Penn State won a landmark game at Ohio State, their first such victory in thirty years. That makes the Nittany Lions the odds-on favorite to win the Big 10 and could possibly finish undefeated. The Lions were the third-ranked team going into the weekend yet remained in the same position afterwards.
Alabama, the no. 2 team in the BCS (and all other standings) destroyed a sorry Tennessee team in Knoxville, 29-9. Sure, the Crimson Tide are a really good team but how does beating UT overshadow Penn State beating Ohio State in Columbus? And please don’t tell me that Penn State got closer to being in the second spot. If they both stay undefeated, Penn State would be out on its ass again like its 1994.
This makes no sense to me. I thought this system was supposed to reward teams for the tough games they actually play. I thought there was supposed to be an objective level of fairness involved in the computer programs that determine the rankings. There is no objective way to say that beating Tennessee was as impressive or important as beating Ohio State even if you take the 30-yard drought out of the equation (which they do).
I don’t see ‘Bama or Texas (no. 1) both going undefeated the rest of the way, their schedules are just too hard and both have conference title games they’d have to deal with as well. Penn State has no conference championship (they just won it) and their remaining schedule is not nearly as challenging as the two teams ahead of them. But can’t the BCS just make sense once? Doesn’t it just make sense to have Penn State jump ‘Bama?