Sunday, December 04, 2005

A Dumb BCS Article

This is from the AP, and its terrible. It acts like the BCS 'worked' this year, and everything is okay in college football. Well, yes and no. The BCS 'worked' because USC and Texas didn't lose, and every other team did. Thats not the BCS, that's fate.

As for the other coments, about how the BCS has good matchups and blah blah blah. Look, I'll be watching exactly two bowl games this year. Ohio State vs Notre Damn, because of Ohio State. And I'll watch USC vs Texas cause it means something. Besides that, why should I care? Penn St and Florida St are playing for 3rd, I do not care. It doesn't mean anything. Sure they are both good teams, and they both have old coaches... but I don't care about either team, the outcome means nothing, why should I give a rats ass.

This is why I can never fully get behind college football: a lot of games don't mean anything. The Bowls don't matter, they just don't.

The title game matters; that's it. In every other major sport, the post season matters. College basketball, NFL, MLB, NBA and even the NHL; win or go home. Keep on winning and you win the title.

College football postseason: win or lose, you go home. And unless you're ranked 1 or 2, it doesn't matter.

I know the games 'do' actually matter. The school that wins gets more money, the winner gets a better chance a recurits and all that. There are benefits. But these same things would happen in a playoff system. You think Duke doesn't benefit on the recruiting trail by playing deep into March?

The article ends like this:

Last season, California was 10-1 but got bumped out of the Rose Bowl by Texas, a slight that caused an outcry from the Pac-10 and elsewhere.

The Ducks won't get as much sympathy this season.

And for once the BCS gets to gloat.





The BCS should not be gloating, they should be breathing a sigh of relief that neither Texas or USC lost. The BCS didn't do shit, they just got lucky nothing fucked up happened this year.

And why no sympathy for the Ducks, lets see: They lost one game (Notre Dame and OSU each have two losses), they play in a major conference, a conference that the 2 year reigning national champs reside.

As for the teams they've played... Oregon is 10-1 and their two non-conference opponents: Houston and Montana. Not exactly powerhouses. Penn State 10-1, non-con oppoenets: South Florida and Cincy. Wow, again, not powerhouses. Notre Dame had a tough schedule, but they lost to the same team Oregon did (#1 USC ) and they lost to a shitty Michigan State team. OSU has two losses, although to two very good teams (Texas and Penn State), but they are ahead of Oregon. So I don't get it. I just don't. Why shouldn't Oregon be pissed that TWO 2 loss teams are ahead of them? Huh?

See, Oregon did all it could, only lost one game (to the BEST TEAM IN THE COUNTRY) and they don't get the money games. This is why theres a problem in college football. First of all, eveyone besides two teams are playing for a ranking other than 1 in the postseason. Whoo hoo, Ohio State beat ND so now we're ranked 3rd. We're number 3, we're number 3! And the teams can't decide it on the field, if this were basketball and Oregon got a shitty seed, they would just buckle down and take it out on their opponents, eventually winning a game vs a top team. But in football... they can't. They get what the voters give them. Or a computer.

No comments: