Last Sunday night once again exposed the inequity of the US college football Bowl Championship Series (BCS) which rewards the most successful college teams in the country with national exposure and the right to play for the title of Champion. It says so right here in the title. And, incidentally, it also rewards the participating schools with several million dollars in the process.

On Saturday night the University of Hawaii defeated the University of Washington in a major thriller, leaving the Warriors of Hawaii the only undefeated Division 1-A college football team in the country. Their record is a perfect 12 wins, 0 losses, 0 ties.

On Sunday the selection committee declared the national championship will be decided between Ohio State and LSU. Ohio State has one loss, LSU is sporting a pair of losses (equaling the records of Boston College and USC among others). Hawaii will play on the same field (the Super Dome in New Orleans), but they will play six days prior to the "Championship" game, against SEC conference champion Georgia (another 10-2 team), perfect record notwithstanding. The reason given for this curious scheduling? Why, the opponents in Hawaii's schedule were not deserving of enough respect to validate their record.

‘There have been five teams from outside the fold who have had perfect seasons ... Not one of these was given the opportunity to play for the title. And the tradition continues.’


The last time a Western Athletic Conference (WAC) team earned a national title was 1984 when LaVell Edwards' BYU Cougars went undefeated, beating Michigan in the Holiday Bowl. This championship was declared controversial as the WAC had lost both Arizona universities to the PAC-10 conference a few years before. How could this upstart conference with such a minor market share possibly be as good as the "money" conferences? And this was before the advent of the BCS system.

The BCS gives automatic series bowl bids to the champions of just six conferences, and to the best of my knowledge there has yet to be a national champion outside of those conferences since its inception. Not even one! There have been five teams from outside the fold who have had perfect seasons. They are Tulane in 1998, Marshall in 1999, Utah in 2004, and Boise State in 2004 and 2006. Not one of these was given the opportunity to play for the title. And the tradition continues.

As to the "strength of schedule" argument, give me a break. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) assigns conferences and schedules are primarily determined by conference. You might as well disqualify an athlete from eligibility for having small feet. Smaller conferences do not necessarily mean smaller talent, or smaller desire. Texas Western College (now U of Texas El Paso) managed to overcome that perceived handicap in 1966 when it beat Kentucky for the NCAA championship. And with players perceived as "inferior" to the established powers. Oh yeah, but that was basketball, wasn't it?

The difference between basketball and football is that the NCAA tournament is open to the top 64 teams in the country, and not just the teams "in the money". And every team keeps playing until someone beats them. Perhaps there is no favoritism, no politics, surrounding the BCS. And perhaps we should just drop the "C" out of the name.

What do you think?