By Evan Troxel
I have always seen the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) as four games of eight teams as a deciding factor to eliminate a few undefeated teams. THE BCS is biased! Let’s get that out of the way! And not all the teams in the BCS games are unbeaten. The Bowl Championship Series involves the Orange, Rose, Fiesta, and Sugar Bowls.
Some Non-BCS bowl games have a lock on which teams are allowed to play in which bowls. For example, the Alamo Bowl has a Big 12 conference school battle a Big 10 conference school each year based on how they do in both conference’s final conference record and overall record.
I have always thought that any team in college football should be able to go to the BCS if they have a good enough record for the season. Going to a BCS Bowl game shouldn’t depend on if a team is part of a certain conference or not.
I don’t even think creating something called the “BCS National Championship Game” is necessary unless at least nine (if not 10 teams) are undefeated. And has that ever happened before? (I’m taking a guess and the answer to the previous question is probably) No. I don’t really know the correct answer to that question.
I think it’s only fair to call a game the “National Championship Game” if two teams are unbeaten or one teams has one loss and the other has zero. None of this unbeaten team vs. one loss team in a “BCS” championship game and a second BCS bowl game in which there may be a zero loss team vs. a two loss team. Drop the title “BCS” in front of National Championship Game.
If in the most important college bowl game (National Championship Game), a team with one loss beats a previously undefeated team then I think they should be coined as “better than the best team by record” in which they beat the previously best team by record head-to-head fair and square. Who says the initial one loss team gets to be coined “National Champions?” Who says any team is the “National Champion” if every team in college football loses, then does College Football have to award a National Championship? No. I think the National Champions are any team who finishes their entire season undefeated.
Basically, I interpret the “BCS” National Champions as the teams who finish the entire season undefeated and the one loss team(s) who beat the previously undefeated team(s) in the bowl game(s).
As far as my thoughts on potential talks of playoffs in the future of college football, I don’t feel playoffs are necessary. Why? Well, because in some years in NCAA Division 1-A college football every team has lost at least one game. Remember these are college students. But just think, every bowl season many schools spend about a month practicing for one football game to ultimately “win.” Maybe they should just have a maximum of 32 Bowl Games equaling 64 Teams. Don’t even get me started and brackets for college football and forget playoffs.
Here’s what I would do if playoffs would happen: To begin with, no teams who have lost a game would be allowed into the playoffs. Maybe they should have playoffs after the Conference Championship Games and before the bowl games. The playoffs would be a maximum of only two weekends after all the Conference Championship Games if for instance there happened to be eight undefeated teams. With four unbeaten teams it would just be one weekend of two games. If there were three unbeaten teams, one one-loss team, and everybody else has two losses then playoffs aren’t necessary. The reason is, if two unbeaten teams go head-to-head and one loses and then the one loss team upsets the previously unbeaten team, then there’s just one undefeated team left in College Football.
The teams who made it to the final weekend of “playoff” games and lost play each other in a consolation match for their bowl matchup. The winners of the final two “playoff” games play each other in a “National Championship Game.”
The one positive thing about the BCS is that more than one bowl game winner can share a “BCS National Title” or a “National Title.” A BCS National Title I think can be defined as a team for example (Florida) who beats a previously undefeated opponent (Ohio State) whether or not (Florida) is undefeated or not. Or it also can be defined as (Florida) who has one or two losses and their opponent (Ohio State) has one loss whether or not (Florida) has one loss or two losses. A National Title I have defined is a team who completes an entire season undefeated.
So, what I think can be defined as a BCS National Title is that Florida and Boise State achieved this in 2006. A National Title I have defined is a team who completes an entire season undefeated and Boise State was the only team in college football in NCAA Division 1-A College Football to do this. If Ohio State and Boise State would have their respective bowl games in 2006 then both would claim the BCS National Title and the National Title.
Finally, the question that everybody is asking the “bowl game deciders.” Why didn’t Michigan and Nebraska play each other for the (would-have-been) “undisputed” National Title in the Orange Bowl? If Michigan and Nebraska would have met The Orange Bowl could have been coined in 1997 as, “The National Championship Game.” There was no “officially titled” BCS National Championship Game in 1997. The BCS National Championship Game was not established until the year 2007.