As Expected, BCS Doesn’t Clear Anything Up
Well folks, it’s LSU and Ohio State. Is that a satisfactory conclusion or does the 2007 season have so many questions attached that, under the current system used by the BCS, there’s not much else you can do? Say what you will about the BCS–and it’s probably all true–but it certainly generates A LOT of discussion. Besides, who needs a playoff when there’s this much confusion.
First off: Kansas over Mizzou? Are you kidding me?
Apparently a team ranked lower in the BCS is more deserving than the Mizzou team that beat them, had a stronger strength of schedule (although, I don’t necessarily buy that) and made the conference championship game. Because of the rule that doesn’t allow three teams from one conference to make the BCS, either Missouri or Kansas was going to be left holding the bag. In this case, the BCS committee made the incorrect choice.
What’s the point of having a BCS ranking if a lower-ranked team is being picked for a BCS bowl over one with a higher ranking?
However, Kansas over Mizzou is a microcosm of what plagues college football, a sport with one of the most exciting regular seasons and one of the worst post seasons. No, the biggest problem facing the BCS is that no one has any idea which teams should be playing for the National Championship. Each team that thinks they have a legitimate claim to be in the BCS Championship game also has some question marks, including Ohio State.
Conversely, everyone in the BCS Top 5 does have a reasonable argument as to why they should be the one playing on January 7th.
The question is, what can be done? The relationship between the NCAA and the BCS is not going to go away and even though just about everyone with a voice is screaming for some kind of playoff, deep down inside, we probably know that’s never going to happen. But, once the again, after the bowl series is done, the BCS will need some kind of revision. Will this one lead to the “plus one” game that’s been rumored for a couple of seasons now?
God, I hope so, because we need something–anything–that will gives us a more definitive answer than the one we are going to get when the 2007 season has been completed. The “plus one” would be a move in that direction, something SI’s Stewart Mandel points out quite well.