Saturday, January 10, 2009

Other Things To Hate About the BCS

  • Having the "championship game" be a home game for one of the teams.
  • Having the "championship game" always played in SEC or Pac-10 territory, not, say, Big 10 or Big East. Even better, next year put it in Boise. I want to see Alabama and USC slug it out on the Smurf Turf in January. Someone's arms will no doubt literally fall off before halftime.
  • Having all of the drama and interest sucked out of the other bowl games. There's such a big deal made out of the "championship game" that the obvious corollary presents itself immediately: that if the championship game is all-important, the Rose, Fiesta, etc. Bowls are completely unimportant. Which reduces viewing audiences, which reduces profits for the network broadcasting them, and incidentally reduces my viewing pleasure, as I can now no longer formally muster giving a hoot about most of the games
  • The annual "oh crap, not these guys" BCS bowl. Two teams, there strictly because someone from their conferences had to be, matched up in the "slow kid who owns the only football so we can't tell him to go home" bowl. Cincinnati, Virginia Tech, I'm talking to you - does anyone even remember which bowl these teams played in?
  • The fact that the BCS is so transparently a money grab that the "championship game" doesn't even have an interesting name. Come on, they've got to be able to do better than what they've got now.
  • The endless post-BCS analysis of how the system is *gasp* broken because teams X, Y and Z got screwed. You know what, guys? It was just as broken a month ago, when y'all were gushing over 'Bama and ignoring Utah. Just sayin'.
Post a Comment
There was an error in this gadget