By & large, yes…we’re pretty much guaranteed to get a BCS NCG that matches up 2 very deserving teams.
But I think TCU could give anybody a tussle.
The only way we would find out what TCU could do is to have TCU play the loser of the SEC championship game. If that happens, and TCU won, it would go a long way to validating the assertion that a team like TCU has comparable ability to the top teams from the major conferences.
Last year Utah - Alabama wasn’t enough for you?
Yeah, I think that ended any illusions that the MWC can’t beat the SEC.
Utah absolutely dominated Alabama. By the end of the game, they weren’t even using a ball anymore, they were picking up Alabama players and throwing them instead. Especially memorable was when Brian Johnson of Utah picked up Glen Coffee and threw him for a 20 yard touchdown pass to Bradon Godfrey. This was followed by Louie Sakoda kicking John Parker Wilson through the uprights for the extra point.
I agree. I thought Oklahoma-Boise was a great game, and Boise pulled out all the stops to win. Hawaii-Georgia the next year brought reality back (in no small part, I’ll imagine, to Georgia learning lessons from the OU game).
However, watching last year’s Sugar Bowl, I simply had the impression that Utah was a better team.
Yeah. Plus USC has represented the PAC-10 reasonably well in the post season going 6-1 in BCS bowl games. I don’t know, maybe it’s different in California, but up here in the PNW I haven’t seen USC hate come anywhere near that for Oregon.
That wouldn’t really be a smart argument to make though…
Sports Illustrated had a story a couple weeks ago pointing out that TCU, at least, had a stronger strength of schedule than Texas, based on computer analysis. (Both teams and all of their opponents have played since then, so it’s possible this has changed by now.) That would suggest that TCU should theoretically be at least an even match, and would possibly be favored, against Texas. It also suggests that an unbeaten TCU would be more deserving of a shot at the championship than an unbeaten Texas (if it holds true at the end of the season).
That they would be favored is a problem of perception, not reality. That the BCS teams are automatically better than non-BCS teams is a self perpetuating myth. Even within the BCS conferences there is an assumed pecking order. People assume that an undefeated Florida or Alabama is better than a Texas, which is better than a Cincinnati. I contend that there is much more parity than people will admit. Nowadays, one can never tell unless we see the teams compete on the field. We really need a playoff and this year, with maybe 5 undefeateds, is Exhibit 1,000.
I agree. I feel more strongly than ever that we need an 8 team playoff. 16 is too many games and 4 is too few teams.
Seems pretty accurate, do you have data to counter it?
I’m a Husker fan. We have an anemic offense and resulted in home losses to Texas Tech and (gasp) Iowa State. Yet, we beat Oklahoma, whom Texas only beat by 3. Now, we’re the Big XII North Champion, where the second-place team is 4-4 in the conference.
The only other ranked team is Okie State, who just lost 27-0 to unranked OU.
Texas had a shameful non-conference with zero BCS schools (UTEP, Wyoming, La-Monroe, Central Florida).
So, yeah, I’d say Texas schedule strength should’ve hurt them more than it has.
As an aside, my dad has an old Omaha newspaper when Nebraska won the national title in 1970. Texas was #1 going into the bowls, but lost. Notre Dame, with a loss, beat Texas. We were 10-0-1, but beat LSU to remain the one unbeaten team.
There was a split title. Texas was #1 in the UPI, because they didn’t count the bowls. Nebraska was #1 in the AP because they were unbeaten, but with a tie. Notre Dame was arguing that they beat pre-bowl #1 Texas.
The writer quipped that a playoff was needed to settle these matters in the future.
The other neat thing about the issue: They had one of my favorite football quotes. They asked an NU running back why he never spiked the ball after a TD. He answered that a touchdown drive was an intricate coordination of 11 players working together, than oftentimes, the person crossing the goal line was the least important cog.
OSU is 20th. (And NU is 22).
FWIW, Just a couple of points to nitpick, Okie State is not in the top 20 in either the AP or the Coaches poll. They are ranked #20 in the BCS, and the Harris Polls. There is some dichotomy in the BCS computers. Two of the computers (Massey and Sagarin) do not put OKie State in the top 25, while the other four rank them well inside the top 20.
And Texas has not beat Nebraska, …yet. And chances are if they do beat Nebraska, Nebraska will no longer be in the top 25.
I was referring to the mediocre Big XII part of the argument.
Here’s the BCS by conf. Based on this the Big XII is probably better than the WAC and about even with MWC and Big East and behind all others.
ACC
#10
#12
#17
Big 10
#8
#9
#11
Big East
#5
#15
#23
Big XII
#3
#20
#22
MWC
#4
#14
#25
Pac 10
#7
#16
#18
#19
#24
SEC
#1
#2
#13
WAC
#6
That got ugly on both sides around halftime, but Pike has been shut down by Pitt’s defense. 31-17 at halftime.
Oh, I agree that the Big XII is down. But my team is Top 20 dangit. Even though Gundy needs a good tazering after Bedlam.
Pitt is whipping Cincy in the 4th 38 to 24 with 12 min. left.
I would have liked to see Cincy go unbeaten, but looks like they’re leaving this list. And one from Column A will also go out today for certain. If the score in Pittsburgh holds up that pares us down to (at least) four unbeatens.