The BCS Gets It Right
December 4, 2005 – 11:26 pmRegardless what was said during years past, the BCS got it right this time around. The number one Southern California Trojans and the number two Texas Longhorns will be playing on January 4, 2006, in the Rose Bowl for the national championship. I could not want it any other way.
Both teams have perfect records (12-0). Both teams won big this past weekend, with my Longhorns pulverizing a hapless Colorado team 70-3, and the Trojans beating UCLA 66-19. These two teams have been number one and number two in the country since the preseason. This matchup has been anticipated by some for even longer.
The question now is, how good is the game actually going to be? Last year’s Rose Bowl was an all-time classic, as my Longhorns snuck out a 38-37 come-from-behind victory over the Michigan Wolverines. Last year’s national championship game, however, was a laugher, with USC steam rolling the Oklahoma Sooners 55-19. Stewart Mandel over at Sports Illustrated has already given three reasons why the national championship game could be the same as, or why it could be different than, last year’s game. I think it will be different.
Now we have a month to dissect the matchup and come up with guesses about who is going to win. My initial guess? My gut instinct is that Texas will win a close, high-scoring game, something on the order of 41-37. I think USC’s offense is slightly better than ours, but I think our defense is more than slightly better than theirs. That’s the difference.
USC is going to struggle, at least a little bit, with a mobile quarterback. We’re going to struggle, at least a little bit, with the thunder-and-lightning tandem of LenDale White and Reggie Bush. It should be a good one, as long as both teams show up, unlike Oklahoma last year. I will definitely write more as the game nears.
2 Responses to “The BCS Gets It Right”
“I could not want it any other way.”
I dunno. I’d imagine that you’d want the ‘Horns going in as #1.
I’m looking at USC’s schedule from this year (my opinion of the team is in parenthesis):
Hawaii (bad)
Arkansas (bad-okay)
Oregon (okay)
Arizona State (okay)
Arizona (bad)
Notre Dame (good) (also their closest game, and lowest scoring)
Washington (bad)
Washington State (bad)
Stanford (bad)
California (bad)
Fresno St. (bad-okay)
UCLA (okay)
Looking at their scores, at first glance it looks like USC steamrolled most everyone. However, the scores against ranked opponents are a bit closer than against the unranked opponents. And none of the ranked opponents that they played were truly powerful teams (Notre Dame is the closest one and they only won that game by 3 points: 34-31.
In contrast, Texas’ closest game was against Ohio St. (#4 and a powerful team) where Texas won 25-22. Texas also beat Colorado *twice*. The win margin of the second game was more than 2.5 times the win margin of the first, indicating a stronger team (or a weaker Colorado showing).
While Texas has played fewer ranked teams, the margins of victory have been just about as impressive. And despite the lower number of ranked opponents, I would consider Texas’ strenght of schedule much tougher than USC’s. Mediocre Big 12 teams are better than mediocre Pac 10 teams.
Regardless of the outcome of the national championship, regardless of USC’s record, I will never respect them until they start playing more eastern teams (especially SEC and Big 12 teams), or until the Pac 10 proves that it is a strong conference.
Anyway, I predict a strong, definitive, but reasonably close win by Texas.
By Adam on Dec 5, 2005 at 12:50 am
There are a couple of reasons I wouldn’t want Texas to go in as number one. First, with the way it is now, if we lose, we lost to the number one team in the country. It looks a little better that way.
Second, if we win, we get all the glory in taking down one of the most dominant dynasties in the history of college football. That’s the glory I want. Beating the best at their peak. If not on January 4, USC _will_ lose their first game in three seasons at some point next season. They won’t have Matt Leinart, and they probably won’t have Reggie Bush.
I would like the chance to take down the dynasty while they still have their stars. And, really, all I can ask for is that chance. Then I won’t be able to whine about us never getting a shot at them when they were at their best. Here is that shot. I’m already so excited about it that I had trouble falling asleep last night.
Also, I wish I shared your sentiment about the Big 12. I think the conference sucked this year. After Texas, the two most decent teams were Texas Tech and Oklahoma. The best team Texas Tech beat? Oklahoma.The best team Oklahoma beat? Tulsa.
Whereas, in the Pac 10, after USC, you have a 10-1 Oregon team and a 9-2 UCLA team. UCLA already beat Oklahoma this year. And I haven’t seen much of Oregon, but I figure they’re at least as good as Texas Tech. It’s hard to say, though, because Oregon’s best win was against Fresno State, maybe? Cal? I guess those were decent wins.
I do think, though, that you have a point about mediocre Big 12 teams being better than mediocre Pac 10 teams. We’ll get to see Oklahoma versus Oregon in the Holiday Bowl. And after Oregon’s whining about not getting into the BCS, I hope Oklahoma shellacks them. It would be interesting to see Texas A&M versus Oregon State or something.
As for USC’s strength of schedule, I think it’s hard to ignore who they beat. They beat an all-everything Oklahoma team 55-19 last year that some people thought in the early to mid-season may be the best college football team ever. They beat a pretty good Notre Dame team on the road this year, and they beat a pretty good Michigan team in the Rose Bowl two years ago. They beat a really good Iowa team in the Orange Bowl during Carson Palmer’s senior season to start the whole dynasty thing.
But, I’m with you. I’m predicting a Texas win. The shoddiness of the Big 12 is giving me some worry, though.
By jjk on Dec 5, 2005 at 9:39 am