I compilment the Big East for raising the 'competitive bar' this year with respect to the BCS. Had W. Virginia not been selected, they would still have had a 'worthy' representative, in Louisiville. That's what compeitition does, it separates the wheat from the chaff, and that's a good thing in general.mountainman wrote:Well, this may be the first time you have agreed with something I've said, but this would not be the first time I've agreed with something you have said.
To me, the biggest difference you and I have are how the words "fair" and "equal" are defined and used.
If I understand your position correctly, your position is that it would be fair if every D-1 conference champion received a BCS bid. I agree with the notion that that would be fair, but only from a narrow perspective. Since I do not believe that all the conferences are equal, from a competitive or a broader college football perspective, I do not believe it would be fair to either the BCS conferences or the non-BCS conferences or to college football. At this point in time in college football I believe it would promote mediocrity.
That's the reason I support the BCS 'system'.
I'm simply saying give every team the same opportunity you are giving W. Virginia, or in other words, a 'fair' way to be selected to the BCS, every year. TCU wouldn't have been an 'automatic' participant, anyway, they would have had to 'earn' their way into the BCS, similar to how every other team did, had they been given the opportunity.
Someone tell me how this isnt' fair?
Boise St. wasn't selected either, this year, or last year, either, for that matter. They were at least sufficiently capable of 'earning' a BCS bid, through competitive play, if their Liberty Bowl pairing against Louisville means anything.
Similarly, TCU 'earned' the right to be selected, and ought to have at least been given an opportunity to play a team of comparable talent & ability. Iowa St. was decent but 4-4 Big XII isn't going to raise any eyebrows. That TCU beat them says something, however. They were at least as good, if not better than Colorado, and maybe even Nebraska.
And TCU likely would have been in position to win the Big XII N. division, just as ISU was, but for an OT loss to Kansas, in Kansas.
Why should TCU have to play OSU's schedule? If they were a Big Ten team, then maybe I'd agree to it, but they aren't so drop it.
They play Nortwestern, and beat them fairly regularly, so use that as a 'gauge' if you have to, to approximate TCU's talent level.
They beat Northwestern a year Northwestern was a Big Ten Co-Champion. Northwestern eventually got hammered by Nebraska in the Alamo bowl, but shouldn't take anything away from the significance of it.
TCU can compete head-to-head they've proven it, you just haven't noticed.
Their record against OSU is admirable, really, given they played nearly every game in Columbus OH. Have OSU schedule TCU, outside Columbus, maybe it's a different result? But they don't schedule TCU, so it's a moot point, although they did schedule San Diego St.
So, it's not about who you play, it's about how you play, that matters.
TCU didn't play OSU, haven't in a long time, which is actually another reason i prefer a playoff, it would maybe be the only 'fair' way to see how each team compares, other than on paper.
It might have even happened this year, had TCU been admitted. OSU vs. TCU would have been a 'draw' in any respect.
You can argue all you want about whether or not TCU would be competitive, but until it happens, it's still a debate of words.
TCU is 1-4-1 overall. Not great, not terrible either.
It's likely a rematch would follow that precedent. that gives TCU something of 1.5/6 chance or roughly a 25% chance of a W. I'll take those odds.
