The purpose of this article is to prove why Cincinnati deserves to play Alabama in the National Title Game. First, I need to explain an important item. I went to Grad School at Alabama, as well as South Carolina. However, I am not using any SEC bias in my conclusions.
For those that do not realize the purpose of the BCS, then its job is place the #1 and #2 teams in the country at the end of the season against each other for the right to play for the BCS National Championship. I plan on using 2 variables, strength of schedule, and the strength of conference. Also, I hope we can all agree that Alabama deserves to be one of those teams with the following resume, 8-0 in the SEC, they haven beaten 5 ranked teams (ranked at the time they played them) in #7 Vtech, #20 Ole Miss, #22 South Carolina, #9 LSU, and #1 Florida. Furthermore, Alabama played 3 teams ranked in the #10 compared to 0 from Texas. Well, someone might say that they are a result of conference games, but VTech is from the ACC, which is something Texas failed to do, schedule a team from a BCS Conference. Heck schedule, Washington St. or Duke, at least they are from a BCS Conference. The point of this was to compare the strength of schedule from the 2 teams that are in the National Title Game, and then compare it to Cincinnati. First, I want to give a 5 year historic overview of the 2 conferences, followed by an analysis of this year.
Before I begin the next section, I need to explain one of my philosophies. I hate comparing stats between different conferences due to the different types of styles played in each conference. For example, most teams in the Big 12 run some variation of the Spread, which leads to higher offensive stats, but lower defensive stats; whereas most teams in the SEC (Auburn and Arkansas are moving to the Spread, and Florida does not run a true Spread because of Tebow, but the latter discussion is for a different article). As a result, the SEC has great defensive stats, but their offensive stats will be much lower when compared to conferences that run the spread such as the Big 12 or Pac 10. Therefore, I prefer to compare OOCS and success in BCS Bowl Games. T
The Big 12 is 3-2 in BCS Games the last five years with 2 different teams winning, West Virginia and Louisville along with a total of 5 different teams representing the Big East (Pitt and Cincy lost), compared to 3-3 from the Big 12 with only Texas winning those games (Only 2 different Big 12 Schools appeared during the time span, Texas and Oklahoma).
Now lets compare this year's Cincinnati's schedule to Texas. First, let's take a look at the success of the Big 12's Schedule compared to the Big East. Does it really matter that “cupcakes” are involved? No, because maybe 1 team schedules a quality opponent once a year ( Yes, some teams schedule more, but please for the sake of the argument). Anyone, for those that do believe in the “cupcakes”, then in 2009 the Big 12 was 36-12 vs 30-9 from the Big East (The Big East plays 5 nonconference games (8 teams in their conference), in other words The Big 12 won 66% of their OOCG vs. 75% from the Big East. Now let's examine each team's schedule. Texas played UTEP, TCU, Louisiana-Monroe, and at Wyoming compared to Frenso St., Illinois, at Oregon St., and SE Missouri St. Quite frankly, Texas played 0 teams from a BCS Conference, but Cincinnati played 2 teams from BCS conference (and for those that know College Football, Frenso St. is no joke).
Now lets compare this year's Cincinnati's schedule to Texas. Cincinnati played 3 ranked teams during the season at #21 South Florida, #25 West Virginia, and #15 Pitt. Texas played 3 ranked teams, #16 Oklahoma, #14 Oklahoma St., and #22 Nebraska. On face it appears fairly even. On a closer look The Bearcats outscored these teams 103-79, but Oklahoma beat their ranked teams 93-81.
I will leave ya'll with this to think about. Six of the eight teams in the Big East are above .500, aka 7-5, which is 75% of the league. On the other hand, 6 of 12 teams from the Big 12 are at least .500 or below, which is .500. Also, please do not use the argument that this is because the league is smaller. I wont by that for a second when the Big 12 have had recent success such as Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas ., Texas, Oklahoma, Oklahoma St., Texas Tech, Texas A&M. Furthermore, Cincinnati played 8 games with teams above .500, while Texas played 4 teams above .500.
I have provideded my evidence as to why Cincinnati should play Alabama based on the facts ago. Some people tend to stretch the truth to make their point, but I have not twisted them in any way. One can go to any sports website, and look them up. Again, my point is that Cincinnati deserves to play Alabama over Texas.
In the upcoming days, I plan on writing why TCU does NOT deserve to play Alabama, and how to greatly improve the BCS Formula and still keep the major BCS Conferences in it, while allowing 1 or 2 non BCS Schools. Followed by why a Playoff would ruin College Football.
Also please try to logical argue why Texas should play Alabama. Honestly, I have yet to heard one. All I hear is that they should play because they were in the Top 2 or 3 all year. Please don't argue that Texas should be their because they got ripped off last year, folks that was last season, not this season. Finally, besides the topic in the paragraph above, are there any others you would like me to discuss in the upcomping weeks (please try to stick to College Football until this season is over)
For those that remember me, I have been gone for about a year and half due to a major medical problem, and this is my 1st article since coming back on Fan IQ. If some people could provide some constructive criticism, then it would be much appreciated. Also, for those that can feedback would be very helpful so I can begin to remember what topics people want to read.