[The Horrible Esthete]

So now that Rutgers has "blown the BCS wide open", does any doubt still linger over whether or not this system is a complete SHAM?

You had all the talking heads agreeing that although an "unbeaten Louisville" might not be one of the best 2 teams in college football at season's end, they nonetheless would "deserve" to be in title game if the BCS rankings put them there.

So now what? Rutgers beat Louisville, so why wouldn't unbeaten Rutgers "deserve to be in the title game" if they run the table? They hail from the same conference, face many of the same opponents, had a similarly weak non-conference schedule as UL -- but they potentially will not get the same opportunity to play for the National Championship as an unbeaten UL would have had. ALL BECAUSE they were the ugly girl in the Preseason Beauty Pageant.

Last night's game showed that a championship system that relies on people casting votes on based on hazy perception and bias is a FARCE. They were dead wrong about Louisville, and now Louisville is gone -- but all the Floridas, Auburns, Texases, USCs, Cals, Arkansases, Notre Dames, etc. still remain, and remain under the auspices of the very same system of biased "evaluation" that was just shown to be inaccurate. Yet we're forced to stick with same opinions and perceptions to pair-up the 2 "best" teams in college football at season's end.

What a joke. cratch:

[joshwayy]

It's a shame because it has become all about the money. I don;t think TV has ruined college football, but this is resounding proof that the system is flawed..beyond repair IMO. I think Rutgers deserves to play if they run the tables- I think they have a great story to tell, but the media hasn't invested in them as much as the perenial front runners.

[prz]

Didnt see this thread here. I posted my BCS rant in the OSU-UM thread.

The BCS is a joke.

[tkkarpen]

Rutgers' "similarly weak non-conference schedule as UL" must not be as bad as you think since Rutgers is rated ahead of Ohio St. in the computer polls. The Big East is a much better conference than the Big Ten this year (from top to bottom). So far Ohio St. has played only 1 good team (Texas) since they were able to avoid Wisconsin. Iowa has been terrible (the OT game vs. Syracuse) and Penn St. hasn't been much good either. Does anyone think the loser of the UM-OSU game should play for the title?

[The Horrible Esthete]

Rutgers' "similarly weak non-conference schedule as UL" must not be as bad as you think since Rutgers is rated ahead of Ohio St. in the computer polls. The Big East is a much better conference than the Big Ten this year (from top to bottom). So far Ohio St. has played only 1 good team (Texas) since they were able to avoid Wisconsin. Iowa has been terrible (the OT game vs. Syracuse) and Penn St. hasn't been much good either. Does anyone think the loser of the UM-OSU game should play for the title?

1. Texas is better than anyone on the UL or Rutgers non-conference schedule. Hands down. Period. The end. They were #2 in the nation before OSU whooped 'em, and lost their starting QB this weekend in the 1st qtr. of a conference road game giving them their 2nd loss.

2. Do you honestly think Rutgers is better than Ohio State? Please.

3. I'll admit the Big Ten is down this year. But if OSU, UM, & UW each played Rut, WV, & UL, the Big Ten teams probably win AT LEAST 7 of 9.

4. South Florida is a decent team this year, but no better than Iowa, and CERTAINLY not better than PSU. Remember, Drew Tate did not play vs. Syracuse.

5. So this leaves Pitt / UC / UCONN / SYR. Are you saying these teams are "much better" than PUR / MINN / IND / ILL / MSU / NW? How do you know?

[tkkarpen]

I don't think that Rutgers is in any way better than Ohio St., and I agree that Texas is way better than any non-conference team that Rutgers, Louisville, or WVU played. I just find it interesting that the computer polls have Rutgers ahead of Ohio St., since most of the formula is the strength of schedule. Louisville did win at Kansas St., the team that just knocked off Texas. I know McCoy got hurt, but Louisville was playing without their starting QB when they beat K State. I know Syracuse is better than Illinois, since SU won at Illinois, but it is always difficult, if not impossible to compare conferences without straight-up head to head meetings.

- Ohio St and Michigan are better than any Big East team.
- Rutgers, Louisville, WVU are better than any remaining Big Ten team
- Wisconsin is the next best team
- Then its a mess, who knows who is better from there, other than Syracuse is better than Illinois, MSU beat Pitt, and UCONN beat Indiana

[The Horrible Esthete]

- Ohio St and Michigan are better than any Big East team.
- Rutgers, Louisville, WVU are better than any remaining Big Ten team
- Wisconsin is the next best team
- Then its a mess, who knows who is better from there, other than Syracuse is better than Illinois, MSU beat Pitt, and UCONN beat Indiana

I must respectfully challenge your basis for the claim made in the two statments in bold type above.

Wisconsin suffers from the same predicament Rutgers does -- starting the season as an unranked team. They have just one loss: Michigan in Ann Arbor, a game which was tied 10-10 at halftime before Michigan's 3rd-ranked defense shut Wisky down, and the Wolverines won by 14.

Let's look at each team's offensive and defensive national rankings:

WISCONSIN
Scoring Offense......22 (29.82 ppg)
Total Offense..........26 (383.09 ypg)
Scoring Defense........6 (12.73 ppg)
Total Defense............7 (251.18 ypg)

RUTGERS
Scoring Offense......28 (29.11 ppg)
Total Offense..........79 (322.67 ypg)
Scoring Defense........4 (10.89 ppg)
Total Defense............4 (231.67 ypg)

WEST VIRGINIA
Scoring Offense..........2 (40.22 ppg)
Total Offense..............3 (462.89 ypg)
Scoring Defense........25 (17.44 ppg)
Total Defense............35 (303.89 ypg)

LOUISVILLE
Scoring Offense..........6 (37.78 ppg)
Total Offense..............2 (467.44 ypg)
Scoring Defense........21 (16.67 ppg)
Total Defense............50 (318.22 ypg)

I see nothing the those key statistical categories that can substantiate the claim that RUT / WV / LOU are any better than Wisconsin. If anything, they show Wisconsin to be perhaps the most balanced of the four.

Keep in mind that WV's offense relies on the run -- their passing offense is ranked 106th in the nation. Any team with a legitimate defense loads up the box, shuts Slaton down, and thus shuts WV down. The fact that Louisville, aware of WV's dependence on the run, still yielded 313 rushing yards to them really makes me wonder if UL's defensive front is worth a damn.

Also keep in mind that the offensive stats for UL are padded by a 62 point, 671-yard game vs. Temple (a Division 1A disgrace), that the offensive stats for WV are padded by a 52 point, 591-yard game vs. Div. 1AA Eastern Washington, and that offensive scoring stats for RUT are padded by the 56 points yielded by Div. 1AA Howard. Wisconsin did play a Div. 1AA team (Western Illinios), but the Badgers' 34 points and 336 yards don't do much to bolster the season averages.

At any rate, I am of the opinion that Wisconsin would beat any of these 3 Big East teams, but since I have no way of knowing, I won't bother making the claim that they are any "better". Maybe we'll get to find out in a BCS bowl?

What I will do is tell you to prepare yourself for the strong possibility that the steadily-improving Cincinnati Bearcats will hand Rutgers their first (but not last) loss of the 2006 season! :mrgreen:

[The Horrible Esthete]

What I will do is tell you to prepare yourself for the strong possibility that the steadily-improving Cincinnati Bearcats will hand Rutgers their first (but not last) loss of the 2006 season! :mrgreen:

[tkkarpen]

Nice prediction, I was feeling a Rutgers letdown, they were a good story while they lasted