BCS Bowl Games: What the BCS Bowls Should Have Looked Like
So, the BCS bowls selections have come out, and it seems like everyone outside of Louisiana and Alabama are angry about what has transpired. A BCS championship against not just conference foes, but division foes seems unimaginable—especially since No. 3 Michigan was denied in 2006 when it lost to No. 1 Ohio State by the same margin Alabama lost to LSU this year.
Also, how many more times do we have to suffer through BCS games with two- and three-loss teams when there are one-loss teams high in the rankings? Why even keep the rankings when they don't even matter at the end of the year and teams are picked on some sort of popularity contest?
Four of the Top 10 teams in the country did not make a BCS bowl. Even if a conference cannot have three teams in BCS games that still leaves No. 7 Boise State and No. 8 Kansas State left out.
The bowls have become about pairing the two teams that will generate the most fans and money for the sponsors, the BCS and ESPN rather than pairing the best teams against each other.
I'm thankful MLB doesn't pick World Series foes like this or the Yankees would play the Red Sox every year.
Needless to say, most of us think that the BCS could have done a better job at putting quality teams against each other. So, here is how the BCS could have hit a home run in the bowls this year.
This is the only BCS bowl where the two teams that are playing in it are the right teams.
The Big Ten champ Wisconsin vs. Pac-12 champ Oregon will make for an excellent game. These two teams could not be more opposite, and even though I don't like bowl tie-ins for conference champions, in this situation it worked nicely.
Sadly, there is nothing that could have been done about No. 23 West Virginia playing against No. 15 Clemson without breaking the BCS rules since they are both AQ conference champions.
Well, after last year's UConn debacle I think it is definitely time to break this rule. While we're at it, let's break another rule and allow three teams from the same conference in to BCS bowls as long as they are in the Top 10.
Because Clemson is the ACC champion, we will keep it here, but West Virginia has no business in a BCS bowl. It lost three games this year with two of them being against Louisville and Syracuse, who combined for 12 losses.
To replace West Virginia, No. 6 Arkansas will get the nod and we will get to see a game between two good teams instead of the ACC champ versus the team that was lucky enough to survive a terrible Big East Conference schedule.
I agree that one of the two teams currently picked to be in this bowl should be there and that is Stanford; however, it should be facing the No. 2 team from the Big 12, not the No. 1 team.
No. 8 Kansas State with its ground game against Andrew Luck's air attack would not be as much of an offensive shootout if Oklahoma State and Stanford were to play but it would make the BCS a whole lot more credible, because Oklahoma State would be free to go where it belongs this year.
Also, I think pairing these two teams would make for a much more exciting game than watching Oklahoma State beat up on Stanford for four quarters.
Boise State lost one game by one point to the No. 18 team in the country and it gets relegated to a bowl before Christmas playing a barely bowl-eligible Pac-12 team. The Broncos deserve better than that.
Beating Georgia in the Chick-fil-A Kickoff Game was apparently not enough to prove Boise State can play with the "big boys." So, it should get another chance by facing Alabama in the Sugar Bowl.
Alabama had its chance at beating LSU to prove it's better than the best team in country and lost; it's now time to allow another team to try.
Nick Saban and the Crimson Tide seem like this would be a slap in the face to a program as "illustrious" as the Tide, making them just arrogant enough to shrug off a team like Boise State much like Oklahoma did in 2007.
Regardless of which team wins this game, Michigan and Virginia Tech do not belong here just because they may be able to bring more fans.
No. 7 Boise State vs. No. 3 Alabama would be much more compelling and would probably get higher ratings than the current matchup.
BCS National Championship
The reason Alabama was No. 3 in the previous slide is because Oklahoma State proved it belongs in the BCS National Championship by absolutely destroying an Oklahoma team that was picked to be one the best, if not the best team in the country at the beginning of the season.
I truly believe Oklahoma State would be able to put up double-digit points on LSU, something Alabama could not do. LSU would likely win the game, but Oklahoma State is the only team in the country that has a chance at beating the Tigers since Alabama proved it couldn't.
Oklahoma State and LSU are at their peak and showed it by dominating great teams.
Regardless of whether you believe Oklahoma State is better than Alabama or not, the fact of the matter is that Alabama did not even win its conference and Oklahoma State did. No conference championship means you don't deserve a national championship.
College football needed to see Oklahoma State go to the BCS National Championship to keep the BCS and NCAA relevant; now it looks like a popularity contest ran by a cartel.
What a shame.