The Big East Commissioner says it best
Take the system itself. At the time of its creation, no one understood how the BCS would galvanize the regular season. If anyone had, don't you think it would have been used as a selling point?Is it a perfect system? Obviously not. But given the unique structure of College Football (120 teams that only play 12 games each), it's the best "accessible" way of crowning a champ currently.
"You go to the opening game of the season, even the announcer is saying, 'Well, if this team loses the game, it jeopardizes its chances in the BCS,'" Tranghese said. "… For example, Pitt played West Virginia in the last [Big East regular-season] game of the year [2007]. Everybody in the country watched the game. It did an incredible television rating. If we were in a full-blown playoff, who would have watched the game? West Virginia would have already won our league. What the BCS has done is, people who used to watch football in isolation -- the conference of their interest, the team of their interest -- are now watching it across the board because all those games have an effect [on the national championship]."
Which reminds me...I'm completely and totally against a BCS Rule that says "If you don't win your conference title, you're not eligible for the National Title Game."
Why would the SEC, Big 12 or ACC ever sign off on such a rule? Those conference can only have one true champion while the Big 10 and Big East can have two or three champions. Even more importantly, Notre Dame isn't in a conference. If they don't have to win a conference title to play for the title, why should we?
(Note: If you want to insert your bashes of Kirk Herbstreit here, now would be a good time)
UPDATE: Pat Forde's retort is here.
PWD
