BCS Rankings: 5 Things the BCS Needs to Happen This Bowl Season

The BCS has come under tremendous heat this year for what I like to call "The Year of the Quality Loss."

The quality of loss allowed Alabama (lost to No. 1 LSU by three in OT) to remain in the No. 2 spot at the end of the year, with Oklahoma State (lost to unranked Iowa State by six in two overtimes) fans crying foul at the injustice of not allowing their Cowboys into the title game.

Clemson's loss to the Wolfpack allowed Virginia Tech to slide into a bowl game better than their conference champion, Clemson (who thrashed Va. Tech, not once, but twice).

Stanford (11-1), by virtue of the head-to-head loss to Oregon (10-2), will slide into the Fiesta Bowl against OSU.

Before I get too far ahead of myself, here's the slideshow (I feel a rant coming on, and I want to put it where it belongs: directed at each bowl selection.).

5. Alabama Has to Win by No Less Than 7 Points

Alabama's position at No. 2 in the BCS final poll has everyone outside of the SEC crying foul.

Winning the game, even by a touchdown, will not silence the critics. I don't think anything short of a 17-point victory will silence the critics, but a win that gives no doubt as to who is No. 1 is a decent start.

If Alabama doesn't win "Round II," then the OSU Cowboys are going to say "See, they already lost this game in November; we told you so!"

I believe the BCS got it right with LSU as No. 1 and 'Bama at No. 2. However, there are plenty of people who will not be persuaded without an Alabama demolition of LSU.

Of course, the "Alabama-doesn't-have-as-many-championships-as-they-claim" crowd will have another one to add to their hit list if Alabama takes No. 14 to the Capstone after having lost to LSU in the regular season.

They would be wrong, but they'll scream it anyway.

4. Oklahoma State Needs to Lose to Stanford

Finishing No. 1 in the Big 12, it makes sense that Okie State ended up here (without regard to the BCS title game argument). I would not wish a different opponent for them to play against, but Stanford in the Fiesta Bowl instead of the SEC-vacated Sugar Bowl made no sense to me.

Oklahoma State has earned themselves an opponent of Stanford's caliber. Stanford may have been shafted as well. Either way, the BCS heads should definitely be concerned with the outcome of the Tostitos "Obvious Campaign to Overthrow the Sugar Bowl" Bowl.

LSU > Oregon > Stanford.

OSU was left out of the title game. The only way the BCS finishes with logic on its side is if the equation ends with: LSU > Oregon > Stanford > Oklahoma State.

If the Cardinal beat the Cowboys, then the BCS saves a little bit of face, though putting 11-1 Stanford in any bowl other than the Sugar Bowl still looks dumb from any camera angle.

3. Virginia Tech Needs to Win Commandingly over Michigan

No amount of argument will ever have me agreeing that the No. 11 and No. 13 teams in the nation should meet in the Sugar Bowl. I mean, the cutoff for the BCS Bowls is No. 14.

Back in my Dad's day, the Sugar Bowl meant something. Heck, last year, the Sugar Bowl meant something. This year, not so much.

The SEC normally has a team in this bowl, and a team like this year's Stanford Cardinal would be pitted against them in a game that at least lends credibility to whichever conference comes out with the "W."

How in the world does a non-conference-champion end up in a bowl game better than their conference champion, who annihilated them twice?

This year, the BCS really needs both teams to decline the invitation on the grounds that it wouldn't be fair to the Sugar Bowl itself. Since that won't happen, they need to root for Va. Tech do dismantle Michigan to the tune of three or four touchdowns.

That wouldn't give the matchup credibility, but it would give the "VT got a better bowl than Clemson" argument a teensy-weensy bit of credibility.

2. The Clemson Tigers Need to Lose to West Virginia

Clemson earned this bowl bid by defeating Virginia Tech a second time to take the ACC crown.

Little did they know that an at-large bid would land No. 11 Virginia Tech in the Sugar Bowl.

Hindsight, right? It looks like the BCS is trying to fail this year.

Anyway, if the Clemson Tigers can throw the BCS a gigantic bone, it is by losing to West Virginia by two (or more) touchdowns.

No one will ever really understand this year's Sugar Bowl, other than the fact that No. 11 vs. No. 13 should be an entertaining football game (Even that argument is hollow against the argument that it still shouldn't be in the Sugar Bowl.).

West Virginia needs to put a hurtin' on Clemson. The BCS can at least save enough face to star in a DC comic opposite Batman.

1. All the Teams in the BCS Bowls Need to Hit the Top 10 at Some Point in 2012

Somehow, even if all four of the previous slides come true, it still doesn't explain the stinkin' matchups this year.

What was it? Did the schools all have un-leaked contracts that said, "If my school doesn't get in a BCS Bowl and win by the end of the 2010 season (BCS 2011 Bowls), I get a free spot in the 2011 BCS postseason (BCS 2012 Bowls)"?

Seriously, if these teams aren't in the top 10 of the first BCS rankings (which means they have earned the spots after seven games), the BCS has no justification for this years games.

Even if these teams all have the top 10 locked up, it still doesn't mean they are the best choices for this year.

I mean, if RG III takes home the Heisman, how is the Heisman winner left out of all five of the BCS games? It should be a new NCAA rule that, "You shall not pick as an at-large selection any team ranked lower than the team on which the season's Heisman winner resides."

Sorry, Michigan, but Baylor didn't earn a BCS bowl; what are you doing in there?

File this season's BCS Bowls under: #reallybcsreally?