As for college football, there were more than half a dozen teams who, by virtue of their records, deserved consideration for a national title game. Texas, ‘Bama, USC, Penn State, Florida, Oklahoma, and Texas Tech all had one loss, IIRC, and Utah and Boise State were undefeated. Utah (undefeated, mind you) beat a one loss team. Texas Tech, Boise State, Penn State, Alabama, and Oklahoma all lost their bowl games, leaving four teams deserving of consideration for the national title.

Utah ran the table and in their bowl game beat what was once a #1 ranked Alabama team. So by virtue of those two things, I see no reason why they aren’t national champions.

USC played for a conference that went 5-0 in bowl games. They crushed Penn State, with Pete Carroll (again) refusing to run up the score on a team that was dominated so badly the game was over by halftime. It’s *hard* to win by 30 points when all you are doing in the second half is maintaining a more than two score lead (until the final gun) by running all the time to keep the clock moving. I doubt anybody who watched that game felt that Penn State was in any way in that game. USC’s non-conference record was three BCS conference teams (if you include Notre Dame); Ohio State was ranked #5 when USC played them as game #2, and was in a BCS bowl game against Texas. Notre Dame was in a minor bowl, beating Hawaii.

Texas built its national title resume by playing Rice, Florida Atlantic, Arkansas, and UTEP out of conference. This hardly is a championship schedule. Florida did a little better, playing Miami and Hawaii (both bowl losers who at least reached minor bowl games, a combined 14-13) and The Citadel, which was a losing team from a dreadful conference. Florida beat Oklahoma in the final game, but it was by no means over after the first half.

On the face of things, Texas had the closest bowl game against the weakest opponent based on final record, and clearly deserves no consideration for the national title. USC and Florida both lost one conference game to an eventual 9-4 record and bowl winner. The Pac-10 had a better conference bowl record than did the SEC (5-0 to 5-2). USC played a much tougher non-conference record than did Florida. It would seem that if Utah is not going to be the national champion, that USC has the edge over the SEC.

However, as has happened many times before, the eastern media bias often is against the western schools. Many reporters don’t watch West Coast games that may begin as late as 10:30 p.m. Eastern time. They ignore strength of non-conference schedule and say only that the conference is stronger. But consider, for example, Kentucky, the worst team in the SEC division with Florida. They went 4-0 non-conference, playing no schools from any major conference (Louisville, Norfolk State, Middle Tennessee State, Western Kentucky) which got them into a bowl game against East Carolina. Washington was the worst team in the Pac-10 this year, but their non-conference games were Brigham Young (then ranked #15), Oklahaoma (Bthen ranked #3), and Notre Dame, all three bowl game participants. I am pretty sure that if you switched the non-conference opponents Kentucky would have finished 2-9 instead of 6-6 and Washington would have been 4-8. This repeated practice of playing weak teams, teams so bad that ones star players won’t have to risk injury by being on the field for more than a quarter or two, is why the SEC and others seem to be a much better conference. They are why Florida played for the national title instead of USC, not because Florida played a better schedule, but because every team in the SEC packs in weak opponents and thus the conference seems stronger than it really is.

And now we come to the real inequity of the BCS. Time was a great minor school like Brigham Young, Utah, or Boise State could run the table, win its bowl game against a solid opponent, and if they were the only undefeated team, they’d get the national crown. That can’t happen any more. Before Utah gets to prove that it deserves to be in the national title game, it needs to defeat Alabama in its January bowl game to prove that it is no fluke. The problem is, that bowl game means that Utah, BYU, et all, will never be given a chance to play for the national title unless there is at most one BCS team with only one loss. Thus, taken as a group, the BCS conferences have guaranteed that the BCS winner will come from a BCS conference. They may let an undefeated crash the party of eight, but they’ll never let them play for the title any more.

I see no reason why Utah did not win the national title this year other than the BCS has cheated them. I think USC was cheated out of its BCS title game appearance by virtue of playing in a conference that schedules real games, not fake games. I think Florida should be ranked third, and Texas fourth. A Plus-Two schedule would enable us to say, okay, we have four contenders. Maybe the top 8 would have played a different mix of games, but after those four games we’d have four teams with 0-1 losses, and that’s only two more rounds.

Yeah, I know that the Pac-10 commissioner is one of the firmest against a playoff, screwing USC. And I think that Obama has more important things to do than push for a football playoff. But I think we, the viewers whose eyeballs drive the advertising dollars that drives the revenues that makes the NCAA rich without one legitimate dime making its way to the athletes whose bodies are put on the line for our entertainment, we viewers deserve a playoff. And maybe the final four would be Florida (over Texas Tech or Ohio State), Okalahoma (over Utah), Texas and USC. Or maybe Utah would have pulled the upset. But Utah was never given the chance, will never be given the chance, and it’s not fair to Utah or to us fans. This needs to change.

2. I was tired a month ago of hearing Texas and its fans complain (and of constant media coverage of Texas and its fans complaining). Funny how there seemed to be a lot less complaining from Texas Tech.

3. As a professional mathematician, I feel obliged to link to Bill James’s article for Slate — http://www.slate.com/id/2208108/ — urging statisticians to boycott the BCS. I concur.

Pathetic.

Re: Vick vs. Pryor….I don’t see them as being similar at all, beyond both being mobile. Pryor definitely has a better body type for the NFL, especially if he can put on weight without losing quickness, and I think he’ll develop as a passer. Vick was all speed and just had a cannon arm. I was one who thought he’d revolutionize the quarterback position, but his decision making never matured (obviously) and he never could learn to throw with anything resembling touch.

Must have missed McCoy’s girlfriend, but hopefully Tebow’s lady will make up for it on Thursday.

I loved that the old design had a main page for the blog so I could see the various headlines before clicking on a blog post to read. You post a blog about everyday, yet I only visit the site every couple days, so being able to see several headlines at once (instead of having to hunt for posts be scrolling down) was beneficial. This design might work best for people who check your blog daily, but for readers like me, who hit you up a couple times a week, this redesign is a hassle.

Otherwise, though, fantastic post as usual.