New BCS standings are right here

If Rutgers beats WVa to win the Big East, Louisville probably gets an at-large BCS bid.
If WVa wins, Louisville gets the Big East BCS bid and neither RU nor WVa gets an at-large.

 

If Rutgers gets that win, ND oughta be out. LSU has lost its collective games by a far smaller margin than ND.

 

LSU currently is No. 5 and ND is 10th...I'd say LSU gets an at-large ahead of ND

 

Wisconsin's already accepted another bowl bid.

 

to the Cap One Bowl...why only two bids per conference?

 

"What's in your bowl game?"

 

I posted this on the other thread, which was deleted, so I'll post it here.

Southern Cal lost to a decent Oregon State (8-4, No. 24 BCS) team.
A Beavers team that got pole-axed by Boise State 42-14.

Considering the loser of the SEC title game (LSU-Fla.) gets dropped, Boise State will be unbeaten and ranked No. 7 in the BCS.
Yea, they play in a "weaker" conference and their strength of schedule sucks.

But who's to say they couldn't play with OSU?
Because OSU-Boise isn't as big an commercial sell as OSU-USC and upsets never happen in sports.
As long as greed, er, bowls run Division I football, it's always going to be a joke.

[Of course, we can't have Michigan-OSU II for the national championship because "that wouldn't be fair" but watch the Rose lock up Michigan-ND II in a heartbeat. Because, you know, everybody is crying out for that rematch.]

 

Assuming Southern Cal beats UCLA, at large bids will go to be Boise State, Michigan, second SEC team (LSU or two-loss Florida) and Notre Dame over Big East also-ran or third team from SEC/Big Ten.

 

Fault them for their non-conference schedule, sure.
But you can't blame them for their conference sked. Sure, it's not the Pac10. And maybe they don't go undefeated in the Pac10. But if you start making the argument that only schools from the Pac10, ACC, Big10, Big12, SEC and Notre Dame can play for the national championship -- and maybe a Lousville or WVU, because let's be honest, an unbeaten Rutgers has as good a shot to play in the title game as Boise State -- why is anybody else even involved in the BCS? Especially considering the BCS's sole stated purpose is to create a national title game, everything after that is up to the bowls and their tie-ins.

I'm not as big a proponent for Boise State-Ohio State as I am for a playoff.
In an eight- or 16-team format, at least they have the opportunity to knock a couple people off, maybe make it into the semifinals. The "chance" to play for a national title, which will never come under the current system, can be a great recruiting tool. Who knows, maybe 5-10 years into a playoff, we see a "george mason-esque" run where a WAC-type team pulls off a couple upsets and finds up in the title game. Harder to do in football than basketball, sure, but still plausible. If it weren't, we'd have just given USC a win against Oregon State to start the year -- because, after all, why play the game, we all know Oregon State can't hang with USC.

But greed always overrules logic.
And so we get to watch a 6-6 Florida State team in the Emerald Bowl while waiting a month for a "BCS title game."