It seems that the elections killed this blog.... back to football... and back to Boise State vs. the world!
I was listening to ESPN radio on the way to work and a guy framed the argument perfectly. Basically, BSU is a team that looks like it is good enough to play for a national championship. They've absolutely destroyed everybody in the WAC and it is clear that they are a team that looks as though they could beat anybody on a neutral field in a one-for-all-the-marbles scenario if they play well. On the other hand, you have Auburn... they are a team that has played and beaten the #5 ranked schedule in the country (and that includes their win against 1-AA Chatanooga last week). Auburn has a couple of convincing wins and a bunch of relatively close wins, but they have won every game against a schedule that is just about as tough as it comes. So who should play for it all? The team that is good enough? The team that deserves to go? Of course, there's also TCU that put a serious beat-down on ND's next victim (please don't let my homerism for the Irish ruin my credibility... I'm aware that we just lost to Navy and Tulsa, and conventional wisdom has us losing badly this weekend... I just don't want my call of 5-7 after the Stanford game to come back to haunt me). Anyways, TCU is kind of a hybrid of Auburn and BSU... They've played a better schedule than BSU (but still not as tough of a slate as Auburn), and they've blown out just about everybody (but not as convincingly as BSU). This season continues to scream for a playoff. I've always tried to look at this situation as if ND were in the positions of these teams. If ND ran through a schedule as poor as BSU's, and we were left out of the NC game in favor of a team that played the 5th toughest schedule in the country and also went undefeated, I would undoubtedly be pissed, but I would probably be able to swallow that jagged little pill since the other team played a schedule that was so much tougher than ours. Conversely, If ND went undefeated against the #5 schedule in the country and got left out in favor of a team that played a bunch of complete patsies, I would NEVER get over it. It would be similar to '93 FSU getting the national championship over ND... the same ND that BEAT THEIR ASSES by 2 scores! The same ND that missed out on a national championship when Miami beat us in '89 and lost the following week but the voters said that the head-to-head matchup was the tipping point... God damnit... that was bullshit, but I digress... where was I... Oh, if ND were left out after defeating the #5 schedule in the country. This is why I would want to see Auburn in the game (assuming they are undefeated at the end of the year, and Cam Newton isn't found guilty of recruiting infractions... can anybody defend the SEC against my allegation that it is the dirtiest/scummiest conference in college football?). Oregon looks like the best team this year, the other team for the big game is completely up in the air...
Another thing that came up was that BSU (or some other VERY deservant team) could be left out of a BCS bowl due to the obligation that the BCS must include the Big East and ACC champs. Just think... 4 of the 6 AQ conferences stand to send 2 teams: The big 10 (from the pool of OSU/Wisc/Iowa/MSU). The Pac 10 (Oregon/Stanford). The big 12 (Nebraska, OK State). The SEC (Auburn, LSU, Alabama). The BCS has 4 bowls and the NC game. Let's assume the NC game is Oregon/Auburn. That leaves 8 slots that must be filled. The SEC and Pac 10 champs will be represented in the NC game. Now we have 4 AQ teams (including two awful teams from the Big East/ACC) and 4 at large bids. Let's say that two of those go to BSU and TCU... this could leave a real possibility that a team like Stanford (who looks GREAT this year) could go to the Alamo bowl... another possibility would be that BSU gets left out in favor of teams from the AQ conferences due to monetary reasons... either way, this STINKS! I actually hope that the season turns out this way so that the BCS will have even more reason to go down in flames.
No comments:
Post a Comment