[Previous entry: "Phat Links"] [Main Index] [Next entry: "Maccabees"]

01/05/2005 Archived Entry: "BCS"

BCS
The season is over and no doubt that today every sports show from Cold Pizza to PTI will debate the BCS, whether Oklahoma was over-rated, and whether we need a play off system. USC's dominance over the No. 2 is evidence enough. Not evidence that Oklahoma didn't deserve to be there and Utah or Auburn did, but that college football needs to adopt the college hoops model: tournament. What makes the tournament so great is that it allows teams to have lost at some point in the year (how ridiculous is football getting? lose a game, lose your season) and still compete for the championship. On any given night, just about anybody can beat anybody. The tournament returns the competitive spirit to those best teams left and lets them fight it out. So what if a one loss or two loss team beats an undefeated? At that level, the teams are more or less equal - more or less because of padded non-conference schedules, different levels of conference play from year to year, and reputations. Utah's bad rep (conference and history) keeps them out of a game that maybe (I said maybe) they win. I want to see the WAC and SEC battle it out. I want to see the MAC and Big Ten battle it out. Why not? BCS has become too elitist in a time when there is more and more talent out there playing at all kinds of levels. We see it in college hoops - in a BCS system, St. Joes never would have been a number one seed the year they excelled. Gonzaga would never get any respect. And if the BIG MONEY argument surfaces, so what? The big money players can still sponsor tournament games and schools can still earn the mega bucks to pay for collegiate sports.