Saturday, January 10, 2009

Is The BCS Fair part 2

BCS Busters came to pass when in 2004 The BCS was threatened with an anti trust law suit.

The first BCS Buster was The Utah Utes, winner of this years Sugar Bowl and winner of the 2004 Fiesta Bowl.

Since that time, the BCS has set a higher standard for the mid-majors, they must nationally ranked in the top 12. Which usually means they must be undefeated.

While other teams from BCS Conferences can get in with two or more losses because they are automatic qualifiers.

This season, there were 3 mid majors ranked in the top 12 and yet only one team was taken while teams with lower rankings were included through at large berths, such as Ohio State in the 2008 Fiesta Bowl.

In my mind this still violates both anti trust laws and what sports is all about, sportsmanship.

Proving the talent gap is closing between BCS teams and the non BCS teams is the current record. Mid-majors lead the series 3 to 1. Rendering moot the argument the "little guys" just can't hand with the "big boys".

Millions are at stake, as the BCS said, it is not their role to be fair, just to try and match #1 against #2. Even at this mission, it appears they fail, just ask this seasons Texas Longhorns.

Is a 16 team playoff a viable answer, probably not. Again its the money, cities make too much money from the bowls and a 16 team tournament would damage the current bowls.

What is the solution, I am not sure, but the BCS better find an equitable solution that is fair to the mid majors and football fans across the nation.

BCS greed is what fuels the current system, it is broken, they need to fix it.....before Congress does.

No comments: