Screw the BCS. My Utes should've played either USC or Auburn in 2004 and Boise should have a shot at Ohio St. this year (although they'd likely lose, that's why you play the game, right?)
2007-01-02 06:31:59 · 6 answers · asked by someguy 3 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Granted Utah did play Pitt, but they also made them look like a high school team. Pitt wasn't a great team, but they were made to look much worse than the really were because the Utes pounded them into oblivion, just like they did every other team that year. The point I'm making is that we'll NEVER know what they could've done. Sure, they could've been blown out by USC, but who's to say they wouldn't have won? If a 6th grader does his homework with perfection and with little effort, would you not see it reasonable to test him at higher levels to see how he/she'd do?
There's a lot more to college football than just talent and good recruits. Work ethic, guts, and sheer willpower will take any good team to great levels. And that's what the '04 Utes and the '06 Broncos had.
2007-01-02 07:16:21 · update #1
I played D-III college football and we had playoffs. Why can't the D-I boys? Hell, they end up playing 14 games anyway if their conference has a championship game at the end.
That's just it, it sucks, we'll never know if Boise State or the '04 Utes could have done anything against the top team and we never will. I totally agree that the major conferences are tougher, but, every year there is some chance that the smaller schools will catch lightning in a bottle and have just the right combination to beat everyone in their path. Hell, look at the NCAA basketball tournament every year! For that matter, look at major league baseball, there is a serious gap between the haves and have nots there, but every year, some small market team makes a run at the world series.
The argument that a playoff system would undermine the existing bowl system is ludicrous. All you have to do is make the playoff games be the existing bowl games. It would be the most-watched TV ever. Period. The reason there isn't a playoff is b/c of money; the big schools have it and don't want the smaller schools to have a chance to get it. It sucks, but I don't think it will ever change. Screw the BCS indeed.
2007-01-02 07:05:48 · answer #1 · answered by loveitorleaveit1111 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not counting Oklahoma (which Boise St beat in a bowl), Boise St's opponents are 4-1 in bowl games while Ohio St's opponents are 2-3 in bowl games. Ohio St played two opponents a lot tougher than anyone Boise St played in the regular season, but otherwise Boise St didn't play a weaker schedule.
Of course Florida's opponents are also 4-1 in bowl games and Florida's schedule was a lot tougher than Boise St's (or Ohio St's). USC also played a tougher schedule.
So, I think it's true Boise St didn't prove themselves to the level that Ohio St or Florida or some of the other bigger schools have, but it's also true that the gap between the quality of smaller conferences like the WAC, MWC, and Big East, and the schedules they play, is a lot smaller than it used to be in the past. Especially in the Big East, which had Louisville, Rutgers, and West Virginia.
It really has reached the point where a play-off is the only way to decide a national champion.
2007-01-02 15:14:59 · answer #2 · answered by Bob G 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The BCS is very flawed, but an Ohio State - Boise State match-up for the mythical National Title would not be justified. I totally agree with the earlier responder - going undefeated in the WAC doesn't measure up to other Leagues. Boise State had a great season -congratulations to them. They are a great Cinderella story for the year. I hope at least they get ranked among the top five in the final polls.
2007-01-02 14:55:05 · answer #3 · answered by Tee Double You 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Boise State was fortunate to beat Oklahoma and if memory serves Utah played the weakest team ever to appear in a BCS game (Pitt was horrid).
Just because you're undefeated doesn't mean anything. There's a big difference between going undefeated in a conference like the Pac Ten or the ACC and going undefeated in the WAC.
2007-01-02 14:38:23 · answer #4 · answered by TheOnlyBeldin 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I agree with the fact that the BCS sucks. But I also think that the teams that end up playin the mid major teams just aren't taking them seriously. I mean, UCLA can beat USC once every 7 years but if it's the right day they will do it. Mississippi State can beat Florida once every 10 years. Teams have good days and bad days. I'm not trying to rain on the parade but BSU isn't as good as Oklahoma but they just played better yesterday. Congratulations to them thoughh.
2007-01-02 16:40:19 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Xactley what I think this is why we need playoff in Div. 1-a football
2007-01-02 14:34:56 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋