Image via Wikipedia BCS Logo 2006-2010. An alternate version of th..." src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2e/Bowl_Championship_Series_2006-2010_logo.png" width=250 height=224>
ESPN the Magazine ran an article in their Dec 13 edition called 5 Things You Should Know About The BCS and Why it Does Not Need Fixing, No Matter What Anyone Says. I'll go over point by point why Bill Hancock, executive director of the BCS, is an idiot and why the system needs tweaking.
1. Hancock says that there is nothing to fix. He says that you can't please everyone and no matter what system is in place people will have issues with it. He goes on to say that before the BCS the #1 and #2 teams in the country were not guaranteed to play for the title and now the title game is one of the most watched out of all sports. Just because the BCS is better than a poll for for deciding a champion doesn't mean that it doesn't need tweaking. Boise State has lost one game in 3 regular seasons and has yet to play for a national title they were ranked 4th before their this week and had no chance of competing for the title even if they went undefeated again. Boise State dropped to 11th behind three 2 loss teams. I just heard From Kirk Herbstreet that if Auburn losses in their SEC Championship game this weekend then TCU, undefeated, could be left out of the National Championship game. Are you sure that there is nothing to fix Mr. Hancock?
2. Hancock says that facts aren't always straight. He says that 11 conferences voluntarily participate in the BCS and Have the option of leaving when the contract is up. I find it funny that he uses the word participates because it feels like there are maybe 5 confrences that have any pull in the system. The SEC has the most since like I said earlier, it is still possible for Auburn to go to the National Championship game even if they loose tomorrow. Boise's and TCU's confrences obviously are on the outside looking in. Those are the facts and they are pretty straight forward.
3. Money isn't everything but it is something Hancock says. I really think that this is something none of us should have ever learned about the BCS. A team that earns an automatic qualifying bid to a BCS game earns $24 million for their confrence. A non automatic qualifying school that scraps it's way to a BCS game earns $6 million. Why is it that a team that makes it to the same bowls as all the other BCS teams makes $18 million less? What is that about? So far I have learned that no AQ teams that go undefeated can't play for National Championships and they can't make the same money that the AQ teams can. Glad to know that they are equal participants in your BCS system Mr. Hancock.
4. Hancock has the gaul to say that "We embrace the little guy. Really". He basically says that it is the confrence commissioners fault that Boise State and TCU can go undefeated and still not play for a National Championship. He doesn't say why they can't make the same as everyone else for making it to a BCS bowl game, but I guess it is because he wants to see them fight and scrap for respect and money. Just keep showing them the love.
5. To know us is to love us. The BCS is happy to talk with senators and the president. Really, that's who you think you need to explain this stuff to. I don't the legislater involved in sports in anyway shape or form and especially not amature sports. Besides, they have more important things to be talking about. Explain to me how many undefeated seasons it takes to prove you are worthy of a title shot. Explain to me how a team can improve their strength of schedule when top teams refuse to play them because they are too good. Explain to me how you can honestly crown a champion without at least a 4 team playoff.
The BCS is better than what was there before but it is still not what the fans want or what the teams deserve. All teams deserve a shot, especially if you run the table. the only fair thing to do is have a play off. 8 teams at most would add one extra week to the already 2 week bowl schedule.
1. Hancock says that there is nothing to fix. He says that you can't please everyone and no matter what system is in place people will have issues with it. He goes on to say that before the BCS the #1 and #2 teams in the country were not guaranteed to play for the title and now the title game is one of the most watched out of all sports. Just because the BCS is better than a poll for for deciding a champion doesn't mean that it doesn't need tweaking. Boise State has lost one game in 3 regular seasons and has yet to play for a national title they were ranked 4th before their this week and had no chance of competing for the title even if they went undefeated again. Boise State dropped to 11th behind three 2 loss teams. I just heard From Kirk Herbstreet that if Auburn losses in their SEC Championship game this weekend then TCU, undefeated, could be left out of the National Championship game. Are you sure that there is nothing to fix Mr. Hancock?
2. Hancock says that facts aren't always straight. He says that 11 conferences voluntarily participate in the BCS and Have the option of leaving when the contract is up. I find it funny that he uses the word participates because it feels like there are maybe 5 confrences that have any pull in the system. The SEC has the most since like I said earlier, it is still possible for Auburn to go to the National Championship game even if they loose tomorrow. Boise's and TCU's confrences obviously are on the outside looking in. Those are the facts and they are pretty straight forward.
3. Money isn't everything but it is something Hancock says. I really think that this is something none of us should have ever learned about the BCS. A team that earns an automatic qualifying bid to a BCS game earns $24 million for their confrence. A non automatic qualifying school that scraps it's way to a BCS game earns $6 million. Why is it that a team that makes it to the same bowls as all the other BCS teams makes $18 million less? What is that about? So far I have learned that no AQ teams that go undefeated can't play for National Championships and they can't make the same money that the AQ teams can. Glad to know that they are equal participants in your BCS system Mr. Hancock.
4. Hancock has the gaul to say that "We embrace the little guy. Really". He basically says that it is the confrence commissioners fault that Boise State and TCU can go undefeated and still not play for a National Championship. He doesn't say why they can't make the same as everyone else for making it to a BCS bowl game, but I guess it is because he wants to see them fight and scrap for respect and money. Just keep showing them the love.
5. To know us is to love us. The BCS is happy to talk with senators and the president. Really, that's who you think you need to explain this stuff to. I don't the legislater involved in sports in anyway shape or form and especially not amature sports. Besides, they have more important things to be talking about. Explain to me how many undefeated seasons it takes to prove you are worthy of a title shot. Explain to me how a team can improve their strength of schedule when top teams refuse to play them because they are too good. Explain to me how you can honestly crown a champion without at least a 4 team playoff.
The BCS is better than what was there before but it is still not what the fans want or what the teams deserve. All teams deserve a shot, especially if you run the table. the only fair thing to do is have a play off. 8 teams at most would add one extra week to the already 2 week bowl schedule.
No comments:
Post a Comment