Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Another reason to hate the BCS

There are many, for sure. But here is another. The BCS games suck this year, but they didn't have to. The rules allow for a BCS matchup shift that could be enacted if [1] "the same team will be playing in the same bowl game for two consecutive years" or, [2] "whether alternative pairings may have greater or lesser appeal to college football fans".

Haha, good one BCS, the "fans".

Anyway, enough sarcasm. So to get down to it, the BCS selected their teams, looked at the matchups, and then decided that Hawaii-UGA, VT-Kansas(?!), and Oklahoma-WVU where "the balls". No adjustment (namely pitting #3 VT against #4 OU) would be of greater "appeal to college football fans". Or so they say.

So, logically, when someone gets screwed, it's either about money or saving face. In this case the latter appears to be the case. As SI points out, "Theoretically, a decisive victory by Oklahoma -- which is ranked No. 3 in the AP and Coaches polls -- combined with a less decisive LSU victory over the Buckeyes could have opened the door for a split national championship. Unlike the coaches***, AP voters are not obligated to select the BCS title-game winner No. 1."

This actually makes a lot of sense. The BCS does not like splits. The whole justification for the BCS is the fact that they will no longer exist*. Why would they set themselves up when they can make just as much money by taking the safe road.

So, BCS, why can't we have a VT-OU matchup?

"Everybody looked at that, and knowing that, still came to the same conclusion. In any such consideration of something like this, you have to look at the question of what precedent does it set -- particularly when there have been more compelling requests** that have not been granted -- and what are the unintended consequences?"

So the reason why you are making a dumb decision now is because you have made dumb decisions in the past? Ya, that sounds like the kind of fucked up logic that got us here in the first place.

*except sometimes.
**probably referring to the FSU-Miami rematch in 2003.
***This isn't true, after the USC/LSU/OU debacle, the Coach's Poll allowed their members to to vote for whoever they wanted. Most voted for LSU anyway, some did not.

No comments: