Boise State with no chance? Hardly

Mr. Sarbinsky,

I had the pleasure of reading your April 4th article as it was mentioned in a recent column by Andy Staples. As I don’t live in Birmingham I don’t have the opportunity to read your work regularly, but did have a response to your article.



I thought it was interesting that you initially bring up the point that Butler proved that “on any given day…a good team can beat a big name” when they are certainly not the first team, in college basketball or football, to have done this. 2 seeds have been upset by 15 seeds in the tournament a number of times, and one of the main reasons that the NCAA tournament is billed as “March Madness” is because of the upsets. In football, a classic David vs. Goliath (much more than the Butler case because Butler hadn’t lost since before last Christmas and was a 5 seed) happened as recent as 2007 when Division IAA App State beat Michigan to open the season on Michigan’s home field. Sure you haven’t forgotten about that game? Not to mention later than same year, when Stanford pulled off a huge upset to beat USC. How do these cases not prove that a good team can beat a big name? There aren’t many names bigger than Michigan and USC.

I believe the real heart of your argument is that the BCS is inferior to college basketball’s playoff, as the BCS does not allow smaller schools to have a chance at a title while the college basketball tournament does. You could possibly say the argument has proven to be true over in recent years, but if you look at history, these non-BCS schools weren’t exactly perennial powers that were bringing in the championships. Going back to the end of World War 2, BYU in 1984 was the only team not currently in a BCS conference or named Notre Dame that won an AP national title in football. So maybe it is simply more difficult for smaller schools to be successful in football, which makes more sense than trying to contrive an argument that the BCS is conspiring against the smaller schools. Success in basketball requires much fewer players and much fewer resources than football does. Should we diminish the accomplishments of others simply to level the playing field and allow less qualified teams into the mix? Absolutely not. If they want to be included in big time college football, there is a simple formula; win your games. And going undefeated against a weak schedule doesn’t count. You will be exposed, just like Hawaii was in the 2008 Sugar Bowl.

Your article chooses to omit the fact that there were 5 undefeated teams last year, not only Boise State. It was not a case of everyone else having a blemished record and the BCS chose teams other than Boise State. In this system, there is a 2 team playoff, so when there are cases of more than 2 teams being undefeated, someone is going to be unhappy. Don’t pretend like it only happens to non-BCS teams either. Remember 2004 Auburn? Or what about Cincinnati last year?

The BCS rewards teams that play well for over 3 months. The NCAA basketball tournament rewards teams that play average during the regular season but get hot for 3 weeks. Which is a better reflection of the season’s best team?

Boise State has a good chance to be included in the national title game this year. They have a good team and they finally play a tough schedule that is comparable to what BCS conference teams play. If they go undefeated, they will probably make it into the BCS title game. What is your argument then? There is nothing about the BCS or written in its rules that excludes non-BCS conference teams from the BCS Championship game. It simply isn’t there, no matter how much you may believe it is.

Is it Boise State’s fault that they’re not in a BCS conference? Certainly not. Is it right for the BCS to not hold them to the same standard when measuring teams? Certainly not.

I’m sure you’re a busy person, but a response to these thoughts would be appreciated. Thank you for the time.