Yet another BCS whiff: Alabama’s brand burns the Cowboys
Maybe there'll be a touchdown scored the second time around. Then again ... (AP photo)
Nobody ever said the BCS made sense, and this year it makes less sense than … well, can you make less sense than zero? Alabama did not win its division and did not win its conference but could well be the national champion in a sport where we’re told Every Game Counts.
Actually, what this year’s serving of BCS glop tells us is that it’s good to have an aura. Nick Saban has an aura, albeit one of fire and brimstone, which means Alabama has an aura, which means Alabama got a nod it didn’t deserve.
Bama played its two toughest conference games — LSU and Arkansas — at home. It didn’t play either Georgia or South Carolina, the best teams in the SEC East. It played five teams that finished with a winning record, and one was Georgia Southern. The Tide beat three teams that finished the Top 25 of the BCS standings.
Oklahoma State played four such teams and won all four games. It played seven teams that finished with winning records. The Cowboys did, for mavens of minutiae, win their conference title. The knock on them is that they lost to unranked Iowa State. But they did lose on the road, and in overtime.
Alabama, the counter-argument goes, only lost in OT to the nation’s No. 1 team. But Alabama lost at home. Alabama was favored that night and couldn’t win. But because Alabama is coached by the dark lord Saban and because Alabama is from the SEC, which is the feeder league for BCS titlists, the Tide gets a second chance.
And this time the talking heads on ESPN, who make less sense with every week, had no problem with the concept of a rematch or the reality of a non-conference champion playing for the BCS crown. (Oddly enough, some of those same voices hooted down Georgia’s credentials in 2007. “Can’t consider a team that didn’t win its conference,” the ESPN choir harrumphed.) And Saturday night, moments after Oklahoma State finished routing Oklahoma, which entered the season ranked No. 1, some ESPN boys leaped at the chance to say, “Ah, that doesn’t really matter.”
“SportsCenter” opened with the highlights of the SEC title game and then Oklahoma State’s dismissal of its bitter rival. Then the Bristol anchors tossed, as they say in TV, to Brent Musburger and Kirk Herbstreit. Musburger, who had famously lobbied for Georgia Tech to be promoted above Colorado to No. 1 when calling Tech’s victory in the Citrus Bowl in January 1991, started with a little joke. What’s wrong with a rematch, he asked, and cited the extremely appropriate case study of Rocky Balboa versus Apollo Creed.
Then Herbstreit dismissed Oklahoma State by saying the Cowboys had lost in Ames, Iowa, and, more to the point, didn’t pass “the eyeball test.” Which made you wonder: How could Kirk Herbstreit know just how Oklahoma State had looked against Oklahoma? He (and Musburger) had been sitting in a booth in Charlotte, N.C., calling the ACC title game.
Because big-time college football has no playoff grid, ephemeral stuff like “the eyeball test” and someone’s opinion — yours, mine and especially Kirk Herbstreit’s — are allowed to hold disproportionate sway. Alabama won’t be playing for the (exceedingly mythical) national championship because it had a better season than Oklahoma State but because its has the stronger brand. It’s Alabama. It plays in the SEC. It’s coached by Saban. Good enough for me! Give that team a second chance!
And that’s what big-time college football has become — a game of brands, not reality. Is it mere coincidence that ESPN has a 15-year contract to carry SEC games? (ESPN also has a contract with the Big 12, Oklahoma State’s diminishing league, but the bigger Big 12 package is with Fox Sports.)
This was a year when opinion mattered. Five of the seven computer rankings had Oklahoma State above Alabama, but the Tide finished ahead in both human polls. Why? Because of the brand. You cannot tell me that if Alabama’s name were attached to Oklahoma State’s body of work and vice versa that the results wouldn’t have been different. We all know they would have.
And now we’re faced with this scenario: A winner of nothing save some eyeball test can split two games against another team … and be declared national champ. Some “system” this is.
By Mark Bradley
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
1,739 comments Add your comment
Realist
December 5th, 2011
12:58 am
Alex, Alabama has beaten one top ten team (Arkansas, #6). Okie State has beaten one top ten team (Kansas State, #8) Alabama has beaten 3 ranked teams, Okie State 4. Pretty similar resumes. That’s why it was so close.
Sour Grapes
December 5th, 2011
12:59 am
sorta like the NCAA BBALL playoffs, each bracket is ranked 1-16 with 1 playing 16, 2 playing 15. Get it BCS slave. Heck they even have a wildcard play in game for the 16th seed.
Realist
December 5th, 2011
1:00 am
BC$ Slave, it wouldn’t have to be a ranking like the current system, it could be a selection committee, just like the NCAA Basketball tournament. Heck, just like I-AA tournament that is going on now (there were three teams from the Southern Conference this year).
BC$ Slave
December 5th, 2011
1:00 am
Tide:
You keep telling me I’m wrong…but you don’t get it.
We would need a seeding committee…not rankings to determine who gets in.
The only “selection” that committee would do is for at large berths among lower tier conference champions. That would probably be 2 slots.
The rest of the brackets would be filled by automatic qualifying conference champions.
No RANKING necessary.
No POLLS necessary.
ESPN influence would be gone.
Bama would be out.
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:01 am
Alex,
Really? How many top 10 opponents has Okay state beaten? An OU team playing without its starting tailback and the alltime leading receiver??? Bama beat Ark which is top 10.
Sour Grapes
December 5th, 2011
1:03 am
never happen then if teams like ALA will be excluded from the playoffs because only conference champions get to play. The A SHE SHE CHAMPION (as it is affectionately called here on these blogs) gets to play but ALA does not and that would be a legitimate way to crown a NC. The current system may be flawed but that kind of playoff system…please give me a break.
BC$ Slave
December 5th, 2011
1:04 am
Realist:
No need for a selection committee to determine the majority of the slots.
In football…we know who the big boy conferences are…the conference champs would get automatic entrance into the playoff. The “selection committee” would serve only to seed the teams…not determine who gets in (except for 2 at large berths who are also conference champions of lower tier conferences).
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:05 am
bcs slave,
So your mind is convinced that a “selection committe”, similar to an NCAA basketball selection committee, would leave out a Bama team as an at large bid in an 8 team or more playoff scenario? A Bama team that has lost one game all year in OT to the nation’s only unbeaten team. And your mind is convinced that this Bama team would be passed over for one of the 2 at large bids that would be awarded. You should just quit posting. You are sounding dumber with every post. Forget about rankings. Just look at record and body of work and tell me with a straight face that Bama would be left out as an at large in an 8 team or more playoff scenario?
Professor
December 5th, 2011
1:06 am
Mark,
Could not agree with you more! As if I wrote the piece.
Realist
December 5th, 2011
1:07 am
So, BC$ Slave, we would “seed”, not “rank”. Gee, that fixes everything! Thank goodness you have figured this out for us. And Northern Illinois would be in, but Alabama, Stanford, Boise State, Arkansas, South Carolina, and Kansas State would be out? Riveting tournament. I’m sure you and your fellow inmates at the asylum will enjoy it.
Sour Grapes
December 5th, 2011
1:07 am
the Clemson team that lost to Tech, NC State and SC goes but ALA would not. BCS slave many on here agree that a playoff would be the way to go but the way you are putting it forward just does not seem any better than what we have now
Professor
December 5th, 2011
1:08 am
Failed in the game at home! Now if they beat this team at a neutral site we are to believe they are the NCs?
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:09 am
bcs slave,
Sorry but in every scenario that I’ve seen the 2 at large bids would be reserved possibly for a non bcs team like a boise but also for special situtations where the 2nd or 3rd best team in the country clearly plays in the same divison or conference as the best team.If you dont think that an at large bid would be reserved for special situations such as Alabama this year or for no. 2 Michigan in say 2006 after losing to no. 1 Ohio State then you are just plain stupid.
BC$ Slave
December 5th, 2011
1:10 am
Sour Grapes:
You haven’t said what’s wrong with only conference champs getting into the playoffs.
Competition is what sports is all about.
Every team, including bama, would have their shot to win their conference.
It is so simple.
Win your conference and if you are one of the major competitive conferences…you get a shot to play for the national title.
You win…your in.
Simple…clean…fair.
The BC$ is about opinion, agendas, and money for ESPN and the schools.
That’s why we have it.
No other reason.
Sour Grapes
December 5th, 2011
1:12 am
does not matter what you believe. LSU or ALA will be National Champs. As in the days of old when there were split NCs in the polls, we can argue ad nausem until next season as to who is the best, unless of course LSU wins then the argument will have been settled with an unbeaten 14-0 LSU
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:12 am
So according to bcs slave 23rd ranked 3 loss West Virginia would be in a national playoff scenario as well as Clemson which has 3 losses I think but 1 loss Alabama whose only loss was to the only unbeaten team would be left out? Is this guy just dumb?
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:15 am
Simple…clean…fair.- bcs slave
But of course. It would be much more fair for a 3 loss 23rd ranked West Virginia or 3 loss Clemson to get into a national playoff over a 1 loss Alabama team that lost to the nations only unbeaten team.
Sour Grapes
December 5th, 2011
1:16 am
I would like to see the best teams play not just whoever happens to win their conference regardless of how weak it is.
BC$ Slave
December 5th, 2011
1:16 am
A playoff where only conference champs get in is the only fair way to determine a national champion.
Each team in a conference has a shot to win the conference to get in the playoffs.
Each conference champion has a shot to win the national championship.
Head to head competition determines who gets the chance to play.
Simple. Clean. Fair. Logical.
The BC$ is about agendas, opinions, and money for ESPN and the schools.
That’s why we have it.
No other reason.
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:20 am
BC$ Slave
December 5th, 2011
1:16 am
A playoff where only conference champs get in is the only fair way to determine a national champion.
Only conference champions get in? Tell that to the NCAA basketball selection committee. And tell it to Uconn which I believe won the whole shebang despite going only 8-8 in its conference. And tell that to NFL football and Major league baseball and NBA basketball all 3 of which where teams that dont win their conferences or even their divisions get into the playoffs.
Sour Grapes
December 5th, 2011
1:21 am
How can this be about money for ESPN. With all the complaining and threats that “I won’t watch” because of the re-match, you would think that ESPN would have pulled strings to keep ALA out of this game.
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:22 am
You only get into a playoff if you win your conference or division? Tell that to John Elway who won his first super bowl with a team that couldnt even win its division. And tell that to any baseball or basketball team pro or college that won its championship without winning its division let alone its conference.
Sour Grapes
December 5th, 2011
1:25 am
Well I am in the Eastern time zone and got to get some shut eye, but I am sure this controversy will still be raging when I come back to blog some more, and for many months to come if ALA wins.
But so far no one has answered my question: Why OK State instead of Stanford?
BC$ Slave
December 5th, 2011
1:26 am
Tide:
No…BC$ slave is not saying “23rd ranked 3 loss West Virginia” would be playing for anything.
He’s saying that ANY RANKED TEAM would be playing.
Rankings would be gone if we made it competition based.
You have a lot of faith in human ability to rank teams and be fair.
Invariably…their opinions are wrong…their guesses about who the better teams are miss the mark.
If that happens to your team…you’d be upset.
I think it happens far too often to a LOT of teams.
A playoff would mean a team controls it’s own destiny. Win and you are in. Period. Simple. Fair.
If you lose…you have no one to blame but yourself.
You don’t like the logic of this because bama would be out under this scenario. Bama couldn’t win when it mattered…at home. They didn’t win their conference. So if we had a playoff…it would be better luck next year.
But that is fair to EVERYONE.
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:26 am
I wonder if the dawg fans would be happy with a playoff system with no at large bid possibilites. In particular I wonder if they would have been happy if the 2007 dawgs who ended the season ranked 3rd in the bcs would have been left out of an 07 playoff system cause they “didn’t win their conference”
Sour Grapes
December 5th, 2011
1:28 am
One last question for Mark if he comes back tomorrow and reads these comments by all of us:
Why not Stanford instead of OK State?
AuburnGuy
December 5th, 2011
1:30 am
I’m a War Eagle all the way but the two best teams in the country are Alabama and LSU. No problem for me that they are going to play again for the national title. And for all of you Georgia haters out there who persist in believing that Auburn bought the championship last year when all, ALL, the evidence and the rulings say otherwise, you can carry your hate to your graves and it won’t change a thing. Cam rode a scooter around campus. I hear Hershel drove a gold TransAm. Hershel was a poor boy from Wrightsville so just how did that happen? I’ve seen that question asked before on these blogs and I have yet to see one of you Georgia homers explain that. Get over it.
BC$ Slave
December 5th, 2011
1:32 am
Tide:
You seem to think that all sports are equal and can use the same system
They can’t.
The NCAA basketball tournament is huge. Teams can play more than one game per week in basketball. The number of schools playing basketball exceeds those playing football.
You are comparing apples to oranges here.
As for the NFL…I am laughing at the ridiculous argument you are making.
They added a wild card entry into the playoffs BASED ON WON LOSS RECORD…not ranking by biased, money grubbing voters.
I’m sorry but your NFL argument hold no merit in the discussion.
Nor does a comparison between football and basketball.
Good grief.
Najeh Davenpoop
December 5th, 2011
1:33 am
I’m a man. I’m 40.
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:35 am
A playoff would mean a team controls it’s own destiny. Win and you are in. Period. Simple. Fair.- bcs slave
Going by your logic then the NFL, NBA, MLB, and I suspect NHL would not have non division teams earning wild cards because “only conference champions” get to go. The problem with your logic is that you seem incapable of understanding that there are going to be years where the best 2 teams in the nation just happen to play in the same conference and sometimes even in the same division as in this year. And when the loser in the head to head in those years is that darn good these organizations that have the wisdom to understand that there has to be an at large provision or wild card to allow these teams to keep competing. They do this because of fluke wins or wins where one team may be the victim of a starting qb being out, bad breaks such as missed field goals, bad bounces of the ball, etc. This thinking factors in body of work for the entire season and this is what allows wild cards and at large bids. Your thinking is lacking and simpleton in nature. Thank God the NFL and other major sports understand that leaving a top tier team out just because they compete in the same division as the best team is ridiculous. You sir clearly do not understand that point.
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:37 am
bcs slave,
Your idea of only conference champs is a simpleton idea. The wiser folks in all the major pro sports understand the various reasons why its important to have at large or wild card bids. This thinking is clearly beyond your simpleton scope.
BC$ Slave
December 5th, 2011
1:37 am
Tide:
I wonder if you’d support this BC$ system if bama was passed over and jobbed by the polls more often.
I doubt you would.
YOU CAN’T SEE what the rest of us see because the poll voters are biased.
They usually favor Penn State…don’t know why because they haven’t been relevant in a long time.
They favor Oklahoma…wouldn’t even let them fall out of the top ten after their losses.
They favor Ohio State…that argument has been proven through the years.
And the favor Bama especially…the history, tradition, etc.
I’m not taking anything away from these schools.
I’m saying a playoff would mean they’d ALWAYS have to earn a title shot through winning their conference and then beating other champions. Then we’d see who is best based on competition.
Would the best teams on paper always win? NO.
That’s why we play the games!
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:38 am
AuburnGuy,
Congrats on your bcs title. Too bad the dawgs are the only one of the big 6 sec programs that dont have one. Gawd they suck. 31 years and counting
Realist
December 5th, 2011
1:39 am
BC$, it still wouldn’t be fair because some conferences are easier to win than others. You acknowledge this when you say we all know the big boy conferences… we do? The ACC and Big East have been way down of late. Are they big boys? In your system, non conference games will not even matter. Go 0-4 in non conference, win your conference with a 5-3 record, and bingo, a team with a losing record plays for the national championship. But in your bizarre world, that is fair? It’s insane, and that’s why the NCAA moved away from in it in the mid 1970’s in basketball. Simple yes or no question… is the FCS (I-AA) tournament fair?
Dawgie Poo
December 5th, 2011
1:41 am
Mark you act as if Alabama would have played Georgia that would have been a feather in its cap. Reality is UGA was terrible and it showed against teams with winning records. Don’t badmouth Alabama when in fact South Carolina should have played LSU instead of UGA. UGA gave up over 350 yards to a so called “high school offense” and won. UGA not in the same class as Alabama or LSU.
BC$ Slave
December 5th, 2011
1:41 am
Tide:
Now you call me a simpleton?
You can’t win the argument with ideas so you try insults?
Nice.
You who can’t tell the difference between the NFL won/loss playoff system and the BC$ call me a simpleton?
Chalk one up for the quality of an Alabama education.
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:42 am
bcs slave,
There is a reason why every single major pro sport here in the U.S. and college sports such as college basketball, baseball, etc. allow at large bids. If you cant understand the obvious reasons why then I just cant help you. The idea that only a conference champion goes is a simpleton idea and quite frankly all other of the sports I mentioned above validate this. Have a good night and when you get time try to understand the various reasons why all the major sports and the college sports allow at large bids and not just conference champions. And in an at large bid system Alabama would definitely have been in. And I suspect this is what bothers you more than anything.
13andcounting
December 5th, 2011
1:45 am
Oh well. All of you can sit back and watch ALABAMA in the National Championship. We can’t help if your team sucks. Georgia looked pathetic against LSU. Oh, Oklahoma State are scrubs with a qb thats old enough to be in his 6th or 7th year in the NFL. BOO HOO. Roll Tide!!!!
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:45 am
bcs slave,
If your mind cant understand why all pro sports and the major college sports such as basketball and baseball allow wild card or at large bids then I just cant help you sir. The idea that only conference champions go is just plain silly for various reasons. I suspect what is really bothering you is that you know that if we had a playoff system with say 6 conference champs and 2 at large bids you know that bama would get an at large. And that is what really bothers you.
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:47 am
bcs slave,
The nfl playoff system features plenty of you guessed it- rematches. And guess what else. Plenty of non division winners get at large bids called wild cards. Thank you for making my point for me. You are now dismissed.
BC$ Slave
December 5th, 2011
1:49 am
Realist:
It doesn’t matter how easy a conference is to win.
If you have a true playoff…all conferences would improve if they want a chance play and win a NC.
The stronger teams in the smaller conferences would move to larger conferences and upgrade their teams.
As for determining the “big boys” there will some debate about that.
In an imperfect world…you have to choose where to fight your battles.
I think any system that uses opinion to crown a champ is far worse than head to head competition.
I’m not opposed to letting every conference champion have a slot in a playoff.
Shorten the regular season, play only in your conference and lengthen the playoffs.
Whatever…just let competition decide it over biased opinion and money grubbing.
Ian C. Hodson
December 5th, 2011
1:50 am
While everyone knows that a playoff system is a much better option, this article is a joke. Alabama lost by THREE points to the most dominant defense in recent memory. I also agree that watching Oklahoma State’s prolific offense against LSU’s vaunted defense might seem like a “sexier” matchup, it’s simple, Alabama missed 4 fieldgoals and in overtime to the top ranked team in the land!! We cannot punish the SEC for having the two best teams in the nation, even if they are in the same division and only one can the SEC West.
13andcounting
December 5th, 2011
1:50 am
Hey all of you Bama haters. It does not matter what you think or say. We made it to the Championship. If you wanna complain, go work for the AP or somewhere like that so you can vote for your weak teams!
Realist
December 5th, 2011
1:51 am
BC$, so is the current system in I-AA flawed? And if you honestly think the Big 10 or other “big boys” are just gonna welcome smaller teams in, you are truly delusional.
Ian C. Hodson
December 5th, 2011
1:54 am
With all that said, Tide Rising should do us all a favor and SHUT THE HELL UP REDNECK!!!!!! GGGGGGGGGOOOOOOOOOOOOO DDDDDAAAAWWWWGGGGSSSS, SSSSIIIIIIICCCCCCC EMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BC$ Slave
December 5th, 2011
1:57 am
Tide:
Not arguing against rematches. Never said anything was wrong with that.
Not saying there should be no “wild card” or “at large” berths. Never said anything was wrong with that.
What you can’t seem to comprehend is that in the NFL…those “wild card” slots are based on WON LOSS RECORDS. Will that work in college football? NO.
College uses biased, money grubbing voters to sort out which teams play for championships.
That system doesn’t work. Its been proven to get it wrong a lot.
Only conference champions…who have actually won something meaningful…should be allowed to compete for a NC.
What is sad is you think you make sense. Only a koolaid drinker sees the world as you do.
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
1:57 am
“It doesn’t matter how easy a conference is to win.”
Oh. Really?
“If you have a true playoff…all conferences would improve if they want a chance play and win a NC.”
Is this a fact or just your opinion?
“The stronger teams in the smaller conferences would move to larger conferences and upgrade their teams.”
Oh, so now we are just talking about moving teams around all over the country every couple of years. So if the big east is weak then lets just plop Bama up into the big east for a few years till they get better overall. Sheer freaking insanity.
“Shorten the regular season, play only in your conference and lengthen the playoffs.”
Yeah. Sure. Shorten the football season. Nevermind that football and to a lesser degree basketball fund practically all other athletic programs. Sheesh. What planet do you live on? And if you take away that extra game for a lot of teams that wont make the playoffs you take away enormous amounts of badly needed money to fund other sports programs. Didnt think this one through did ya?
“Whatever…just let competition decide it over biased opinion and money grubbing.”
Just more opinion masquerading as fact.
13andcounting
December 5th, 2011
1:59 am
The Dawgs will NEVER win a National Title with Pretty Boy Richt there! Plus, you guys are always Underachievers! Georgia sucks. You are a bunch of cry babies. I bet you thought ya’ll had the game won at halftime the other night. Haha, you didn’t. And so much for moral victories, which you will probably call the Thumping LSU put on you! Ga sucks and Roll Tide!
BC$ Slave
December 5th, 2011
2:02 am
Tide:
I am wondering…could your continued support of the BC$ have anything to do with your fear that Alabama can’t win it all in a playoff?
That must be it. You are afraid your team will be kept out of the national picture because they can’t win their conference.
With a playoff…all Bama…the greatest team that ever played the game…would have to do is win their conference. Something you koolaid drinkers argue they will do each and every year.
So what is the problem?
Won’t bama always win their conference?
Of course you know without the bias in college football polls, bama would be out of the discussion more often.
Sad. Pathetic.
Tide Rising
December 5th, 2011
2:03 am
What you can’t seem to comprehend is that in the NFL…those “wild card” slots are based on WON LOSS RECORDS. Will that work in college football? NO.
Really. So in a college playoff system with at large bids Alabama’s 11 and 1 record, a WON LOSS RECORD, wouldnt work in college football the same way that those “wild card slots which are based on won loss records work in the NFL? And this wouldnt work in college football why???? Works everywhere else genius.
Do you actually read just how damn asinine your logic is? Gawd you are stupid. Im calling it a night. Cant argue with the insanely stupid all night long.