Sugar Bowl's Selection gives more Fodder to BCS Critics
Posted on December 6, 2011 by Jacob Bunn
As if any of the Critics of the BCS needed another reason to slam the system. Sunday night, as a lot of college football fans gathered around their television sets to watch the BCS selection special on ESPN, there seemed to be a consensus about what the biggest blunder in choosing the top postseason games was. As the time of the BCS selection show approached, most thought the biggest story would be whether or not the BCS Championship Game would consist of two SEC teams or LSU and Oklahoma State.
When ESPN’s Rece Davis unveiled the final BCS Standings, the top two were LSU and Alabama. But then, something else happened that sparked more outrage and registered much higher on the controversy meter. Since Alabama, which would have been the second SEC team chosen for a BCS bowl slot regardless of whether or not it was in the championship game, was selected for the big game in New Orleans, the Sugar Bowl had two at-large slots to fill. Instead of taking a team with a better resume, the Sugar Bowl decided to sacrifice any credibility it might have had when it selected a floundering Virginia Tech team to face Michigan.
I don’t think the Wolverines are a bad choice. They had their moments, but by and large had a decent year. But Virginia Tech? Give me a break.
The obvious other selection for the game was Kansas State. Bill Snyder’s team had a wonderful season and only lost to the two Oklahoma schools. As much as I think teams from the Mountain West do not play the same competition as those in the SEC, Boise State and TCU have better arguments than Virginia Tech.
The Hokies played three tough games on the year. One of them was a nice win over Georgia Tech. The others two games, though, were two beatings at the hands of the same team, Clemson. Other than those three games, there was not another quality contest on the schedule. That cannot be said for Kansas State. And if we are going to put a team in the BCS that plays a poor schedule, it might as well be Boise State or TCU.
As far as the top of the ticket, the BCS got the championship game correct. It is supposed to consist of the best two teams. I even think most of the other BCS bowls are acceptable. The Fiesta Bowl will be very intriguing with Stanford against Oklahoma State. The Rose Bowl will be good, as it usually is, with the champions of the Pac 12 and Big Ten, Oregon and Wisconsin. The Orange Bowl dodged a bullet with West Virginia claiming the Big East title. And Clemson, having not been conference champions in years, will be a great opponent for the Mountaineers. But, the Sugar Bowl’s selection is fraudulent and flies in the face of the intelligence of any college football fan.
This is not the first time the Sugar Bowl has been found at the epicenter of controversy. Remember last season? When Terrell Pryor and other Ohio State players were found at the end of the season to have had improper dealings with the owner of a tattoo parlor, the NCAA decided that the situation was not bad enough to prevent them from playing in the Sugar Bowl. More incriminating evidence was found against those Buckeye players at a later date to make the ruling in favor of them look like a complete sham.
I can be heard defending and criticizing the BCS, depending on which day and about what issues you listen. Over time, though, I have uncovered more negatives about it than positives. This development, though, with the Sugar Bowl is downright revolting.
Tweet Tweet this!
Email Jacob at jacob@bunnsports.com and follow him on Twitter at @JacobBunn
