Boise falls

You could almost hear the shouts of delight ring through media and coaching offices across the United States. Boise State finally fell to defeat on a freezing night in Reno-Nevada, puncturing their hopes of a National Championship berth for good.

There has always been a sense that certain groups have been waiting for this moment. Boise play in the WAC, a conference that is dismissed as inferior and commands significantly less lucrative television rights deals. How dare they make a nuisance of themselves and challenge the college football world-order by trying to land a spot in the title game?

This year marks the first season that they have begun to be talked about in more respectful tones. In previous terms their achievements have been dismissed as being a result of easy scheduling and weaker opposition. Both complaints have solid grounds; Oregon and Auburn stand with unbeaten records after facing significantly stronger conference opponents on a weekly basis. But Boise have often felt as if they are not only playing against their opposition, but also the goodwill of those that determine the rankings and bowl match-ups.

Of the most irritating tactics in this campaign, retrospectively attempting to down-grade victories against ranked opposition is perhaps the most mindless. After Boise legitimately beat then #10-ranked Virginia Tech in a tight and exciting game on national television to open the season, Tech lost to FCS James Madison. In certain critics eyes, this was reason enough to render Boise's win less impressive.

Not even appreciating that the James Madison loss was up there as one of the shock results of the year in the sport, such analysis ignored the fact that Virginia Tech played Boise as a #10-ranked team would both physically and mentally, that perhaps the loss to Boise had in fact subsequently affected the VT efforts against James Madison, and that if Tech were not as strong as the coaches and media had assessed before the season, that it was the fault of the system, not Boise State.

The archaic nature of the college football system has long been cross-questioned and argued over, and there have been calls for a playoff system for a significant number of years now. But if Boise had gone unbeaten again this year as they did last and were again denied a berth in the Championship game (last year both unbeaten Boise and TCU were matched up against each other in the Fiesta Bowl to fudge the issue), it would have been deeply unfair to deny them a shot at a National Championship once more.

The current system essentially prays for there to only be two unbeaten sides come the conclusion of the regular season, and if Boise and TCU are in a list of several unbeatens, their lack of historical prestige and conference strength will always play against them. But without the ability to play the bigger teams (who are eager to avoid such match-ups for obvious reasons; they have everything to lose), Boise and TCU can never break that vicious cycle.

In cases such as these where there are multiple undefeated teams, they should be matched up in a semi-final (where #1 plays #4, #2 plays #3) and final series. These additional games would attract huge television audiences and commercial potential, and most importantly, would be a step towards fairness.