The BCS is great.

[Solon]

Seriously. I mean it.

Sure, it automatically disqualifies a team like Utah from having any real chance of a National Championship, but it allowed the Utes to play a highly ranked Alabama team in the Sugar Bowl in January (not to mention being invited to the Fiesta Bowl in 2005), for crying out loud! That right there is something I would have never dreamed 15 years ago.

The real problem with the BCS isn't the way it rewards the elite programs. With three or four consecutive years of top-ten finishes, Utah would be established as a de facto BCS team. The real kick in the pants is the way it financially rewards the bottom-dwellers of the BCS conferences. Based on on-field performance, Utah and the BYU deserve BCS money much more than Baylor or Duke.

There are lots of examples of undefeated teams being left out of the national championship. JoePa has had several undefeated teams that finished lower than #1 (most recently in 1994). The difference this year is that Utah is the only undefeated team remaining, but the meaning of the number one ranking (in my opinion) has changed between 1984 (who had the best season?) and the present (who is the best?). Don't get me wrong. I'll be tickled if a bunch of AP writers choose the Utes as #1, but I'm just grateful the Utes are in the conversation instead of a mid-major team with a gaudy record that just beat a 6-5 team in the Freedom Bowl or something. Without the BCS, Utah might get a few more votes, but they'd never get to play an Alabama in the Sugar Bowl, and never get the national love they're getting now.

A playoff would negate all this. I don't like Utah's chances to pull of three or four of these types of wins in a row. Utah's defense looked beat in the fourth quarter, and lots of guys were slow getting up. Guts and heart and adrenaline will only get you so far when the other team is 4-deep at a position that requires heavy pounding.

As it is, the Utes finished 13-0, trounced Alabama, and I get to revel in the bragging rights, the national attention, and the recruiting advantages for awhile.

Life is good.

[myboynoah]

Seriously. I mean it.

Sure, it automatically disqualifies a team like Utah from having any real chance of a National Championship, but it allowed the Utes to play a highly ranked Alabama team in the Sugar Bowl in January (not to mention being invited to the Fiesta Bowl in 2005), for crying out loud! That right there is something I would have never dreamed 15 years ago.

The real problem with the BCS isn't the way it rewards the elite programs. With three or four consecutive years of top-ten finishes, Utah would be established as a de facto BCS team. The real kick in the pants is the way it financially rewards the bottom-dwellers of the BCS conferences. Based on on-field performance, Utah and the BYU deserve BCS money much more than Baylor or Duke.

There are lots of examples of undefeated teams being left out of the national championship. JoePa has had several undefeated teams that finished lower than #1 (most recently in 1994). The difference this year is that Utah is the only undefeated team remaining, but the meaning of the number one ranking (in my opinion) has changed between 1984 (who had the best season?) and the present (who is the best?). Don't get me wrong. I'll be tickled if a bunch of AP writers choose the Utes as #1, but I'm just grateful the Utes are in the conversation instead of a mid-major team with a gaudy record that just beat a 6-5 team in the Freedom Bowl or something. Without the BCS, Utah might get a few more votes, but they'd never get to play an Alabama in the Sugar Bowl, and never get the national love they're getting now.

A playoff would negate all this. I don't like Utah's chances to pull of three or four of these types of wins in a row. Utah's defense looked beat in the fourth quarter, and lots of guys were slow getting up. Guts and heart and adrenaline will only get you so far when the other team is 4-deep at a position that requires heavy pounding.

As it is, the Utes finished 13-0, trounced Alabama, and I get to revel in the bragging rights, the national attention, and the recruiting advantages for awhile.

Life is good.

I think that there is some pretty spot on analysis.

[creekster]

You've been co=opted by the powers that be. They toss you this worm-eaten bone called the BCS, compare it to somethign that was even worse and convince you that you have it good when with just a little tweak you could have it so much better, but at thier expense. Solon! COme back to us. DOn't give in to the dark side! The BCS sucks!

[myboynoah]

You've been co=opted by the powers that be. They toss you this worm-eaten bone called the BCS, compare it to somethign that was even worse and convince you that you have it good when with just a little tweak you could have it so much better, but at thier expense. Solon! COme back to us. DOn't give in to the dark side! The BCS sucks!

But he has a point. There is finally at least some hope of feeding at that trough. And as SU has so aptly pointed out, rankings don't matter anyway.

[SoCalCoug]

Yeah, don't you wish they had the BCS in basketball? The chance to go to a big game at the end of the year against a Gonzaga or Duke every few years is MUCH preferable to that March Madness silliness.

[SeattleUte]

Seriously. I mean it.

Sure, it automatically disqualifies a team like Utah from having any real chance of a National Championship, but it allowed the Utes to play a highly ranked Alabama team in the Sugar Bowl in January (not to mention being invited to the Fiesta Bowl in 2005), for crying out loud! That right there is something I would have never dreamed 15 years ago.

The real problem with the BCS isn't the way it rewards the elite programs. With three or four consecutive years of top-ten finishes, Utah would be established as a de facto BCS team. The real kick in the pants is the way it financially rewards the bottom-dwellers of the BCS conferences. Based on on-field performance, Utah and the BYU deserve BCS money much more than Baylor or Duke.

There are lots of examples of undefeated teams being left out of the national championship. JoePa has had several undefeated teams that finished lower than #1 (most recently in 1994). The difference this year is that Utah is the only undefeated team remaining, but the meaning of the number one ranking (in my opinion) has changed between 1984 (who had the best season?) and the present (who is the best?). Don't get me wrong. I'll be tickled if a bunch of AP writers choose the Utes as #1, but I'm just grateful the Utes are in the conversation instead of a mid-major team with a gaudy record that just beat a 6-5 team in the Freedom Bowl or something. Without the BCS, Utah might get a few more votes, but they'd never get to play an Alabama in the Sugar Bowl, and never get the national love they're getting now.

A playoff would negate all this. I don't like Utah's chances to pull of three or four of these types of wins in a row. Utah's defense looked beat in the fourth quarter, and lots of guys were slow getting up. Guts and heart and adrenaline will only get you so far when the other team is 4-deep at a position that requires heavy pounding.

As it is, the Utes finished 13-0, trounced Alabama, and I get to revel in the bragging rights, the national attention, and the recruiting advantages for awhile.

Life is good.

I agree totally. All those posters on Utefans crying for a tournament are just running off at the mouth. I'm also not for a tournaments because I trust the university presidents to do what's best for higher education overall.

The fact this debate about whether Utah should be no. 1 is occurring all across the nation (after such a sepctacular season) is all that matters.

By the way, I've decided the most likely outcome is no. 2 AP and BCS. I don't see how USC winds up ahead of the Utes, after losing to Oregon State, which Utah beat; with the two big USC wins coming against Big 10 teams, Penn State being ranked far below Alabama and USC having played Penn State on its home field while Utah played Alabama in a hostile stadium; and the MWC 6-2 (thanks, BYU) against the Pac 10. Texas is similar. It struggled against Ohio State closer to home than Utah, Ohio State was not nearly as respected as Alabama, and Texas has one loss. The loser of Oklahoma and Florida will have two losses and should fall below Utah. Let's hope Florida wins and doesn't look too good doing it, because Utah was a lot more dominant against Alabama than Florida was. A lot of sportswriters feel like Feinsein and Utah will get a lot of no. 1 votes for that reason. I think they have a decent chance to be the AP no. 1. It really helps that Texas didn't annihilate Ohio State.

Regardless, que sera sera. A no. 1 ranking would be just the cherry on top.

[SeattleUte]

Actually, Solon, one quibble. I think mid-majors do have a shot at the NC, especially now. No one is ever again going to assume an unbeaten mid-major with respectable wins is second rate. The Big East and ACC have played in the NC game; why not a great mid-major that has built up a strong tradtion?

Hypothetically (strictly hypothetically), assume Utah finished this season with a 2-4 ranking, and then goes 12-0 next season with quality wins at Oregon, BYU and TCU, 25 straight wins. Certainly it would be in the BCS title game unless there were two unbeated BCS teams.

[Solon]

Actually, Solon, one quibble. I think mid-majors do have a shot at the NC, especially now. No one is ever again going to assume an unbeaten mid-major with respectable wins is second rate. The Big East and ACC have played in the NC game; why not a great mid-major that has built up a strong tradtion?

Hypothetically (strictly hypothetically), assume Utah finished this season with a 2-4 ranking, and then goes 12-0 next season with quality wins at Oregon, BYU and TCU, 25 straight wins. Certainly it would be in the BCS title game unless there were two unbeated BCS teams.

You're right. If a "mid-major" does it two or three years in a row, it'll get invited. That's why I think 2005 would have been Utah's year, had the great exodus of coaches and players not occurred.

[ERCougar]

I agree totally. All those posters on Utefans crying for a tournament are just running off at the mouth. I'm also not for a tournaments because I trust the university presidents to do what's best for higher education overall.

The education argument is the biggest cop-out ever. It has nothing to do with education. What about B-ball--without question the most educationally disruptive sport out there, and they have a 3-week tournament?

[Mormon Red Death]

Actually, Solon, one quibble. I think mid-majors do have a shot at the NC, especially now. No one is ever again going to assume an unbeaten mid-major with respectable wins is second rate. The Big East and ACC have played in the NC game; why not a great mid-major that has built up a strong tradtion?

Hypothetically (strictly hypothetically), assume Utah finished this season with a 2-4 ranking, and then goes 12-0 next season with quality wins at Oregon, BYU and TCU, 25 straight wins. Certainly it would be in the BCS title game unless there were two unbeated BCS teams.

Why should a MWC team have to do it for 2 years straight? Here is West Virginia's 2007 schedule. Remember if they had beaten Pitt they would have been in the NC game.

Sat., Sept. 1, Western Michigan, Home, Parents’ Day
Sat., Sept. 8, Marshall, Away
Thurs., Sept. 13, Maryland, Away
Sat., Sept. 22, East Carolina, Home
Sat., Sept. 29, South Florida, Away
Sat., Oct. 6, Syracuse, Away
Sat., Oct. 20, Mississippi State, Home, Homecoming
Sat., Oct. 27, Rutgers, Away
Thurs., Nov. 8, Louisville, Home, Mountaineer Day
Sat., Nov. 17, Cincinnati, Away
Sat., Nov. 24, Connecticut, Home
Sat., Dec. 1, Pitt, Home

Can anyone honestly say that the schedule above is tougher than Utah's schuedule this year?

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

One of my very first posts as a CUFer was about how I thought the BCS was good because it allowed much more access to the mid-major teams. I agree with everything you said. With no BCS Utah would have played a 6-7 win team in a meaningless pre-Christmas bowl, instead of a top 5 team in a meaningless New Year's Day bowl.

That is the one glaring negative to the BCS in my mind is that it make only 1 bowl game of any importance. Prior to the BCS Florida would have gone to the Sugar, Oklahoma to the Orange and USC to the Rose and there would have been a ton of interest in all three games.

[jay santos]

Seriously. I mean it.

Sure, it automatically disqualifies a team like Utah from having any real chance of a National Championship, but it allowed the Utes to play a highly ranked Alabama team in the Sugar Bowl in January (not to mention being invited to the Fiesta Bowl in 2005), for crying out loud! That right there is something I would have never dreamed 15 years ago.

The real problem with the BCS isn't the way it rewards the elite programs. With three or four consecutive years of top-ten finishes, Utah would be established as a de facto BCS team. The real kick in the pants is the way it financially rewards the bottom-dwellers of the BCS conferences. Based on on-field performance, Utah and the BYU deserve BCS money much more than Baylor or Duke.

There are lots of examples of undefeated teams being left out of the national championship. JoePa has had several undefeated teams that finished lower than #1 (most recently in 1994). The difference this year is that Utah is the only undefeated team remaining, but the meaning of the number one ranking (in my opinion) has changed between 1984 (who had the best season?) and the present (who is the best?). Don't get me wrong. I'll be tickled if a bunch of AP writers choose the Utes as #1, but I'm just grateful the Utes are in the conversation instead of a mid-major team with a gaudy record that just beat a 6-5 team in the Freedom Bowl or something. Without the BCS, Utah might get a few more votes, but they'd never get to play an Alabama in the Sugar Bowl, and never get the national love they're getting now.

A playoff would negate all this. I don't like Utah's chances to pull of three or four of these types of wins in a row. Utah's defense looked beat in the fourth quarter, and lots of guys were slow getting up. Guts and heart and adrenaline will only get you so far when the other team is 4-deep at a position that requires heavy pounding.

As it is, the Utes finished 13-0, trounced Alabama, and I get to revel in the bragging rights, the national attention, and the recruiting advantages for awhile.

Life is good.

A playoff likely wouldn't change the revenue that Baylor and Duke get from college football.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

The education argument is the biggest cop-out ever. It has nothing to do with education. What about B-ball--without question the most educationally disruptive sport out there, and they have a 3-week tournament?

Just because the basketball tourney happens during mid-term/final exams does not mean it hurts education at all.

[Solon]

Why should a MWC team have to do it for 2 years straight? Here is West Virginia's 2007 schedule. Remember if they had beaten Pitt they would have been in the NC game.

Sat., Sept. 1, Western Michigan, Home, Parents’ Day
Sat., Sept. 8, Marshall, Away
Thurs., Sept. 13, Maryland, Away
Sat., Sept. 22, East Carolina, Home
Sat., Sept. 29, South Florida, Away
Sat., Oct. 6, Syracuse, Away
Sat., Oct. 20, Mississippi State, Home, Homecoming
Sat., Oct. 27, Rutgers, Away
Thurs., Nov. 8, Louisville, Home, Mountaineer Day
Sat., Nov. 17, Cincinnati, Away
Sat., Nov. 24, Connecticut, Home
Sat., Dec. 1, Pitt, Home

Can anyone honestly say that the schedule above is tougher than Utah's schuedule this year?

This is a good point. For me, the ideal scenario would be for the MWC to seize the Big Least's or ACC's auto-bid. Or maybe the three conferences could share two bids, with the highest rated two teams getting them.

I'm just grateful that the Utes had a chance to play in the sugar. That way, we could go to New Orleans to see that live donkey show, as well as the tranny club where the "guys are prettier than the girls."

[SeattleUte]

I'm calling it. If Florida beats Oklahoma on a sandlot play in overtime the Utes will be no. 1 (AP) THIS YEAR!