SEC links: BCS title night

SEC links for Thursday:

Share

Comments Closed

2 Responses to “SEC links: BCS title night”


  1. 1 rjr January 8, 2009 10:50 pm at 10:50 pm

    Not that it matters- but your “summary” of Dan Wetzel’s column is a little misleading. He doesn’t say the winner of the BCS National Championship will produce a “worthy champion.” In fact, I can’t find those words or even that sentiment anywhere in his article.

    Quite the contrary, he simply states that the rules are the rules, and the winner of Thursday Night’s game is the National Champion. He spends the rest of the article making a very credible argument that the BCS is a joke. However, he acknowledges those who would complain, mainly Texas and USC, have no one to blame but the commissioners of their conference who voted against a plus one playoff. Utah, of course, is another story.

    No biggie, but I’m a big fan of Mr. Wetzel’s take on the absurdness of the BCS, so I was surprised he would ever suggest the winner of the BCS would be a “worthy champion.” A champion yes, but “worthy” is your word.

  2. 2 CC January 9, 2009 8:26 am at 8:26 am

    I am a proponent of the plus one format and have yet to see an argument against it in terms of it being a better system to decide a national champion.

Comments are currently closed.