Reviewing the BCS

By David Martin Sports Central Columnist

Every week, the NCAA compiles a list of 15 teams, proclaiming them to be the top-15 teams in the land. They do this using a formula that draws on the AP and USA Today/ESPN Coaches' polls, a number of computer-generated polls, applying strength of schedule measurements, and losses. Wins over teams in that week's top-10 apply a bonus. And the lowest totals go to the best teams.

Over the past two years, the BCS has sloppily applied its numbers to the championship matchups, giving us Oklahoma/Florida State in 2000 when we wanted Oklahoma/Miami, and Miami/Nebraska in 2001 when we deserved anyone else but Nebraska testing the 'Canes.

Controversy has abound this year, as well. When the nation had eight teams with undefeated records, there was cause for concern. A week later, we saw the number of loss-less teams fall from four to two, giving us hope for the right championship matchup. But, with the two undefeated teams having four games left between them, anything can still happen.

Ohio State over Michigan is never a lock, unless Michigan is competing for the national title. Pittsburgh and Virginia Tech each have defenses that can slow a sometimes sluggish Miami offense. The question for Pitt and VT is this: can their offenses score on the Miami D? VT can run with authority, and they have the better chance. But, this year has had its surprises. One never knows.

This Week's BCS Top-10

1. Ohio State: Road wins by a total of 24 points against teams with a combined 17-24 record. They're a tough team, likely to stay in a game with anyone. But, if they don't whip Illinois by a good number (more than 17), they should drop to No. 2. QB Craig Krenzel is coming into his own, but has been slow getting comfortable. Of course, the power rushing game that OSU has utilized so effectively allowed him to avoid being the focus of the offense. His throw against Purdue proved he's good enough to win games.

2. Miami: They proved all they needed to prove against Tennessee. They will have tough games against Pitt and Virginia Tech, but should come away undefeated. The defense, about which there was early season press, seems uninspired. Reading too many press clippings, perhaps? Willis McGahee and the son of NFL great Kellen Winslow are stars in the making.

3. Washington State: Weapons on offense and a drastically overlooked defense. Looking forward to a great Rose Bowl vs. Iowa.

4. Oklahoma: Suddenly mortal again. I have wondered all year about the highly-advertised OU defense. After allowing a true freshman to throw for 4 touchdowns in a relief role, I'm still wondering. Don't ignore the fact that the Big 12 is just like the Big 8 was -- two good teams, and a bunch of not-so-good teams.

5. Texas: Killing the likes of Baylor, squeaking by mediocre Nebraska, and overrated Iowa State, this team strikes me as highly overrated and ultimately very soft. Where do they go from here? A big bowl, but QB Chris Simms isn't likely to perform as well as Major Applewhite did in his last hurrah.

6. Georgia: A decent team that I've struggled to appreciate, they've won some tight games in their conference. Georgia/LSU will be a good SEC Championship Game. It's unfortunate that the SEC West champion can't be the division's best team, with Alabama on probation.

7. Notre Dame: ND suffered from a bit of an emotional letdown against Boston College. Odd under the Ty Willingham regime. They will destroy Rutgers. USC? Great game upcoming.

8. Iowa: The Hawkeyes right now are the scariest team in the nation. Their offense is high-octane and their defense has really gelled nicely. Do they smell roses in Iowa? I should think so. They need too much help to get to the title game against Miami. But wouldn't that game be one of the more entertaining matchups conceivable this postseason?

9. USC: I have the distinct impression that the Trojans are overrated. Still, the USC/ND game will be a good one.

10. Michigan Dominating win over a soft seven-win Minnesota team. Big Blue can't get to the Rose Bowl, but they can mess up the BCS with an upset in the Horseshoe.

"Playoffs? Playoffs! We just want to win a game!"

That immortal Jim Mora quote really sums up how I feel about a college playoff system. And the continued calls for a college playoff cause me to get about as apoplectic as he was that afternoon. Call me old-fashioned, call me a traditionalist, call me unrealistic. I hate the idea of a college playoff for the national championship. Why? I want to argue over who the best team is. Is that so bad?

In the not so distant past, several polls, most prominently, the AP (sports journalists and broadcasters) and USA Today/ESPN Coaches (formerly UPI) polls determined the national champion by voting at the end of the season. Whoever finished at the top of the polls was the declared national champion. Some changes were made to try to get the top two teams in bowls in the early 1990s, but that system failed miserably when Michigan and Nebraska split the title.

So, beginning in 1998, the Bowl Championship Series promised us the No. 1 vs. No. 2 matchups in primetime event, dragging out the season a couple more days, and cleaning up the controversy. Yeah, right. The BCS quixotic attempts met with success in the 1998 and 1999 seasons, Tennessee over Florida State in 1998, and Florida State over Virginia Tech in 1999. Not much disagreement over who the best teams were, or whether they reached their rankings rightly.

In 2000, things took a turn for the worse. Once-beaten Florida State faced undefeated Oklahoma for the title. The chink in the armor? Florida State's one loss came to another one-loss team, the Miami Hurricanes. The 'Canes entered the bowl season by far the hottest team, on the longest win streak (excluding Oklahoma) and may have been the better matchup.

As if to accentuate the problems with the BCS system, Miami, undefeated, faced another unworthy opponent in Nebraska. Nebraska had only one loss, but a demonstrative one, to Colorado. Oregon complained that their one loss, a humdinger to Stanford, shouldn't push them out of the title game. And Colorado, with two losses, won the Big 12 championship and made a claim on Nebraska's bowl position. But the numbers bore out what they bore out, and the title game bored viewers.

So, the media continues to call for a playoff system. My question is and has always been: why? To what end? Of course the talking heads working for ESPN/ABC/Disney want a playoff to increase advertising revenue for the parent company. But, really, what's wrong with debating whether Miami is better than Oregon? Or if, on a neutral field, the Sooners could beat the Buckeyes.

Sure, the games could answer the questions, but if all the questions are answered, why ask them at all? A playoff renders the regular season meaningless, and in 10 years, all but the biggest bowls bankrupt. Sure, plans exist that utilize some bowls, but at the expense of denying non-playoff teams their deserved postseason.

Are there too many bowls now? Yes, obviously. When nearly half of the field is required to fill all the bowl slots, there are too many bowls. Without a playoff, this glut is highly likely to take care of itself. With a playoff, the NCAA would be committing mass bowl murder.

The proliferation of bowls has also worked to render them meaningless, and attendance at some bowl games previously thought fairly attractive (say, the Gator Bowl) has dipped. Teams are opting out of bowls when such a maneuver was once thought ludicrous, as some bowls require certain numbers of tickets sold, and occasionally even require a fee paid by the schools attending (last year's Humanitarian Bowl required Clemson to pay $300,000 and sell 8,000 tickets to attend ... an obscene cost just to fly to Boise, Idaho).

It has become too expensive for some programs to accept a bowl invitation. The prestige of going to a bowl and playing a team never found on the schedule has disappeared.

I long for a day with fewer than 20 bowl games, a requirement of seven wins for bowl eligibility, and a day-long debate about the merits of the AP pollsters' heritages when they differ from the Coaches' polls' results. Beyond that, I have some ideas for fixing a still-broken BCS for next time.

Article courtesy of Sports Central.