Ravenwood - 06/18/03 05:45 PM
Tulane president Scott Cowen is on a mission to destroy the BCS. He's still miffed about Tulane's having gone 11-0 in 1998 and being banished to the Liberty Bowl where it missed out on millions of dollars. Cowen's plan is to try to unite the teams left out of the BCS, to try to pressure the organization to be more inclusive. If that fails, he could try an anti-trust lawsuit.
While some may think Cowen is just being a sore loser, I think that he has a pretty valid point. The way that the BCS is currently structured, 53 teams are essentially locked out of playing for the NCAA National Championship. To me, that seems akin to holding a Miss America pageant with only 35 states. At best, you could argue that those 53 teams are vying for one of the two at-large bids, but everyone knows their chances of getting one are slim and none. Especially when you throw big money draws like Notre Dame into the mix.
Personally, I wish Cowen the best of luck. I haven't liked the BCS since Virginia Tech had to back into the championship game after going undefeated. If margin of victory hadn't been taken into account (VT won by an average 31 points), once-beaten Nebraska would have gotten to play instead. Of course, margin of victory has been replaced by the "quality win" calculation to discourage running up the score. What many fans are asking, is that if all the mathematical computer formulas are so great, how come they keep changing every year? To fix the system for last year's winner of the "Tough Luck" prize, that's why.
The current BCS system actually penalizes good teams for being good. The reason being that your opponent has a better "strength of schedule" because they are playing you, and you are playing them. Plus, there are the annual scandals. The first BCS season, in 1998, resulted in Florida State being picked over Ohio State because they had a loss earlier in the season. To fix the problem "strength of schedule" was added and more emphasis was put on the computer formulas. Then for the 1999 season, margin of victory was the only thing that kept undefeated Virginia Tech ahead of one-loss Nebraska. Again, the computer formulas were tweaked.
In 2000, one-loss Florida State was picked ahead of one-loss Miami, even though Miami had beaten FSU head to head. Miami claimed they were screwed by the BCS, and the formulas were once again changed, and the "quality-win" component was added. The 2001 blunder had Nebraska playing in the National Championship, even though they couldn't win their own conference. The scandal once again resulted in a change of the BCS computer formulas. Last years BCS put together a good title game, but matched SEC champ Georgia against a mediocre 8-5 Florida State. FSU won the ACC only because of the ineptness of every other team in the conference. It also destroyed the Rose Bowl tradition. When the Orange Bowl selected Iowa and USC, the Rose Bowl was left without a Big-Ten/Pac-Ten match up for the first time since 1947.
Something that might help Cowen wreck the BCS is the current flap between the Big East and ACC. My friends in legal circles tell me that the contractual "out" clause in the Big East pretty much negates any legal claims the member teams have. That means the Big East could be toast in the next year or two. Without the Big East, the BCS would need more re-tooling. There would also be some big name teams like Virginia Tech, Pittsburgh, and West Virginia that would join the ranks of the 53 currently locked out of the race for the national title. They certainly won't be as favored as Notre Dame, who has their own special BCS rule.
That means that Virginia Tech could theoretically play for the National Title one year, and be barred from playing in it the next. For those of you that didn't notice, Virginia Tech was ranked 5th in Stewart Mandel's Spring Poll. Mandel also notes that Vick won't necessarily be given the top QB spot. He has to earn it, and right now Bryan Randall isn't giving it up very easily. With either QB, they could be a force to be reckoned with this season.
Related articles:
Will the ACC destroy the Big East? - 05/16/2003
Lowly FSU clinches BCS bid - 11/24/2002
NCAA Football and the BCS - 11/14/2002
The BCS Sucks - 10/21/2002
BCS Looney Bin - 10/19/2002
BCS Tweaks - 9/30/2002
Category: Sports
Comments (3) top link me
Because, as we all know, if Tulane boycotts the BCS, they'll wreck the entire system.
Still, I don't think enough play is being given to the Notre Dame factor. If the Big East becomes weakened, then Notre Dame will likely lose out on their parasitic bowl bids and will throw a hissy-fit. The only solutions I see at that point are for them to join the Big East in football, which they'll only do extremely sulkily, or try and renegotiate a chance to steal some other conference's bids, which probably won't go over especially well.
Posted by: Robert Bauer at June 19, 2003 12:01 AMND will never, ever join a conference in football. The financial loss would be far too great. ND makes tens of millions of dollars a year on merchandising alone. Joining a conference would also hinder their ability to maintain rivalries, of which they have many.
I don't know how I feel about the BCS. I'm biased, though...I'm an ND alum. ;) With revisions, it could continue to make sense. I don't think people should be locked out, but by the same token, strength of schedule means a lot. If teams want to compete for the national championship, then they should make a concerted effort to strengthen their schedule. No one would argue that Tulane had a shot at beating Ohio State last year, because the quality of teams that Ohio State played was of an entirely different calibur than Tulane. If being in a certain conference doesn't allow them to do that, tough shit...they need to find a new conference. We need to find a happy medium, but I don't think there is anything fundamentally flawed with the BCS.
Whether or not ND deserves special treatment, I don't know. I won't go there. :-D
Posted by: Tony Hagale at June 19, 2003 3:17 AMTony,
There are huge problems with strength of schedule. First of all they are set 5 to 10 years in advance. There is no guarantee that the 10-1 Penn State you signed up to play isn't going to be 2-4 when you play them in 5 years.
Also, negotiating who you play can ge grueling. For instance, VT has been trying to set up a game with Tennessee for years. The problem is that Tennessee refuses to play in Blacksburg. They want both games in Knoxville, which VT simply cannot afford.
Unbalancing your home-away games can put a team in serious financial trouble. That is why you see big teams like ND and Michigan paying off little teams to play them at home. The money can really get in the way sometimes.
Also, I would argue that you are putting too much stock into a variable that teams have too little control over. The kids just go out and play 11 games, the best they can. They don't have any control over who they play. Hell, the administrators don't really even have that much control. It's almost a shell game.
Posted by: Ravenwood at June 19, 2003 8:31 AM(c) Ravenwood and Associates, 1990 - 2014
