right, and I can see how it lowers the morals and busts the pride of alot of teams along the way in an unsportsmanlike manner.
But until they do come up with a better system or a +1 or +2 playoff system we are going to have to deal with it. I think so far, this year, the BCS has the rankings pretty dead on, though, which is a rarity considering it's past.
about 1 month ago
Of course the BCS is responsible for this. It's a scapegoat and the fact that nothing can be determined on the field causes teams to take every incentive they can. Here in Utah, Brigham Young fans cannot in good faith cheer for their beloved Cougs to beat the Utes because this results in the loss of precious funds. Why do we have to vote for our champion? Why do coaches have to lobby for these said votes? It's ridiculous and no matter how Lou Vozza (God rest his soul) spins things, the BCS is still a cartel, it still violates the Sherman Act and it still is oppression. We need a playoff!
about 1 month ago
I think a blowout due to starters being in late in the game reflects more on the head coach than it does the BCS system, is all.
from about 1 month ago
Yeah I agree, but what I'm trying to say is that the BCS is the catalyst for these kinds of decisions by head coaches that cause the lack of sportsmanship.
about 1 month ago
Also, look at the margin of victory the 2006 Florida team had in its title run. That runs counter to your argument.
from about 1 month ago
And of course it's not every team, but it is tending to happen more and more, not just Florida but across all conferences. It's just disappointing.
about 1 month ago
Again, why would a starter like Tim Tebow have his stats suffer when he earned the right to start. I agree the second and third stringers should play but, not till the fourth quarter, after the starters have a chance to make good. I don't believe it has anything to do with poor sportsmanship. If a team is capeable of putting up remarkable numbers they should do it.
This is football, this is hard work, fighting for the full 60 minutes. This is life. Does anyone really think a person making $200,000 a year feels bad for the person making $30,000? Who do you know that wants to "make it more even at thier own exspense???"
If we're talking about pee-wee football, maybe. Are we??
about 1 month ago
Deliberately piling on points late in the game is classless but it is not new with the BCS era. Teams have been running up the score for years. Don't like it - play defense!
Also, the rules of football have been tinkered with for years to generate more offense. With modern coaching and early development the offense are extremely potent. How many schools play 3 yards and a cloud of dust football anymore? The modern passing game is designed to generate points fast when everything is working. Games can get out of hand quickly if you don't make the adjustments and stop a Florida, Texas, OU, etc.
write a new comment