For any idiot that thinks...

[PDXsooner]

...that only conference champions should be able to play in the title game, here's your answer.


Conference titles shouldn't affect title-game eligibility
By Brad Edwards
Special to ESPN.com

It's time to settle this once and for all.

It started when Nebraska reached the BCS Championship Game in 2001 without winning the Big 12 North.

And it escalated in 2003, when Oklahoma reached the BCS Championship Game after losing by four touchdowns in the Big 12 title tilt.

Would you like to see the No. 1 BCS squad left out of the title game?

Ever since that time, there have been cries from media and fans alike that something should be done to make sure this never happens again. Yet, BCS administrators have refused to take that step.

So if you've ever wondered why a team is still eligible to play for the national championship even if it doesn't even win its conference ... well, here you go.

Let's play the ever-popular game of BCS hypotheticals.

Now, these aren't crazy, worst-case-scenario hypotheticals. None of these requires a team to lose as an overwhelming favorite.

• Oklahoma beats Texas Tech and Oklahoma State and wins the three-way tie in the Big 12 South, then loses to Missouri in the Big 12 title game. Missouri (11-2) is the Big 12 champion.

• Florida loses at Florida State, then wins a close game against Alabama. Florida (11-2) is the SEC champion.

• Oregon State beats Arizona and Oregon to win the Pac-10 title with a 9-3 overall record. USC also wins out to finish 11-1.

• Penn State beats Michigan State to win the Big Ten title with an 11-1 record.

• Utah beats BYU and wins the Mountain West with a 12-0 record.

If all of this happened, my best guess is that the final BCS standings would have a top 3 of No. 1 Texas, No. 2 USC and No. 3 Texas Tech. And it's possible Alabama could be ranked No. 4.

But if a rule existed that allowed only conference champions to play for the BCS title, then none of those four teams would be eligible to compete for the ultimate prize. In this scenario, the championship game would likely be played between Penn State (11-1) and Florida (11-2), while Missouri (11-2) and Utah (12-0) would also have arguments to be included.

Some might ask why USC, as Pac-10 co-champion, would not be considered eligible. The explanation is simple: If the Big 12, SEC and ACC can have only one champion because of a title game, then the other conferences can't have two or three champions. Tiebreakers would have to be used to break ties for a conference title when those situations occurred. (Thus, Oregon State would be the Pac-10 champion based on its victory over USC.)

So, anyone who would feel fulfilled by watching No. 5 play No. 6 for the national championship can keep demanding that teams be required to win their conference titles to earn a spot on the BCS big stage.

[Iam4OUru]

I don't necessarily believe that you should be a conference champ to play for the BS Title. I doubt you'll ever see it again, tho. That's the reason UGA didn't jump LSU last year...because LSU was the conference champ...even tho we all knew that UGA had the better team.

[JLEW1818]

CCG are make or breaks, good and bad.

Not me I honestly thought LSU was the best team last year.

[BoulderSooner79]

I don't see the BCS ever putting in this rule just because it could tie their hands. But I do think the human voters (currently 2/3 of the formula) will take a conference champion if they are a viable choice - implicit tie breaker if you will. Conference champions will almost always present a viable choice and Brad Edwards had to jump through hoops to create a scenario where that wasn't the case. It's hard to predict how this might playout going forward because they tweak the friggin formula all the time.

[tigepilot]

I don't see the BCS ever putting in this rule just because it could tie their hands. But I do think the human voters (currently 2/3 of the formula) will take a conference champion if they are a viable choice - implicit tie breaker if you will. Conference champions will almost always present a viable choice and Brad Edwards had to jump through hoops to create a scenario where that wasn't the case. It's hard to predict how this might playout going forward because they tweak the friggin formula all the time.

Yeah, they tweak it every time the computer or mathmatical eliment (like the old strength of schedule and quality win component) skews the results from what it would have been if had just been left to the human polls. :rolleyes:

Considering you don't have to win your conference/division in most other sports to win the respective championship and the fact that not all conferences in D1 play by the same rules, it's hard for me to rally behind that argument but I do understand that point of view.

[PDXsooner]

You don't have to win your conference to win it all in college hoops, NBA, MLB, NFL, or NHL...

[badger]

I think it could be used as an additional tie breaker should the need call for it.

[OUHOMER]

Independents dont have a conference. they are not exposed to a last minute loss.

So unless everybody has a CCG, should not but that a language in the BCS

[badger]

Independents dont have a conference. they are not exposed to a last minute loss.

So unless everybody has a CCG, should not but that a language in the BCS

If you're referring to Notre Dame, they've been exposed to a lot of losing lately :P

[bakerjrb]

You don't have to win your conference to win it all in college hoops, NBA, MLB, NFL, or NHL...

That's a great point.

All you gotta do is remember the NFL last year - the Giants were a wild card qualifier into the playoffs, and won the whole thing.

And, as painful as it is to recall, think back to NCAA basketball in 1988. Kansas finishes 3rd in the Big 8 final season standings, squeaks into the Big Dance, and beats OU in the final to finish the year as NCAA Champs (but 1&2 against the Sooners).

Boomer.

jrb

[Dan Thompson]

To me its a double standard, just like there is an AP champ and BCS champ.

The way it is now, the conference championship is a conference thing, not a BCS thing.

[stoopified]

Personally I don't care what the BCS rules are.I would just as soon the BCS goes the way of the dinosaur and be replaced by playoffs.Football is meant to be decided on the field and not by voters or computers.

[fadada1]

i don't understand why the 5 BCS games can't agree to have #1 v. #2, #3 v. #4, #5 v. #6, etc..... these ridiculous conference tie-ins can kiss my a**. "well, it's tradition" says the beano cooks of the world. it was also tradition to have OU and nebraska play the friday after thanksgiving... what happened to that tradition?

#1- give us a f-ing playoff already!!!

#2- until then, give us the best match-ups to we can enjoy the bowl season.

[A-M]

Personally I don't care what the BCS rules are.I would just as soon the BCS goes the way of the dinosaur and be replaced by playoffs.Football is meant to be decided on the field and not by voters or computers.

What he said!

[JLEW1818]

I honestly like having a Conference championship, think about it, it has never hurt us, (even in 03) still got in.

[jwlynn64]

Did Jason White hurt his hand in the CCG against Kansas St. and that hurt us in the NCG against LSU?

Just trying to remember what happened but I think that was it. I guess you could say that hurt OU.

[StoopTroup]

What I thinks hurts a team like suc is that they don't play a Conf. Championship...especially this year. If they were matched up again and beat State...they might have enough help from that to push them into a Title Game with 1 loss, especially if the right scenario played out. I think I'd rather take that chance than being Crowned AP National Champs.

[MojoRisen]

For poeple who think CCs should be used as a tie breaker, think about what could happen this year with a 3 way tie.. to get a chance to play for the CC and the other bracket is not as good as the 3 way tie bracket.

The voters are getting so political and playing favorites there is not a lot of logic behind it at all..

I say leave it too the computers and SOS at that point.

This BCS stuff gets your blood pumping- but I think it is taking away from College Football - and like another poster said with the BS bowl tie ins... We hardly ever get a match up that people want too really see. Like a 1vs2 3 vs 4 etc etc.

[StoopTroup]

Mojo...what we see now though...it's still better than letting the Media Pick it.

I was pretty happy when they neutered the AP.

They had it coming.