Bleacher Report - BCS Controversy

Basketball Championship Series? The BCS: College Basketball Edition

LaRue Robinson — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 20:31:17 -0500

There has been a historic level of outcry this year regarding the injustice of the BCS. Many complain that the BCS is fundamentally unfair because it awards undeserving teams the chance at a title (i.e., 2007 Ohio State) while, on the other hand, depriving deserving teams of a similar opportunity (i.e., 2004 Auburn, 2008 Utah). To put this system to the test I decided to apply the BCS’s logic to the college sport with the most free-for-all (and fun to watch) postseason series—college basketball. To do this, I dug up the final AP Top 25 Poll for each of the last ten seasons to discover which teams were ranked in the top two (this poll comes out before March Madness begins and after the conference tournaments). Then, I researched how far each of those two teams advanced in the tournament. I also found the AP Top 25 rank of the tournament champion each year and placed that information below as well.

I chose the AP Poll as opposed to the Coaches’ Poll due to the scrutiny the Coaches’ Poll has received (See Steve Spurrier and the delegation of voting issue). Also, the No. 1 and No. 2 teams in the AP Poll have mirrored the top two in the final BCS poll almost every year.

The results of this research were very interesting. The national champion was only ranked in the top two in the final AP Poll a mere four of the last ten years. Even more startling, the No. 1 and No. 2 ranked teams played in the championship game in the same year only once (2004-05). Here are the results:

2008-09: No. 1 Louisville (Elite Eight), No. 2 North Carolina (Champion)

2007-08: No. 1 North Carolina (Final Four), No. 2 Memphis (Runner-up), Champion: No. 4 Kansas

2006-07: No. 1 Ohio State (Runner-up), No. 2 Kansas (Elite Eight), Champion: No. 6 Florida

2005-06: No. 1 Duke (Sweet Sixteen), No. 2 Connecticut (Elite Eight), Champion: No. 11 Florida

2004-05: No. 1 Illinois (Runner-up), No. 2 North Carolina (Champion)

2003-04: No. 1 Stanford (Second Round), No. 2 Kentucky (Second Round), Champion: No. 7 Connecticut

2002-03: No. 1 Kentucky (Elite Eight), No. 2 Arizona (Elite Eight), Champion: No. 13 Syracuse

2001-02: No. 1 Duke (Sweet Sixteen), No. 2 Kansas (Final Four), Champion: No. 4 Maryland

2000-01: No. 1 Duke (Champion), No. 2 Stanford (Elite Eight)

1999-00: No. 1 Duke (Sweet Sixteen), No. 2 Michigan State (Champion)

All of these teams were No. 1 seeds.

This data reveals a number of interesting points.

First, it parallels college football in that one of the top two teams tends to not really belong there almost every year. Duke basketball would have been the equivalent of Ohio State football if the BCS existed in basketball.

Many may argue that the basketball post-season is too large (which opens the door to an uncharacteristic or surprising loss), but if a team can’t make it past the Sweet 16 (as Duke failed to do three times when ranked No. 1) then it is difficult to argue that the team is really one of the two best. If you stretch the “deserving” category to include Final Four teams (due to the no-holds-barred 64 team format) then still only nine of the 20 teams above would be deserving of a BCS championship game opportunity.

Secondly, the data suggests that a sixteen team playoff would be the necessary parameter for a college football playoff that ensures all teams with a solid chance of winning are included. In the last ten years in basketball the winning team has never been ranked outside of that. An eight team playoff could be the next best thing, however, since eight of the ten years the college basketball champion was at least ranked in the top eight.

Nonetheless, since two teams ranked from No. 8- No. 16 could make it through a 64 team gauntlet, which is surely larger than a college football playoff would ever be, they deserve inclusion in any college football playoff.

Thirdly, the BCS is as likely to be absolutely wrong as it is absolutely right. 2004-05 was the only year it would have been absolutely right. On the other hand, 2003-04 it would have been absolutely wrong since it would have matched up two teams who couldn’t get past the second round.

There are many other conclusions one could try to draw from this information, but I hope this kind of data makes its way into the football playoff conversation. Regardless of the conclusion you may personally draw from this data, as a lawyer, I can only think of one phrase that is fitting for this data—res ipsa loquitor (the thing speaks for itself).

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

Bowl Matchups Robbing Us of Progress (And It's Not a Playoff Problem)

Nino Colla — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 20:04:23 -0500

Every year people root for chaos within a system they believe doesn't do them justice in determining who should play for the highest achievement in all of college football.

Many don't want to hear it, but they've been steered wrong in their thinking. The Bowl Championship Series sets out to do one thing and one thing only.

And it does it very well.

I sat down to write this and started going at it from an angle that most definitely would have made people angry with my stance.

I then deleted all of it, not because I don't want people to disagree with me, but because I realized the point I was making wasn't the one I set out to make.

I'm not here to dispute or defend the BCS. As I said earlier, the BCS does what it is set out to do and that is pick the two best teams to play for the championship. It does not set the rules that we are given and it does not dictate who goes to which bowl beyond that.

Alright, I know you are already thinking that I'm going back on what I said I wasn't here to do. I kind of am, but I need it to get to my point.

Since we don't have a playoff and one isn't on the horizon anytime soon, I'm perfectly content with watching 30-some bowl games. What I'm not content with is watching 25 bowl games that aren't very good.

Traditions aside, let's focus on our so called "money bowls" in the BCS.

The Orange, Sugar, Fiesta and Rose are all out there as the cash cows of college football. It goes back to the reason we do not have a playoff and it goes to the reason it won't change.

The people who run these bowls and those who run the participants in these bowls do not want to mess up what they have going. I have no problem with them continuing to deny us a playoff.

But when their selfish agendas get in the way by screwing up something that doesn't impact them at all?

Then I've got a problem.

Texas Christian was paired up with Boise State in the Fiesta Bowl, a meeting that will pit two undefeated teams and two non-BCS entrants for the first time in a non-title game.

Last year, I was ecstatic when these two teams were paired and the results of that pairing did not disappoint. TCU won a thrilling game that showed both should be taken seriously on a national scale.

Mission accomplished. So why are we seeing it again?

Pairing Boise State and TCU in this year's BCS sets back everything they've both accomplished by going undefeated this season. Not only are they both robbed of a chance to take down a BCS-team, they are robbed of ever being taken seriously for a national championship game.

In just about every inaugural address a president will make, he speaks of change and movement. He will say we have to initiate change and initiate it now, but it won't happen overnight. Change is a long process, but it does need to be initiated to ever begin that process.

TCU, Boise State, last year's Utah team...they are all pioneers for that change. In order to change people's minds, we need teams like Utah to come into the BCS and beat Alabama. In order for change we need a team like TCU to take on a superpower like Florida and beat them.

We need a Boise State team to challenge a Cincinnati team and show them that a Big East and a WAC can get together and put on one hell of a game.

If we don't have that, progress will not be made. You may not like to chip away at a mentality, but that is the only way to go and this year's slate of BCS bowls sets that back yet another year.

I'm relatively happy with the slate in terms of the types of games we will see. I have no doubt after last year that Boise and TCU will put on a show. Georgia Tech and Iowa are perhaps the weakest BCS teams and they are in the same game. Florida and Cincinnati are going to get together for some fireworks.

However the bowl representatives couldn't have screwed this year up. They got Oregon and Ohio State in the Rose Bowl as a lock and a good team that will travel well in Iowa to pair up with Georgia Tech.

They had four very good teams for two very big stages.

Yet somewhere along the way, someone was led astray.

I think it's safe to assume that Florida went to the Sugar Bowl after TCU was put into the Fiesta, which would lead the Fiesta Bowl to make the decision of whether to select Boise State or Cincinnati.

I don't blame the Fiesta Bowl for wanting to make history. They have been one of the best in the past in welcoming different matchups and different scenarios. But I think they dropped the ball on this one.

They're going to get a good matchup. A team close to them in proximity in TCU that is undefeated against a team that owes them a lot for giving them the chance to beat Oklahoma on a big stage.

Not to mention, they get to make a little bit of that history they always like to make.

But again, the progress that these teams have made in just going undefeated has been ruined by pitting them against each other.

By seeing two non-BCS teams face each other it defeats the true purpose of these "BCS Busters" being included in the fray.

It isn't to give these programs a nice bonus for making it this far. Boise State has been there, done that and TCU is a storied program that has seen some true greats come through.

Once again, this is about changing the landscape and we aren't changing it by letting them face each other.

If the people who set this system with five big bowls and the money it makes for all involved really wanted to get it right, they'd eliminate the traditions and the nonsense that is attached.

Without a doubt, tradition is awesome, but not at the expense of what is right. And what is right is good football and rewarding teams who deserve it. As a fan of a team in the Big Ten, I cannot defend it when they and the PAC-10 sit back and fight hand in hand with the Rose Bowl committee in keeping tradition.

Do remind me, what is the tradition of the Sugar Bowl?

Off the top of my head, here are the teams I remember playing in the game as long as I've lived: Florida State, Miami, West Virginia, Georgia, Hawaii, Oklahoma, Ohio State, and Utah.

There are teams from the ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC, Mountain West, and of all conferences, the WAC. Where is your tradition? The tradition for me is sitting down in the late afternoon-early evening of New Years Day and watching the Rose Bowl with my family.

The tradition for me is watching whatever big time bowl game is on that same day, later that night. I think I'm in the majority when I say this, but the tradition isn't watching what teams are in it; it's watching it when I can normally expect it.

I could care less who plays in it, just as long as the game is a good one and I can get into it.

So here I sit, with two wishes, very different in what they would accomplish. If we bring them together with this much hated computer, we may just get something that can appease us all.

If you use the angry computer to establish a ranking of teams, that would essentially seed your bowls, then you are guaranteed five games that are of the caliber of the National Title Game. You may not be getting the first and second best teams, but you are getting the same intensity level with two teams equally talented.

You are getting Cincinnati and TCU against each other. You are getting Florida and Boise State, ready to put on an offensive show. Every once in awhile, the Rose Bowl will get lucky and have their own traditional matchup with Ohio State and Oregon in the same game.

If something doesn't happen often, when it does happen, it becomes just a little more special. That may not be what the Rose Bowl officials want to hear, but sometimes you have to sacrifice for the good of your sport.

You are also getting that change. If Boise State and TCU happen to end up ranked right next to each other then you live with the consequences. But that goes right along with the Rose Bowl mentality.

To appease the football fans that want good games everywhere they turn, start pitting the top ranked teams against each other. We may not be giving the people what they want in a playoff, but we are taking a step towards the change it could bring about.

In the end, taking steps is the best you can do, so we might as well start walking.

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

Why Must the BCS Continue To Exist?

College Football Fanatic — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 17:24:53 -0500

The picture you see above is of Ari Fleischer, who the BCS has hired to, ahem, "protect and defend" their system.

The headline you see above is what I asked myself all of last night as the Fiesta Bowl matchup between Texas Christian University and Boise State was announced.

To me, the Fiesta Bowl was an obvious BCS cop-out to keep a BCS conference team from being beaten by a Mountain West or Western Athletic Conference team, even though it happens every year in the regular season. Hey, at least Cincinnati gets to play Florida, and TCU and Boise get to play each other. Talk about fair matchups.

So, why does the BCS continue to exist?

It exists for money. You know that the people who are affiliated with the BCS don't care about Gary Patterson, Brian Kelly, or Chris Petersen's feelings. They've got one thing on their mind and one thing only—greed.

It exists to, quite simply, create controversy. The BCS wants people to have an opinion on the bowl games, and believe me, they're getting some strong opinions out of the bowl matchups announced yesterday.

It exists because a playoff, according to the BCS, would be the equivalent to the apocalypse.

It exists because we have people like Fleischer, who couldn't even defend George Bush properly, that can't defend the BCS.

It exists because we're the ones who go to the games.

It exists because we're the ones who watch the games.

It exists because we care about the games.

It exists because with a playoff, you wouldn't get to see absolute shams like this.

It exists because no matter how much hate the game gets, it most likely will end up selling out or come close to it.

It exists because these bowls are "ratings winners." Explain to me again how Georgia Tech-Iowa and TCU-Boise will have big viewership?

It exists for the power conferences, not for the "little kid" conferences like the Mountain West, the Sun Belt, the WAC, etc.

It exists because the BCS is a "friend" to the Mountain West and all other mid-major conferences. Read between the lines. The BCS and the Mountain West are friends just like Neil Page and Del Griffith were friends for the first twenty minutes of Planes, Trains, and Automobiles.

But why does it really exist?

It exists so that a BCS conference team, like Florida, Texas, Alabama, or any other team from the Big Six, won't have as much of a chance to be embarrassed on the big stage like Alabama was by Utah last year, Oklahoma was by Boise State in 2006, or Pittsburgh by Utah in 2004.

By the way, remember that Oklahoma-Boise State game?

It was one of the best of the decade and contained, in my opinion, the most memorable finish of the decade.

And, thanks to Utah (twice) and Boise's wins over Big Six teams in the last six years, this is why, according to the BCS, we can no longer have nice things.

Thanks a lot, Ari Fleischer and all members of the BCS. You really screwed it up this time.

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

Glendale Screwjob: TCU and Boise State Get Hosed by the System

David Singleton — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 11:39:07 -0500

It’s the first Monday in December, so it must be time to tilt at the Bowl Championship Series windmill.

It’s become an annual rite, a sign of the holiday season, if you will.

Wrap up Christmas shopping? Check.

Spend an inordinate amount of time at the post office mailing packages to friends and family? Check.

Rail against the BCS overlords for screwing something up? Triple check.

My quibble this year is not with those who will be playing in Pasadena on Jan. 7—even though it seemed to be mostly preordained from before the season started.

No, my anger is at one of the undercard BCS games.

Much-deserved kudos to the bowl powers that be for allowing Boise State to come play. The Fiesta Bowl deserves a lot of props for stepping up to the plate and allowing the Broncos the opportunity to come to the big-money party.

My problem is with Boise State’s opponent.

Boise State should not be playing TCU.

Not because the Horned Frogs don’t belong; in fact, the Horned Frogs were most definitely deserving of being there and, in fact, are ranked higher than Boise State.

Rather, I don’t think that TCU and Boise State should be playing each other.

Both programs deserve better opportunities than they could get by playing each other.

TCU should be playing Florida in the Sugar Bowl.

Boise State should be playing somebody else, be it Iowa, Cincinnati, or Georgia Tech. Hell, even if Oklahoma State had somehow snuck into the BCS, I would have been okay with them playing Boise State.

But it seems to me that by having Boise State play TCU, it’s like you’ve told them that they get to sit at the big boy table but are really going to go sit at the card table that gets added on to the edge of the grown-ups table.

Never mind the fact that both teams have already played each other in the postseason. They faced off last year in San Diego, with TCU edging Boise State 17-16 in the Poinsettia Bowl.

Instead of getting both of these schools in fresh matchups, the Fiesta Bowl has become the game of misfit programs, the schools that, for a variety of reasons, had to be let into the BCS—but c’mon, we can’t have them both possibly play automatic qualifiers and beat them during the same postseason.

So the wonderful opportunity for openness and showing the feds that the BCS really does allow access to all?

That’s gone as far as I am concerned.

This is a total lose-lose for these schools. Whoever wins won’t really have proven anything on a national scale. Whoever loses will have their national perception take a huge hit unless it’s truly a close game.

Will it be exciting? Sure. It might wind up being one of the best bowl games of the entire postseason.

Will I watch? I’ll watch every snap.

Will I be angry no matter who wins? Damn straight.

Because these two schools deserved better. They should have gotten a chance at the big boys. And it was taken away from them.

So don’t tell me that this system is fair to everyone.

Matchups like this prove otherwise.

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

Husker Nation: As Much As It Hurts, It's Time to Move On to Holiday Bowl

Michael Huckstep — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 10:59:51 -0500

My voice is still gone. It probably won't come back until later in the week.

At least my side doesn't hurt anymore.

All game long, the smattering of Husker fans in my section and I had cheered furiously for the Big Red. When what we believed to be the final second ticked off the clock and Colt McCoy's pass landed harmlessly out of bounds, we erupted into a spontaneous release of joy and relief. As I grabbed my wife and shouted deliriously, I felt something tear in my abdomen.

I'm not kidding. It felt like a hernia, or at least how I believe a hernia would feel; I've never had one.

Perhaps it's just a strain.

We embraced and, after she let go, my vision started to waver. I grabbed the rail in front of me for support. For a couple of seconds, losing consciousness seemed like a real possibility. In all that exaltation, it seemed like every molecule of oxygen had been expelled from my lungs.

But I didn't care.

It was over. It was finally over.

All those years of frustration and futility against the Longhorns, gone.

2007. When Nebraska had a 17-9 lead after three quarters in Austin only to give up 19 points in the fourth. Jamaal Charles ran for a sickening 216 yards in the final frame and, despite a late touchdown by Maurice Purify, the Huskers fell by three points.

Forgotten.

2006. When fat snowflakes and a bitter north wind seemed like an equalizer for the Huskers against fifth-ranked Texas in Lincoln. It's conceivable that some of the Longhorns had never seen snow. Terrence Nunn made a reception that probably would have sealed the deal, as Texas was out of timeouts, but CB Aaron Ross jarred the ball loose and the 'Horns recovered.

McCoy was able to drive Texas into field goal range and their sophomore kicker, Ryan Bailey, converted his first ever attempt which handed Nebraska a gut-wrenching two-point loss.

Erased.

2003. One of just three double-digit losses to Texas in series history. The Huskers were ranked 12th in the nation, the 'Horns 16th. My teenage son, who lived in Austin at the time, went to the game with a friend and had beer poured on him by Texas fans. Meanwhile, the Longhorns poured 31 points on the Blackshirts.

Sweet vindication.

2002. I was at work, in an all-metal building, listening on a scratchy AM radio as Jammal Lord ran for 234 yards. However, the much-hyped UT signal-caller, Chris Simms, passed for 419 yards. The No. 7 Longhorns escaped Lincoln with a three-point victory after intercepting our Lord with nine seconds to go.

Ancient history.

There were two four point losses to Texas in '98 and '99. The first one snapped the Huskers' 47-game home winning streak and the second one was avenged in San Antonio by a 22-6 Nebraska win over Texas for the Big XII title.

But none of that mattered.

Not even the infamous 1996 "flu-game" for the first-ever Big XII title, when James Brown, faced with 4th-and-inches, rolled out and passed to TE Derek Brown, shocking the NU defense. Priest Holmes scored on the very next play and the Huskers were denied the possibility of a three-peat.

All of that was drowned out in that moment Saturday night, when the clock read zero and the scoreboard read Nebraska 12, Texas 10.

All of the trash talk that I had heard in Texas, by Texans for the past 15 years was immaterial. Even the incessant barrage of drunken profanity, demeaning Nebraska insults and threats of violence to any and all Husker fans we endured from the four late-arriving Longhorn fans in the row directly behind us was nothing more than the buzzing of four burnt orange mosquitoes.

The Cornhuskers rushed the field as we continued our exuberant celebration and, for one shining moment, all was right with the world. The Longhorn fans were finally silent. You could clearly read the expressions on their faces.

They knew that the better team had won.

The team in Scarlet and Cream.

All of this happened in slow-motion it seemed, like an automobile accident.

It definitely ended like one. Obviously, I do not need to elaborate further.

After the final outcome, I wasn't sure what to feel.

An elderly Longhorn fan walked up to me and shook my hand. He regarded me with an almost apologetic expression; no doubt he had seen how we had cheered for our Huskers.

Walking out, I felt angry, sure. But not surprised. Like many have said here on Bleacher Report, the necessary steps had been taken to ensure a Longhorn win so the BCS "worked."

But what else did I feel? Was it pride?

Yes, it was pride.

Pride for the Huskers' championship-caliber defense who fought to the bitter end.

Pride for a certain player, whose effort will forever be legendary, whose performance was epic on a massive stage, whose name was lustily shouted by the Husker faithful over and over again.

Suh. SUUUUUUUH!

I paid a hefty sum for the opportunity to be there, but Ndamukong Suh more than repaid the Husker fans in attendance with the single most dominating defensive performance I have ever witnessed on any level of football. Period.

When we returned home, words failed me. Normally, I just watch the game, take notes, read the box score for stats and then write from the gut.

This time it was different. A few comments was all I could muster.

I needed to process what I had just seen.

I wanted to watch the game again on the DVR. Wanted to read what the various media outlets had to say, as well as the writers on Bleacher Report, whom I respect greatly, especially my fellow Featured Columnists, Josh Klein and Tyler Dale. I had to watch the news and read both local newspapers, the Dallas Morning News and the Fort-Worth Star Telegram. The phone calls and texts came pouring in as well.

Now, it's Monday morning and I can finally move on.

Please don't misunderstand, fellow Husker fans, this one hurt.

I'm also not trying to convince anyone to be a good little Husker fan and take this one in stride, with an "aw, shucks" and a stupid grin.

Definitely not.

Going into the game, I wanted a win, but I also didn't want it to be an embarrassment for the Husker players who have gone through so much during this topsy-turvy season.

Yes, I had doubts, but they concerned our offense, not our defense. I imagined that unless the Huskers had a meltdown similar to the one in the first half against Texas Tech, that it would be a low-scoring affair.

I told everyone who would listen that the game was going to be closer than everyone expected, in a sense trying to assure myself as much as I was trying to convince them.

The game ended being that much, and more. Despite the outcome, I can honestly say I was glad I was there.

Yes, the refs had it in for us, aside from the extra added second, and non-existent pass interference calls. Every Texas scoring drive was aided by a Nebraska penalty. The lack of holding calls against Texas' O-line as Suh fought through them was just as appalling.

But since the Pelini brothers have had their tirades, with Carl screaming to the Longhorns that they "should be ashamed to accept that trophy" and Bo privately unleashing his emotions on Big XII commissioner Dan Beebe, we must do what they will tell their players to do.

Move on.

It's not going to be easy.

But Nebraska, whether we Husker fans like it or not, has a date with Arizona in the Holiday Bowl.

The team will move on, wanting to reach ten wins for the first time since 2003 and end the season on a positive note.

Husker writers, here at Bleacher Report and elsewhere, will move on, relentlessly analyzing the Huskers' bowl game for the next three-plus weeks.

So, like Suh, who should sweep all of the '09 defensive hardware (and in a just world, the Heisman), and then move on to the next level, Husker Nation should move on, too.

Let the Longhorns have their tarnished Big XII crown. Despite their belief that the gift-wrapped Championship they received is somehow payback for the Sooners making it to the BCS title game last year, karma is coming for them in the form of a Crimson Tide.

It's just unfortunate that they didn't drown in a "sea of red" instead.

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

A Slap in the Face To TCU and Boise State?: Looking at the Fiesta Bowl

Pete Misthaufen — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 02:40:56 -0500

As hints and rumors started coming out about the 2010 Fiesta Bowl, college football fans around the country rose up in revolt.

For fans of Boise State and TCU, it seemed like a calculated insult to prohibit them from playing against a Florida, Cincinnati, Iowa, or Georgia Tech.

Fans have started to come up with nicknames for the bowl, all related to the idea that the BCS worked to put TCU and Boise State together so as to not embarrass a team from the Big 10 or SEC.

A BCS Conspiracy?

Now, fan conspiracies regarding the BCS have some value, given that the SEC made it quite clear to the Sugar Bowl and the BCS that it wanted nothing to do with either Boise State or TCU. No, the "greatest conference in America" could not see its fraudulent Gators get taken to the woodshed and have people question the greatness of the SEC.

So, given that the neither TCU or Boise State was going to get a shot at Florida, there were very few possibilities remaining.

The key decision came from the Fiesta Bowl. The Fiesta had the opportunity to bring in Iowa or Penn State. With either team, the Fiesta Bowl would have had no concern with selling out the stadium or with good TV ratings.

The only concern would be then whether TCU or Boise State would have the opportunity to beat down a weak Big 10 team. But this was a real concern.

Add to this the state of the Orange Bowl. The 2009 Orange Bowl featuring Virginia Tech against Cincinnati was a disaster at the gate and on TV, with about 15,000 or so empty seats and pulling a 5.4 rating, the worst rating for a BCS game ever. Tickets were going by the thousands for $.99 and still nobody wanted them.

So, the Orange Bowl was not going to take Cincy no matter what and it needed payback to make up for such a horrible matchup.

In fact, the Orange Bowl has been suffering for the last few seasons, as its anchor tie to the ACC has been dragging the game down. So, the Orange Bowl was given the Big 10 at-large as compensation for the disasters of the last few years.

So, in many ways, there were no other options for the BCS, given the situations with the Orange and Sugar Bowls.

The Role of Fox

Now, there is another monkey into the whole system. Fox is in its last season of having the BCS rights. Fox and the BCS have always been suspect allies.

Fox is not a college football broadcaster. Sure, they have the regional Fox Sports networks, but those are just that: regional. Ask the Pac-10 schools how much they appreciate the bad deal they have Fox Sports.

Fox refused to build upon its BCS rights by jumping into a major role in the broadcasting of regular season games. Instead, it has remained an outsider.

Fox lacks the institutional understanding of college football. As an NFL broadcaster, it instead thinks purely on matchups for TV. And for Fox, it really wanted TCU and Boise State on the first Monday night after the end of Monday Night Football .

Fox looked at the possible teams out there and pushed the Fiesta into this matchup.

But you are thinking, "Didn't I read that last year's Poinsettia Bowl pulled only a 3.7 rating, the 15th highest rating of all the bowl games, even though it had two top-11 teams?"

So, are the Fox guys just stupid or are they crazy like a fox?

The Poinsettia Bowl Revisited

Last year TCU and Boise State met up in one of the most exciting bowl games of the season. But it only pulled a 3.7, so that means that no one watched it, right?

The game took place on Dec. 23 and had the highest rating for a pre-Christmas bowl game last season. Games played before Dec. 30 rarely draw higher than the high twos, so this was an impressive result for such an early-season game.

Now, take that same game and put it on the biggest stage of all of football, the Monday night of championship week and suddenly you have the makings of a ratings masterpiece.

Or so the people at Fox thought, not without reason.

College vs. Pro Football

The problem is that college football is not pro football. Pro football does have its elite teams and its excluded teams, but at least every single team, be it Cleveland or New England, has a chance to make the Super Bowl at the end of the season. It is a balanced system.

College football is the opposite. It has an established caste system, with half the teams labeled not good enough at the beginning of the season. Even teams like TCU and Boise State that had successful years the prior season are sent to the back of the line so that the names of college football can be hyped again.

For TCU and Boise State to reach a BCS bowl means that they have a chance to take on the world and show them all that the caste system is fundamentally flawed. They want an opportunity to take down the names of college football.

In many ways it is a sign of respect. The Big 10 and SEC know that their teams have a huge chance of being dominated by TCU and Boise State. Even 'Bama is very happy that the Big 12 officials gave Texas a second chance.

No one wants to face these upstarts, which is why teams such as TCU, Boise State, and BYU have such troubles getting out-of-conference home games with major programs. TCU and Boise State expected to have a chance to dominate Tebow, but instead must prepare for the rematch of the century.

In many ways, Cincy is being disrespected even more than TCU or Boise State. The SEC is not afraid of playing Cincy. The Fiesta Bowl passed on Cincy. Moreover, the Orange Bowl never wants Cincy again. So, sorry Cincy. Just because you got the "Gold Star" of BCS status, it does not mean that anyone respects you.

Another Motive for the Fiesta?

Now, the Fiesta could be motivated by an entirely different idea.

It is anticipated that the Mountain West Conference will be gaining automatic qualifying status in a few years, becoming the seventh BCS conference. Boise State may soon be a member of the MWC.

When the BCS expands to seven conferences, it is also anticipated that the Cotton Bowl will become the fifth BCS bowl member, now that the Cotton Bowl is being played at Jerry Jones' new Cowboys Stadium.

The Fiesta Bowl would prefer to remain the home BCS bowl for the Big 12, but may be looking at losing the Big 12 to the Cotton Bowl. As such, it may look at the MWC to become its new anchor conference.

As such, this game is essentially trying out Boise State and TCU as possible long-term partners. So, this is not a slap in the face at all (even though it appears at first glance), but instead an attempt at a love letter.

But, like many love letters, it has been poorly received.

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

Why the TCU-Boise State Fiesta Bowl Should Horrify All College Football Fans

Tyler Stimson — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:43:58 -0500

Just when you think the BCS couldn't get anymore biased against non-AQ conferences, and just when you thought TCU couldn't get any more hosed, the BCS has topped itself once again.

History was made on Sunday. For the first time, two teams from non-BCS conferences crashed the BCS.

But instead of letting TCU and Boise State make a statement against teams from BCS conferences, the Fiesta Bowl, for some inexplicable reason, has decided to pair these two Cinderellas in a rematch of last year's Poinsettia Bowl—a game where a 10-2 TCU team defeated a 12-0 Boise State team by one point.

I think fans of both schools will agree that they'd much rather face any of the other eight teams that are in BCS bowls. They already saw this game last year.

This is a huge boon to the BCS conferences. Instead of risking non-BCS teams gaining a 5-1 record in BCS bowls, the BCS has hedged its bets and made sure that both TCU and Boise State will not go undefeated. One of them will have to lose, and the other will win.

I do not know what the Fiesta Bowl was thinking. Are they just trying to piss both of these teams off?

This is so ridiculous. People do not want to see David vs. David. They want to see David vs. Goliath, and for David to win.

In reality, these are two Goliaths (and Davids). But they are seen as good teams from weak conferences.

So, TCU finally earns a BCS bid (narrowly missing out on the championship game), and instead of getting to prove themselves against undefeated Cincinnati or Florida, they have to play a tough and underrated Boise State team.

TCU was a plethora of small Texas miracles from playing Alabama for all the marbles; now they have to settle for playing for best "mid-major" in America.

This is completely and utterly ridiculous. What is the point of crashing the BCS if you just get set up against your fellow non-BCS party crasher?

TCU finished a historic undefeated season, and instead of getting the chance to face someone like Alabama, Florida, Texas, or even Cincinnati, they get a chance to snuff out one of their fellow underdogs.

This is not what I thought giving access to the BCS bowls was all about.

No doubt this will be a great game. To me it is much of a "national title" game as Alabama-Texas is. But unfortunately it will not be seen that way.

Whoever wins will have a "nice" victory and will be the king of the "little guys."

Because of this unfortunate pairing, we will have no real frame of reference for how good Boise State and TCU really are—no way for them to make a statement like Utah did against Alabama last year, and like Boise did against Oklahoma.

TCU was one second from playing in the title game, and now they face a cannibalistic game against another team from a non-BCS conference.

If the rumors about Boise State joining the Mountain West being a question of when, not if, are true, then this matchup is even more horrifying.

This truly is a no-win scenario for Boise State and TCU.

For fans of the underdog, Texas' miracle victory over Nebraska had you utterly disappointed. Then this happened, and you knew that it was a victory for the BCS and a total loss for the outsiders.

What a complete and utter travesty.

However, to end on a positive note, whoever wins this clash of undefeated football powerhouses will be a champion in my book and just as worthy of a "national championship" as the winner of Alabama-Texas.

This could be a game for the ages. But I think TCU will prevail, as they just might have the best team in the country this year.

Too bad they won't get a chance to prove it against a BCS school, even if Boise State is a more worthy opponent.

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

BCS Bowl Selections: Did BCS Anticipation Crash Twitter?

Bret Feddern — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 23:13:37 -0500

The BCS craze has officially taken over the Internet, and it may have temporarily killed Twitter in the process.

As the anticipation for the BCS bowl selections began to boil, overzealous fans flocked to social media sites like Facebook and Twitter for gossip and hints about bowl games.

The longer fans waited, the more the rumors from "sources" started to float around the web.

The more rumors floated, the more traffic increased on social media sites. Some sites, like Twitter, may have had too much traffic to handle.

Twitter, the micro-blogging service that allows users to send and read text-based messages (called Tweets) of up to 140 characters, has become increasingly important in the world of sports.

Writers use it for breaking news, athletes use it to connect with fans, and fans use it to support their teams.

I am a heavy tweeter. I use my Twitter account to inform people of anything and everything Iowa Hawkeye related. Sports Illustrated 's Stewart Mandel is a heavy tweeter, too, using his account to inform his followers of happenings in the sports world.

And no sports fan needs reminding of Ochocinco's tweeting habits .

Fans and writers may have been tweeting a little heavy on Sunday while awaiting the Bowl selection announcements, which may have caused Twitter to go down for over 30 minutes on Sunday evening.

TechCrunch, a well-known social media news site, reported that Twitter was down while responding to a high rate of errors. As a result, fans were presented with an all-too-familiar symbol known as the "Fail Whale."

Twitter users know the lovable image of the whale all too well, as it represents Twitter's server downtime, something they have experienced their fair share of during their growth.

The popular social networking site has been known to go down unexpectedly from time to time because of heavy web traffic.

When Michael Jackson died, Twitter almost exploded.

Luckily, the social media site was back up and running Sunday night before most people knew what was happening. The rumors and conjecture continued, as if there was no interruption, and fans still continued their assault on the BCS's Twitter account .

While there is no real proof BCS-related traffic caused the Twitter crash, I have a hunch it at least contributed to it. People get crazy come bowl time, and social media allows them a way to have their voice heard.

After the downtime brought on a mild panic attack , the Web-obsessed nerd in me returned to normal, and I was able to watch the rumors about my Hawkeyes jump from the Fiesta Bowl to the Orange Bowl.

As a note to any fellow tweeters, travel agents probably aren't a reliable "source" to listen to when purchasing bowl tickets in advance.

Anyone want to buy Fiesta Bowl tickets?

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

Seven Ways to Improve the Imperfect BCS

Eric Galko — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 22:57:34 -0500

The BCS is a very imperfect system, that’s a definite. However, as much as every fan, including Barrack Obama, wants a playoff system, it won’t happen anytime soon. So, if we can tweak the system to give every team a fair shake as this process further evolves, at least we can remain intrigued with the college football season and the post-season play. Not everyone of these ideas can all be influenced at the same time. However, hopefully some of these (especially the Top 3) concepts can find there way into the BCS system and help to put the best teams in their best possible fit by season's end.

Begin Slideshow

Boise State and TCU: Forget About the Conferences, Look at the Teams

Mark Smith — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 05:46:44 -0500

Another year with the BCS, another year of controversy. The 2009 regular season has ended with an unbelievable five undefeated schools. Three are from major conferences, while the other two, Boise State and TCU, are not.

There have been a plethora of articles written about why the two non AQ schools don't belong in the national championship game. Nearly every one that I have read cites the conference affiliation and the schedule that accompanies.

Nobody will argue that teams like San Jose State and New Mexico are not bad and that the conference is as challenging as the Pac 10 or SEC. Those of us who look at the Broncos and Horned Frogs as being equal to Alabama, Cincinnati, and Texas understand that a great team can come from anywhere.

BCS conference boosters seem to forget how every year many of their beloved teams go down in defeat to "lesser" teams. Oklahoma State early this year lost at home to Houston which belongs in the eighth best conference in the country. Up until last week the Cowboys were considered to be a team that could bump Boise State out of the BCS.

The mighty Nebraska lost at home to Iowa State, Pittsburg lost to NC State, we could go on and on with instances where teams lost to inferior opponents. Here is the point. TCU and Boise State, like the great teams, just don't lose. They win every game that they are supposed to win. They win the games that are challenges.

TCU went out and beat Clemson, BYU, and Utah. Then proceeded to not have any hiccups. Boise State beat a team in Oregon that turned out to be quite impressive, don't even try the argument that they weren't the same team. That's bush league! BSU also took care of business against a super hot Nevada team, and a challenging Fresno State team on the road.

Again, another season where they went out an won every game on the schedule. Some people out there in BCS land believe that is very simple to do. They seem to conveniently forget all about the upsets that occur weekly in college football as if the little guys should be held to a higher standard.

Looking at the facts, going undefeated in any season of Division 1 football is an anomaly. Usually no more than one or two finish that way. So when a Boise State or TCU finish unblemished, their season should be given respect.

The manner in which both of these school have accomplished undefeated seasons is what lends to the credibility. After a narrow win against Air Force mid season, TCU went on a dominating tear winning all of their games by double digits.

For Boise State, it was a close call against Tulsa that got the critics going. They responded by scoring more than forty points in their final seven games. They have outscored opponents this season by 344 points.

So go ahead, and rank the WAC and Mountain West lower than the BCS conferences. There is nothing unfair about that. Just don't be ignorant to the fact that outliers exist. Sometimes greatness is found where we don't expect it. The funny thing is this season it so easy to see.

I have been repeatedly telling people that they should judge teams not by stat sheets or SOS comparisons, but by what they see on the field. When you take the time to do that you just may see what the minority of us have been witnessing all along.

After seeing Texas' lucky escape against Nebraska, I know that some of you are letting the doubt creep into your mind. It's quite alright. Don't be afraid to ask yourself if that is the best the BCS conferences can do. Will Texas and their 19 yards rushing be able to avoid embarrassment against Alabama? Or would you rather see the unknown TCU give their best shot?

Maybe the nation's most efficient passer in Kellen Moore would prove to be more of a challenge to the Tide than Florida was. Maybe...maybe not. The important thing is that we start to think less in about conference and more about team.

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

Why the Big Ten Loves the BCS System

Patrick Hamblin — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 14:15:12 -0500

Each and every year, there are a handful of subjects that dominate the water cooler conversations: the weather cooling, plans for the holidays, and the demise of Big Ten football. The final one has become a running joke for college football fans and pundits everywhere (except for a few states in the upper Midwest).

The joke is on us however.

While the majority of college football fans clamor for a playoff system, (I like one featuring the six BCS conference champions plus two at-large teams) the Big Ten is again taking advantage of the current BCS system and has no plans to stop.

A look at the current BCS standings gives us our first clue. What's the best conference? The SEC? The Pac-10? Surprisingly not.

Based on the combined ratings of clueless voters, who act as if Bo and Woody are still coaching, and the computers, the Big Ten is the best conference. It has two teams in the top ten (Ohio St. and Iowa) and three of the top 11 when you factor in Penn St.

What is the big non-conference win by one of these three teams to earn this prestigious national ranking? It would have to be Iowa's 10-point home win over Arizona; a team that, should it lose to USC on the road this Saturday, will finish sixth in the Pac 10.

History gives us our second clue.

Following the 2007 season, Ohio St. dubiously earned another trip to the BCS title game. USC could have been matched up against a West Virginia team which had just missed out on a trip to the title game, (by virtue of an upset loss to Pitt) or the Rose Bowl could have picked a Missouri team that was the second place team in a strong Big 12.

Who did the Rose Bowl pick? A mediocre Illinois team from the Big Ten that had just squeaked into the top-14 to be BCS eligible. They received a 49-17 whooping that wasn't even that close.

(The Rose Bowl did this to preserve the "Pac-10/Big Ten tradition." Never mind the true Rose Bowl tradition is the CHAMPION of the Pac-10 against the CHAMPION of the Big Ten.)

It seems that no matter what the bowl results prove every year, the Big Ten gets to send off a second team to be humiliated in a BCS bowl, (not forgetting the first place team also gets to enjoy this humiliation), and then have that team return with a second huge payday for the conference.

It will happen again this year.

The debate has been whether Iowa or Penn State should receive one of the at-large berths. The honest answer however is, neither.

Check out these comparisons: Who’s better? Pitt or the team that needed two blocked field goals to beat Northern Iowa? Penn St./Iowa or one of the high-scoring second place teams in the Pac-10? The team that beat Coastal Carolina or a Virginia Tech team that almost upset Alabama?

Naturally, we will hear the argument that the BCS is about money and putting butts in seats. So the bowls (most likely the Orange or the Sugar) will take Iowa or Penn State because they will generate ratings and sell tickets.

Based on the projected matchups, this shouldn't be a cause for fear by either the bowls or the BCS. The Orange Bowl will feature either Georgia Tech or Clemson. The fan bases for either one of those teams will fill most of the seats in the Orange Bowl. No need to send a second Big Ten team there.

How about the Sugar Bowl, where a Big Ten team is likely to end up (at the expense of undefeated Boise State) should Nebraska upset Texas this week? There they would be matched with the loser of the Alabama-Florida SEC title game.

They would not need a team like Iowa to fill their seats. Mobile, Alabama is less than 200 miles from the Superdome and does anyone doubt Alabama could scrounge together 72,000 crimson-and-cream-clad fans to fill it?

An honest analysis shows the Big Ten does not deserve a second BCS team. No one (outside of Des Moines) thinks Iowa is better than the second place team in at least three other conferences, or for that matter, Boise State.

The idea that a bowl needs to take Iowa to fill its ticket allotment is a myth.

And finally, who wants to watch the Big Ten on TV anyway, unless you have a fetish for watching Terrelle Pryor throw incomplete passes all over the field?

Why will we not see a playoff in college football in the near future? The Big Ten conference fills its pockets each year off of the current system, it will fight any type of change, and a playoff will need to have these historical teams in it to be considered relevant.

Thank the Lord for March Madness.

You can follow my random thoughts on the sports world and other matters on Twitter at @plh55.

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

How a Nebraska Upset of Texas Would Rock the BCS Projections

Michael Huckstep — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 22:34:46 -0500

Show of hands. How many of you thought that Nebraska would play in the Big XII Championship?

A few of you?

Duly noted. The Huskers or the Jayhawks were the preseason favorites to win the North. Though I doubt that many of you thought Nebraska would punch their ticket the way they did, winning against Oklahoma and losing versus Iowa State.

Another show of hands. How many of you thought that if Nebraska made it to the Big XII title match and won, it would send the BCS world spinning off of its axis?

Neither did I.

But that's exactly the scenario that the BCS bigwigs fear the most.

Forget for a moment the improbability of it all. In the event of a Nebraska win, no matter how unlikely, the much-maligned BCS system might very well implode.

If everything goes according to Hoyle, and virtually everyone believes it will, Texas should dispatch Nebraska with relative ease and then face the SEC Champion for the BCS National Title.

The BCS fat cats would get the marquee match-up they crave between two undefeated powerhouses replete with rich histories and long-standing traditions. They'll be able to pat one another on the back and claim that the system actually worked, that it delivered a showdown worthy of the sacred cow that is the BCS.

Never mind that the possibility will exist that, when the dust settles, there might be three more undefeated teams still standing, each of them arguing that the whole debate should have been settled on the field, not by crunching numbers.

The only number that will matter to the "also-rans" is the zero in their loss columns.

A Texas win will not come without an additional price, however. At least to the Big XII.

Oklahoma State had a chance to stake their claim to a second Big XII BCS berth by winning this year's installment of the Bedlam Series. However a 27-0 thrashing by the Sooners quickly put any of the Cowboys' BCS dreams to bed.

Therefore, the Longhorns will most likely be the lone Big XII representative at the BCS party, ultimately costing their conference $4.5 million in additional revenue had a second Big XII team secured a BCS bid.

However, don't expect the fans from the SEC, Big Ten, Pac-10, Big East or ACC to shed any tears for the Big XII.

Far from it.

The Big XII's failure to secure two BCS bids will only throw more gasoline on the fiery, annual debate between fans of the various "major" conferences concerning overall supremacy.

Every year, even before the first touchdown is scored, supporters of the six BCS conferences argue their cases, each claiming, some more vociferously than others, that their conference is best.

Nowhere is this conference unity more prevalent than the SEC. While they are bitter rivals on the field, they will quickly defend each other for sake of the bigger picture, routinely claiming that the middle-of-the-pack SEC teams are superior to the best teams that the Big Ten, Big XII and Pac-10 have to offer.

In fact, one of Sports Illustrated's recent cover stories examined the SEC's conference pride more closely, their headline essentially agreeing with SEC fans that "Nobody Does It Better."

It's not hard to see why SEC fans feel this way, considering the mess in the Big XII North Division, the stranglehold that USC had over their Pac-10 rivals and the lackluster performances by both Oklahoma and Ohio State in their recent BCS bowls, especially against SEC foes.

All of that withstanding, what exactly would a Nebraska win in the Big XII Title game mean?

Plenty.

Plenty of chaos, that is.

First off, it would give Nebraska an automatic bid to the Fiesta Bowl, per the Big XII's contractual commitment with that event. Texas would then receive a BCS at-large bid and the Big XII would get that extra $4.5 mil after all.

Secondly, it would give No. 4 ranked TCU a shot at facing the SEC Champion for all the marbles. The Horned Frogs are clearly pulling for the Huskers, despite the fact that, even with a Nebraska win, they might not reach the promised land.

Working against the Frogs are a couple of factors.

Although TCU completed a perfect regular season, No. 5 Cincinnati will have the final opportunity to make an impression on voters this weekend as they face a Top 15 Pittsburgh Panther squad in the Big East Championship. In addition, the fact that TCU hails from a conference without an automatic BCS bid might make voters reluctant to give them the nod.

So, if the Bearcats scratch out a win over Pitt, they could leapfrog the Frogs.

But even then, it's not that simple.

Cincinnati, not traditionally viewed as one of the nation's elite programs, could be passed over by voters in favor of a "sexier" matchup, paving the way for the first rematch in BCS Championship history.

Yes, college football lovers, all hell could break loose.

Brace yourselves for Florida vs. Alabama II, especially if their first meeting lives up to its billing or is decided by a few points in the game's final seconds.

I can already hear the rebel yell rising up from SEC country.

If you remember correctly, this was a possible scenario in 2006. Number-one ranked Ohio State prevailed over number-two ranked Michigan in an epic 42-39 battle, prompting many analysts to make the case for a rematch in the BCS Championship game.

Instead, one-loss Florida got the bid to the BCS title game, by a margin of .0101 points, and promptly crushed the Buckeyes, 41-14.

So essentially, we'd be left with three options, each sure to spark yet another round of BCS controversy. Take your pick.

The one thing I believe I can say with absolute certainty is that Boise State will not be rooting for the Cornhuskers. As mentioned in the above scenario, a Texas loss would still result in them getting an at-large BCS bid and the undefeated Broncos (providing that they take care of business this weekend vs. 3-9 New Mexico State) would be busted, relegated to a second-tier bowl game.

So while they'll be chanting "GO BIG RED" in Fort Worth, they'll be shouting "NO BIG RED" in Boise.

Having said all this, I feel that I should remind everyone that this whole chaotic mess would only occur if (and it's a BIG if) Nebraska manages to pull off the one of the greater upsets in recent history.

So please save your emails; I already have tired-head just thinking about all of this.

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

Boise State's BCS Hopes Are Thriving in Only Their Sophomore Year

Lace Banachek — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:09:03 -0500

At the conclusion of last season, there were not many who imagined Boise State would be undefeated and ranked sixth in the BCS. For that matter, it seemed like the early polls were throwing the Broncos a bone putting them in the top twenty-five at all.

After all, Boise State graduated pretty much all of the team worth mentioning. Plus, there was Jeremy Childs who sought to jump ship in hope of landing in the NFL (he missed his landing). Albeit, there was still hope for Boise State as long as the Broncos sophomore quarterback was healthy.

Kellen Moore is indeed healthy, his touchdowns are up, interceptions down, has passed for over 3,000 yards, and is the number one quarterback in the nation with a passer rating of 168.7 (only Tony Pike from Cincinnati has the next highest rating at 162.2).

Indeed, Kellen Moore achieved all of that with a depleted offensive line, and a new set of receivers, which must be remembered that Ian Johnson, the Broncos all-everything running back, was also a favorite target of Moore’s out of the backfield—and he graduated as well.

It is not easy to come back quickly when a team graduates so much talent. The Broncos did not lose just offensive talent; they graduated pretty much everybody but their secondary off of last season's defensive unit. Thus, in some minds, Boise State would most likely give up the conference title as they had in 2007. It didn’t happen!

Boise State held on to the Governor's Cup one more time when they defeated Nevada Friday evening. The Wolf Pack had just came off an eight game winning streak and proved to be a formidable foe once again, losing to the Broncos 44 to 33.

The Broncos' new defense is very young, but they will only be better next season. Boise State loses two cornerbacks Kyle Wilson and Garcia Day, a fullback/tight end Richie Brockel and reserve wide receiver Michael Choate.

Of these four, only Wilson and Brockel were first team starters. However, Boise State has had many injuries this season; Brockel (lost for the season) was among them. They will be missed, but the Broncos will have considerable depth at all positions (the redshirt scout team is jammed to the hilt).

Next season, the Broncos will be stronger and deeper than they have ever been, but not just in body count—there are numerous potential all-star caliber and select potential NFL candidates.

This season the Broncos surprised everyone, even many of their fans when they assembled such a powerful team in one year. There is no doubt that Boise State's final regular season game against New Mexico State will not be a terrific challenge. However, the challenge will be in replacing their number one receiver Austin Pettis who was hurt in last weeks game against the Wolf Pack.

Austin Pettis is an elusive receiver with strong hands and fingers like glue—he catches just about everything and is already missed. There is hope he may be back for the Bowl game, and this year that Bowl game appears to be a BCS Bowl.

The Broncos got the attention this year of the BCS and they have rewarded them kindly all season. It appears the Broncos need only to finish their NMSU game respectfully and for the University of Texas to beat Nebraska in the Big 12 Championship Game.

Barring that upset, Colt McCoy’s Texas team is headed for a national championship title game with the winner of Florida and Alabama.

There is talk of the Broncos going to the Sugar but it seems most likely that TCU will do that due to their higher ranking—the Broncos will head to the Fiesta Bowl to match up against Iowa or Penn State.

My opinion? Boise State will be primed for either one.

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

Breaking Up the BCS: 12 Steps to a College Football Playoff

Chad Hensley — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 11:47:34 -0500

It is obvious to everyone that follows major college football that a playoff is not only wanted, but needed to level the playing field across the country. I haven't seen a poll that had less than 80 percent public support for a playoff system for the big boys of college football. So what's the hold up? Money. That is obvious to anyone with a pulse, even if the NCAA and the rich stakeholders of bowl games won't admit it. I don't expect a playoff until a "historically great" team like Notre Dame gets the shaft. If Notre Dame went undefeated this year, who would be put in the National Championship game? Texas (assuming they win the Big XII)? The SEC Champion (Florida or Alabama)? Or Notre Dame? That kind of controversy is the only thing that will get the people what they want. Unfortunately it hasn't happened yet, but with six undefeated teams remaining after the regular season has ended for most teams, this year has been the best in terms of an argument for a playoff. *I-A and I-AA is much less confusing than FBS and FCS, so that is what is used in this article

Begin Slideshow

FBS Playoff Series: 14 Teams

Crayton — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:12:43 -0500

The Failed Playoff

One of the problems with the playoff proposal released by the Mountain West Conference last year was the relegation of the lowest two of the 10 BCS teams to a fifth BCS bowl. This year, that would likely mean Iowa or Penn State facing off against the lowest ranked BCS champion (probably the ACC Champ or Pittsburgh) in the Cotton Bowl.

This would be known as the Toilet Bowl of the BCS. Last year, Cincinnati and Virginia Tech faced off in the least watched BCS game ever. Would the powers that be really want to make that an annual occurrence? Would any bowl choose to forgo its traditional matchups to match two disappointments?

The Cotton Bowl would certainly not give up its lucrative SEC-Big 12 matchup to bring in small, disenchanted fan-bases from the Northeast. In this iteration of the FBS Playoff Series we will determine how to improve the MWC playoff proposal.

BCS Expansion

Some have said that any playoff that incorporates less than the current 10 BCS teams is a non-starter. This is true only so far as those 10 teams, at least, play in a BCS bowl, if not the playoff.

The rub is that if you are going to separate playoff BCS from non-playoff BCS, then you will need to have more than one non-playoff BCS bowl. One way to accomplish that would be to simply create a four-team playoff with the six remaining teams put in other BCS bowls.

The alternative is to expand the field from 10 to 14 teams and make the playoff three rounds. With a larger field, those non-playoff BCS games will no longer feel like consolation bowls.

A pay grade can also be established between the two BCS tiers so that weaker BCS conferences will only get the big payday if they are one of the eight playoff teams, and so that more teams from non-BCS conferences (TCU, Boise State, AND BYU) can gain spots in the second tier of the BCS.

Team Selection

Eight automatic bids are available to enter the BCS. The champions of each of the six AQ conferences will gain a bid; the top non-AQ conference champion gains an automatic bid if in the Top 14; and Notre Dame will gain an automatic bid if in the Top 14. All other teams in the Top 14 are eligible for at large selection.

Of the six to eight teams receiving automatic bids (there are seven this year: 6 AQs and TCU), the top six will be included in the first-tier playoff BCS bowls. The next two highest ranked teams, whether at large or with an automatic bid are also placed in the playoff.

The second-tier bowls will try and match teams from traditional conferences (i.e. Cotton Bowl with the SEC and Big 12). The two-team-per-conference rule still applies to the BCS, except that a third team from the larger conferences may play if both division winners are included.

Bowl Matchups

The first-tier bowls will keep their traditional host conferences and the remaining teams will be paired by ranking. If the Pac-10 and Big Ten both send teams, then the Rose Bowl will matchup teams from both conferences. Here is the outlook this year, with one week to go:

No. 1 Florida vs. No. 8 Boise State (Sugar Bowl)
No. 2 Texas vs. No. 7 Alabama (Fiesta Bowl)
No. 3 TCU vs. No. 6 Cincinnati (Orange Bowl)
No. 4 Oregon vs. No. 5 Ohio State (Rose Bowl)

Note, the lowest BCS Champ (currently the ACC Champ) will not make the playoff unless it is ranked higher than the two at large teams, Boise State and Alabama (or the SEC championship game loser). Also, teams are shown here with seeds rather than by BCS rankings.

The second-tier bowls will then attempt to match teams from their traditional tie-ins. If there are not enough at large teams available, then the at large cutoff will be extended by four ranks to No. 18; but all eligible Top 14 teams must be chosen.

No. 13 LSU vs. No. 12 Va Tech (Cotton Bowl: SEC vs. Big XII)
No. 9 Iowa vs. No. 10 Ga Tech (Citrus Bowl: Big Ten vs. ACC)
No. 14 BYU vs. *No. 18 USC (Sun Bowl: Pac-10 vs. Big East)
*No. 15 Pittsburgh and No. 16 Oregon State were also considered for the Sun Bowl

Conclusion

While three rounds of playoffs in January never were my cup of tea, the Mountain West Conference could have presented a better proposal.

When there is only one second-tier bowl, it is nearly impossible to spin it as anything other than a consolation game; created just to guarantee money. When there are six teams playing in the second tier, it becomes a satisfying reward.

This alteration to the MWC proposal expands the field and also provides the option of a pay grade, helping divvy out a more equitable bonus to conferences based upon performance.

Further Iterations of the FBS Playoff Series

Three Teams

Four Teams

Sixteen Teams

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

Texas - Nebraksa: Can The Huskers Help TCU Leap to the Top?

Pete Misthaufen — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 12:18:32 -0500

If there is one thing Frog fans are pulling for on Saturday, it is a Nebraska upset of Texas at Cowboys stadium, located just a few miles east of TCU.

For TCU to make the BCS title game, Texas must lose in the Big 12 title game. Even then, TCU is not guaranteed a chance for the BCS title, as strange things may happen to result in a different team being No. 2 in the final BCS standings.

The Huskers are a two-touchdown underdog to the Longhorns and seemingly have no chance. Nebraska has struggled on offense all season and Texas appears fully capable of dominating Big Red on offense and defense.

However, the line has been falling as people start wondering if Texas can score enough points on the solid Nebraska defense.

The Decline of Big Red

Nebraska was one of the most dominating programs in college football when the Big 12 was formed, going to three of the first four Big 12 championship games.

From 1963 to 2003 Nebraska appeared in the AP Poll, finishing in the top 15 every year but two from 1963 to 2001.

Simply put—Nebraska was one of the true powers in college football.

In the sixth year of the Big 12, Nebraska went to the BCS title game at the Rose Bowl, even though Nebraska had not won its division or its final regular season game.

Nebraska has not had a ten win season Fank Solich was fired in 2003 for only winning ten games.

But the fall came hard. Since the 2001 season, Nebraska has not appeared in a single final AP top 15.

The Bill Callahan experiment proved a relative failure, with two losing seasons and only one shared Big 12 North title.

Now, a lot of different explanations arise for the decline of Big Red.

The firing of a ten-win coach is a prime contender.

Another possible reason relates to changes in academic standards between the Big 8 and Big 12, introduced by the insistence of Texas.

In any event, the decline has only stopped with the hire of Bo Pelini. Pelini took over last year and quickly brought some life back into Big Red, especially on defense.

Nebraska finished 21st in rushing defense and 14th in sacks in 2008.

In 2009, Nebraska regained its defensive reputation—No. 4 in Pass Efficiency Defense, No. 3 Scoring Defense, No. 15 Rushing Defense, and No. 11 Total Defense. Only one team, Texas Tech, put up more than 20 points on the Huskers.

Unfortunately for the Huskers, the offense has fallen off completely as it transitions from Callahan's pass happy offense to Pelini's more traditional ground-oriented attack

Texas Offense vs. Nebraska Defense

Texas under Colt McCoy seems to be an offensive powerhouse, but appearances can be deceiving.

Twice Texas was held under 300 yards of total offense, with two times under 350 yards.

The Longhorn pass offense has been almost pedestrian at times—held under 206 yards four times.

The Longhorns have faced only one tough defense, Oklahoma, and failed offensively in that game.

It is unlikely that things will change much against Nebraska, so we can expect somewhere in the range of 250 total yards and 15 points.

Texas Defense vs. Nebraska Offense

Now, the Texas defense is currently ranked No. 5 overall. Texas has not fared well against superior offensives (Texas A&M and Texas Tech both put up huge numbers on the Longhorns), but that will not be a worry here.

The Huskers do run the ball decently and may find success keeping the ball on the ground.

Overall, Nebraska will be lucky to put up two touchdowns on the Longhorns defense.

Texas is very good at interceptions, with 21 on the season, four of which were returned for touchdowns.

Special Teams

Neither team has a good punting game, which bodes very well for Texas.

Texas is No. 3 in kickoff returns and No. 15 in punt returns, with three kickoffs returned for touchdowns, as well as four punt returns. It was a kickoff return for a touchdown that helped Texas secure victory over A&M on Thanksgiving.

Given Texas's return ability, Texas has a decent chance of returning a kick in the Big 12 Championship Game.

Prediction

Texas has a much better offense and a much better return game than the Huskers. Everything else is basically equal.

Texas has problems containing high-powered offenses, but Nebraska lacks that. Likewise, Texas has problems moving the ball against even above average defenses, and Nebraska's is excellent, not merely above average.

Ultimately, Texas' ability to break open a game by way of a return or Colt's passing and running ability will likely be the determining factors in this game.

However, this will be a low-scoring, hard-fought game where only a few plays will determine the outcome.

Unfortunately for Frog and Husker fans, I think this one will go the way of the Longhorns, 17-10.

As such, Texas will most likely be heading to Pasadena and Boise State will get its second BCS invitation.

TCU will mostly only have a chance to finish undefeated and No. 2 in the nation, but such is life in the silly BCS world.

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com

College Football's Week 13 Awards

Alex Ferguson — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 04:52:00 -0500

Sorry we're late this week. After getting tied up with writing pseudo obituaries for Charlie Weis and Bobby Bowden's careers at Notre Dame and Florida State, as well as giving Al Groh the British "two fingers," we thought we could rest.

But then we remembered our Week 13 Awards for "rivalry week." And boy, was last weekend fun....

Games of the Week

1. LSU 33, Arkansas 30: Redemption lives in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, after getting the clock right and hitting the tying field goal, and eventually winning out in OT.
2. Alabama 26, Auburn 21: Can we get our breath back? Please?
3. Stanford 45, Notre Dame 38: Charlie Weis' game was a fun one. Mind you, haven't most of Charlie Weis' games at Notre Dame been fun.
4. BYU 26, Utah 23: The "Utah Classic" had the boys in Salt Lake City happy, anyway.
5. Texas 49, Texas A&M 39: A&M never gave up.

Now You've Got Your Pink Slip Award (in order-ish)

1. Steve Kragthorpe (Louisville). Just. Not. Good. Enough.
2. Al Groh (Virginia). Throw a massive party in the frat houses—Groh's gone!!
3. Charlie Weis. Hey, Fat Charlie the Archangel—Notre Dame just filed for divorce (Name the song!).
4. Bobby Bowden. Thanks for the years, Bobby.

Early Pink Slip Favorites for 2010

1. Mark Mangino (Kansas): If he stays in 2010.
2. Rich Rodriguez (Michigan): If the Wolverines collapse three years in a row, RichRod's out.
3. Mark Richt (Georgia): The locals are getting tetchy
4. Jimbo Fisher (FSU): I wish I was joking
5. Dan Hawkins (Colorado): He's got one more year. Goodbye in 2010, Dan!
6. [Add coach's name here] (Notre Dame): No pressure is like Irish pressure.

Big Surprises in Week 13 (although there are no surprises in rivalry games, apparently)

1. Georgia beats Georgia Tech 30-23. Didn't think the 'Dogs had a prayer. Helped with Nesbitt's injury, though.
2. Mississippi State blows out Ole Miss: Cue hot band/cheerleader girls.
3. Missouri 41, Kansas 39: How did that happen again?
4. The way Arizona beat Arizona State: Special teams, Devils, special teams!!
5. How woeful Florida State were at Florida: We expected better.

He Should Get The Heisman Award

1. Toby Gerhardt (Stanford): A team was on his shoulders for the whole season. He answered.
2. Colt McCoy (Texas): Great quarterback, but the defense and....
3. Jordan Shipley (Texas): Made this team.
4. Mark Ingram (Auburn): Was a No.1 pick right until his poor outing at Auburn.
5. Tim Tebow (Florida): Coach Tebow's speech to UF players of 2028: "No one will see us lose in 2028. I promise you!"

Early Heisman 2010 Awards

1. AJ Green (Georgia): Quite simply, the best wide receiver in college football.
2. Michael Floyd (Notre Dame): He's quite good too!
3. Jacquizz Rodgers (Oregon State): Piles up the yards like nobody's business—and yet woefully ignored.
4. Matt Barkley (USC): Watch the improvement from Year One to Year Two.
5. Tate Forcier (Michigan): He's already the player of the year at Ohio State, so why not get an award for his own team?

Games we're looking forward to in Week 14

1. Florida vs. Alabama (SEC Championship Game): Biggest. Game. Of. Season.
2.Oregon State vs. Oregon: Civil War by name, Civil War by its on-the-field nature. Oh, and the winner goes to the Rose Bowl. So no pressure then.
3. Georgia Tech vs. Clemson (ACC Championship Game): It was a great game earlier on in the year, and the repeat shouldn't be bad either.
4. Texas vs. Nebraska (Big XII Title Game): So who thinks we'll see Colt McCoy in the fourth quarter? Anybody?
5. Arizona vs. USC: Cheerleaders people, cheerleaders. The coeds aren't bad either.

Now, back to Florida vs Alabama. This is what happened in 2008. We can't wait for more of the same.

Read more BCS Controversy news on BleacherReport.com