Every year since its inception, the BCS inexcusably SNUBBED a deserving team from a shot at the title game or at least an invitation to one of its high-paying bowl games.

Lest we forget, I have chronicled the SNUBS from each season and given the reason for each snub, which relates back to my page describing the problems with the BCS (What is Wrong with the BCS).

1996

Mormons don’t drink beer Snub - BYU finished the season 13-1 and ranked #5 in the nation.  The Fiesta Bowl chose lower ranked Penn State (9-2), even though BYU’s campus in Utah is thousands of miles closer to the Fiesta Bowl stadium in Arizona than Penn State’s campus, because they were concerned that the Mormon fan base of BYU wouldn’t buy any alcohol at the game (Mormons don’t drink) and therefore the bowl wouldn’t be as profitable (I’m not kidding - see the links). 

Reason for Snub:  Its all about the Money

http://www.iht.com/articles/1996/12/11/bowls.t_0.php 

http://magazine.byu.edu/?act=view&a=423

1997

Wilted Roses Snub - This was the only year when the BCS itself got snubbed.  Nebraska finished undefeated and then crushed #3 Tennessee in the orange Bowl.  Unfortunately for the Bowl Alliance, the Rose Bowl wasn’t yet a participant and when #1 Michigan defeated Washington St. in the Rose Bowl it resulted in a split national championship.  This had the unfortunate effect of  giving some momentum to the BCS, by those naively thinking that the BCS system might actually improve college football.

Reason for Snub:  no reason, but I’m happy no one could claim the system “worked”

Tarheels don’t play football Snub - North Carolina played one of its best seasons ever, finishing 11-1, but was snubbed for a BCS bowl selection in favor of recognized football powerhouse Ohio St. at 10-2 .  Its easy to speculate that the BCS figured a team with a long football tradition would fill up a stadium more than a basketball school would.

Reason for Snub:  Its all about the Money

1998

Tulane Green Wave Goodbye Snub - Tennessee finished the regular season undefeated and one loss Florida St. was chosen over one loss Kansas St., Ohio St. and UCLA to play Tennessee in the title game, BUT WAIT, there was actually another undefeated team that year that was never given a chance to play Tennessee for the title.  Tulane (with QB Shaun King) went undefeated in Conference USA and routed BYU in the Liberty Bowl in route to a perfect 12-0 record.  Did Tulane even get a sniff of the national title - not a chance!  The polls conveniently kept them locked-in at around #10 in the polls all year long - conveniently allowing “big name” schools with one or two losses to leapfrog them in the polls.  Not only did Tulane not get a chance to play for the national title, but they were snubbed altogether from a BCS bowl game in favor of 10-1 Ohio St and 9-2 Florida.  If I were the athletic director of Tulane I would hang a huge banner in our football stadium that read “CO-NATIONAL CHAMPIONS 1998” because  TLP awarded them the co-national title.  

Reasons for Snub:  The Poll Problems; the Mid Major Problem

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9901E0DF1E3FF932A35752C0A96F958260

Kick Kansas St. while their down Snub

Kansas St. was only minutes away from playing in its first national title game.  Kansas St was undefeated and it was leading Texas A&M in the 2nd half of the Big XII championship game.  UCLA had lost earlier in the day to open an door for them.  Then Texas A&M stormed back to win in overtime.  Kansas St. finished 11-1 at the end of the regular season and #3 in the BCS and the polls.  Florida State with an identical 11-1 record was picked to play the title game against undefeated Tennessee.  If missing a chance to play in the BCS title game wasn’t crushing enough, the BCS decided to rub dirt in Kansas St’s face by selecting #4 Ohio St. at 10-1 and #8 Florida at 9-2 for the at large BCS bids.  Hmmm.  I wonder why the Orange Bowl picked Florida and the Sugar Bowl picked Ohio St (with its national following) - hint $$$.  This also highlights the poll problem. Several teams finished with just 1 loss (Florida St., Kansas St., UCLA, Ohio St.).  The BCS can’t explain why 1 loss Florida St. was chosen over 1 loss Kansas St and 1 loss UCLA for the national title game. The reason appears to be, ridiculously enough, that because UCLA and Kansas St were handed their only defeats in the last game of the season, the polls automatically felt compelled to lower them in the rankings and put them out of reach of the BCS numbers game.  Why should WHEN you lose your only game of the year have an impact on whether you are the best one loss team?

Reasons for Snub:  Its all about the Money; the Poll Problem

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4179/is_20031206/ai_n11807723

1999

The Thundering Herd get Stampeded Snub - This year the BCS worked to perfection exclaims the BCS website.  Everyone remembers that there were two undefeated teams at the end of the year who played a very exciting championship game Florida St. vs Virginia Tech (with QB Michael Vick). BUT WAIT, there were actually 3 undefeated teams that year.  Marshall (with QB Chad Pennington) went undefeated in the MAC and routed BYU in the Motor City Bowl in route to a perfect 13-0 record.  Did Marshall even get a sniff of the national title - not a chance!  The polls conveniently kept them locked-in at around #10 in the polls all year long - conveniently allowing “big name” schools with one or two losses to leapfrong them in the polls.  Not only did Marshall not get a chance to play for the national title, but they were snubbed altogether from a BCS bowl game in favor of 9-2 Michigan and 9-2 Tennessee (hmmm, this story sounds familiar.  Oh, that’s right, the exact same thing happened to Tulane in 1998) .  If I were the athletic director of Marshall I would hang a huge banner in our football stadium that read “CO-NATIONAL CHAMPIONS 1999”.  

Reasons for Snub:  The Poll Problems; the Mid Major Problem

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/college/recaps/1999/12/27/mmc_bbi/

Messing  with Manhattan (Kansas) Snub - Version II - One year after the BCS’ spectacular snub of Kansas St. (who finished #3 in the BCS standings, but wasn’t invited to a BCS game), Kansas St. once again finished the regular season 11-1 and ranked #5 in the BCS standings.  Finally the BCS has a chance to make amends for something, to do something right, to correct a past wrong and to pick Kansas St. for a BCS bowl game - so what does the BCS do - SNUB KANSAS ST. AGAIN.  The BCS picked 9-2 Michigan and 9-2 Tennessee for the at-large BCS bids.  Of course the population of Manhattan Kansas is only about 50,000 and the Big House stadium at Michigan seats over 100,000.   The pattern has existed from the beginning - big name schools with national followings get the nod over more deservings but smaller or lesser known schools just so the BCS can be comfortable it will fill the stadiums.  Making money is a higher priority than fairness or equality.

Reason for Snub:  Its all about the Money

2000

The Dog in the Hurricane Snub - Oklahoma finished the regular season undefeated.  Three teams had one loss each - Florida St., Miami and Washington.  In other years, when comparing two or more one-loss teams, the one-loss teams hadn’t played each other in the regular season.  In this case the teams had played each other.  In any other sport if the teams are tied and you need to determine playoff seeding, you look at the head to head match-up to break the tie, which means Miami has to get into the title game ahead of Florida St.  But what does the BCS do?  It puts itself in another ridiculous position by inexcusably picking Florida State over Miami (who beat Florida St.) and over Washington (who beat Miami). 

Reason for Snub:  The Poll Problem

http://media.www.centralfloridafuture.com/media/storage/paper174/news/2000/12/06/Sports/Bcs-Has.One.Too.Many.Letters.In.Its.Title-12044.shtml

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/inside_game/john_donovan/news/2000/11/27/miami_bcs/

2001

The Ducks get Buffaloed Snub - Miami finished the season undefeated.  Nebraska was on its way to an undefeated season until it got embarrassed by 30 points in its final regular season game by Colorado.  Amazingly the computer system still picked Nebraska (#4 in the polls and not even its own conference’s champion) to play in the title game ahead of one loss Oregon (#2 in the polls).  I wonder how the BCS managed to add the east coast poll bias into their computer rankings?  Oregon coach Mike Bellotti referred to the BCS as a “cancer”.  Good call there coach.  One loss teams such as Maryland and Illinois also have a legitimate complaint for not even being given a sniff of the national title game.  Fans from those schools will always be left to wonder what could have been, if they had been given an opportunity.  Colorado also did some pretty loud griping even though they had two losses.

Reason for Snub:  The Poll Problem

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9506E2DF163FF933A25751C1A9679C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print

http://espn.go.com/ncf/news/2001/1209/1292594.html

2002

Miami and Ohio St both finished the season undefeated and played a classic game for the national championship.  They were the only two undefeated teams and therefore seemed to be a logical fit for the title game.  Many people touted the BCS as having “worked” for once.  However, there were many excellent one loss and two loss teams that year (including 13-1 Georgia whose only loss was a tough 7 point defeat to the Florida Gators in the Swamp in the brutal SEC conference) who very well could have been better than both Miami and Ohio St., but without a playoff system, we’ll never know.  

Broncos are treated like Smurfs in the polls Snub - Boise State finished the year 11-1 but unbelievably they were only ranked 19th in the final polls.  I think this was an extreme case of the east coast bias and mid-major bias rearing their heads in the polls.  Boise St hadn’t yet established itself as a recognizable program and so those with a vote had no intention of putting them ahead of several 3 loss teams (even 9-4 Florida St was ranked ahead of them).  Boise St. was so far away from at an large bid to the BCS it was laughable. 

Reason for Snub:  Poll Problems, Mid Major Problem

2003

#1 isn’t good enough Snub - USC finished #1 in all the polls, but #2 Oklahoma and #3 LSU finished #1 and #2 in the BCS and got invitations to the national title game.  USC and LSU win their bowl games causing a split national title - the one thing the BCS said could never happen under its system.  Oops.  It comes out in the media afterwards that the coaches are obligated by contract to “vote” for the winner of the BCS game as the national championship.  Is it really a “vote” if someone is telling you how to vote?   What a great idea for politics!  Political parties knock on doors and get people to sign a contract that they will vote for the Democrat in the next Presidential election - even before they know the Democratic nominee will be.  The whole “required to vote” thing just shows again how ridiculous the entire BCS system is.  Notwithstanding their contractual obligation to vote for LSU, some coaches broke ranks and voted for USC.  This result (#1 in the polls out of the title game) the 2001 result (#4 in the polls and not even a conference champion making it into the title game) and the 2000 result (choosing one team over another with an identical record even though the team left out had beaten the team that was chosen) had an interesting effect on the BCS.  The BCS realized all of its fancy computer rankings were producing some ridiculous outcomes, so they started to “tweak” their “formula” to give more emphasis to the “human” polls.  How ironic that the BCS is evolving back into simply picking #1 and #2 in the “human” polls for the title game (but this magnifies the Poll Problems)

Reason for Snub:  The Poll Problem

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/sec/2004-01-05-lsu-cover_x.htm

Mid Major Triple Snub - While one-loss USC, Oklahoma and LSU were bickering about who should be in the national title game, the country had all but forgotten (or more appropriately said - the country ignored) the three one loss teams from the mid-major conferences - Miami (Ohio), Boise State and TCU  all finished the season with only one loss but finished 14, 18 and 19 respectively, in the final polls.  Why  weren’t any of them in the discussion for a one-loss team to be in the title game?  We know why - the polls refused to recognize them until far too late in the season and the polls don’t want to deal with mid-majors.  Numerous 3-loss teams and even #16 Florida (8-4) were ranked ahead of some of these teams.  I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - if the nation really thinks that Mid Majors can’t compete with the big boys - then create the Mid Major division of college football and let them have their own national title game.  Otherwise, please give them a fair shake in the polls (until we can convince the NCAA  to scrap the BCS and adopt the Laddie Plan) so they can have access to the title game based on their records, not the perceived weakness of the conference.

Reason for Snub:  Mid Major Problem; Polls Problems

2004

The Fantastic Five Snub - One year after NO teams finished undefeated, leaving the BCS arguing over which one loss teams should be in the title game the BCS had a different problem - FIVE teams finished the regular season undefeated, USC, Oklahoma and Auburn are the ones you will remember, Utah and Boise St were also undefeated (but are from mid majors so they were given zero consideration for playing in the title game - more on that below).  The computers and the polls liked USC and Oklahoma, but after Auburn won its bowl game it was left wondering how an undefeated team from the SEC couldn’t be a national champion.  The Auburn fans are still not very pleased about the situation to say the least.  I’m all in favor of Auburn hanging a co-national title banner in its stadium.  Too bad for Auburn that it was ranked below USC and Oklahoma in the pre-season polls.  How absurd that because some sports writers guessed that USC and Oklahoma would be better than Auburn (before any games were played) at the start of the year, that it would keep Auburn out of the title game.

Reason for Snub:  The Poll Problem

http://www.auburnfootball.com/auburn-football-2004-2005-national-champions.htm

The Who-tah Utes Snub - The University of Utah and Boise St both finished undefeated regular seasons but again, the polls conveniently kept them away from any sniff of the national title game.  Perhaps because of the triple mid-major snub of 2003, the BCS modified its rules so that if a mid-major team finished in the top 6 of the BCS standings it couldn’t be denied a BCS bid.  So when Utah finished in the top 6 many of the national commentators were gushing over how fair and just the BCS was to invite little ole Utah to a BCS game, blah blah blah.  The proper way to view this isn’t that Utah got into a BCS bowl game, but that they were SNUBBED from the national title game.  Utah was as good as the other four undefeated teams (they crushed Texas A&M, Arizona and North Carolina and embarrassed Pitt in the Fiesta Bowl - that makes one team from 4 separate BCS conferences that got steamrolled by the Utes).  They should hang a co-national champion banner in their stadium.  And poor Boise State, the clueless, east coast biased, mid-major hating polls are finally starting to realize that they are for real after going 33-3 over the last 3 years (this year the pollsters were so generous that they actually put them in the top 10 by the end of the year instead of relegating them to the mid-teens). 

Reason for Snub:  The Poll Problem; Mid Major problem

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/mwest/2004-11-21-utah-perfect-season_x.htm

The Mack Attack Snub This was also the year Texas coach Mack Brown was successful in publicly lobbying poll participants to change their votes to so Texas could jump over Cal (who was ranked ahead of them all year) and get into a BCS game.  Cal won its last game of the year on the road in a tough contest - but the margin of victory was “only” 10 points and apparently that was a weak enough performance that Mack Brown was able to convince pollsters to vote for him instead of Cal.   If ever there were a year that shows how ludicrous, biased and unfair the polls can be, this is the year.  The fact that pollsters can  be persuaded by a lobbyist (i.e. Mack Brow) to switch their votes is embarrassing.

Reason for Snub: The Poll Problem.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=1939401

2005

UCS (QB Matt Leinart) and Texas (QB Vince Young) were wire to wire #1 and #2 in the country and the only undefeated teams at the end of the regular season.  Again, a few misguided commentators actually thought the BCS “worked” this year because these two teams were the top 2 all year long and played each other in the title game.  They were both excellent teams and the the title game they played was an instant classic - no doubt about that.  But we will never really know if perhaps Georgia or LSU (each had 2 losses in the brutal SEC) couldn’t have crushed both Texas and USC.

The Ohio State Duck-eye Snub.  When picking it two “at large” bids this year, the BCS selected 9-2 Ohio St. and 9-2 Notre Dame over the 10-1 Oregon Ducks (whose only loss was to #1 USC).  Part of the reason for the snub is the special deal Notre Dame cut with the BCS which practically gives Notre Dame a guaranteed BCS bowl if they can finish in the top 6 or so in the BCS standings.  Then again, we shouldn’t be surprised - we’ve seen it before - the BCS loves teams with a national follow and will eagerly select them over a more deserving team because they want the $$$.  The east coast bias also played a large factor in this one, as well as the poll problem, which had some two loss teams ranked ahead of one loss Oregon.  Of course we shouldn’t even mention that TCU finished 10-1 but was only ranked #14 because no one cares about the mid majors anyway.

Reason for Snub:  Its all about the Money

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10327662/

2006

The Gator Bait Snub Ohio State beat Michigan in the final regular season game to give Michigan its only loss of the season.  USC, was the highest ranked one-loss team after Michigan lost, but USC lost its final game to UCLA.  That left Michigan (with one loss) ranked #2 and Florida (with one loss) ranked #3.  Florida won the SEC title game while Michigan was idle and magically leapfrogged Michigan in the polls.  We will never know for sure, but this sudden change of position in the polls arguably may NOT have been based on pure football analysis of which team is actually better.  Instead, it is easy to speculate that this was a case of the pollsters deliberately manipulating the polls to achieve a desired result (i.e. avoiding a rematch of Michigan and Ohio St in the title game).  Can there be any stronger evidence that the Laddie Plan must be adopted to eliminate the poll problem?   There are also two other forgotten one-loss teams, 5th ranked Louisville and 6th ranked Wisconsin why were neither of these teams in the mix to play in the national title game?  Who knows? 

Reason for Snub:  The Poll Problem

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/03/AR2006120301222.html?nav=emailpage

Boise St. gets smurfed (again) With all the talk about which one-loss team gets to play Ohio State in the title game, everyone seemed to conveniently forget the fact that Boise St. was UNDEFEATED (again).  There were two undefeated teams in college football.  The national title game should have been Ohio St vs Boise St.  At least Boise St was invited to a BCS bowl game in which  they beat Oklahoma in one of the most exciting bowl games I’ve ever seen.  Finally, even the east coast biased pollsters had to take notice of Boise St.  The 2006 Boise St. and 2004 Utah teams highlight that the current system makes it IMPOSSIBLE for a mid major to ever play for a title.  Bottom line - either create a playoff which guarantees the mid major conference champions a spot, or create a new division and let them compete for the Mid-Major national championship.

Reason for Snub:  The Poll Problem the Mid Major Problem

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/games/2006-11-25-boisestate-nevada_x.htm

2007

The “You’ve got to be kidding me” Snub  In the most turbulent regular season in recent memory during which the #1 and #2 teams in the nation seemed to lose every week there were at least 11 teams with a legitimate argument to be playing in the national championship game that either had 1 or 2 losses: Ohio St., LSU, Oklahoma, Georgia, Virginia Tech, USC, Missouri, Kansas, West Virginia, Arizona St. and, oh yeah, the ONLY UNDEFEATED TEAM Hawaii (but who cares since they are from a Mid-Major conference) (too bad the Laddie Plan wasn’t in place since all 11 teams would have been invited to the tournament - see link Tournament Invitations (past 6 years).  For the SECOND YEAR IN A ROW, the people voting in the polls INTENTIONALLY MANIPULATED the poll results to have LSU leapfrog Georgia to get into the title game.  Its official - the polls have ZERO credibility.  I understand the argument - that its not right to have Georgia in the title game when they aren’t even a conference champion, but my point is that if you’ve set up a system that is going to be based on the polls, shouldn’t you respect the system?  (Also see 2001 - Nebraska wasn’t even its conference champion and it still made it to the title game).  THERE IS NO BETTER EVIDENCE THAT THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS BROKEN THAN THE FACT THAT THE POLLS THEMSELVES DON’T RESPECT THE SYSTEM.  The polls instead  try to take matters into their own hands.  This year more than ever, the calls for a playoff have increased, but people still aren’t addressing the core problems identified on this website (the Poll Problems and Mid Major Problem). 

Missouri gets declawed Snub.  How is it possible that the #1 team in the nation, loses a tough conference championship game and misses out on the BCS title game, AND THEN, ON TOP OF THAT, IS COMPLETELY SNUBBED FROM ANY BCS GAME at all.  Oh wait, this sounds exactly like what happened to Kansas St. in 1998 (see above).  The BCS must have it in for the Big 12.

Aloha means “too bad for you” Snub.  Yet again, another Mid-Major team goes undefeated and is conveniently kept at no higher than #10 in the polls so no one gives them serious consideration for the title game.  I can’t say it enough - there really is no excuse for the unfair treatment given to Mid-Majors - THEY HAVE ZERO CHANCE of ever playing for a national title under the current system.

2008

Red River Roadblock Snub

Once again the BCS finds itself in the ridiculous position of having to pick among 7 equally qualified one loss teams from BCS Conferences (we will set aside undefeated Utah for a moment because we all know the BCS never seriously considered them): 

Oklahoma lost to Texas

Texas lost to Texas Tech

Texas Tech lost to Oklahoma

USC lost to Oregon State

Florida lost to Ole Miss,

Alabama lost to Florida

Penn State lost to Iowa

The pollsters once again took matters into their own hands, with no guidelines, rules or reason, they voted based on whatever they felt best.  Who knows what criteria they even used?  There are no tie-breaker formulas.  Maybe the pollsters say some teams play and not others.  Maybe they voted for teams from their home conferences.  Who knows.

In all other sports I know of where tie-breakers are in place, the “first” tie-breaker is almost universally who won the head-to-head match-up.  The pollsters used the head-to-head rule to determine that one-loss Florida deserved to be in the title game over Alabama.  However, the voters (after eliminating Texas Tech because of how badly they lost to Oklahoma) refused to use the head-to-head rule when picking between Texas and Oklahoma.  Texas beat Oklahoma on a neutral field for goodness sake!  How can anyone in their right mind pick Oklahoma over Texas if you are choosing between the two of them.  Who cares the match-up was 6 weeks ago, who cares that Oklahoma seemed to have “momentum” and was beating its opponents by wider margins than Texas in its final games.  It once again shows the absurdity of the BCS system - there is no rhyme or reason.

Looking at it another way, if you want to analyze based on which team had the best “loss” you have the circular problem of the three Big 12 teams each beating the other in a round robin, but of the remaining 4, you would have to say Alabama’s close loss to Florida is the best “loss” so they should be in the title game of those 4 teams.  ARRRGGHH.  I had better stop before I blow a fuse.

No Sugar for “U” Snub

Once again two teams from a mid-major conference go undefeated (Utah and Boise State).  Once again they are no where near the national title game.  The polls kept them conveniently locked in at around #10 all year long.  Does this sound familiar??????

Utah, the highest ranked of the mid Majors went to the Sugar Bowl and thrashed Alabama in a qusi-home game for the Crimson Tide.  Commentators were astonished.  How can this happen?  A mid-major team beating a team that was ranked #1 for most of the season?  Maybe they should have been in the title game?  But oh well, better luck next year Utah.

The fact that undefeated Utah isn’t a national champion under the BCS system is a joke.  Even 3 of the 6 BCS computers ranked Utah as #1 in the final poll.  Its a good thing the BCS didn’t release its final computation as Utah may have been #1.

Boise State faced off against TCU - another excellent mid major team in a classic bowl game that came down to the last minute.  Both teams finished in the Top 10.  Its a shame that these two teams didn’t get a similar chance to embarrass a BCS school like Utah did.

© 2007 Ladd Johnson