BCS Rankings are NOT Power Rankings!
| 7
|
by Kingsrule41
I'm getting a little sick of people complaining that Ohio State is not the best team in the country, and that team A could never beat lower-ranked team B.
It doesn't matter! The BCS isn't based on who the best team in the country is. If it were, losses really wouldn't matter as much; a team that was on paper the best team in the nation would still be the best team in the nation even after a tough upset loss, wouldn't it?
I'm not saying the system isn't flawed, but I am saying stop treating it like it is a power ranking. It is not saying that Ohio State > South Florida > Boston College > LSU > Oklahoma. THAT would be a power ranking and it would be false.
With so many teams it is impossible to correctly gauge power rankings. Instead, the BCS pretty much just tells us;
1. Which teams have done the best within their schedule.
2. Which teams have faced/beaten the toughest opponents.
3. Which teams look "best" (power ranking-esque)
The top 3 teams right now are not the top 3 teams in college football by a longshot. They have, however, put together 3 of the best individual team seasons in the nation (so far).
1. Ohio State is undefeated and has outscored opponents 250 - 46, and has only given up a double-digit point total ONCE on defense (14).
2. South Florida is undefeated with strong wins @Auburn and vs. West Virginia
3. Boston College............ eh, never mind, I can't rationalize this one.
In one of the worst articles I've written in a long time (it made a lot more sense in my head, but now that I've typed it, hey, might as well post it) I guess my "point" here is that nobody cares how upset you are that Ohio State is number one and they could never beat (Your team here) on a neutral field. USC, LSU, Okl, Cal, and WV all knew coming into this season that one loss meant national championship in jeopardy and two losses meant completely done. And they all lost. Blame them, not the system.
