The Best of Both Worlds

Tonight, USC will be traveling to play Oregon State in a "big time" PAC-10 conference match- up. Unfortunately, this prime-time contest lacks any sort of luster that the networks are trying to maintain the game will feature; almost everyone knows that this game was over as soon as USC stepped off the plane.The Trojans are head-and-shoulders above their Pac-10 counterparts, they should not only run the conference table but should do so in convincing fashion. The more interesting game would be if USC got the courage to go play a team like BYU, now that would be must-see TV.

Editors note: So I guess I was wrong about Oregon State, as many people were. The Beavers must be commended for their win more than USC should be condemned for their loss. But while the result of this game did not play out to how this story was originally written, it does contribute to the argument that this is shaping up to be a really interesting year in college football. This season is going to be ripe with upsets, resulting in many 1-loss and 2-loss teams without two stone cold locks for the BCS championship; this will ultimately result in a bit of controversy come bowl time when certain teams are left out of big bowls.

This is shaping up to be a really interesting year in college football. Most of the major conferences are down, letting mid-major teams shine through. Come bowl season there will be more than one small conference team making a valid argument for a BCS birth over a team from one of the six major conferences. Of course, though, teams from the larger conferences will get preference over arguably better teams because of conference affiliations. That will undoubtedly lead to a compelling debate for a playoff system throughout the country, but inevitably won't lead to much change, if any. So if there is still going to be this God-awful BCS/bowl system, at least make it fair and more competitive. If they are going to keep the bowl system and ignore any and all reasonable logic for a playoff system, then some serious changes have to be made.

The major conferences - ACC, SEC, Pac-10, Big Ten, Big XII, and Big East - should adopt some of the stronger teams from smaller conferences like the WAC, Mountain West, MAC, and others, in order to create a more balanced and competitive system. This would essentially combine some of the mid-majors with the BCS conferences to make larger, super-conferences. Utah, BYU, Fresno State, ECU, Boise State, Bowling Green, Ball State, and some others, are all teams that can compete with the big boys, and some of them have proven it this season already. At the same time, teams like Syracuse, Baylor, Washington, and Duke have proven through this year and in the past that perhaps they don't belong.

Three of the BCS conferences, the Big East, ACC, and Pac-9 (Pac-10 minus USC), are beyond weak; they are abysmal. The Big 12 has a few strong, big-game teams - Texas, Missouri, Oklahoma - but aside from these teams, the conference is down and bordering on the line of mediocrity. The Big East's traditional big names have been tarnished by big losses. The Big Ten has shown a recent tenancy of not showing up in the big game; Ohio State's big loss to USC two weeks ago cemented that idea. Without USC, the Pac-10 the rest of the conference is weaker than either the WAC or MWC. When the strongest teams from these conferences run into any reasonable competition, they loose. Teams from the Big East, ACC, and PAC-10 have fallen to the likes of East Carolina (twice), Fresno State, Bowling Green, and others. And when teams like UCLA run into BYU, then they get embarrassed.

If the major conferences combined with some of the stronger mid-majors, it would take care of many of the issues that surrounds the conference bowl system. First, it would assure that every conference would have a conference championship game. Many have complained that Big Ten and Pac-10 gets a break because they don't have a championship game, and therefore have one less opportunity for a loss at the hands of a quality opponent. Second, it would ensure that teams that are outside the six "major" conferences get their shot at a BCS game.

It would also maintain the whole "every game means something" argument that many cling to when discussing a playoff format. It would also eliminate some of the computer factor in determining the BCS rankings. The strength of schedule and quality of wins argument would be less important because most of a team's game would be played against their own division, and since there will only be 6-major conferences, when teams play teams from the TCU, Houston, Akron, Troy, etc., they would not be penalized for playing a weaker opponent since these teams will all be in the same conference.

Also, this will force the big boys to step up. USC should be commended for scheduling BCS opponents for their early non-conference schedule, not like Ohio State who battled lowly Youngstown State and Ohio University. Teams would HAVE to step up and play big time schedules. The emphasis for judgment and rankings would be more focus on wins rather than how many points they could rack up against FCS schools.

Admittedly, the idea is a bit exotic, perhaps even crazy. But in principal it would account for some of the BCS's shortcomings and at the same time feature the best aspects of the bowl system. In essence, it is the best of both worlds.