We're Asking the Wrong Question

Ever since 2004, I have been amongst the BCS-Elitists whose slogans represent something to the effect of “Just Say No to the Non-AQ!!!” Sure, I have respected the success of Utah, Boise State, BYU, Hawaii and TCU over the past 6 years, but I was strongly against their inclusion in the BCS Bowls and in particular the National Championship discussion. So many people that argue with me on the subject continue to ask me some variation of the following question: “What… you don’t think that Boise or TCU could beat Mississippi State, Clemson, South Carolina, LSU, Arkansas, Georgia, or Alabama?”

And there within lies my problem with the entire discussion. We’ll come back to this.

Even in this season, the 3 Non-BCS powerhouses have proven their capability. TCU beat a Baylor team that now sits atop the Big 12 South. Boise beat a Virginia Tech team who is currently undefeated in the ACC. And Utah beat a Pittsburgh team which has started 3-0 in Big East league play. Right now you’re probably thinking… “exactly, so they should have the chance to play for the title.” Keep dreaming (and reading).

There is NO DOUBT in my mind this year that Boise State, Utah, and TCU could beat any team in the country on a neutral field. Heck, I even think that they could go into some of the most hostile road environments, including SEC venues, and come away with victories. But let’s change that “or” to “and” and re-ask the aforementioned question.

“Do you think that Boise or TCU could beat Mississippi State, Clemson, South Carolina, LSU, Arkansas, Georgia, and Alabama?”

The answer to that question… is an emphatic NO.

But, that is what Auburn has been asked to do this year… and so far (with a 9-0 record) they have done it.

Ohio State has been asked to beat Miami, Wisconsin, Iowa, Penn State, Michigan, Illinois, and Purdue.

Oklahoma has been asked to beat Florida State, Cincinnati, Air Force, Texas, Missouri, Iowa State, Baylor, and Oklahoma State.

Even though Oklahoma and Ohio State both slipped up once, the fact that they are attempting to navigate such a difficult schedule is the point. Week-in and week-out, the BCS conference members have to play a schedule that requires their best effort. The Non-BCS schools do not have nearly the challenge that the BCS schools do. BCS teams are asked to beat more than 1 or 2 tough opponents every year, unlike the non-BCS teams.

Ponder this. In the heart of the season (October):
Boise State played New Mexico State, Toledo, San Jose State, and Louisiana Tech.
TCU played Colorado State, Wyoming, BYU, Air Force, and UNLV.

Now, during that same stretch:
Alabama played Arkansas, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Ole Miss.

LSU played West Virginia, Tennessee, Florida, and Auburn.

Oregon played Stanford, UCLA, Washington State, and USC.

The bottom line is that these non-BCS schedules are not on par with their BCS brethren, so why should the non-BCS teams play for the same reward? Even the title of the game itself should be enough to drive home that point. It’s not called the “College Football Championship” or the “FBS National Title”. It’s called the “BCS Championship Game”. It is a reward for the top teams that come out of the BCS conferences. It’s not a reward for teams that play schedules with a strength ranking below 90th.

I have softened my stance on allowing the Non-BCS teams to participate in some of the BCS games. It is entertaining to see how a Boise or TCU matches up with some of the BCS powers every now and again. But the BCS Championship should remain reserved for schools that reside in BCS conferences. That is a question that is easy to answer.