Who am I?

I'm from Houston, a graduate of the University of Texas, a fan of the Houston Astros and Houston Texans. But this blog will be about the "greater sports", whatever that means.

Follow me on Twitter: @lhd_on_sports

Labels

LHD_PotW (291) MLB (112) NFL (109) NCAA (97) NBA (50) NFL Playoffs (47) NHL (41)

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

More BCS woes

I'm going to try not to repeat themes from last year's BCS rant. But I think I've found enough "new" problems with the BCS this year to further my opinion.

First of all, it took me this long (and I am thick headed) to realize that the BCS is really no reflection of conference strength when considering participation. I thought it kinda resembled and was worthy of bragging, but it became apparent this year the the Big 10 will always get two teams only because of name recognition. Anytime two Big 10 teams are eligible, punch your ticket. The Big 12 (bias warning here) frequently has very worthy participants, but nobody considers Kansas State or to be worthy as Michigan. It's just names. Fine, I get it.

Alluded to last year, but regional autonomy is lost. The Sugar and Orange have struggled to sell tickets this year. Somehow the Cotton Bowl doesn't. Why, because they have two regional teams (SECW vs. Big 12). And aren't stuck with some draft style team selection. Sugar this year with two teams people in that region really don't care about. Orange just about every year with two teams from areas not really tied into that region (Big 8 in the old days used to send the OU or Neb fans, it was tradition). Even the bowl in Houston (which has changed names multiple times) seems to get a Texas A&M or Baylor or TCU or Houston or Rice in recent years. And sells really well and makes for good games.

Backing up to Bowls in general, the ticket sales are of absolutely no consequence. TV contracts and sponsorships pay all the bills. All the more reason to take Michigan instead of Boise State, Ohio State instead of Purdue, etc.

Also in the BCS woe mix is the Bowl stadia. The Orange Bowl is not played in...the Orange Bowl. That was demolished. The Fiesta Bowl is not played in Tempe anymore, but rather a new stadium people aren't familiar with. I'll pick on the Cotton Bowl (non-BCS) which is not played in the Cotton Bowl. The Ticket City Bowl is. The end result, the big bowl games are played in stadia that we are not familiar with and it loses luster.

Final rant, just watching these last few bowls, I really can't tell what game I'm watching. The TV contract holder seems to advertise graphics for the BCS (watch it flash before replay) instead of the bowl played. Only when the teams are at midfield do I see the logo. Check the endzones, too, big BCS logos. I remember being overdosed with the Orange bowl guy or that bowl of Sugar in my 80's memories. That with the lack of consistency in Bowl participants and really, they're all just random games now.

Much of this is unintended consequence. Like side effects. Great idea to put the best two teams in the title game, oh wait, that leaves two bowls without good matchups and total bowls minus one with no relevance. Didn't see that coming.

Easiest solution (resembling last year's rant) is to take the Top 2 teams and put them in the "only" BCS game. Same as it is now. The rest of the current BCS games have picks like the non-BCS, best team available from their home conference (even if third place). Big East loses AQ, the rest of the games are filled regardless of BCS standings, all teams are fair game. This year would resemble:

Fiesta & Rose the same (great matchups)
Sugar: Arkansas vs. Kansas State
Orange: Clemson vs. Oklahoma

Last Orange slot is really up for grabs. South Carolina was my first pick but would be a rematch. As would VT. OU would sell tix and has an Orange Bowl tradition (and would have been favored IMO).

1 comment:

  1. End result was a National Championship which ended up being profoundly unfun to watch. LSU vs OK State would have made a lot more sense and would have been a better show.

    ReplyDelete