Can mid-majors undo the current BCS system?

[Saint_Cad]

@furt

Ah, I see. I still think 5 games is way too little a sample size to draw any conclusions from, especially given that in those games you tend to expect the non-BCS team is much more motivated. If you put the best non-BCS teams in 2010, 2006, 2004, 2003 and 2002, against another top-10 team, do you think 4/5 they would have won?

If not ranked in the top 15 probably not. The point is that 80% non-BCS conference versus 20% for low-ranked BCS conference automatic qualifiers is significant. To be equal, the top-ranked non-BCS conference team would have to lose their game every year for the next 15 years.

[villa]

@astorian

“Who’d they beat this year? NOBODY? Wisconsin? Ha! The Big Ten was down this year. You saw what Alabama did the Michigan State, right? THAT’S what ANY Southeastern Conference school would do to ANY team in the Big Ten.”

To be fair, that IS what any SEC school would to to any team in the Big Ten. Hell, my beloved Commodores would be top half at least.

And a lot of the SEC doesn’t like the BCS either. It’s not our fault our schools keep winning the title, though.

[Saint_Cad]

Update:
low-ranked automatic qualifiers are now 2-9 (18%). V Tech deserved igoing to a BCS bowl much more than Boise St. :rolleyes:

[Munch]

@Saint_Cad

Update:
low-ranked automatic qualifiers are now 2-9 (18%). V Tech deserved igoing to a BCS bowl much more than Boise St. :rolleyes:

Sure they did. Boise St. brings in a shitty geographic/television market, while VaTech covers pretty much the eastern seaboard. Virginia Tech is going to earn everyone involved a hell of a lot of money.

Seriously - why would Boise State want to go to a non-national championship BCS bowl game, if not to make a ton of money? If you want to make money in college football, you have to show that you can attract that money. Boise State is really pretty terrible at it, so why should they get a big paycheck? This whole “they earned the right” is garbage - unless we’re talking about them having a legitimate claim at #1 or #2, it’s an empty argument.