Why the BCS needs to be fixed 1

Why The BCS needs to be fixed

Nick Weltner

Why the BCS needs to be fixed 2

In 2008 the Texas Longhorns played the toughest schedule in the whole NCAA D1 football. The Longhorns were an interception away from beating Texas Tech, on the
road, but ended up loosing on a last second touchdown from Grahm Harrell to Michael
Crabtree. This was the Longhorns only loss on the season with the toughest schedule. But
the BCS didnt care they lost late so they shunned them for loosing late in the season and
Texas dropped past a team they had beat earlier, 45-35 Oklahoma. (Hayes, 2008). The
only reason Oklahoma jumped them was because their loss was early in the season so
Oklahoma got the NO.2 ranking even though Texas beat them. Texas never got a shot to
come back. So Texas with the toughest schedule in the NCAA and only one loss on a last
second touchdown pass doesnt even deserve a chance to play for the conference title
game?, or even a shot at the national championship game instead, Oklahoma.
That makes absolutely no sense to me which is why I am interested in the Bowl
Championship Series (BCS) and why it needs to be fixed it is a financially driven
unethical way of finding NCAA teams for the national championship game. It has not
been fair to all NCAA teams for the last 12 years. The BCS will give a team with one loss
maybe two losses in an automatic qualifying conference a bid before they give a team
with an undefeated record in a so called bad conference, which makes no sense. It also
doesnt give a team that plays a great season but just because they made one bad play and
lose a game and dont even receive a chance for the title.
I know so many better ways to find a champion. Many people disagree with the
format that is why I am interested because it is wrong and ruins the sport. I used many
sources to back up my opinion most of them for EBSCO and one great help from Sports
Illustrated. The BCS needs to be fixed.

Why the BCS needs to be fixed 3

The BCS is a mathematical formula to try and find two teams for the national
championship. BCS was made in 1998 (Heistrad, 2010). It was formed to ensure that
college football would finally always have a national championship game (Anderson,
2009). When it was created it had six automatic qualifying conferences, the ACC, Big
East, Big Ten, Pac-10, and the SEC (Whiteside, 2010). What this means is that the
champion of these conferences automatically receive a shot in the BCS. The BCS ranked
other teams and made the BCS rankings with a mathematically unsound formula based
on subjective rankings, computer generated polls, and a complex formula of stats.
With that system the BCS is not fair to all other schools. The only way a team
from a non automatic qualifying conference can be rewarded a bid to the BCS
championship game is to finish number 1 or 2 (Whiteside, 2010). This would never
happen though. Boise State is from a non automatic qualifying conference and went 13-0
two years in a row but didnt play so called good teams in their conference so with an
undefeated record never went past number four in the polls. How does a No. 21 Virginia
Tech team that had two loses and one of them from Boise State receive a BCS bid but
Boise State with a better record doesnt? (Whiteside, 2010). That just isnt fair.
With that system and having to have the stats for BCS points it ruins the regular
season. In the BCS system margin of victory is one of those stats. So if a team beats
someone 45-10 instead of 30-10 the team can lose points because they didnt score as
much. And also say a team loses by 15 instead of 22 they wont lose as many points since
it was technically a closer game, and that is exactly what Oklahoma did. The Oklahoma
Sooners had a fourth down in their own territory with two minutes left on the clock and
down by nine so still with a chance for a comeback, but, instead Oklahoma punted

Why the BCS needs to be fixed 4

because now they would only lose by nine instead of maybe not converting on fourth
down and letting Missouri score again and lose by 16 (Wetzel, 2010). Loosing like that
would hurt them even more in the BCS polls. However, the BCS still claims that every
regular season game matters and that it makes every team try harder, then why did
Oklahoma quit? If that is true, why did Boise State drop two places in the polls after
beating a No. 22 Hawaii team 47-7? That is also another reason that the BCS isnt fair in
not treating teams equally. Boise State never quits in a game and keeps scoring and
Oklahoma loses and gives up but only drops one spot and stays in front of Boise State.
That just says the regular season is being ruined by BCS.
Mark Cuban, Barack Obama and the government dislike the BCS so much that
they all try to get involved in fixing the system. Mark Cuban offered college football 500
million dollars each year to get a playoff started (Passon, 2010). Cuban has two different
playoff system proposals he has offered. Some of the athletic directors of the schools are
starting to side with Cuban (Passan, 2010).
After the 2009 championship game when Obama was asked about the game, this
being the championship Texas belonged in, Obama said, We need a playoff (Anderson,
2009).
The U.S. Justice Department has even announced they might open an
investigation into the legality of the BCS, which authors contend is not a formal
organization so much as faceless cartel knitted together by a series of contracts
(Atkin, 2011, para. 4).
That was also one of the few things Barack Obama and John McCain agreed on. They
both said they were going to try and fix the BCS system.

Why the BCS needs to be fixed 5

The one easy way to fix the problem is a playoff system. A playoff system is
better for many reasons. With a playoff system all teams would always have a fair chance
at the nationally championship game. A playoff would make finding the teams for the
national championship so much easier. Instead of a mathematically unsound computer
formulas and confused voters to pick a champion, they could pick an 8 team playoff or 16
team playoff. If they have a playoff instead of the formula right now that one worthy
team is always left out, that team wont be left out anymore. A playoff system would also
ensure the colleges more money. Big ten commissioner Jim Delany estimated that an
NFL-style football playoff would generate three or four times more money than the
current system does (Murphy & Wetzel, 2010 para. 23). With that an extra $700 to $800
million annually could be spread among the division one conferences.
Take in this years football season, could a 13-0 TCU team beat the Oregon Ducks
or the Auburn Tigers? No body will ever know unless the BCS changes to a playoff. Or in
2009 when an unbeaten Big East champ, Cincinnati, that went on the road to beat NO. 20
Oregon State, and NO. 17 Pitt and routed a NO. 16 West Virginia team at home and they
didnt get a shot at the title because two other teams were unbeaten. (Burwell, 2009). A
lot of people say that the BCS not only isnt as good as a playoff, it also sometimes
doesnt make much sense (Heistrad, 2010 para. 4). The main reason people dont want to
have a playoff is because they think that it will ruin the bowl games. With interviews with
numerous bowl executives, television marketers, athletic directors, and conference
commissioners they all say the bowls would survive in a playoff system. But, some teams
dont even like the bowl games anyways. The University of Michigan actually gained
money in the football program with two loosing seasons and not going to a bowl rather

Why the BCS needs to be fixed 6

than making it to a bowl game. This happens with most teams. And so with a playoff they
may not lose money because of all the extra money a potential playoff would generate.
This shows a playoff is a much better option.
My opinion is that the BCS can be fixed by one easy system, a playoff. The BCS
is unfair to schools and with Mark Cubans $500 million offer for a playoff would be a
much better choice. First they would take the champions of each of the six major
conferences, The ACC, Big East, Big 12, Pac-10, and the SEC. Then for a fair chance to
all other teams, four at large teams would be selected for a ten team playoff. With this the
NO. 1 seed and the No. 2 seed would receive a first round bye for finishing one and two
in the season. With the four at large teams this gives teams like Boise State and TCU a
fair chance at the national title. And in 2008 when Texas deserved to be in the title game,
now they could still have a chance being one of the at large teams.
People think this would ruin the regular season, the BCS already does. How
would a playoff ruin the regular season when people go crazy for college basketball
regular season games and then at the end they have the greatest playoff ever invented.
College football could have that, but they think the BCS is better because it has bowl
games. What I learned while researching is that the bowl games actually make colleges
lose money when they go to the bowls. The bowls make the schools pay for everything.
Even if the bowls were really that important they would still survive. When there was
interviews with numerous bowl executives, television marketers, athletic directors and
conference commissioners they all say the bowls would survive in a playoff (Murphy &
Wetzel, 2010).

Why the BCS needs to be fixed 7

The only way college football can have a true Cinderella is to have a playoff. The
bowls would still survive and they would be needed for the teams that get eliminated
from the playoff. College football could have the greatest Cinderella story, a stunning
climax, it could be the greatest sporting event ever, but, instead it has a soap opera that no
body likes and it needs to be fixed.

Why the BCS needs to be fixed 8

References
Anderson, J. (2009, Jan 26). Obama & the BCS. Weekly Standard. p. 19. Retrieved from
SIRS Researcher.
Atkin, R. (2011, Jan 10). Death to the BCS. Christian Science Monitor. n.p. Retrieved
from EBSCO Host.
Burwell, B. (2009, Dec 8). St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Bryan Burwell column. BCS gets it
wrong again. St. Louis Post-Dispatch (MO). Retrieved from EBSCO Host.
Heistrad, M. (2010, Dec 6). Many factors working against the BCS. USA Today.
Retrieved from EBSCO Host.
Murphy, A & Wetzel, D. (2010, Nov 15) Sportsillustrated.cnn.com. Retrieved from
sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG/1177192/index.htm

Why the BCS needs to be fixed 9

Passon, D. (2010, Dec 16). Mark Cuban persuasive enough to kill the BCS. Retrieved
from http://deathtothebcs.com/blog/2010/12/cuban/
Wetzel, D. (2010, Oct 26). Why Oklahoma quit. Retrieved from
http://deathtothebcs.com/blog/
Whiteside, K. (2010, Oct 26). BCS controversy seems guaranteed. Newspaper Source.
Retrieved from EBSCO Host.