Sorting the pile

Now we have it. The BCS bowls and their matchups (and all non-BCS bowls) are set. And once again it is painful to watch the system. Here are the BCS games:

BCS Title Game:   No. 1    LSU (13-0) vs. No. 2 Alabama (11-1)
Orange Bowl:        No. 15  Clemson (10-3) vs. No. 23 West Virginia (9-3)
Sugar Bowl:          No. 13  Michigan (10-2) vs. No. 11 Virginia Tech (11-2)
Fiesta Bowl:          No. 3   Oklahoma State (11-1) vs. No. 4 Stanford (11-1)
Rose Bowl:           No. 5   Oregon (11-2) vs. No. 10 Wisconsin (11-2)


The champion will either be LSU or Alabama. The almighty Southeastern Conference (SEC) will get even more powerful and revenues will flow to the already rich universities. Both colleges are ranked 1 (LSU) and 2 (Alabama) and this will automatically select them into the BCS championship game. So the BCS champion is from the SEC, no matter who wins the game. Oklahoma State has an 11-1 record as well but they were selected into the Fiesta Bowl. Well, they are not from the SEC....

Now one can understand why Texas A&M and Missouri will join the SEC in 2012. The name SOUTHEASTERN Conference is a bit of a stretch considering Texas and Missouri I would say.

One can like it or not, but at least the BCS is somewhat consistent concerning the championship game selection. But when we take a look at the other bowl the system really shows how broken it is. Let us take a look at Monday's final BCS ranking:

1 LSU
2 Alabama
3 Oklahoma State
4 Stanford
5 Oregon
6 Arkansas
7 Boise State
8 Kansas State
9 South Carolina
10 Wisconsin
11 Virginia Tech
12 Baylor
13 Michigan
14 Oklahoma
15 Clemson
16 Georgia

When we look at number 7 we see that Boise State is not playing in a BCS bowl. Boise State has a 11-1 record (note same as Alabama or Stanford who are both in a BCS bowl) and is selected into a small non-BCS bowl. West Virginia is not even ranked among the top 16 but is playing in the Orange bowl. Although it lost 3 times it is selected over Kansas State, Michigan State and South Carolina who are all ranked in the top ten. But that is the automatic qualification system. But why have a ranking then? To mock a somewhat fair system? The BCS has lost a lot of support among journalists, coaches, politicians and, most important, football fans. Those who give their time and passion to cheer their teams, those who love the game of football,  should have seen by now that the BCS is all about one thing: money. 

I think CBS's Tony Barnhart nails it when he writes:

"Still, it was surprising the Sugar would take the Hokies over No. 7 Boise State (11-1) and No. 8 Kansas State (10-2). Actually, it wasn't surprising. It is a reminder that after the BCS Championship Game, it's really not about the most deserving teams. It's about putting fannies in the seats and drawing eyeballs to the TV in a down economy. That's simply the way it is."

Amateur sports, right?