Last season, I made a post about why an Ohio State-Michigan rematch would be a travesty, sham, and a mockery - a travishamockery. Guess what it's time for:
This season, an Ohio State-West Virginia matchup of two one-loss teams with cupcake schedules would destroy the legitimacy of the 2007-08 BCS Championship Game.The 2007 season has been crazy. I'll state off the bat that my opinion, based on how the teams have played this season, is that three of the top four teams have been eliminated due to an injury-related loss. USC lost to Stanford with 8 or 9 starters and about a dozen total players missing. Oregon was ranked #2 and cruising before losing Heisman candidate Dennis Dixon for the season, causing the Ducks to drop two straight games with perhaps no relief in sight. Oklahoma lost the nation's #1 starting QB in passing efficiency, Sam Bradford, to drop a game to Texas Tech. Injuries always have some effect every year (ever wonder if 05 Alabama could have won the SEC with Prothro healthy all season? Or for that matter had Mack Brown not been dropped on the head as a kid, 01 Texas could have appeared in the Championship game with Applewhite.), but I've never seen it knock out three national title contenders.
That leaves Missouri - by far the least sexy of the four. Probably not as good as Oklahoma, as evidenced in their loss earlier this season, and I'm not sure how they'd stack up against a healthy USC or Oregon. But thanks to Bradford's one-game injury, the Big 12 Championship game won't be a battle of #1 vs #2 for a spot in the BCS title game. It'll be #1 vs #9 to see if a B12CG result can create chaos at the top of the BCS standings for the 4th time in 10 seasons. As usual, both the BCS championship matchup and at-large situation would be muddied by an upset in this game.
Ohio State needs Missouri or West Virginia to lose. West Virginia doesn't need anything to make it to the title game. But on another level, both of those teams and the BCS system need Missouri to win against Oklahoma. The Tigers are the team who would bring legitimacy to the championship game.
If we're really lucky, like in 2002 or 2005, we'll get a pair of teams each with a big win or two under their belt and zero losses. Most seasons that's not the case, but hopefully any team who comes to the title game with a loss on their record has some big time wins to make up for it.
In an absolute worst case acceptable scenario, only one of the two teams has had to post impressive wins to get to the title game. Even this, however, makes the eventual champion legit... because it's somewhat assumed that the winner of the title game should have been able to defeat all of the teams who the loser beat during the regular season. It's at least logical on the surface, as you wouldn't assume that one of the top two teams winning a game was a fluke upset.
So what has being BCS Champion meant accomplishing in the past?
My data source is the BCS Standings Archive on FOX Sports. From 1998-2002, only the top 15 (or so) teams are listed in the BCS rankings, so I have done all analysis counting teams in the top 15 only. In some cases I do mention where teams in the 16-25 range fell if that's available, but it's not included in the combined resumes. Perhaps this is better anyway, as the top 15 is a more elite group while I often find myself just throwing some teams into the bottom of my top 25 for the sake of having a full 25 teams on that list. (see this week's #25)
In 1998, both Tennessee and Florida State had defeated a Florida team that finished #8 in the BCS standings. FSU had a second impressive win over #14 Georgia Tech with their loss coming to unranked NC State.
Florida State was one of six one-loss teams vying for that final spot in the first ever BCS Championship. They lost early while Kansas State and UCLA lost late, Arizona didn't beat anybody with more than 8 wins, and Ohio State's and Wisconsin's SOS were both hurt by not playing against each other and finishing tied for 1st in the Big Ten.
Both teams had beaten a top 10 opponent and in the end the winner was unbeaten, which is why this season wasn't as controversial as it could have been.
The two participants had a combined resume of:Key Wins:
* #8 Florida
* #8 Florida
* #14 Georgia Tech
Losses:
* NC State
In 1999, Florida State had defeated a Florida team that finished #10 in the BCS standings. Nobody on Va Tech's schedule finished in the BCS top 15.
In his pre-dog killing days, I was a big fan of Michael Vick. Loved to watch the electrifying QB play. But I've heard it retrospectively argued that Nebraska would have been a better team to face Florida State. This argument was made by Phil Steele, so basically it's not an argument so much as a statement of fact. Those Huskers were battle-tested, dealing BCS #6 Kansas State their only loss, annihilating #14 Texas A&M, and splitting a pair of games with #15 Texas.
Indeed, the untested Hokies buckled under the pressure of their first big game. Their first drive stalled out on a 4th and goal play where Vick and his RB ran the option in opposite directions (ouch). They still lead going into the 4th quarter before a mutliple turnover meltdown that wound up as a comfortable 17 point win for FSU.
Nonetheless, as FSU was unbeaten and with a win over a top 10 team going into the Sugar Bowl, their legitimacy wasn't to be questioned. I will however note that 1999 featured the least impressive combined wins for the title game participants.
The two participants had a combined resume of:
Key Wins:
* #10 Florida
Losses:
* none
In 2000, Oklahoma defeated BCS #8 Nebraska, #9 Kansas State twice, and #12 Texas. Florida State defeated BCS #7 Florida, #13 Georgia Tech and #15 Clemson with their loss coming to BCS #3 Miami.
There was an uproar that Miami, who was #2 in both polls but #3 in the BCS standings, should have gone voer FSU. The Hurricanes boasted wins over Florida State (BCS #2) and Virginia Tech (BCS #5) while losing to Washington (BCS #4). Nonetheless, the victory over FSU gave Oklahoma a 4-0 record against the BCS top 10, making them indisputable champions.
The two participants had a combined resume of:
Key Wins:
* #7 Florida
* #8 Nebraska
* #9 Kansas State
* #9 Kansas State
* #12 Texas
* #13 Georgia Tech
* #15 Clemson
Losses:
* #3 Miami
In 2001, Miami defeated BCS #15 Washington. Nebraska defeated #11 Oklahoma with their loss coming to #3 Colorado.
This was another controversial season as many feel that Oregon should have faced Miami. Oregon sported a win over BCS #12 Washington State and a loss to BCS #9 Stanford.
However, Miami and Nebraska had both defeated a BCS top 15 opponent and when Miami won the Rose Bowl, they were left as the nation's only unbeaten.
The two participants had a combined resume of:
Key Wins:
* #11 Oklahoma
* #15 Washington
Losses:
* #3 Colorado
In 2002, Miami defeated #14 Florida State. Ohio State defeated #6 Washington State, #11 Michigan, and #12 Penn State.
Once again Miami entered the BCS Championship only having beaten one team in the top 15, but with a perfect record. Ohio State's record was also perfect and they defeated 3 top 15 teams to get there. The winner was guaranteed legitimacy from this impressive combined resume.
The two participants had a combined resume of:
Key Wins:
* #6 Washington State
* #11 Michigan
* #12 Penn State
* #14 Florida State
Losses:
* none
In 2003, LSU defeated #12 Georgia twice while losing to #15 Florida. Oklahoma defeated #6 Texas while losing to #10 Kansas State.
USC was ranked #1 in both polls but could not boast a similar resume (best victory over #16 Washington State, loss to unranked Cal) until after they had beaten Michigan in the Rose Bowl. Though the matchup was questioned, nobody could doubt that LSU had earned their share of the title.
The two participants had a combined resume of:
Key Wins:
* #6 Texas
* #12 Georgia
* #12 Georgia
Losses:
* #10 Kansas State
* #15 Florida
In 2004, USC defeated #5 California and #8 Virginia Tech. Oklahoma defeated #4 Texas.
Oklahoma's inclusion was questioned in light of Auburn's superior resume (victories over #7 Georgia, #11 LSU, and twice over #15 Tennessee). What could not be questioned was the fact that USC went 3-0 against BCS top 10 opposition and had earned the title.
The two participants had a combined resume of:
Key Wins:
* #4 Texas
* #5 California
* #8 Virginia Tech
Losses:
* none
In 2005, Texas defeated #4 Ohio State and #15 Texas Tech. USC defeated #5 Oregon and #6 Notre Dame.
Unbeaten and combining for victories over the #4-6 teams, there was no question who the top two teams in the country were.
The two participants had a combined resume of:
Key Wins:
* #4 Ohio State
* #5 Oregon
* #6 Notre Dame
* #15 Texas Tech
Losses:
* none
In 2006, Florida defeated #4 LSU and #12 Arkansas and lost to #9 Auburn. Ohio State defeated #3 Michigan.
An all-Big Ten rematch was narrowly averted when voters swapped Florida and Michigan in the final week. The decision added breadth to the combined resume of the championship game participants, and in the end the bowl results made Florida's championship resume conclusive.
The two participants had a combined resume of:
Key Wins:
* #3 Michigan
* #4 LSU
* #12 Arkansas
Losses:
* #9 Auburn
This season, Missouri has defeated #5 Kansas and #15 Illinois while losing to #9 Oklahoma.
West Virginia hasn't played anybody in the BCS top 15 (or top 20), losing to #21 South Florida with their most impressive win coming over BCS #23 Cincinnati. Ohio State hasn't defeated anybody in the top 15 and they lost to #15 Illinois, with their most impressive victory coming over #18 Wisconsin.
A Missouri-West Virginia title game would feature two teams who have combined to defeat:
* #5 Kansas
* #9 Oklahoma (more like #11 after a loss)
* #15 Illinois (maybe moving up)
With losses to:
* #9 Oklahoma (more like #11 after a loss)
* South Florida
If Missouri wins, they would obviously have a great list of victories.
If West Virginia wins, it would have been against a team who had done a lot to get into the NC game.
A Missouri-Ohio State title game would feature two teams who have combined to defeat:
* #5 Kansas
* #9 Oklahoma (more like #11 after a loss)
* #15 Illinois (maybe moving up)
with losses to:
* #9 Oklahoma (more like #11 after a loss)
* #15 Illinois (maybe moving up)
If Missouri wins, they would obviously have a great list of victories.
If Ohio State wins, it would have been against a team who had done a lot to get into the NC game.
A West Virginia-Ohio State title game would feature two teams who have combined to defeat:
* um, yeah
with losses to:
* #15 Illinois (maybe moving up)
* South Florida
If Ohio State wins, it would be against an opponent whose 0-1 record against the BCS top 15 (0-2 against anyone higher than #23) probably means they didn't belong there, and still leaves Ohio State with a weak resume.
If West Virginia wins, it would be against an opponent whose 0-2 record against the BCS top 15 probably means they didn't belong there, and still leaves West Virginia with a weak resume.
Missouri's schedule alone makes either matchup look about on par for combined resume, and if WVU/OSU were to defeat Missouri, they're essentially getting credit for beating a team who did all that. With WVU vs OSU, you've got two teams who will bring zero quality wins into the title game, meaning they could be the best two teams in the nation or two teams just inside the top ten for all we know.
The closest game to this one in terms of small # of combined quality wins would be FSU vs Virginia Tech in 1999, with just one total between the two teams. But they were also both undefeated; OSU and WVU have each lost a game.
Without a doubt this would be the weakest of the ten BCS title game pairings. Which is why, for the sake of the championship game, Mizzou must win to face WVU or OSU.
