Whining About Whining About
the BCS
by Will Stewart
Reprinted by permission from: TechSideline.com, 7/12/05
Okay, time for a quick rant here: College
football season is less than two months away that's the
good news. The bad news is that the whining about the BCS is
right around the corner, too. Is it just me, or do the constant
claims about how "the BCS is a mess" get on your nerves,
too? Why take a great game like college football and ruin it
by fussing about the BCS from mid-October to early January?
I'm probably alone in this, but I don't really care if the BCS
selects its teams by having blind-folded midgets throw darts
at a hippo's butt. I'm not a guy who feels a burning need to
turn over every rock in a never-ending quest to make sure
darn sure that the national champion crowned at the end
of the season is agreed upon by everyone, holding hands and singing
in harmony.
We have learned that at the end of the season, when participants
in a championship are selected by some combination of humans
and computers, there's always someone fussing. It doesnt
matter if you're talking about the 65-team NCAA Tournament field
in basketball or the two-team BCS championship game, the ones
who get left on the outside, looking in with their noses pressed
to the glass, are going to fuss. Fuss, fuss, fuss, whine, whine,
whine.
Let's take last year in college football as an example. Three
teams went undefeated: Auburn, USC, and Oklahoma. USC and Oklahoma
played for the BCS championship, and Auburn didn't, and my how
everyone fussed. Auburn sympathizers railed about how the system
was flawed, and how they should have been in the championship
game.
Well, guess what? If you plug Auburn in and exclude Oklahoma,
the Sooner fans would fuss. Play Auburn versus Oklahoma, and
the USC fans would fuss. The whining would have happened no matter
what. That doesn't mean the BCS is flawed; it means three teams
went undefeated, and one had to get left out. Suck it up and
deal with it!
So the argument becomes that a playoff should be put in place,
so "no one gets left out," and deserving teams like
Auburn get to "play for the national championship."
Really? If you have a four-team playoff, that #5 team's going
to fuss about how the system is flawed. Play eight teams, and
#9 is going to pitch a fit. Go with sixteen, and
you get
the idea.
I'm a college football fan. For me, the glory of the game is
the tailgating, the camaraderie with the fans, and watching young
men who work hard year-round finally get to compete on the field
of play. There is enormous drama, excitement, and achievement
in college football that has nothing to do with crowning a national
champion. It's all about pride in your team and your university,
and shaking your fist at the BCS means that you're taking your
eyes off the prize. Don't forget to enjoy the game.
I think the BCS controversy, if you really want to call it that,
is created and propagated by the media and isn't of much interest
to the fans. I dont know about you, but I can't recall
ever sitting around a tailgate and having an in-depth conversation
about how the BCS works, and arguing about whether or not it
was fair. It's primarily the sports media who cry out for a playoff
and a "true" method of crowning a champion, because
they're not fans of any one team, and their observation of college
football takes place in a press box or a studio. For the fans,
who have to travel to the games, purchase the tickets, and pay
for the hotel rooms, the idea of chasing their favorite team
around the country through an eight-team or 16-team tournament
sheesh,
who's got the time and money for that?
Answer: the media, because their TV stations and newspapers and
web sites would pay for those trips, and it's their job, anyway.
Homer G. Fan has zero appetite for trying to decide if he should
travel to Tuscon for the Wildcats' (name chosen at random) first-round
playoff game, or hold off on traveling in the hopes that the
Wildcats will win and play in round two closer to home, or in
a more attractive city. Nah, give me the bowl system, where it's
announced a month ahead of time where my team is going, so it's
easy to plan, and it's the only trip I'm taking.
A playoff isn't going to happen. The NCAA presidents, the real
decision-makers here, aren't interested in it. So we're stuck
with the BCS. And in some years, your team might be one of the
two chosen by the BCS, and in others, it might not be. Sometimes
you're the windshield, sometimes you're the bug.
Does the BCS have flaws? Sure, I guess. Nebraska going to the
Rose Bowl a few years back was a joke, because they didn't even
win their own conference. The BCS formula from a couple of years
ago, which was so heavily weighted towards strength of schedule,
was also ridiculous. (Any system that would have excluded the
1999 VT team from the championship game is definitely flawed,
and the system that was in place in 2002, according to computer
guru Kenneth Massey, would have excluded VT.)
And the notion that coaches change their votes in the coaches
poll to manipulate the BCS rankings is a little disgusting. Last
season, Cal dropped from #4 in the next-to-last BCS poll (automatic
inclusion in a BCS bowl) to #5, dropping them from the Rose Bowl
to a second-tier bowl. Bill Brill (beloved to Hokie fans as he
is) had some interesting comments in a May article posted in
the ACC Area Sports Journal:
What we know is that several
members of the USA Today/ESPN coaches poll changed their votes
in the final ballot, enabling Texas to jump past California [into
4th in the BCS] and therefore qualifying for the BCS
What
was never made public was that two people in the poll voted Texas
second and dropped Cal to eighth, even though the Bears won a
difficult, rescheduled game at Southern Miss in their finale
to go 10-1, with the only loss being a last-second deal against
USC.
And why mention [Texas
head coach] Mack [Brown], the former North Carolina coach? Because
he has conceded to some Texas writers that he did exactly that,
voted his own team second while dropping Cal, which remained
fourth in the Associated Press rankings and ahead of Texas.
Who might the other voter have
been who did precisely the same thing? A reasonable guess is
that it was Watson Brown, the Alabama-Birmingham coach and Macks
brother. |
That's all interesting conspiracy-theory
stuff, and if true, stinks to the high heavens. But when you
get right down to it, I'm not going to storm the castle, demanding
changes. I just don't get that excited about trying to tweak
the BCS until it's juuuust riiiight.
Am I alone on this? You're the average fan. What do you think?
And that's not just a thinly-disguised query to create message
board traffic; I'm legitimately interested in what you think.
Because me, I don't care if the BCS uses the coaches' poll, the
Harris Poll and six computers, or if it uses three Vulcans, a
Swiss watch, and, well, midgets and hippos.
In the meantime, sorry to waste five minutes of your life with
yet another article about the BCS. At least this time, instead
of complaining about the BCS, I'm complaining about the complaining
about the BCS. Bet that's the first time you've ever read an
article where that was the topic.
Also See:
Lack of Quality
Leadership Opens The BCS To Annual Controversy
BCS Bashing Has Big Bandwagon
Did BCS Do The Right Things With Its Changes?
Computer
Rankings and National Titles |