Dick Harmon: New book points out BCS flaws in big way

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Zoniezoobie Mesa, AZ
    Oct. 27, 2010 6:06 p.m.

    The BCS formula is 66% reliant on the OPINION of voters to decide which two teams compete in a 1-game playoff championship. End of story.

    The opinions begin PRE-SEASON, when only 25 or so teams are nominated for the title game. (The lowest pre-season team to win was LSU at 24th.)

    All others need not play a down of regular season with the national title not a goal.

    It is a money-driven travesty, student athletes prostituted by their universities.

    ELIMINATE the polls. Decide it all on the field by sending the conference champions to a playoff based on conference wins only (no out-of-league games count). Independents need not apply!

    This makes every game, every week, decide the champion on the field, not in 'weakly'leap-frog polls.

    Maybe add a few at-large bids to round out the field based on on-the-field statistics, not polls.

    No strength of schedule, no margin of victory considered.

    Be true to the game. Be true to the athletes. Be true to the fans of each team. For the good of America, get this fixed, because we will be playing college football until the end of time!

  • Gracious George West Jordan, Utah
    Oct. 27, 2010 3:51 p.m.

    None of the arguments are valid enough to change the technology-based system.

    Nick Saban is one person--he only has one vote. Many coaches throughout the country vote.

    The computer code that compiles the BCS was developed by NCAA administrators and referees. It can be changed at anytime. It is not biased.

    One can cry about Utah being champs, but Florida had a tougher schedule. If Florida had had Utah's schedule, they would have been undefeated too. If Utah had Florida's schedule, they would have lost several games. All conferences are not created equal--that is why Utah is in the PAC-12 now.

    Complaining that things are unfair is not how one brings changes to the BCS.

    Go and win on the field. Utah has done that. Utah is getting its opportunities now, just as they got in 2004 and 2008.

    If you want to get to the big time, you have to earn it. It doesn't just get handed to you on a silver platter. Utah has earned it; Boise State and TCU are in the process of getting there.

    If you want change, stop griping and win on the field.

    End of story.

  • badlandscougar great plains, sd
    Oct. 27, 2010 2:55 p.m.

    mr harmon, i liked the article and i know utah was the champ in '08. the bcs is corrupt along with all its cohorts who dismiss non-aq amateur athletes in division one as inferior. playoff time!!

  • anti BCS Anaheim, CA
    Oct. 27, 2010 2:22 p.m.

    Utah fans supporting the BCS is just more evidence of the built in hypocrisy and bias of the whole BCS mess and proof that we can't trust anybody with their hand in the cookie jar to help clean up the mess.

  • mkSdd3 Ogden, UT
    Oct. 27, 2010 1:11 p.m.

    The biased nature of football power conferences IS strong enough to keep anyone out they don't want. However, I remember back to when Utah was given Alabama as their opponent in the sugar bowl. Only true Ute fans were giving them a chance to win. The rest of us were falling victim to the rhetoric and biased tone of the experts. We felt Utah could give them a game, but unlikely to win it. When something is said long enough and loud enough, it usually becomes accepted. After the game, everyone believed that Utah should have been the team playing for the championship. All that proves is the BCS has got to go. We should let the athletes on the field prove who is best.

  • Ufan Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 11:12 p.m.

    The Utes may be joining a BCS conference next July, but they'll never play in the BCS championship game. There's a good ol' boys club even within the BCS conferences and, as much as it may hurt to admit, the Utes never will be one of the good ol' boys.

  • Skierelmo Oakley, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 7:05 p.m.

    Gracious George... last I checked the Coaches poll is a third of the equation, and when you have coaches like Saban who say (about week 5) that they will never vote a team like TCU or BSU into the top spots.... it insures they will never get a fair chance because of human influence. Not to mention SOS is factored in for the purpose of said exclusion. A computer program is only as good as its programmers code... and who writes the code????

    To finish my previous thoughts (even my droid can't contain my fat fingers) the previously mentioned schedule would end the playoffs at the same time the bowl games end now, and I fail to see how the money would be lessened by having more meaningful games...Everybody wins. And you can still have the maxi brand who cares bowl on some random wed night to fill our bowl season with meaningless but entertaining games that feed the conference walets a little more.

  • Classless Ute Fan Magna, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 6:59 p.m.

    Gracious George,

    I do not understand why people are so against the BCS when it is so obvious that it is the most unbiased system developed in the history of college sports.

    It does not have the human bias element interfering like the old college football polls did because it is a technology-based system.

    Actually 2/3'rds of the BCS is based on human polls.

    Do you realize that it is possible for Utah to win the rest of their games and finish in the top 4 or 5 and still be not included in a BCS game but Pittsburgh could?

    It creates a fair playing field for teams to prove themselves through a combination of schedule strength and computer rankings.

    Certain conferences are given preference over others, like the SEC and Big Ten, then the Big 12 and PAC, finally the ACC and Big East. It isn't fair that Utah's strength of schedule is lowered because BYU loses to Utah St, Nevada, or FSU. Was that something that Utah did? (Just an example, not dogging on BYU) Yet they could be the best team in the country and unable to prove it.

  • Tim Jones Bronx, NY
    Oct. 26, 2010 6:59 p.m.

    Thanks Dick!

  • Skierelmo Oakley, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 6:40 p.m.

    The 4-8 team playoffs still in my mind don't guarantee large enough inclusion. It would have to (at the very least) have to be a 12 team option, and best case scenario involve 16 teams. 11 automatic conference champion spots (assuming they are in the top 20), and 5 at large bids. The AQ. powers still get most of the (at least 5 depending on top 20 ranking) at large spots, and teams like BSU, Utah and/or TCU get a chance to prove their metal.

    Take one OOC game off the schedule and that leaves time for a bye week before the playoffs and another before the championship

  • Gracious George West Jordan, Utah
    Oct. 26, 2010 5:35 p.m.

    I do not understand why people are so against the BCS when it is so obvious that it is the most unbiased system developed in the history of college sports.

    It creates a fair playing field for teams to prove themselves through a combination of schedule strength and computer rankings.

    It does not have the human bias element interfering like the old college football polls did because it is a technology-based system.

    It also does not start until Week 7 in the season, an appropriate time to begin because even media figures have said for years the first polls coming out mean little or nothing.

    It is very sound and well thought out by experienced NCAA administrators, referees, and university officials.

    Does Mr. Harmon not have better things to write about because of the struggles BYU is facing this football season?

    Mr. Harmon writing about this in mid-season is like Sen. Hatch using this as a campaign bumper sticker to bolster his chances for being re-elected in 2012.

    I suggest that if Mr. Harmon or fans have better ideas, to please voice them.

    Otherwise, please keep your unproductive opinions to yourselves.

  • fresnogirl Fresno, CA
    Oct. 26, 2010 5:24 p.m.


    You clearly didn't even READ the article. It doesn't mention BYU nor 1984. In fact, it was quite flattering to Utah. (Isn't that supposed to be your team)?

    Leave it to you to take such a nice article about the Utes and try to make it a slam on the Cougs.

  • Hellooo Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 5:19 p.m.

    Just a reminder the Bowl Championship Division has no national championship. Not in 1984 and not now. The BCS is a made for TV promotion. Articles that reference the BCS "the national championship" as such only add to this myth. Nice for increasing advertising revenues, and dollars for those conferences that are included, but does nothing to improve football. If it did, how is it that in a BCS conference receiving so much money you have a Northwestern, Iowa St., Duke, Kentucky, Rutgers, or Washington State all programs comparable to New Mexico in the MWC or New Mexico State in the WAC that does not receive the big dollars. Any fan that thinks winning or losing in such games means anything other than they had a great experience (if they won) or a good experience (if they lost) at a great location as the highlight for someones extended Christmas vacation has been deluded by TV hype.

  • Transparency 2 Walnut Creek, CA
    Oct. 26, 2010 5:09 p.m.

    continue Bain is interviewing faculty, staff, senior management and the academic senate leaders for $150 million in inefficiencies, most of which could have been found internally. One easy-to-identify problem, for example, was wasteful procurement practices such as failing to secure bulk discounts on printers. But Birgeneau apparently has no concept of savings: even in procuring a consulting firm, he failed to receive proposals from other firms.

    Students, staff, faculty, and California legislators are the victims of his incompetence. Now that sports teams are feeling the pinch, perhaps the California Alumni Association, benefactors and donators, and the UC Board of Regents will demand to know why Birgeneau is raking in $500,000 a year despite the abdication of his responsibilities.

    The author, who has 35 years’ consulting experience, has taught at University of California Berkeley, where he was able to observe the culture and the way the senior management operates.

  • Transparency 2 Walnut Creek, CA
    Oct. 26, 2010 5:07 p.m.

    When UC Berkeley announced its elimination of baseball, men’s and women’s gymnastics, and women’s lacrosse teams and its defunding of the national-champion men’s rugby team, the chancellor sighed, “Sorry, but this was necessary!”
    But was it? Yes, the university is in dire financial straits. Yet $3 million was somehow found to pay the Bain consulting firm to uncover waste and inefficiencies in UC Berkeley, despite the fact that a prominent East Coast university was doing the same thing without consultants.
    Essentially, the process requires collecting and analyzing information from faculty and staff. Apparently, senior administrators at UC Berkeley believe that the faculty and staff of their world-class university lack the cognitive ability, integrity, and motivation to identify millions in savings. If consultants are necessary, the reason is clear: the chancellor, provost, and president have lost credibility with the people who provided the information to the consultants. Chancellor Robert J Birgeneau has reigned for eight years, during which time the inefficiencies proliferated. Even as Bain’s recommendations are implemented (“They told me to do it”, Birgeneau), credibility and trust problems remain. continue

  • Thriller Saint George, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 4:49 p.m.

    Wow BeWhyUte, did you even read my comment?

    I quote: "I still feel the BCS is a corrupt system that needs to be overhauled."

    You're right, before the Utes got into the PAC-12 I called the BCS corrupt. Now that they're in, I'm still calling the BCS corrupt! How exactly is that hypocritical? I actually drew up a proposal detailing the playoff system that I described in my post for an argumentation class I was in a year and a half ago, long before the PAC-12 invite.

    If you can come up with a better system that might work in the real world and not the fantasy world you live in, I'd love to hear it. Until then, tone down the hate.

    Other posters have talked about an 8-team playoff like I have. What is so wrong with that? It would be a huge change over what we have now and not a "slight modification".

  • Fed Employee Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 4:16 p.m.

    No, Uncle Tom in Ann Arbor, MI, the BCS is not better. It does not pit the two most deserving teams against each other. We've seen that multiple times i.e. Oklahoma, Florida, Ohio State, etc. It pits the two teams which will create the greatest revenue. It's just as bad if not worse than the system in 1984.

  • hedgehog Ann Arbor, MI
    Oct. 26, 2010 3:48 p.m.

    I'm sure we all must agree the BCS is much better than that ridiculous system back in 1984. Back then they made no logical effort in pitting the two most deserving teams.

    Funny how Dick has no problem with 1984


  • Cherrycoug Kearns, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 3:07 p.m.

    I appreciate the efforts of the authors to expose the BCS and I hope that this is the catalyst for change. However, I remain pessimisstic on if that will actually happen.

    The BCS has never been about fairness, competition or anything that college athletics is supposed to represent. It has been about creating a class system with two distinct classes of Division 1 football teams; the haves and the have nots. Congrats to the Utes for becoming a have but the system is broken and will not be fixed until the haves are compelled to change.

    Sadly, this change would have to take place in the courts and anytime any momentum is squashed because they put out ridiculous argutments that are listened to and never scrutinized like they should be. We hear such excuses as "doesn't congress have anything better to do" and "we've given them access to the BCS". This is a billion dollar enterprise which is based on collusion, and universities that are publicly funded are part of it.

    If college football was started tomorrow and proposals were made to determine a champion, the bowl system would be shot down immediately. So should the BCS.

  • wwookie Payson, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 3:01 p.m.

    Thank you for the article. I dont generally like your articles, but this was a good 'book review' and probably convinced me to buy it (Now i have to find it).

  • Not So Common Sense Lehi, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 2:59 p.m.

    The BCS is clearly unfair/ corrupt/ dishonest/ etc.
    However it is still better than what preceded it.
    Conference affiliations determining ALL bowls, regardless of rankings.
    The BCS at least tries to put 2 of the best teams in the country head to head, to decide on the field.

    The BCS was a step in the right direction.

    Its just long past time to make the next step.

    A 4 or 8 team playoff using the existing BCS bowls would solve most of the problems.
    It would keep the existing bowls, which reward many teams accross the country with postseason play.
    It allows teams to decide on the field who is the best. It is large enough to include the likely best teams in the country. It maintains the importance of the regular season.
    Utah would still have missed out of a 4 team playoff in 2008. Nothing's perfect. But BCS is not close right now.

  • cougartilidie Sandy, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 2:59 p.m.

    hedgehog | 6:43 a.m. Oct. 26, 2010
    Ann Arbor, MI
    I have no problem with the BCS, in fact I love it!!

    Go Utes
    Official PAC12 member.

    Correction: Official PAC12 Bottom Feeder.

  • Uteology Fort Worth, Texas
    Oct. 26, 2010 2:55 p.m.

    @Go Utes
    Anyone who refers to the red zone as the "blue zone" in an article doesn't just "lean BYU" but is a PR man.

    Being the only undefeated team in the nation to beat 4 top 25 and 2 top 7 teams might not mean much to you but it does to this Ute.

    BCS is a cartel regadless if Utah is looking in or out. TCU and Boise have proven that they belong more then teams like Washington State, Duke, Iowa State, etc. I would like to see a top 8 team playoff.

  • Go Big Blue!!! Bountiful, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 2:54 p.m.

    I am sure the book will be a best seller in to the WAC and MWC whinners. The schedules played by BSU TCU and Utah do not make them worthy for a NC run.

    The complaining about the BCS system detracts from the joy of watching football during the regular season and enjoying the fantastic BSC bowls.

  • BeWhyUte Sandy, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 2:31 p.m.

    The name of the book should have been The Emperor's New Clothes 2.

    Thriller, thanks for your amazing generosity. What a hoot. Before the Utes got into a BCS conf. I'm sure you were trashing the BCS just like everyone else as unfair and corrupt, NOW that your team is IN you want the rules to pretty much stay the same with a slight modification for a playoff...how pathetic and hypocritical.

    For those of you bashing Dick for this article and implying that he should have no interest in the subject because he's "A BYU FAN", you need to grow up. He's a journalist. He may have the BYU beat but he certainly can report on the Yewts and other items of interest to all football fans!

    Can anyone who wears red think objectively about anything related to college sports? Please raise your hand and be counted if you exist...

  • govt rocks Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 1:16 p.m.

    Cristoph, how about those teams go play at Utah, at Boise, at TCU? You cannot assume that a team has to go to those places and beat those teams. Things should be equal, they should go on the road too. Oregon got it handed too them at Boise last year. And Boise handed it Oregon in Autzen stadium the year before. BSU went on the road and beat virginia tech. TCU went into Clemson and beat them. Utah beat Michigan in the big house. And don't give me that those teams weren't any good. They are the same teams and same formidable places that their conference foes play as well. The fact is that BSU, TCU, and UT can go into those places and beat these teams when given the chance to do so.

  • christoph Brigham City, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 12:39 p.m.

    TCU, Utah and Boise State have powder puff schedules; this was omitted in Harmon's article. It is true that Boise State should probably have been #1 in the first BCS poll; yet it was also understood that they would have dropped from there week after week (playing bad teams hurts you). I want to see these 3 play at Wisconsin, at South Carolina, at LSU, at Arizona, at Iowa, at Florida State, at Alabama, at Auburn, at Oregon, at Stanford (need I go on??) You can not win the title by playing powder puff and then hope to win it all on a nuetral site. Boise State has never seen a good defense blitze them----not once this season!!!!

  • Thriller Saint George, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 11:57 a.m.

    I can't speak for the Utes or the Utah politicians, but as a Ute fan, I'm glad we made it into a BCS conference. That will finally give us the respect we have deserved for a long time. That said, I still feel the BCS is a corrupt system that needs to be overhauled.

    I've long thought the best system would be to keep the big 4 BCS bowls (Sugar, Fiesta, Rose, and Orange) and use them as a jumping off point for a playoff. The winners of the Sugar and Orange bowls play each other while the winners of the Fiesta and Rose bowls play each other. The winners of those two games then play for the NC. That would only add two more games to the schedule. To appease the big conferences, we can keep most of the current rules intact regarding who gets into the BCS bowls.

    I think this would satisfy everyone as much as possible. The BCS boys still get their AQ while the little guys get their shot at a NC.

  • Go Utes Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 11:47 a.m.

    I appreciate the article. I am as big a Ute fan as you will find, but I am not going to knock Dick for writing the article. I know he has BYU leanings, but the fact is, no matter what conference any team is in, the BCS has to go. I am excited about the Utes' move to the PAC-(10/12), but I still deteest the BCS. Even if a team wins it all, there is no legitimacy to it. Florida "won" in 2008, but many still talk about how they might not of if the Utes had received a fair shake. Under any non-playoff system (including the system in place in 1984, for example), there can never really be a true champion--there can only be a final poll that is not superceded by some subsequent poll.

    The BCS has to go. Any Ute fan, BYU fan, or college football fan in general, who truly loves the sport, would agree.

    Ute fans, don't sell out to the BCS!

  • govt rocks Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 11:40 a.m.

    A couple of points were made by commentators that have been really glossed over but are very important: politics had everything to do with utah going to the Pac-10. I am certain that the PAC-10 was getting pressure from the BCS folks to invite Utah. I am also sure that the Big 12 was getting equal pressure to stay together.

    Second, next year Utah will have a tremendous burden on their shoulders. They carry the weight of all non-AQ teams to demonstrate that they can compete week in and week out in an AQ conference. IF they fail, then there will never be a non-AQ team playing for a national title. If they succeed (win the division, win 10 games, and/or win the conference), the door is opened just a little bit further for other non-AQ teams. But it has to happen in the first few years.

  • sammyg Springville, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 11:31 a.m.

    Wow, a nice article in defense of the Utes, non-AQ conferences and yet many fans can't take the complement.

    I thought the Utes were very deserving in 2008. Too bad being undefeated doesn't mean much without the NC title.

  • Turtle Owasso, OK
    Oct. 26, 2010 11:30 a.m.


    "Reggie Bush and USC deserved to be in the NC game. They were the best those years"

    Are you talking about his last year at USC? They weren't the national champs - did you forget that Texas beat them thanks to Vince Young who took down Reggie, Matt Leinert and Wendell White. Now USC is on probation for illegal recruiting and abuses by the alumni, proving that if you cheat to win, you will have to pay the price.

  • Utefan Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 11:25 a.m.

    Since the school down south is not in a BCS qualifying conference, nor has a schedule that will give it enough respect to rise to the #2 position, which is the only spot in the rankings from which they can qualify to play in a BCS bowl, Dick's article seems to be intended for audiences other than his usual crew in Blue.

    I, for one, can not figure out why he would not write about how the school down south might never qualify for a BCS bowl considering the folly of their decision to go independent and it resulting consequences. 1984 willnever happen for them again...not by 2084, nor 2184 nor even 2284. I guess national exposure trumped all other rational considerations.

  • dakuwaqa Seattle, WA
    Oct. 26, 2010 11:10 a.m.

    Anyone from the U that claims the BCS is working is like Tide fans claiming that Alabama had nothing to play for in 08.

    Kinda takes the savor outta your win huh?

  • Just Truth Saratoga Springs, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 10:51 a.m.

    And yet Utes tout BCS wins, when they should have been national champions. Pathetic!

  • butters Salt Lake city, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 10:32 a.m.

    i'm a big fan of a playoff system. even though the utes will make a lot more money in the pac i still think a playoff makes more sense. byu got lucky with the independent draw when it comes to revenue. kind of hard for them to get in without a spotless record though and that's too bad.

    if the bcs is really all about money, i don't understand why there can't be a playoff system where the individual games are still sponsored by big name companies.

    for example:

    lets say there's a 16-team playoff. citi, who normally sponsors the rose bowl, could get a playoff game and sponsor it like they would the rose bowl. the loser takes the money for making it that far, the winner moves on and plays another day.

    i know that's a bit clouded but it's just an idea. you'd figure with all the different bowls they have ever year (i swear viagra has a bowl game this year) major companies would be cool with a playoff system as long as they got some deal like they do with the bowl system

  • fresnogirl Fresno, CA
    Oct. 26, 2010 10:22 a.m.

    It is too bad that Utah has gotten the shaft in this unfair game of Monopoly. Most likely, it'll happen again this year. Because, (sorry Hedgehog) they're not in the PAC 10 yet. Utes won't get a fair shake until next year. It sounds like, from the article, the MWC TV deal has not exactly been helpful to them in getting the votes they need. Few will vote #1 for a team they haven't (and can't) watch.

    It will be nice to see a strong Utah team get the chances it deserves.

  • 9er4life Provo, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 9:29 a.m.

    Next year will be an important year with Utah joining a BCS league. It will be closely watched as questions whether Utah will be able to hang with the big boys each week. If they fail than it will legitimize the BCS that mid-majors don't have the SOS to be considered in the NC talk. But Utah do have the BCS level personnel to hang with them. We will see if the success of the undefeated Utah's 04, 08, 10 teams will hold any weight.

  • Old Cougar Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 8:46 a.m.

    In my mind there were (are) many valid reasons why Utah was invited to join the "elite" conference of champions.
    Allow me to suggest another possibility -- Could another reason for the invitation be to get the United States Senate off the BCS's back?
    Where does Utah's Senior Senator now stand on his anti-trust argument? Also, where does Utah's AG now fit with other states in fighting this supposedly unfair system? Have they become "Mayered" in accepting the status quo?
    I would love to see Utah become the NC and it would be even more fun to watch them demolish several of football's storied teams in the process -- I still vote for a playoff system!!!

  • Bo Jangles Meridian, ID
    Oct. 26, 2010 8:46 a.m.

    Have to hand it to Harmon, As a BYU guy it probably wasn't easy for him to write an article so glowing about the Utes

  • Breadstar Provo, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 8:37 a.m.

    I purchased and read this book, because I've always been curious as to exactly what the "BCS" is and who is running it. This book opened my eyes to some highly disturbing information, not only about the BCS, but all bowl games in general. There are people getting rich off these things, and it's not the Universities that play in them...many universities actually lose money going to bowl games, and this book exposes why and how. There is plenty of lies, corruption, and misinformation in the BCS. This is a must read for any college football fan.

  • Chickenchaser Centralia, WA
    Oct. 26, 2010 8:11 a.m.

    The BCS is a machine with a heart but no brain. This goes back to its incepetion long before the Utes got the short end of the stick.

  • TJ2407 Springville, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 7:18 a.m.

    Reggie Bush and USC deserved to be in the NC game. They were the best those years. The BCS system works perfectly for what it was designed for. there is no flaw in the function only in the set up and design of it. I think people make was to much of this.

  • TJ2407 Springville, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 6:43 a.m.

    My favorite when talking about the BCS is Urben Meyer. He was against it at Utah but they asked him about it when he got to Florida and he said it works fine. He Thinks it does what it is designed to do and that is help the big schools and big conferences. He likes it because he benefits at Florida.

  • hedgehog Ann Arbor, MI
    Oct. 26, 2010 6:43 a.m.

    I have no problem with the BCS, in fact I love it!!

    Go Utes
    Official PAC12 member.

  • Turtle Owasso, OK
    Oct. 26, 2010 5:02 a.m.


    Please no generalizations - I know a lot of BYU fans who cheer for the Utes in post season play including myself. I was thrilled to see them take down the Tide two years ago.

    Why don't you appreciate someone trying to help the cause of fighting against the BCS? "The only time his team ever even went to the BCS was to root against their rivals." Not true.

  • DEW Cougars Sandy, UT
    Oct. 26, 2010 12:25 a.m.

    mwc, wac and many others already knows - FLAWS. Beware of LEAPFROGGERS. Oh, don't forget - how many times we saw USC (Reggie Bush and Pete Caroll) played in the NC games? They really didn't deserve it. Same with "THE Ohio State" which I can't stand them. And one more, I can see the tunnel is coming to an end when bcs going to Poof (vanished soon). You think soon that Texas, Tx A&M, Ohio State, Mich. and many others will leave their conferance and go Ind? Why not, like BYU said, we will keep all the revenue when comes to tv and bowl game? Or am I wrong? Like I said before, I don't care about the bcs poll and full of FLAWS!!!

  • Taylor Morgan Draper, UT
    Oct. 25, 2010 11:57 p.m.

    Excellent article, Mr. Harmon. "Death to the BCS" is well-written, thoroughly-researched, and a fun read.

    As their program is pursuing independence outside of a BCS conference and without special terms from the BCS, BYU fans should pay special attention to the arguments presented by Mr. Wetzel et al.

    I wonder if your readers are familiar with the work of Playoff PAC, a group actually founded by BYU and Utah fans. They're doing some exciting things to fight the BCS.

    Thanks, Dick, for an outstanding article.

  • Boom Irving, TX
    Oct. 25, 2010 11:54 p.m.

    Could someone explain to me why DICK is so worried about the BCS? The only time his team ever even went to the BCS was to go root against their rivals.

    Go Utes!!!

  • 1984 for life Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 25, 2010 11:25 p.m.

    Keep cryin Dick, we're still not invited.