Big East: Least or Beast
I'm not one of the rabid college football fans like you find throughout the South and Midwest, but I do enjoy the games when I watch them. And as a hard core sports nut I of course have an opinion on everything sports related, including the BCS.
After the Big East conference lost 3 of its top teams to the ACC, folks starting suggesting that the Big East should lose its BCS standing and be considered a "second tier" conference like C-USA and the Mountain West. The conference began to be called the Big Least. And many still consider it an inferior brand of football to that played in the "real" major conferences. For those holding such opinions let me throw some stats at you:
1. The top 3 schools in the Big East this season are undefeated as of today. That means HALF of all the 1-A schools still sporting spotless records play in the Big East.
2. Those 3 schools are unbeaten in play against schools from other BCS conferences.
3. It's not only the top 3 Big East teams that have been successful against other BCS schools, but the conference as a whole has a winning record (10-7) in games with teams from other BCS conferences.
4. Only ONE Big East school has lost more games than it has won against teams from other BCS conferences.
5. In the last round of BCS bowl games the Big East champion demolished the SEC runner-up (WVA over GA in a rout). The SEC was said to be the toughest conference in the nation at the time, and the Big East was said to be on a par with the bottom rung schools from the SEC.
So, maybe it's time for the CFA to do what it originally was thought to be doing when it broke free from the NCAA and created the 1-A classification. The idea then was to set up a conference of major conferences that would play in the major bowls and decide the national champion amongst themselves.
Maybe it's time to create that super conference. Let any of the so-called second tier schools that can meet the criteria for institutional support step up and be part of the BCS, and send the other small schools down to 1-AA or some other classification. The result should be no more than 6-8 conferences making up the super conference. (It'd be kind of like the champions league in Europe for soccer.) Let the conference champions face off in a round of bowl games. Don't even try to set up a playoff system since it'll never happen under the present reality. But by pitting the conference champions against each other every year in a rotating system where every conference eventually faces the other conference you would generate some real excitement, and the opportunity for bragging rights across the country.
It would be comparable to the pre-BCS Rose Bowl and Orange Bowl games where the Big Ten faced off against the Pac-10 and the Big Eight matched up with the SEC champion each year. That system matched West Coast against Heartland and Midwest against the South, but always left the question of whether the conference that won the Orange was stronger than the one that won the Rose. By pitting the eight conferences against each other over an eight year rotation every conference would get a shot at bragging rights over another major conference.
And of course, for the benefit of the boys in the penthouse offices at the television networks, we'd retain that last bowl game matching up the number one and two ranked teams (after the first round of bowl games). Have that game 2 weeks after the New Year's games so that teams would have some time to prepare.
Oh, yeah, I can already hear those Texans whining after the first bowl game in which the Big East champ knocks off the Big IX champ.
After the Big East conference lost 3 of its top teams to the ACC, folks starting suggesting that the Big East should lose its BCS standing and be considered a "second tier" conference like C-USA and the Mountain West. The conference began to be called the Big Least. And many still consider it an inferior brand of football to that played in the "real" major conferences. For those holding such opinions let me throw some stats at you:
1. The top 3 schools in the Big East this season are undefeated as of today. That means HALF of all the 1-A schools still sporting spotless records play in the Big East.
2. Those 3 schools are unbeaten in play against schools from other BCS conferences.
3. It's not only the top 3 Big East teams that have been successful against other BCS schools, but the conference as a whole has a winning record (10-7) in games with teams from other BCS conferences.
4. Only ONE Big East school has lost more games than it has won against teams from other BCS conferences.
5. In the last round of BCS bowl games the Big East champion demolished the SEC runner-up (WVA over GA in a rout). The SEC was said to be the toughest conference in the nation at the time, and the Big East was said to be on a par with the bottom rung schools from the SEC.
So, maybe it's time for the CFA to do what it originally was thought to be doing when it broke free from the NCAA and created the 1-A classification. The idea then was to set up a conference of major conferences that would play in the major bowls and decide the national champion amongst themselves.
Maybe it's time to create that super conference. Let any of the so-called second tier schools that can meet the criteria for institutional support step up and be part of the BCS, and send the other small schools down to 1-AA or some other classification. The result should be no more than 6-8 conferences making up the super conference. (It'd be kind of like the champions league in Europe for soccer.) Let the conference champions face off in a round of bowl games. Don't even try to set up a playoff system since it'll never happen under the present reality. But by pitting the conference champions against each other every year in a rotating system where every conference eventually faces the other conference you would generate some real excitement, and the opportunity for bragging rights across the country.
It would be comparable to the pre-BCS Rose Bowl and Orange Bowl games where the Big Ten faced off against the Pac-10 and the Big Eight matched up with the SEC champion each year. That system matched West Coast against Heartland and Midwest against the South, but always left the question of whether the conference that won the Orange was stronger than the one that won the Rose. By pitting the eight conferences against each other over an eight year rotation every conference would get a shot at bragging rights over another major conference.
And of course, for the benefit of the boys in the penthouse offices at the television networks, we'd retain that last bowl game matching up the number one and two ranked teams (after the first round of bowl games). Have that game 2 weeks after the New Year's games so that teams would have some time to prepare.
Oh, yeah, I can already hear those Texans whining after the first bowl game in which the Big East champ knocks off the Big IX champ.
posted by Wake of the Flood at 11:05 AM
5 Comments:
The BCS is pure bullshit. The notion that this is the best remedy to a playoff format is laughable, too.
Gee Bruce, I know half the fun of being a college football fan is the controversy -- just like the joy of the Hot Stove League for baseball fans -- but couldn't you at least played along with me for a little bit?
since we're not gonna get a playoff in 1-A while you and I are alive and the money is too big to go back to the old system, what ya got? BCS ain't going away, it''' only get bigger as it controls the $$$$$$. So, what now?
Big IX? Big nine? what the heck is that?
I like the idea of the proposed rotation though. It could be fun.
One element that doesn't come into play in your opening comments though was that of a school that thought it was going to compete for the national championship (Georgia) going to a lesser bowl. I can't say for certain, but I would guess that both the coaches and the players suffered a degree of let down by being regulated and that the coaches were already using that game as both a reward for the faithful seniors that had been playing on practice squads for four years, plus taking a look at underclassmen to attempt to gauge their talent levels.
IX = typo smart rear.
And the idea of a let down would make some sense in the GA-WVA bowl game, except that GA got their butts stomped. The game was never close. Which says that the talent levels are comparable at the very least, negating the argument that the Big East has a much lower level of talent and that the loss was simply an SEC team not playing up to its talent level.
Now that WVA has lost it will be interesting to see what happens with Louisville and the BCS. I predict that the national title game will be a rematch of OSU-Michigan unless the first game in Columbus is a blow out. Louisville just won't get the respect needed to make it to number 2 in the polls even if it goes undefeated.
And if Rutgers ends up being the undefeated champion of the Big East they'll be the last school chosen when the BCS bowls divvy up the teams. They'll be like the kid at recess that nobody wanted on their team but somebody had to get stuck with because the rules said he got to play. Go stand in right field, real deep -- deeper! -- and maybe you'll decide you want to go play with the girls on the swings before your turn to bat comes around.......
Oh, won't Annamaria and Jenn and the rest all have fun with that last analogy....
those women won't ever get this deep into the comments of a sports related post, so you are safe. this is where i bury all my chauvinistic statements that i couldn't make anywhere else!
and i was up this morning. as i am most mornings now. i find as i get older that morning is way more attractive to me than it used to be (unless i was coming at it from the other side!)
Post a Comment
<< Home