Sunday, September 20, 2009

Why is Boise State ahead of USC in the Polls?

Boise State is #8 in the current AP poll. They could easily go undefeated with only 1 quality win (Oregon) on their schedule. The problem with the BCS is not its process, but rather the voter mentality that enables Boise State to move up in the polls after wins over low quality opponents. Does anyone believe that Boise State is better than USC, Ohio State, Virgina Tech or Oklahoma? If not, why is Boise State ranked higher than them? Teams in non-BCS conferences just don't face the week-in-week-out competition that SEC, Pac-10 or Big-10 do. For example, if Boise State and USC both win out, Boise State would likely go BCS championship game instead of USC. Yet, USC will have played 10 quality opponents to Boise State's 1.

Teams that play in the WAC, MAC, Mountain West, Sun Belt and Conference USA should be explicitly banned from competing in BCS bowls because no matter how difficult of a non-conference schedule they play, having 8 conference games simply makes their schedules too weak to take a BCS bid away from an SEC or Pac-10 team with 1 or even 2 losses. Any football team playing in a non-BCS conference that wants to compete for the national championship should only become eligible if they go independent and schedule at least 8 opponents from BCS conferences or join an existing BCS conference.

5 Comments:

At September 20, 2009 4:43 PM, Blogger Hubber said...

And yet Utah beat Alabama last year (Sugar Bowl) and Boise State beat Oklahoma the year before (Fiesta Bowl). If they don't belong...then they should have lost those bowl games, no?

 
At September 20, 2009 5:36 PM, Blogger Andrew Fife said...

Hubber:
Non-BCS schools are actually 3-1 in BCS games. In addition to the 2 wins you cited, Utah also won the '05 Fiesta Bowl and Hawaii lost the '08 Sugar Bowl. But wins and losses aren't the point. Its college sports and upsets happen all the time.

The question is were they the best team and therefore the most deserving to go? Its hard to believe that going undefeated while playing 1-to-3 quality opponents in a weak conference is more impressive than 1-or-2 losses in the SEC against 8-to-9 quality opponents. Did Utah really deserve to play in the Sugar Bowl last year more than Texas Tech who's only regular season loss was to Oklahoma who finished the regular season at #2?

-Andrew

 
At September 20, 2009 7:56 PM, Blogger Hubber said...

Well...Texas Tech didn't even with their bowl game (Cotton) against Mississippi. So send them to lose to Alabama in the Sugar would have been your answer? ;-)

The thing we need is a playoff system, but Delaney will never allow that.

 
At December 09, 2009 11:07 AM, Blogger Tony said...

This line of thinking is tired. Get over it. Until there is a playoff in college football, I will not get to into it. In a sport, it is ridiculous that a champion is picked by a bunch of fat sportswriters instead of guys on the field.

 
At December 14, 2009 11:44 PM, Blogger Andrew Fife said...

Tony:
the post is really about voter mentality, not taking a stand on the bowl vs. playoff debate. Albeit on a lesser scale, the voter mentality issue would be a problem in the deciding the seeding and final invites for any playoff system whether it be 4, 8 or 16 teams.
-AF

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Powered by Blogger