BCS Ridiculousness

Sure, this happened last Sunday, and yet I'm still stewing over it. When the BCS Standings were released last Sunday, I was shocked. ESPN Projections had called for Boise State to be in first, Oregon second, and the current #1 Ohio State at fifth. Well, Ohio State lost, and I was very ready to see Oregon and Boise State atop the polls. And yet, Oklahoma becomes #1 in the BCS polls, ALL from the computers, as they are not ranked #1 in either the AP or coaches poll, the other 2/3rds of the equation. And I was even more surprised that the mainstream media took this news so easily. Oklahoma at #1? Why? They all seemed to be okay with this, saying it had been because of their 'tough early season schedule'. Are you kidding me? This team beat Utah State (!) by seven, Cincinnati by 2 (!) and a decent Texas team by eight. Their other wins came against even worse opponents. I fail to see how that schedule is any better than Oregon, who has beat a top ten team (at the time) in Stanford, or Boise St, which beat Virginia Tech AND Oregon State, two quality teams. No, Oklahoma is number one because of the ridiculousness of a system that was created to try and end the arguments over who should be the national champion. The computer systems that create the BCS formula are not even supported by the statisticians who run the computers (as this New York Times story shows). One ranker, in fact, uses LAST SEASON'S RANKINGS as a factor in his computations. Because Alabama finished #1 in last years poll, they have an advantage over plenty of other teams. Same with Florida.

I hate to sound like some wackjob conspiracy theorist, but the system is broken and slides heavily in the favor of the conferences that created it. The BCS guarantees that major conference teams will always be seen as the best and play for the championship, shutting out non AQs like Boise State and TCU. The media, particularly those who broadcast the games, agree to the major conference bias because they know they will get more money from Oklahoma being in the title game rather than Boise State. So yeah, Oklahoma is the #1 team according to a system designed to have Oklahoma and another big money NCAA team play for the championship, at the expense of good football.

So now all I have to hope for is that Oklahoma loses. And most major teams lose or lose again (I'm looking at you Alabama). Maybe if the BCS becomes trapped in a situation where all it can spit out is Boise State vs. Oregon or Boise State vs. TCU, it might make all the big wigs crap their pants enough to inspire real change in the system. If their very system is corrupted from the inside, they might just have to change it in order to keep the money rolling in. Somehow these people don't realize that a playoff system would a)increase interest in the college football postseason and b)make tons of money. Imagine if at the end of the year, eight teams were selected by a committee not unlike the NCAA basketball tournament (with major conference champions-ACC, Big 10, Big 12, SEC, Pac-10,and Big East plus two "at large teams"), seeded, and thus a three or four week bonanza begins. It would be March Madness in December. And March Madness is one of the most popular and money making operations in sports. To keep the Bowls happy, the games can be played at their stadiums- you could have a "Fiesta Bowl regional", "Sugar Bowl regional", etc. Then, the fans are happy because we see more football between the best teams, and we see who the true champion is. Hell, maybe to appease the Rose Bowl, their regional could always feature the Pac 10 and Big 10.

Sure, some deserving teams would be left out, but isn't that a reality of the NCAA basketball tournament? Or make it 16, and add an extra week. Either way, a playoff system could only help NCAA Football, instead of angering fans when the BCS invariably screws over someone.