Another College Football Season Finished, but Not Without Controversy

I'm sure that anyone with an interest in college football probably took the time to watch last night's BCS National Title Championship Game Sponsored by FedEx between Florida and Oklahoma University. It was perhaps not a pretty game, owing to the layoff between conference championship games and the last game of the BCS bowl season. Still, the game was interesting for many different reasons.

The first example is that last night's game pitted the past two Heisman Trophy (the award that annually goes to the player voters deem to be the best overall player in all of college football) winners, Tim Tebow of Florida (the 2007 Heisman winner) and Sam Bradford of OU (the 2008 Heisman winner). There have been many players who won the Heisman as underclassmen, certainly. I would venture that last night's game was the first to have two Heisman winners opposing each other* in a game with national title implications on the line.

* When Matt Leinart and Reggie Bush were playing Texas in the BCS Title game after the 2005 season (Leinart being the 2004 Heisman winner, and Bush being the 2005 Heisman winner), they were on the same side of the ball.

The announcers also made a comment that I took to be a real, "Well, duh!" statement during the game. They made sure to point out how Bradford was also named to the AP First Team All-American roster.* If a person has been voted as the best all-around player in all of college football, why wouldn't he be named to the First Team All-American squad?

* Tebow, by the way, was only named to the Third Team All-American list, with UT QB Colt McCoy being named to the Second Team list. Forget that he was the 2007 Heisman winner, and that he outplayed Bradford by a large margin in the BCS Title game itself.

Which then got me to thinking about whether there had been times in the past where the Heisman Trophy winner has not been voted First Team All-American. I know that the voters for each award are different, but as I started to do some research on the topic, I was blown away just at the sheer number of All-American lists put out every year. I'm not even going to touch on all the other awards out there in big-time college football, such as the Bronco Nagurski (awarded annually to the best defender), Chuck Bednarik (ditto), Dick Butkus (best LB), Outland Trophy (best lineman), Doak Walker (best RB), Lou Groza (best K), Ray Guy (best P), etc. etc.

In terms of All-American rosters alone, there are 12 different entities that annually select a team of All-American players, to wit: the Associated Press, the Football Writers Association of America, the American Football Coaches Association, the Walter Camp Foundation, the Sporting News, Sports Illustrated, Pro Football Weekly, ESPN, CBS Sports, College Football News, Rivals.com, and Scout.com. Whew! I'm tired from typing all of that! Trying to choose just one All-American team to compare against the list of Heisman Trophy winners, I wanted to go with just the best known of all rosters, the annual AP list of All-Americans.

While it was easy to pull up a comprehensive list of Heisman Trophy winners from the www.heisman.com website, I had a much harder time finding resources on the Internet for the history of AP All-American teams. Finding historical records for AP All-Americans might be one of those traditional trek-to-the-library-and-pore-over-microfiche tasks. Normally, putting more search terms into a Google search helps to limit the results somewhat. When I googled for "first team ap all-american history", I received 102,000 hits. When I added the word "records" to the search string, that narrowed down the list somewhat, but only to 74,800 hits. Unfortunately, whenever a writer pens a story about someone from his or her school being named to the AP All-American team, he almost always includes the word "history" or "records" in the story itself. The end result was I couldn't find historical records of AP All-American teams, not even on the AP's own website.

Which brought me back to using the ol' standby, Wikipedia. I actually really like and generally trust the information I find available on Wikipedia, even though I know it is ripe for abuse by people who push a singular point of view. On balance (or should I say "by and large," in honor of Wall-E [2008]?), I feel the people behind Wikipedia do a very good job of moderating revisions to the point where it is no less accurate than any other encyclopedia out there. It's a reference, and any information on it should be treated like it's coming from any other reference: Trust but verify.

Sadly, on the Wikipedia page for College Football All-American Teams, they have data basically covering the modern Internet plus a few scattered years in history (1998-2008, plus 1970, 1931, 1925, and 1910). For comparison's sake with the list of Heisman winners, only those years since 1935 are relevant. Here are the Heisman winners for the years on which we do have AP All-American roster data:

• 1970 - Jim Plunkett, QB, Stanford
• 1998 - Ricky Williams, RB, Texas
• 1999 - Ron Dayne, RB, Wisconsin
• 2000 - Chris Weinke, QB, Florida State
• 2001 - Eric Crouch, QB, Nebraska
• 2002 - Carson Palmer, QB, USC
• 2003 - Jason White, QB, Oklahoma
• 2004 - Matt Leinart, QB, USC
• 2005 - Reggie Bush, RB, USC
• 2006 - Troy Smith, QB, Ohio State
• 2007 - Tim Tebow, QB, Florida
• 2008 - Sam Bradford, QB, OU

That's it, that's the list! Going through all the current years (1998-2008), it certainly appears that every single Heisman Trophy winner was named to the AP First Team All-American roster. In 2000, only AP named Chris Weinke to its list of All-Americans; all the other rating entities chose Josh Heupel, QB, OU over Weinke, which is interesting in and of itself.

Going back to 1970 reveals something different, however. Jim Plunkett, voted as the best player in all of college football that year, was named only to the AP Second Team of All-Americans. None other than Joe Theisman, QB, Notre Dame beat out Plunkett for First Team honors. Which meant the AP voters didn't think Plunkett was the best QB in college football, much less the best overall player that year. As Spock would say, "Fascinating!"

All of this gets right back to what's wrong with Big Time College Football and the BCS, naturally! Too many opinions are thrown around, and you know what they say about people's rear ends and opinions. Voters chose to elevate undefeated Utah up to the #2 spot in the final AP poll of the season, and 16 of those voters selected Utah as the #1 team in the country.

Utah head coach Kyle Whittingham even broke ranks on the USA Today coaches' poll, voting his own team #1 even though coaches are typically bound to vote for the winner of the BCS National Title Championship Game. As of yet, there is no word whether Whittingham will be disciplined for his action by the American Football Coaches Association, but the better question may be why only 61 coaches vote in the USA Today coaches' poll when there are 120 universities playing Division 1-A football?

In my own humble opinion, no one who is a fan of college football would lose interest in early- or mid-season games if the NCAA were to switch to a playoff system. No one would talk around the water cooler any less, and sportswriters still would provide their opinions at the same rate if we had a true champion in college football. Last time I checked, everyone LOVES March Madness, with the only gripes coming just after the Selection Show. People still love to debate who got dissed and/or who should be in the NCAA Tournament, and in that format, 65 teams earn the right to play for a national title in mens' college basketball. At least the outcome of the season is decided on the court, with every team having a chance to win. In Big Time (Division 1-A, or Bowl Subdivision) College Football, everything is subject to opinion. This year, many of the voters never saw Utah play a game until they destroyed Alabama in the Sugar Bowl.

I think I'll go back to supporting my second alma mater, the College of William & Mary, who plays big time (albeit Division 1-AA, or Championship Subdivision) football. When they made the playoffs in 2004, it was terribly exciting going to the playoff game between the Tribe and James Madison, the eventual champ. Even as a grad student, I thoroughly enjoyed the playoff atmosphere. The Division 1-A guys could learn from that.

Back to What's Wrong With the BCS

Blow up the BCS already!!!

I'm getting really tired of bad bowl game matchups, tired of blowouts in big games, and really tired of not letting the players decide on the field of play who really is the best team in the "Football Bowl Subdivision" (what everyone still knows as Division I-A college football).

In case you're curious, here are the official rules straight from the BCS Football website on FOX Sports on MSN (whew! Sounds like many of these multi-sponsor bowl game names!):

Bowl Championship Series

Automatic Qualification, At-Large Eligibility and Selection Procedures, 2007-2010 Games

Automatic Qualification

1. The top two teams in the final BCS Standings shall play in the National Championship Game.

2. The champions of the Atlantic Coast, Big East, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10 and Southeastern conferences will have automatic berths in one of the participating bowls after the 2008 through 2013 regular seasons.

3. The champion of Conference USA, the Mid-American Conference, the Mountain West Conference, the Sun Belt Conference or the Western Athletic Conference will earn an automatic berth in a BCS bowl game if either:

A. Such team is ranked in the top 12 of the final BCS Standings, or,
B. Such team is ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS Standings and its ranking in the final BCS Standings is higher than that of a champion of a conference that has an annual automatic berth in one of the BCS bowls.

No more than one such team from Conference USA, the Mid-American Conference, the Mountain West Conference, the Sun Belt Conference, and the Western Athletic Conference shall earn an automatic berth in any year. (Note: a second team may be eligible for at-large eligibility as noted below.) If two or more teams from those conferences satisfy the provisions for an automatic berth, then the team with the highest finish in the final BCS Standings will receive the automatic berth, and the remaining team or teams will be considered for at-large selection if it meets the criteria.

4. Notre Dame will have an automatic berth if it is in the top eight of the final BCS Standings.

5. If any of the 10 slots remain open after application of provisions 1 through 4, and an at-large team from a conference with an annual automatic berth for its champion is ranked No. 3 in the final BCS Standings, that team will become an automatic qualifier, provided that no at-large team from the same conference qualifies for the national championship game.

6. If any of the 10 slots remain open after application of provisions 1 through 5, and if no team qualifies under paragraph No. 5 and an at-large team from a conference with an annual automatic berth for its champion is ranked No. 4 in the final BCS Standings, that team will become an automatic qualifier provided that no at-large team from the same conference qualifies for the national championship game.

OK, so we're dealing with five bowl games pitting the top ten teams according to the last BCS rankings at the end of the season against one another, right? To borrow a line from Lee Corso, Not so fast, my friend!

This year, rule #1 is fairly easy to implement. #1 Oklahoma* (Big 12 champion, 12-1 record) faces off against #2 Florida (SEC champ, 12-1). Unlike in years past, this should be a good matchup between two very deserving teams. No quibbles here. Let's look at some of the other four BCS bowl games, however.

* For clarity's sake, all rankings are pulled from the final BCS rankings as of today, 7 Dec.

Now we're down to eight spots to fill from the mix of automatic berth qualifiers and teams deserving of at-large bids. Le "Granddaddy of them all"(TM), the Rose Bowl gets #5 USC (Pac 10 champ, 11-1) against #8 Penn State (Big 10 champ, 11-1), and that has two benefits: 1) It should be an entertaining game between two very good teams; and 2) It preserves the Big 10-Pac 10 matchup everyone likes to see. At least, that is the preferred matchup since 1947.

Now just six spots remain in three other BCS bowls. Let's swing over to the Sugar Bowl first, just for giggles. Meeting at the Super Dome this year are #6 Utah (Mountain West champ, 12-0) and #4 Alabama (SEC number two, 12-1). Wait, so that means we're already burning one at-large bid for a conference number two. Given that Alabama held the number one ranking for so long, and is still ranked so highly after losing to Florida in the SEC Championship, that's probably OK. This should be a good game, although I haven't seen much of either team this year. Alabama has a strong defense, and I couldn't begin to tell you anything at all about Utah other than they are undefeated. Urban Meyer isn't still coaching there, right?

Four spots remain; who's gonna get 'em?! Again, for giggles, let's go to the Orange Bowl. For some reason, the BCS commissioners decided to award automatic BCS berths to the winners of the Big Least and ACC conferences. The ACC has some traditionally decent football schools in there, including the Florida version of Miami, Georgia Tech, Clemson, Florida State, and Boston College. Virginia Tech rose to prominence behind Beamerball and Michael Vick, and Ralph Friedgen did some good work at Maryland, but the rest of the schools are more basketball schools like UNC, Wake Forest, NC State, and Duke. The Big Least has been something of a football wasteland ever since they lost their more powerful schools to the ACC. They had to pick up Cincinnati and Southern Florida just to keep the conference going, so we're basically talking about Pitt, Rutgers, WV, and Louisville. Syracuse is a basketball school that hasn't been good in football since Jim Brown played there. Regardless, two other automatic bids go out for this game, and it should be a real winner. #12 Cincinnati (Big East champ, 11-2) looks much better in this matchup against a #19 Virginia Tech (ACC champ, 9-4) team that played its way into the automatic BCS berth by beating a better BC squad in the ACC Championship game. Again, this game should be a real winner... NOT!

Now that we've let in two teams that finished outside the top ten in the last BCS rankings, that means two teams from the top ten have to get screwed somehow. It's simple math.

And that takes us down to the last BCS bowl game, the Fiesta Bowl. Fortunately, we didn't have to worry about Notre Dame taking up a BCS spot via rule #4, although by some miracle, they did finish 6-6 and bowl eligible this season. They're playing in the Hawaii Bowl on 24 Dec, so Merry Christmas, ND fans. We did see the successful application of rule #3, in which the MWC champ, Utah, gets to play in a BCS game. That also invokes the last paragraph of rule #3, stating that no more than one team from one of the "lesser" conferences shall obtain an automatic berth. So, now that we've satisfied all the automatic berths, we go to the at-large berths.

This year, we actually see the successful application of rule #5 (and aren't you happy all the rules are right where you can see them?!). The University of Texas ended up #3 in the final poll, and since OU won the Big 12's automatic berth (not an at-large bid), the Longhorns suddenly find themselves in an automatic berth. Confused yet? We also see the successful application of rule #6, since Alabama finished #4 in the final poll, yet Florida qualified as the automatic berthee from the SEC Conference. But wait, we did see UT qualify under rule #5. At this point, I think all bets are off, and the BCS gurus can basically pick whomever they want.

The teams we're left with are #7 Texas Tech (Big 12 number three, 11-1), #9 Boise State (Western Athletic Conference champ, 12-0), #10 Ohio State (Big 10 number two, 10-2), and #11 TCU (MWC number two, 10-2). They already allowed two Big 12 teams into the BCS club, and the rules stipulate that no more than two teams from a BCS conference can take up spots in the BCS bowls. Sorry, Texas Tech, you had a great season and even knocked off the number one team in the land at home, but you're out!

They already allowed in one "lesser" conference champion in Utah into the BCS club, so what are the odds that Boise State would get an at-large invite? Even though Boise State proved two years ago they could play with the big boys (during one of the most thrilling Fiesta Bowls ever!!!) when they shocked OU in overtime through a little razzle-dazzle, what are the odds of getting another shot at a big-time football factory like Texas? Maybe the BCS gods were a little scared that Boise State might pull off another upset against a Big 12 school on a neutral field. That just might upset the whole BCS apple cart. Shock me once, shame on you; shock me twice, shame on me...

Oh, and sorry, TCU, but no one is about to pass out an at-large BCS berth to the number two team from the MWC. It just ain't gonna happen.

So, this year's Fiesta Bowl matches #3 Texas (Big 12 number two, 11-1) against #10 Ohio State (Big 10 number two, 10-2). Yes, OSU fans do like to travel to the desert in January. Yes, Ohio State has had good success at the site of the Fiesta Bowl. Yes, OSU is a football factory competing head-to-head with the football factory from Texas. OSU and Texas even played that very memorable home-and-home series several years ago, when Vince Young parlayed an early-season victory over Ohio State into a national title run. So there are numerous reasons why the BCS gods wanted to match those two schools against one another in Tempe, AZ.

And yet, I can't help but think that Boise State got screwed. Where will they be playing their bowl game this year? The 23 December San Diego Poinsettia Bowl, and against none other than TCU. So much for finishing the year ranked in the top ten overall, ahead of Ohio State. No good deed goes unpunished. Meanwhile, many other more prestigious bowls like the Outback, Gator, Cotton, and Capitol One Bowls filled their slates with the third- and fourth-best teams from the traditional power conferences. Why not match Boise State with Texas Tech in the Cotton Bowl? They were the next two highest ranked teams, and they had Texas Tech fans to pack the place even if folks from Boise decided not to fly down (which is highly unlikely).

This type of thing happens every year, and generates no small amount of controversy. I, for one, was really hoping Missouri could pull off the upset in the Big 12 Championship game. That would have meant a 10-3 Missouri team (if they had won) taking up the Big 12's automatic berth, while Texas probably would have played for the national title -- without winning their own Division, much less their own Conference! That has happened several times in the past, and it seems the Big 12 is always the culprit.

Blow up the BCS already!!!

The Problem With the BCS

It is readily apparent that there is simply too much money sloshing around the current Bowl Championship Series system (formerly known as Division I-A AKA big-time football) to get anything to change in favor of a playoff system. We've all heard the arguments for and against a college football playoff system, which basically boil down to this:

For: Let the players decide who really is the best team on the field.
Against: A bunch of really specious arguments, none of which make any sense whatsoever.

I don't even want to get into the reasons why the arguments against a Div I-A playoff don't make any sense; they just don't. For those who say you can't take these players away from their studies for that long, who are you trying to kid? Many football factory schools don't make their star players attend classes anyway, and if the athletes in Division III (none of whom have a hope of playing at the NFL level) can have a playoff system, then why can't we have one at the Div I-A level?

There was a brilliant proposal last year on Yahoo! Sports, and I don't remember who wrote it, but it basically said this: put the top eight teams according to their rankings at the end of the season into a playoff system. (Sure, you'll get griping from the number 9- and 10-ranked schools, but that's better than the current system.) It would take three rounds -- three weekends -- to decide the champion, which is not much different from today's bowl game schedule. For the first two rounds, let the higher-ranked team play at home. That means additional home ticket sales, additional revenue for the school, and the fans don't have to travel ungodly amounts to see and support their team. Plus, wouldn't you just love to see a warm-weather team like LSU, USC, or Florida go north to play in Ohio Stadium or Happy Valley in December? It would remove a lot of the advantage those teams enjoy in warm-weather venues, that's for sure. For the final game, call it whatever name you want, and play it wherever you want, but then the fans only have to travel once for the actual championship game.

Now, a lot of the fans and sportwriters that defend the current system blather on about lots of different quality-of-life arguments related to Div I-A football. To wit: every week is important, even those September games (forget that very few non-conference games mean a darn thing as the football factories schedule Div I-AA patsies for easy victories, Appalachian State over Michigan notwithstanding); with 38 bowl games, you have 38 teams that finish on a high note (and only about two or three of those bowls mean anything -- hell, keep playing all the Armed Forces Emerald Nuts Poinsettia Aloha California Raisin Humanitarian Bowls you want); tradition, tradition, tradition (also forget that the traditional bowl pairings have really only been around since the 1920s or later [in the case of the "Grandaddy of Them All"(R) Rose Bowl, the Big 10 and Pac 10 have sent their conference champs to meet there only since 1947] -- in the entire course of human history, that's a speck of time); speculating on bowl matchups and who is in versus who is left out of the current system makes for great debate (for sportswriters and talking heads on Saturdays); etc. etc., blah blah blah.

Here's my problem with that. Can anyone follow what this writer is talking about relative to Oregon State and the BCS? Never mind for one instant that for Oregon State to crash the BCS system, they have to finish in the top 16 to win an at-large bid and they currently sit at 21 in the BCS rankings. I just get extremely tired with all the speculating about potential matchups and bowl pairings. Nothing is simple like: "Win or go home." A person can hurt his or her brain trying to keep up with all the possibilities.

Maybe the sportswriters want it that way, just to keep their jobs interesting. The bowl commissioners, who have no ties to the NCAA or college football other than being able to raise enough money to keep their bowl game afloat from year to year (seriously, check out how many commissioners from the Rose Bowl actually do anything at all related to college football), definitely don't want to upset their apple carts. Any playoff system would have to find a way of keeping those people happy, which would take a ton of money. They have a vested interest in keeping the current system alive and well, thank you very much.

I did like Barack Obama's response on MNF, when Chris "Ethel Merman" Berman asked him what he would change about sports, if he could change one thing as President of the United States (POTUS). John McCain delivered a very serious, thoughtful answer about stopping the spread of performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) in sports. Obama went with a fan's response, in favor of a Div I-A playoff in football. Now that he is President, he still can't make that happen, but it is nice to dream.

OSU 27 - (1) USC 21 F

My first reaction after watching the number one team in college football lose to Oregon State on Thursday night was that Tony Kornheiser was right on PTI when he chose the under for whether or not USC would score 50 points.

I also kept wondering why my OSU, Ohio State, couldn't attack the line of scrimmage on either side of the ball the way the Oregon State players did, especially in the first half of their game. Oregon State had those two little running backs, James and Jacquizz Rodgers, who combined for 296 total yards and scored all four OSU touchdowns. But they really won the game because their offensive line opened running lanes and gave their QB time to throw passes to his receivers. On defense, OSU limited USC to just 86 yards total rushing. 86! Given the stable of RBs that USC has, that was pretty amazing.

But my biggest question now is this: how far will USC drop in the polls now? Ohio State went on the road, played in a hostile environment, lost 35-3 to the Number 1 team in the land, and dropped from 3 to 14 in most polls. I thought that drop in the polls was probably well justified, given the egg laid by the Ohio State team. After that game, it would have been really hard to say that Ohio State was better than the 13 teams then ranked ahead of them.

However, USC went on the road, played in a hostile environment, and lost 27-21 to an UNRANKED TEAM (and one that wasn't even picked to finish well in its own conference). Should USC fall farther than Ohio State did? That might be hard to justify. However, given that Oregon State lost 45-14 against #12 Penn State, I think USC has to drop no less than past Penn State when the revised rankings come out next Monday.