CJHawkeyes
08-08-2007, 02:10 PM
It seems to me that nonBCS schools are just as greedy as BCS schools and have sold out their teams and fans for a better chance at the BCS pie without regard to improving their chances for competing for the national title. Yet, how many players and fans care about the money? I know I don't. From a competitive point of view, the biggest advantage of the BCS label is that everyone, most importantly recruits, knows that BCS schools are ranked best to worst record and nonBCS schools are essentially eliminated before a game is played. Scolding nonBCS teams for playing weak schedules is unfair. If obtaining the required schedule were a simple thing such that recruits could know an unbeaten season has the same guarantee at a nonBCS schools, surely nonBCS schools would get it. Although not my first choice, I think nonBCS schools should petition the NCAA to formally recognize a champion based on records. Again, the difference between BCS and nonBCS is based on how records are valued. The pretense that BCS schools challenge themselves more is just that....pretense. Imagine the NCAA did as I suggest. How much of a difference would it make in the recruiting wars if nonBCS schools can approach recruits with the same selling point that BCS schools enjoy (unbeaten beats beaten everywhere)? Furthermore, how might that increase nonBCS conferences' value to bowls? As I suggested awhile back, any argument against this idea or one similar to it brought by BCS schools would only be self-serving. It certainly wouldn't be about the best possible competition. Bottom line is what are nonBCS schools waiting for? And if the NCAA's purpose is to serve the best interests of all members, how could it refuse the suggested request by nonBCS schools? A free market bowl system is one thing, but lopsided and unaccountable rules that predetermine values under the free market is quite another. I'm beginning to think that nonBCS fans should be just as upset with their own schools as they are with the BCS.