13-0 Utah + Barack Obama = playoffs???

Earlier this year, President-elect Barack Obama stepped into the college football controversy known as the BCS, when he publicly called for the college football championship system to include playoffs.  A mere 11 days after being elected as the most powerful man in the world, Obama made the call that millions of football fans are begging for.

“If you’ve got a bunch of teams who play throughout the season, and many of them have one loss or two losses, there’s no clear decisive winner. We should be creating a playoff system.”

I don’t know any serious fan of college football who has disagreed with me on this. So, I’m going to throw my weight around a little bit. I think it’s the right thing to do.

I think it’s about time we had playoffs in college football. I’m fed up with these computer rankings and this that and the other. Get eight teams — the top eight teams right at the end. You got a playoff. Decide on a national champion.”

Once sworn into office, Obama could sway the BCS to abandon the current system in favor of a more accurate determination of a champion.  If any one man can do it, it would have to be the President of the United States.

But add to that the fact that Utah has just completed its’ second unbeaten season in four years, and you have more reason to change the system.  Utah’s biggest detraction was a softer schedule and the fact that very few people outside of the Mormon state got to see them play football.  Personally, the only time I saw them play was when they nearly lost to Michigan in the final seconds…..and after the season UM had, I would never have wanted a national championship shot given to a team that barely beat the Wolverines.

But looking back, you can see a better strength of schedule for the Utes, including wins against Oregon State, #12 TCU, and a blowout of then-#14 BYU.  Now counter in the destruction of #4 Alabama, and you’ve got a worthy team.

Also, don’t forget that Utah beat Alabama by MORE than Florida did, and the Gators ARE playing for the national championship.

Did unbeaten Boise State deserve a shot?  Hell, no.  But we didn’t find that out until the bowls.  So give 8-12 teams a chance and let’s find out who deserves it and who doesn’t.

So let’s see some action on this Mr. President.  It’ll be for the good of the sport, and for the good of the country.

Plus, when you get that playoff system in place, think of the landslide re-election you’ll have when the solidly-Republican state of Utah gives you their vote for President in 2012.

Story By The Buckeye Battle Cry

Texas’ Brown in top form as countdown begins

Posted by ESPN.com’s Adam Rittenberg

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. — Mack Brown still gets nervous, even if he doesn’t show it. 

When Brown met the media this morning, the Texas head coach recalled a conversation he had with coaching legend Darrell K. Royal about managing anxiety before games. 

	Joe Robbins/Getty Images
	Mack Brown doesn’t see a playoff system coming to college football anytime soon.

“I asked coach Royal once, ‘Did you have trouble sleeping the night before a big game?’” Brown said. “And at Texas they are all big. If you lose one, it gets real big. He said that unless you gag before you brush your teeth on Saturday morning, you are not ready to play.

“I gagged this morning. So I think I’m fine.”

Brown will coach in a BCS bowl for the first time since guiding Texas to the national championship when his team takes the field Monday against No. 10 Ohio State in the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl (Fox, 8 p.m. ET). Despite his nerves in front of the bathroom sink, Brown showed none in front of reporters as he discussed Texas’ final preparations for the game. 

Here are some highlights:

• Brown doesn’t see a playoff system coming to college football, but he acknowledged that the impressive wins by USC and Utah strengthen the argument for one. A Texas blowout of Ohio State certainly would add to the playoff push, which Brown certainly advocates. With many coaches supporting a playoff, Brown encouraged media members to continue the fight. And while he covets a playoff, Brown doesn’t want the bowl system to suffer.

“I played at Vanderbilt for two years, and when I saw Vanderbilt kick a last-second field goal to win their first Bowl game since 1955, there will be no team or coaching staff any happier than that Vanderbilt staff was,” Brown said. “We do not need to take that away from college football. It is an exciting time. I see 7-5 teams throwing Gatorade on their coach. At Texas, if we were 7-5, they’d be throwing something on me but it wouldn’t be Gatorade.”

• The Big 12 has been average at best during the bowl season, with Texas Tech and Oklahoma State losing, and a heavily favored Missouri team struggling mightily against Northwestern. But Brown thinks a conference and its teams shouldn’t be evaluated solely on one game, especially a game that might bring lukewarm enthusiasm. 

“We’ve had some teams that weren’t as excited about their game because they didn’t get the draw they wanted and they got disappointed at the end of the year,” Brown said. “That’s the biggest thing in the bowl games: Who has the edge? Who is motivated? Who wants to be there? … If you look at the games and see who wants to be there and who is motivated because none of us have played for a month, I think that usually tells you the story more than anything else.”

• Brown recounted the process of telling his players that they didn’t reach the Big 12 championship game and likely wouldn’t be heading to the national championship in Miami. His first directive was to refrain from commenting publicly about the snub and instead let him do the talking. Rather than allowing the players to learn their fate on TV, Brown and his staff sent text messages minutes before the announcement and then scheduled a team meeting several hours later. In the meeting, Brown explained why Texas was left out (the computer rankings weigh road wins more than neutral-site ones), reiterated that the system is flawed and told players not to start throwing a pity party.

“Some people like it,” Brown said. “It is better than what we had 10 years ago. But in this case, it didn’t work out for you. But one year it didn’t work out for [USC]. One year it didn’t work out for Auburn. In 2004 it worked out for you when you went to the Rose Bowl to play Michigan. Don’t say ‘Oh, poor me’ and don’t say the system was poor to you just this time. It has been poor to a lot of people. This year it was good to Oklahoma instead of us.”

• Texas has tried to strike a balance between fun and serious preparation this week in Arizona. Players were given an 11 p.m. curfew most nights, and Texas hasn’t had any disciplinary infractions. Director of player development Ken Rucker gave the players an added incentive not to mess up.

“[Rucker] said if he smelled any alcohol on them, he would kiss them,” Brown said. “That took care of that. As far as I know, nobody has been kissed by coach Rucker before they went to bed. If you see coach Rucker, only [his wife] Nancy wants to kiss coach Rucker. It is not a group of guys.”

• Like Ohio State’s 28 seniors, Texas’ seniors have made a unique impact on the program and the coaches. Longhorns All-American defensive end Brian Orakpo said Thursday that the team might be closer than the 2005 squad that won a national title. They built that foundation as juniors before the 2007 Holiday Bowl, when they spoke up about helping the coaches maintain the right focus.

“A lot of people say this team will be great next year, and that’s not necessarily true because when you lose some ingredients, like Orakpo and his leadership and what he has meant to this program or Roy Miller,” Brown said. “My experience has been you don’t wave the wand and say we have a lot of good players coming back so it works again. For whatever reason it didn’t work as well for 2006 and [2007], and it’s has worked this year.”

• Brown on the prospect of Ohio State using quarterbacks Terrelle Pryor and Todd Boeckman on the field together: “We hope it works as well as ours. I think ours had five plays for minus-12 yards.”

Go to Source

BCS Vs. Playoffs (Plus a Proposal to End All Proposals, Maybe)

Note: This article will be submitted as a final project for a research paper in a class of mine, so it isn’t in typical B/R style. I debated on whether to rewrite it in a more familiar form for you readers, but decided to leave it as is. Thus, it has citations and a works cited. Also, it will be a little long, but I believe you will enjoy it. I look forward to hearing all of your feedback. 

 

 

BCS vs. Playoffs

            The subject of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) has been a hot topic among sports fans. Some are in favor of it, like BCS creator Roy Kramer (Carey) while others want a playoff system, like The Sporting News Columnist Steve Greenberg and ESPN columnist Bruce Feldman (Staff). However, one side definitely has the edge. If a person would want to see why a playoff is better for college football, look no farther than Penn State Head Coach Joe Paterno. During the 1968 and 1969 seasons his Nittany Lions went undefeated both years, but not only did he not win a national championship either of those years, he and his teams were not even given the chance to play for a national championship because the NCAA was not under a playoff system. Paterno is now an 81 year old man, having coached four undefeated teams without one single national championship on his resume (Wetzel, Wetzel’s playoff plan: I’ll drink to that). The NCAA needs to establish at least a 4 team playoff to start off and eventually arrive at a 16 team playoff because the current system, the BCS, does not fairly give deserving teams a chance at a national title. 

            The BCS is a system put in place in Division 1 college football that creates postseason matchups based on certain criteria, with one game designated as the national championship game. There are five total games in the BCS, with the final game played being the national championship game. They are the Rose Bowl, Orange Bowl, Fiesta Bowl, and the Sugar Bowl.  Those bowls and their respective site host the national championship game on a rotating basis, meaning one of those sites gets two BCS bowls each year. The champions of the six major conferences (Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-10, SEC, ACC, Big East) get automatic bids to a certain BCS game, with each conference having a tie-in to a certain bowl site. The remaining four spots go to at-large candidates that have to meet special criteria set by the NCAA conference commissioners and the Notre Dame athletic director. Notre Dame is a special case with the BCS because they do not belong to a conference, so they must have special rules applying to them to gain eligibility for the BCS. Those at large bids are not just limited to the six major conferences, smaller conference teams can go to a BCS game if they achieve a certain ranking in the BCS standings (The BCS is …).

The BCS was preceded by the Bowl Coalition, from 1992-1994, the Bowl Alliance, from 1995-1997, until the BCS started in 1998. Those previous systems introduced an actual national championship game, whereas in previous decades the national champion was mythical, meaning the team did not actually play a national championship game, they were just chosen as the national champion by polls. The previous Bowl systems prior to the BCS were created to alleviate growing pressure to have a national championship game (Fréchette, Roth and Unver).

            The BCS standings are a poll released after a week during the middle of the college football season, then every week after that until the final poll. The BCS formula uses extensive statistics, like win-loss record, margin of victory, home and away games, and many others, as well as factoring in the human polls, one being the coaches’ poll, and the Harris Interactive Poll, which is the poll that college football writers and other experts across the sport get a vote in. These three parts, the computer rankings, coaches’ poll, and Harris poll, get 1/3 of the overall importance to the BCS standings. The top two teams in the final poll go to the BCS National Championship game (BCS Selection Procedures).

The pros and cons of each system are numerous. BCS proponents say that their system creates a playoff during the regular season because every game counts, just like a playoff, while their system also uses the bowl games, which have a storied history behind them. Playoff supporters say that head to head competition is the best way to decide the best team. Also, they point to how well a playoff works in Div. I-AA, II and III (Alder).

            Arguments against the BCS include that a national champion has a very real possibility of being named by personal opinion and biases and that the BCS also allows for a team to have one bad game during the regular season and thus cost them any chance at the national championship later, in a society where we are entrenched with the idea of giving second chances. The playoff detractors point to the diminishing importance of the regular season and the extension of an already long season. They also say that academics would be harmed (Alder).

This topic is important for many reasons. One main reason is the time put into college football by its fans. In the grand scheme of things, football is not important. However, for many, football is one of their major hobbies outside of the minutiae of life. People put hope into football teams. When people place such importance into these games, college football has a responsibility to establish a good product. Another big reason is the money involved with the college football postseason. Each team, or school, in the Rose, Orange, and Fiesta Bowls will get roughly 17.5 million dollars for the upcoming January Bowls while each conference represented in the Sugar Bowl will get 17.5 million dollars. Each national championship school, win or lose, gets 17.5 million dollars as well (BCS Bowl Facts). This brings us to a major reason why the BCS system is supported by a few, but powerful, people.

            The main supporters for the system are the major conference commissioners and athletic directors because they are benefiting from those huge sums of money. These detractors of a playoff point to the tremendous amounts of revenue football teams take in. For instance, in 2005, Alabama’s basketball program took in 1.8 million dollars in broadcast rights from the postseason while the football program took in 5.4 million dollars from their postseason (Walsh). In April of 2008 BCS conference commissioners met and discussed the current system and possible tweaks they wanted to make, as well as looking at a possible playoff system championed by many around the sport. Coming out of that meeting, Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe said that his league’s boards of directors were strongly against any type of playoff system. SEC commissioner Mike Slive proposed a plus one model –a system between the BCS and a playoff- and according to sources at the meeting, no commissioner met his ideas with any kind of enthusiasm (Schlabach). The BCS rules state that these men have the power to deal with the college football postseason (BCS Selection Procedures). These men have the power to change things.

As noted before, a major reason many are against a playoff is the money involved. Another main one is that people like the BCS and believe its working. Former Notre Dame athletic director Kevin White said, after the commissioner meeting mentioned before, that “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” (Schlabach). Still, that does not justify looking at other alternatives. If you can make something better, why would you not try?

Let’s look at a case where a playoff would have been nice to have in place. In 2004, three major conference teams were undefeated after the regular season ended. They were Southern California, Oklahoma, and Auburn. All three won their conferences. As you can see, a controversy was bound to come into play. Eventually, Oklahoma and Southern Cal were chosen to play because they had started the season off with high expectations, and in turn a high preseason poll ranking, while Auburn was not expected to be as good as they were. Thus, they could not move past either team in the BCS rankings, no matter how well they played. So it broke down to this: the expectations people had of them four months ago, when they had not yet played a single game, doomed them. They eventually went to the Sugar Bowl and won, while Southern Cal beat Oklahoma in the title game, 55-19 (Walsh). What does it say when a team cannot do anything at all themselves to create a real chance at a national title? This shows the only fair way to crown a team as the champion is to prove it on the field, not through computer statistics and early season predictions.

Dan Wetzel of Yahoo Sports released an article where he unveiled “The Wetzel Plan” that would be a great college football playoff system. He calls for a 16 team playoff because if a college football playoff mirrors the way college basketball does their tournament, which is highly successful, it would create the best experience. To do this, all 11 conference champions would be included. This involvement of all of the champions would help to lessen one of the issues people have with a proposed playoff system, that is, that the regular season would be diminished. BCS proponents believe that the way the system is now, the regular system is hugely important, which is true. They then say that when you add a playoff, you will give teams the option of taking games off at the end of the season when they have a playoff position clinched and then they can rest their players. However, if you include all the champions, it gives top teams an incentive to win their games because if they can achieve a better overall seed, they can start off by playing a weaker team. Putting all the conference champions in also gives them a chance to prove themselves on a national stage, which they otherwise would not get. Another thing this would bring, he adds, is true Cinderella teams, like in the basketball tournament. When those teams win, everyone watches and pays attention. People like seeing underdog teams have success, and the ratings and revenue this could bring would be gigantic.

A logical idea would be to start off with a four team or eight team playoff because it would be a step in the right direction of a 16 team playoff. The step from the BCS to a 16 team playoff is such a large one that would need to include much change to make happen. For instance, proposing a four team or eight team playoff to the conference commissioners would most likely be met with greater acceptance because this smaller playoff system is much closer to what the BCS is. Proposing a smaller system to start off also would allow for unforeseen issues that could cause unnecessary damage to be avoided, so having a middle step or two would be acceptable and smart in the long run. This idea would also allow for the people involved to figure out the scheduling for a playoff much easier, as you would need less time to start off.

The problem that people will have with this playoff proposal is that it will cause huge issues with final exams in December. If you break the bracket down, you would need four weeks (16 to 8, 8 to 4, 4 to 2, 2 to 1) to have this playoff. Right now, there is about a month break between the last regular season or conference championship games and early January BCS games (Saturday, Dec. 6 was conference championship day; the first BCS game is Jan. 1). There are some issues with cramming the playoffs in here, but it can be done. You could eliminate the conference championship games, and set each team’s schedule at 12 games, or even start the season earlier. Under the current system, some teams without a conference championship game ended their season a few weeks ago, meaning they might have as many as 50 days between games. That is more of an issue than trying to fit in finals. How in sync is a team when they have not played a game for weeks? College basketball makes finals work late in December, and they play multiple games a week. Football teams play one game a week. Athletics and academics have worked together for years. How can they not find a solution now?

There is a common ground for BCS proponents and playoff proponents in that both are trying to establish a credible postseason system that appeals to the masses, and also to serve the student athletes. The difference lies in the two sides’ execution of these ideals. The BCS side has taken these goals and decided their system is best because it allows for exciting, ratings filled games while allowing student athletes to have ample time for academics. The many playoff proposals have factored these situations into their plans as well. It’s hard to imagine a football playoff not being a ratings success when we have seen how well the basketball games do in attendance and on television while the numerous other colleges around America that have football teams in playoffs make school work as well. That’s where the administrators need to begin. They should look at where a playoff has worked and what a successful playoff has done to accommodate the potential issues associated.

Right now, college football is not in crisis. The BCS games will get huge ratings, and most people will be satisfied with what they watch early in January. There is evidence out there, however, that says the experience could be much better. The NCAA needs to establish at least a 4 team playoff to start off and eventually arrive at a 16 team playoff because the current system, the BCS, does not fairly give deserving teams a chance at a national title. 

Works Cited

Alder, James. “BCS vs. Playoff System.” About. 13 November 2008 <http://football.about.com/od/bowlchampionship/i/bcsvsplayoffs.htm>.

 

“BCS Bowl Facts.” Fox Sports on MSN. 3 December 2008 <http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfb/facts>.

 

“BCS Selection Procedures.” Fox Sports on MSN. 29 October 2008 <http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfb/eligibility>.

 

Carey, Jack. “Man behind creation of BCS pleased with results.” 8 December 2007. USA Today. 29 October 2008 <http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/bowls/2007-12-06-bcs2-football_N.htm?csp=34>.

 

Drehs, Wayne. “BCS figures new formula makes for a better title game.” 12 July 2001. ESPN. 29 October 2008 <http://espn.go.com/ncf/s/2001/0712/1225482.html>.

 

Fréchette, Guillaume R., Alvin E. Roth and M. Utku Unver. “Unraveling Yields Inefficient Matchings: Evidence from Post-Season College Football Bowls.” Rand Journal of Economics (2004): 1-29.

 

Guidry, Phil. “Mythbusters: Minus the “playing”.” 6 November 2008. Sports Illustrated. 10 November 2008 <http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/sioncampus/11/06/mythbusters/?eref=T1>.

Schlabach, Mark. “Current BCS system a hit with most conference commissioners.” 30 April 2008. ESPN. 3 December 2008 <http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=schlabach_mark&id=3375723>.

 

Staff. “Experts Discussion … BCS vs. a Playoff.” 10 July 2008. College Football News. 13 November 2008 <http://www.cfn.scout.com/2/768444.html>.

 

“The BCS is …” Fox Sports on MSN. 1 December 2008 <http://www.bcsfootball.org/bcsfb/definition>.

 

Walsh, Christopher J. Who’s #1?: 100 Years of Controversial National Champions in College Football. New York: Taylor Trade Publishing, 2007.

 

Wetzel, Dan. “Big Lie: Big Ten.” 27 November 2008. Rivals.com from Y! Sports. 6 December 2008 <http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-playoff112707&prov=yhoo&type=lgns>.

 

—. “Wetzel’s playoff plan: I’ll drink to that.” 28 October 2008. Rivals.com on Y! Sports. 28 October 2008 <http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-bcs102808&prov=yhoo&type=lgns>.

 

Go to Source

Major Bowl Projections: Round Two

 

BCS Bowls

BCS National Championship: Florida vs. Oklahoma

I was happy today when I found out that Oklahoma came out ahead of Texas in the BCS standings. To me, Oklahoma is the best team in the country. While their defense is mediocre, their offense is one of the best in history and picks up the slack. Nine times out of ten they would have beaten Texas this year. The Longhorns do have an argument, but I feel the computers got it right.

Florida is also a great team. Tebow has really stepped it up a notch during the second half of the season and the Gators should easily defeat Alabama in the SEC title game. Percy Harvin, Tebow, and the defense should have big days.

Fiesta Bowl: Ohio State vs. Texas

Sorry Longhorns. Texas may think that they got hurt by the computer rankings, and they may have a point, but in reality, Oklahoma was the right choice. Texas’s win over the Sooners was a fluke, and not to upset Longhorn nation or anything, but nine times out of ten, they would have lost.

Ohio State on the other hand looks to be headed to a BCS Bowl game after Oregon’s drubbing of Oregon State in the “Civil War.” The Buckeyes have turned their season around after two early losses to USC and Penn State. Look for Terrell Pryor and OSU to give Texas a run for their money and maybe pull out a win.

Sugar Bowl: Alabama vs. Utah

Like my first two projections, this game hasn’t changed much either. I don’t think Alabama will be able to match up with Florida in the SEC title game. The Gators are too good and should dominate a less talented ‘Bama team.

Utah should be the lone team from a non-BCS conference to reach a BCS Bowl. They certainly have earned it over top 15 non-BCS counterpart Boise State after beating ranked teams such as BYU and TCU. Although I have a feeling that the Utes will lose, it should be a much closer game that Georgia’s drubbing of Hawaii last year.

Rose Bowl: Penn State vs. USC

As I projected last time, Oregon beat Oregon State last week, opening up the Rose Bowl spot for USC. All the Trojans have to do is beat 4-7 UCLA next weekend, and they will be smelling roses.

Penn State has been locked in this spot since last week after winning the Big Ten conference title.

Orange Bowl: Boston College vs. Cincinnati

This is my first change in projection thus far. Cincinnati has been locked here after winning the Big East title, allowing them to reach their first BCS bowl in school history.

After winning last weekend, Boston College just needs to beat Virginia Tech, who didn’t look at all convincing last weekend against Virginia, to secure an Orange Bowl spot.

Other January Bowls

Cotton Bowl: Texas Tech vs. Ole Miss

Although Red Raider fans may be disappointed when they look back and think what could have been, they should be happy with the outcome of going to a January bowl.

 

 

At 8-4, Ole Miss should be taken over LSU and South Carolina to go to the Cotton Bowl. This should be an intriguing match-up. While many expect Texas Tech to win in a blowout, I would watch out for the Rebels. They are hot, while Texas Tech is cold.

Capital One Bowl: Iowa vs. Georgia

Like I said last time, I think Iowa will be taken over Michigan State. Iowa is hot and Michigan State is cold. Also, Iowa has a marquee win, a star player, and its fans travel better. Plus, they have been to the Capital One Bowl before and last time, they gave the bowl a great finish with a hail mary as time expired to beat LSU 30-25. Capital One Bowl reps have said that if teams are close, they look to momentum and traveling fan base, and Iowa has both of those.

Georgia has had a decent year, and while their recent loss to Georgia Tech has to hurt, it won’t hurt their bowl position. I don’t see any circumstances in which the Capital One Bowl would take Ole Miss over Georgia.

Gator Bowl: Missouri vs. Florida State

Although Missouri did lose to Kansas and will probably lose to Oklahoma in the BCS title game, they will still make the Gator Bowl. For some reason or another, SI and ESPN both think that Nebraska will be taken over the Tigers, but I don’t see that happening.

With their loss to Florida, Florida State will likely be third in the ACC bowl pecking order, behind Georgia Tech. While FSU has a much better fan base, both the Chick-fil-A and Gator Bowls are so close to both teams, I don’t see that being a factor.

Outback Bowl: Michigan State vs. LSU

Once again, Michigan State fans will be mad at me for placing them behind Iowa, but I sincerely think that will happen. They don’t have momentum or that good of a traveling fan base. They will certainly be taken over Northwestern though, who can’t even fill up their own stadium.

The Outback Bowl will either select South Carolina or LSU, two 7-5 teams who struggled down the stretch. Just because of their better fan base, I think that LSU will be selected, but neither team has enough momentum or is good enough to compete well with Michigan State or Iowa.

Major December Bowls

Chick-fil-A Bowl: Georgia Tech vs. LSU

Holiday Bowl: Oregon vs. Oklahoma State

Sun Bowl: Oregon State vs. West Virginia

 

Go to Source

"The Man" Angered By Obama: College Football and Sylvester Croom Pay The Price

Go to Source

Buckeyes Fall In BCS Standings After Loss

NEW YORK – Penn State surged in the Bowl Championship Series standings after its big win at Ohio State, closing the gap on first-place Texas and second-place Alabama on Sunday.

In the second weekly Bowl Championship Series rankings, Ohio State fell from ninth to 12th. Further calling into question the computers used in the BCS, the two-loss Buckeyes are tied for 10th in the computer rankings – with Florida (6-1) and unbeaten Texas Tech (8-0).

Still, the Nittany Lions are in danger of being unbeaten and left out of the BCS national championship game.

The Longhorns were again first by far in all the polls and on top of all the computer rankings. Staying undefeated won’t be easy for Texas, which plays at Texas Tech on Saturday, but if Colt McCoy and crew can, a trip to Miami for the Jan. 8 title game will be theirs.

The top two teams in the final BCS standings play for the national title.

Texas‘ .9981 BCS average is the third highest since the current formula, which counts the USA Today coaches’ poll and Harris poll for two-thirds of the grade and a compilation of six computers for the other third, was put in place in 2004.

The Crimson Tide (.9499) were a solid second in the polls, and second in all but one of the computer ratings.

Penn State’s 13-6 victory over Ohio State helped in the computer rankings and pushed its average to .9257. The problem for the Nittany Lions is the perceived weakness of the Big Ten in comparison to the Southeastern Conference and the Big 12.

After a week off, Penn State plays at Iowa (5-3) and finishes the season with home games against Indiana (3-5) and Michigan State (7-2).

It’s unlikely those opponents will help lift Penn State into one of the top two spots if the Crimson Tide win the SEC and Longhorns win the Big 12.

The rest of the top five remained the same, with Oklahoma (.8270) fourth and Southern California (.7822) fifth.

Georgia (.7703) is sixth, Texas Tech (.7431) is seventh and Florida (.7295) is eighth. All could make big jumps next week – or take substantial falls.

The Red Raiders get Texas in Lubbock, the second of four games against currently ranked teams.

The Bulldogs and Gators meet in Jacksonville, Fla., with the winner getting the inside track to the play in the SEC title game with national championship hopes.

Tenth-place Utah and 11th-place Boise State are both in position to earn an automatic BCS bid, but only one is reserved for teams from the non-BCS leagues that finish in the top 12 of the BCS standings.

Utah’s Mountain West Conference rival, TCU (8-1), is in 13th place, and with some help could become the first team from an conference without an automatic bid to reach the BCS without a perfect record.

The other potential BCS busters are Ball State in 16th place and Tulsa in 18th.

Go to Source