One More BCS Gripe For the Year

Will someone please explain to me why?

It's obvious that the BCS cannot get things straight, whether it be the computers, the coaches, or the actual poll itself. But the one human element, the bowl selection committee (namely the Orange), didn't get this one right, and it's frankly quite surprising.

Call me a homer, but get this: Mizzou is ranked higher than Kansas in the AP, Coaches, Harris, computers, and BCS. Mizzou beat Kansas in their only matchup of the year. Mizzou has one more loss than Kansas only because Mizzou made the Big XII Championship Game, losing to the one team that beat them earlier in the year. Mizzou played a much more difficult schedule, namely meeting Rose Bowl-bound Illinois, Fiesta Bowl-bound Oklahoma (twice, losing both times), as well as ranked Texas Tech and Nebraska, while Kansas only played Mizzou and Kansas State (whom Mizzou played as well, though not when they were ranked). Mizzou has a very exciting offense, a suitable defense, and a legitimate Heisman candidate (Chase Daniel). KU quarterback Todd Reesing got a few mentions for Heisman candidacy, but he's not at the same level as Daniel, Tebow, McFadden, White, Brennan, and others in consideration. Also, KU's offense did not score at least 31 points in 12 of their 13 games (they didn't even play 13 games), and their defense is pretty much as good as Mizzou's.

Despite all of this, KU is in the Orange Bowl, and Mizzou is on the outside looking in. The only crime Mizzou did was to beat KU and lose in the Big XII Championship while KU was idle after losing to Mizzou.

Call me crazy, but isn't there something wrong with this scenario?

Enable Comment Auto-Refresher

The BeastAAA-er

726 days ago

Score 1

You are right on. I agree. It's total BCS (The C is silent).

Permalink | Reply

JMFlyer1454Draft Pick

726 days ago

Score 3

I agree with you but Missouri playing Nebraska isn't anything to brag about.

Permalink | Reply

Bobbyjim45Draft Pick

726 days ago

Score 1

I really think that Illinois being in there is what the outrage should be about. THREE losses and arguably only TWO marquee wins. Zook can get off his knees now.

Permalink | Reply

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

726 days ago

Score 1

Who else would get in?

You can only take 2 teams per conference. With Georgia, LSU, Oklahoma, and Kansas in there; you can't take an SEC or Big XII team. The team selected also has to be in the top 14 of the BCS standings, which leaves you with Boston College, Arizona State, and Illinois. The Rose Bowl traditionally pits a Pac-10 team against a Big Ten team. And it would be ridiculous to have USC playing Arizona State in the Rose Bowl. So Illinois is the logical choice.

Now, they could have moved Georgia to the Rose Bowl to face USC, then have Arizona State play Hawaii in the Sugar Bowl, or move Oklahoma to the Rose Bowl (OU vs. USC would be fun to watch), and have ASU play the Fiesta Bowl. They could have done some maneuvering to get Arizona State in there instead of Illinois, but they like that Pac-1o/Big Ten thing.

Permalink

Bobbyjim45Draft Pick

726 days ago

Score 0

If you really want to do it the fair way, you put Missouri in there, but that goes against the B(C)S rules. I think ASU deserves it over the Illini. Sure it's tradition to have Pac 10-Big 10 in the Rose Bowl, but it's also tradition to save teams of Illinois' caliber for the Cotton Bowl or the Cick-fil-a Bowl.

Permalink

Taytay 24All-American

726 days ago

Score 0

Rawb is right on this one--conference tie-ins forced the Illinois decision here. It's not pretty, but what else can you expect from the BCS?

Permalink

ASwaffAll-American

725 days ago

Score 1

Rose Bowl has first pick over the other bowls. They have special circumstances as the "daddy of them all." They could have taken Missouri to give them a possibility of ANOTHER phenomenal game involving a Big 12 team (like Texas-Michigan and Texas-USC) and forced either the Fiesta Bowl or the Orange Bowl to take ASU. That would have made everything better, because both of the teams that got in (Missouri and ASU) would be more deserving than the teams that got "snubbed" (Kansas and Illinois). I agree with Bobby - there is plenty of justifiable blame to place on the tradition snobs at the Rose Bowl.

Permalink

ASwaffAll-American

725 days ago

Score 0

And Tay - there is a conference tie-in, but that doesn't FORCE the Rose Bowl into anything. With the BCS system the way it is, there are tie-ins, but it's not MANDATORY for them to take an undeserving team from the Big 10 or the Pac 10.

Permalink

RawbeezeitzMajor Leaguer

726 days ago

Score 1

I think the Orange Bowl might feel as though KU is a better story. That's the only logic I could come up with, because it certainly wasn't that KU was better than Missouri.

Permalink | Reply

ASwaffAll-American

725 days ago

Score 1

Missouri defeated Kansas AND Illinois, and they are ranked higher in this week's BCS standings than FIVE teams that got BCS Bowls, including THREE that got at-large invites (Kansas, Hawaii and Illinois). Missouri not being in a BCS is ridiculous. I put most of the blame on the Orange Bowl, but I also put some blame on the Rose Bowl for being so obsessed with tradition that they'd take an undeserving Big 10 team over a deserving Big 12 team.

Permalink | Reply

DNLLegend

725 days ago

Score 1

Illinois or Arizona State were getting the last bid, no matter what. There were simply no other reasonable choices outside of BC, which is to say, there were no other reasonable choices. The Orange Bowl may have twisted some arms here, too -- they probably did not want a VTech/Illinois or VTech/AzState game (they'd not have taken a BC/VT rematch) -- but I doubt it.

Permalink