Much has been written in the vein of "the BCS needs to go away." Let me add one more voice to this fray.
This has simply gone too far. LSU-Alabama part II should never have even happened. In NCAA Football 12, a sign is featured that reads "Every Saturday Proves who's Number 1," yet another sign saying what ESPN stands for. Except that the BCS, and ESPN by extension as their television partner, clearly don't stand for this.
During the 2011 season, LSU proved every Saturday that they were the best team. They proved they were better than Alabama on November 5th. Yes, Alabama had turnovers and missed field goals and mistakes in that game. It's football. Those things happen. LSU still won.
One of the biggest (only real?) arguments I've heard in favor of the BCS is that it makes the regular season games so much more meaningful. ("How could we have a playoff system and let an 8-4 USC team win a national championship? Harrumph!") Except this year, regular season games meant NOTHING. LSU beats Alabama, but hey, why not let them have another chance, right? It doesn't matter that they didn't win their division or conference, aren't they the second best team, and so therefore, by BCS fiat, they MUST play the best team, LSU?
The problem is that the BCS presents us with the false choice, namely, that there must be a #1 vs. #2 game at the end of the season. The second, and in this case, much bigger, problem, is that the BCS did not provide any caveat in the rules to exclude teams that haven't won their conference. Such caveats exist to make it to a BCS game in the first place, particularly for the non-AQ conferences. But for only the most important game of the season? Hell no, throw that rule out!
And so what we are left with is the utter ridiculousness we witnessed tonight. If AP voters had any guts they'd vote LSU #1 anyway. But I don't have much faith that will happen.
Disclaimer: I'm not an LSU fan.
Monday, January 9, 2012
Brain Crushing Stupidity
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
i agree, i'm not sure why this matchup was made. it seems to have penalized LSU for winning the first matchup. they had to beat alabama twice to win the championship, whereas alabama only had to beat LSU once. seems silly that LSU would have to do more.
on a broader note, i also agree that it tarnishes the
value of the regular season. for years i've been a proponent of not having a playoff because of the playoff-like importance/atmosphere for regular season games [which shouldn't be taken as being a proponent of the BCS, as i view the BCS as having multiple flaws], but a playoff would have been preferable to this championship matchup. it seems with the direction of college football going towards 16 team superconferences, a playoff may be the most logical choice, especially since it already is preferred by 95%+ of fans.
in your disclaimer, you said you were not a LSU fan, but another disclosure would be whether you dislike alabama/nick saban. just wondering, since it really doesn't affect your overall stance even if you did.
It's true that I do dislike Alabama but not necessarily Saban. But yeah, the biggest thing is how much this diminished the regular season, which seems the opposite of what they're supposedly going for.
Post a Comment