Skip to content

Lone wolf coach votes TCU No. 1; was he right?

Rose Bowl Game - Wisconsin v TCU Getty Images

As they are a part of the cartel system used to determine a national champion, the coaches are expected to fall in line with the results of the BcS title game and vote for the winner in the final USA Today coaches poll.

For the second time in three years, one coach has bucked the system.

Auburn claimed 56 of the 57 first-place votes — two coaches could not be reached in time to place their vote — while the other vote went to unbeaten non-automatic qualifier TCU.  The identity of the coach was not revealed, but some reasonable assumptions could be made as to who may have broken ranks with the other coaches — Utah’s Kyle Whittingham and Boise State’s Chris Petersen are two of the 59 voters this year.

In 2008, Utah was the only team to receive a first-place vote after Florida laid a beat-down on Ohio State in the national title game.

While the name of the coach who voted TCU No. 1 was not revealed, he will be ultimately.  And, more than likely, he will be vilified by a good percentage of the country.  That would and will be a shame.

Almost as big of a shame that there has to be this argument in the first place, that a national champion can’t be decided on the field instead of on some subjective ballot filed by someone who simply doesn’t possess the time to make a rational decision.

As Penn State assistant Jay Paterno tweeted Tuesday morning, “Not sure TCU isn’t the best team in the Nation—someday the system must allow a team like that a shot at all the marbles.”

And that’s the thing.  A playoff would afford a team like TCU, like Boise State in 2009/2010 or Utah in 2008, the opportunity to prove their worth on the field of play.  Just like every other sport governed by the NCAA currently crowns their champions.

Not to impugn what Auburn accomplished last night or over their previous 13 games against a rugged schedule — they are indeed worthy — but there is a better way to determine a national champion.  Like it or not, teams like TCU and Boise State have earned the right to, as Paterno wrote, have a shot at all the marbles.

Plus-one, eight-team, 16-team playoffs and anything in between, teams like the non-AQs must be allowed the opportunity to prove, one way or the other, whether they deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as the so-called traditional powers.

All I know is, it’d be a step in the right direction arguing about the fifth-, ninth- or 17th-best team getting screwed over for a playoff spot than the current system that only allows two of 120 schools to have a shot at hoisting the crystal at season’s end.

Until Congress acts, though, I’m not holding my breath.

Permalink 31 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Auburn Tigers, Mountain West Conference, Rumor Mill, Southeastern Conference, TCU Horned Frogs, Top Posts
31 Responses to “Lone wolf coach votes TCU No. 1; was he right?”
  1. suckitflorio says: Jan 11, 2011 12:00 PM

    Die BCS…. Die!

  2. richmcn says: Jan 11, 2011 12:18 PM

    auburn would crush TCU…sorry

  3. jamie54 says: Jan 11, 2011 12:24 PM

    Don’t keep banging that drum JT, Congress has no business getting involved with how the NCAA runs it’s business. NCAA didn’t get bailed out by Congress so they don’t owe US anything. Congress needs to keep out of running businesses, no need to intrude or else you’ll be getting them involved in things you don’t want them to. Can’t have it both ways.

  4. phillyb6 says: Jan 11, 2011 12:26 PM

    @richmcn

    That’s not the point, dipshit. Read the words again. In order this time.

  5. edgy says: Jan 11, 2011 12:29 PM

    With the solution that I proposed, here are the first round matchups, seeds and seeding for any team that makes it past the first round

        Number in parentheses is seed after the first
    	round is over.
     1. Auburn (1)          vs  16. Florida State (15)
     2. Oregon (2)          vs  15. West Virginia (14)
     3. TCU (3)             vs  14. Utah (13)
     4. Wisconsin (5)       vs  13. Nevada (12) 
     5. Oklahoma (7)        vs  12. Missouri (10) 
     6. Boise State (9)     vs  11. Arkansas (8) 
     7. Virginia Tech (11)  vs  10. Ohio State (6) 
     8. Connecticut (16)    vs   9. Stanford (4)
    

    Participation is as follows: the designated champions of the 4 permanent BCS conferences (Big 10ish, Big 12ish, Pac-10 and SEC) and the 4 current probationary conferences (ACC, Big East, MWC and WAC). The at-large field is filled by the highest remaining teams as ranked by the final BCS poll but no more than 2 teams per conference. Home games in all rounds would go to the highest ranked BCS team so that while Connecticut has the higher initial rank, they would play at Stanford, which has the higher BCS rank.

  6. burntorangehorn says: Jan 11, 2011 12:49 PM

    And that’s the thing. A playoff would afford a team like TCU, like Boise State in 2009/2010 or Utah in 2008, the opportunity to prove their worth on the field of play.
    ===========================
    Would? Eh, maybe, but I think the correct word there is “could,” or perhaps “might.” Considering that football doesn’t hold games more frequently than once per week, that limits the number of teams, and it’s entirely possible that undefeated conference champions like TCU, or Utah, Boise State, etc. in years past, could miss the boat again.

    With that said, I think every FBS conference champion should be involved in any playoff that happens, and that wild-cards should be kept to an absolute minimum.

  7. bernieboy79 says: Jan 11, 2011 1:06 PM

    Edgy…I like it.

    First round games can be held two weeks after the conference championship at the home stadium you mentioned.

    2nd round games can be held on NYD or that week via the 4 BCS bowls. Everyone is happy.

    Another option is to cut the field to 12 and allow a 1st round bye for the top 4 seeds. That way the bowl committees knows at least one team per bowl which allows them to promote the game.

  8. richmcn says: Jan 11, 2011 1:13 PM

    @richmcn

    That’s not the point, dipshit. Read the words again. In order this time.

    ======================

    wasn’t addressing the point, dipshit. just stating my opinion. go fuck yourself next time, philly trash.

  9. jstrizzle says: Jan 11, 2011 1:35 PM

    richmcn says:
    Jan 11, 2011 1:13 PM
    @richmcn

    That’s not the point, dipshit. Read the words again. In order this time.

    ======================

    wasn’t addressing the point, dipshit. just stating my opinion. go fuck yourself next time, philly trash.

    ======================

    Ever heard that opinions are like assholes? I think that should be said about yours as the whole point of the article is to say they should have a legitimate shot at a National Championship and not whether they would win or lose.

  10. diamondduq says: Jan 11, 2011 1:39 PM

    JAY PATERNO?!?! Seriously? Forget only having a job because of his last name, that wouldn’t even save him if his dad wasn’t the coach. This is the biggest moron in college football with coach in his title!

    That being said, does anyone honestly believe there are 16 teams in any given year worthy of being crowned NC? Even 8? Look at the past 20 years, there are, at most, a handful, and that’s pushing it. A +1, or 4-team playoff since the money-hungry cartel wouldn’t go for an “if needed” game, would be ideal.

    The real problem isn’t even the NC, it’s all the money in the other BCS games. For the most part the NC game has been correct, which is why the +1 is ideal for cases like this year, when the whiners are crying for TCU, or BS University last year, or Auburn in 2004 but no one questions Texas vs. USC in 2005, no need for any other games, the winner of that game was the hands down NC.

  11. muschamplove says: Jan 11, 2011 1:41 PM

    Richmn,

    Don’t argue with Philly scum. These people piss on themselves at games and throw food, drinks, etc. This guy has more than likely never sniffed a college campus, has a fathead of Ron Mexico in his bathroom to enhance his illicit penal fondling and eats brats for breakfast.

  12. richmcn says: Jan 11, 2011 1:45 PM

    Ever heard that opinions are like assholes? I think that should be said about yours as the whole point of the article is to say they should have a legitimate shot at a National Championship and not whether they would win or lose.

    ===============

    yes, reggin…and I said they would lose. that so hard to comprende, chief?

  13. jstrizzle says: Jan 11, 2011 1:57 PM

    reggin? Wow it is hard to argue with someone who has such a low IQ. Now I am sure on the internet you are a powerful CEO of a billion dollar company, bench press 450 lbs and can beat up anyone you want. The fact is that you cannot read an article for what it is and you can constructively criticize it. You can never prove that they would beat TCU. In fact, I can easily say that TCU would win. We can argue all day and no one would ever win. You may sling more mindless insults and sentences that are more insensitive than they are informative. I am sure you will go about your day thinking Auburn in the best team in the NCAA but there is no for sure proof. 2 teams won every single game. To me they are identical. The irony is that I was rooting for Auburn to win. On a side note, I would say your mommy and daddy love you and someday you will resolve the issues with them. Until then, keep up they great work.

  14. nawlinsraider says: Jan 11, 2011 1:57 PM

    Right now, there are 117 D-1 football teams. Lets add 3 teams to it and make 120 teams. Form 10 12-team conferences and play conference championships (i.e. 1st round of playoffs). This gives us 10 teams to fill 5 NYD games (Sugar, Rose, Fiesta, Orange, and Cotton). From the five remaining teams, the top two, using BCS rating, are chosen for a plus 1 game the week after. This way, the bowl games are unaffected, necessary battles take place and the SEC will still win it just as they have done the last 5 years and 6 of the last 8!!!

  15. richmcn says: Jan 11, 2011 1:59 PM

    reggin? Wow it is hard to argue with someone who has such a low IQ

    =========

    yep…think about it, “jstrizzle”

  16. jstrizzle says: Jan 11, 2011 2:42 PM

    yep…think about it, “jstrizzle”

    =========

    Haha. This is priceless. I know exactly what it means. You could not be more off. That is why it is so great. I’ve heard it used in two contexts and you are off on both. But so great that you can bring your racist bigotry to the board.

  17. nawlinsraider says: Jan 11, 2011 2:48 PM

    Tale of the Tape:

    Auburn:
    Overall schedule record: 107-72
    Victories over 10 Bowl-bound opponents
    Victories over final AP top 25 – 7
    1st Team All-Americans – 2
    Heisman Award winner

    TCU:
    Overall schedule record – 80-85
    Victories over 7 Bowl-bound opponents
    Victories over final AP top 25 – 1
    1st Team All-Americans – 1

  18. jstrizzle says: Jan 11, 2011 3:10 PM

    Oregon:
    Overall schedule record – 78-83
    Victories over 3 Bowl-bound opponents
    Victories over final AP top 25 – 3
    1st Team All-Americans – 1

    Not sure if you are proving that Auburn would crush TCU or if TCU didn’t belong in the finals but regardless then you are saying Oregon doesn’t belong in the finals or else they should have gotten destroyed but regardless it was a close game to the final seconds.

  19. gamustangdude says: Jan 11, 2011 3:28 PM

    @richmcn

    I got reggin, nigger (please don’t censor) spelled backwards.

    Now does that say more about your class or the person you responded to. ( PS I only recoginized the word because i’ve been called that a few times in college) Thanks for making it hard for decent southerns.

  20. brasho says: Jan 11, 2011 3:35 PM

    There are no more than 8 teams that need to be in the playoffs. The rules would be simple and easy:

    there are no probationary conferences or BCS conferences, that is BS!

    if you win your conference and have 1 or fewer losses and are in the top 10, you are in.

    if you have 2 losses and played in the conference championship game (win or lose) and are in the top 10, you can get in.

    If only 8 teams get in then the two championship teams would only be playing an extra 3 games, which could take place over a period of 6 weeks. The first game taking place two weeks after conference championship games and the last games and the last game taking place in the 2nd week of January. It’s simple. The playoff games would take place in place of some of the bowl games at some of the larger venues. Seeding would be set solely by ranking with the qualifier that no non-conference champions could be seeded higher than the conference chanpion from that conference.

  21. gatorprof says: Jan 11, 2011 3:56 PM

    TCU would be a 3-5 loss team in the SEC west.

    All of this talk about TCU and BSU is a joke, period. If you they to play tough physical teams week in and week out, they would take their lumps. Good team, bowl worthy team, but not a top SEC team by any stretch of the imagination.

  22. 1990tiger says: Jan 11, 2011 4:00 PM

    richmcn says: Jan 11, 2011 1:45 PM

    yes, reggin…
    _____________________________
    Is that really necessary? It certainly isn’t appropriate (although I have to admit I didn’t know what it meant until gamustangdude explained it). I can understand that things sometimes get personal on these boards (I’ve gotten involved in a few of those exchanges myself) but there really isn’t a need to stoop to racist attacks.

  23. jstrizzle says: Jan 11, 2011 4:45 PM

    I figured richmcn would disappear after he got put in a box by 2 or 3 people. To anyone above that stated that TCU would be 3-5 in the SEC I pretty much agree. Also, I agree with that being the case with BSU as well. But lets jump back a week ago. I don’t know if anyone here is a NFL fan. Everyone knew that Seattle was the worst team to ever make the playoffs, also everyone knew that New Orleans was gonna destroy them. I think that is the reason why the NFL has such high rating is that uncertainty. Maybe I am way off and I realize this is just my take. I just look at the success of March Madness. Man how I would love to fill out a January Madness for football. I also would hope that they come up with a better name than January Madness.

  24. kfwokc says: Jan 11, 2011 4:55 PM

    Any playoff involving more than 8 teams is a pipe dream and that requires 3 extra weeks. AND the 9th place team may easily be as good as the 5th or 6th place team but would be left out, just like the 3rd or 4th place team is currently. I like the bowls as they always have been and the BCS is better than what we had in the 1960′s, as well as before then and after then prior to the BCS. It’s flawed but a playoff system can’t work because it takes too long. I don’t want the Championship game played at the end of Jan. It’s already a week later that it should be. Someone will always be crying, whether its the 9th place team, the 17th or the 3d.

  25. richmcn says: Jan 11, 2011 6:06 PM

    LOL – yeah, chief I “ran away”

    clown

    word up, jstrizzle nizzle bizzle

  26. jstrizzle says: Jan 11, 2011 8:36 PM

    Haha again with the racial stereotypes. First off, I am white so your “insults” carry no weight. Second, the screen name is a silly nickname in high school. You have no idea the context for which it was created. I think you keep going back to it because you have a weak argument. Usually people that have lower IQ use insults such as this because they cannot formulate a strong argument. Also, I think you know that you’re done so your only hope is to aspire to get the last word. No one is impressed but many are insulted. I, however, am not one of them.

  27. jonanthans says: Jan 11, 2011 8:43 PM

    Auburn shouldnt have even been in the NC game due to an illegal athelete, sCAM kNEWnothingTON. Oregon has a crappy defense and it took all 60 minutes to allow AU to even win the game. AU may not have even scored against TCU. It will carry the asterik beside it for the brief time that it stands before they are stripped of the title.

  28. pff says: Jan 12, 2011 12:26 AM

    pal…keep the long paragraphs comin’…zzzzz

  29. pff says: Jan 12, 2011 12:31 AM

    The Southeastern Conference is now 7-0 in BCS championship games and has more national titles in the Bowl Championship Series era than all the other conferences combined. Auburn is the fifth different SEC team to win a BCS championship.

    just sayin’…

  30. dempsey63 says: Jan 12, 2011 7:00 AM

    President Obama should pull a “Nixon” and declare TCU the national champions, just like Tricky Dick did with Texas.

  31. sfsaintsfan says: Jan 12, 2011 12:20 PM

    Edgy:

    I like the idea of a 16 game playoff system, but you can’t limit the bracket to two teams per conference.

    Just this year:

    USA Today/Coaches Poll
    1. Auburn
    8. LSU
    11. Alabama
    12. Arkansas
    (17. Mississippi State)

    AP Poll
    1. Auburn
    8. LSU
    10 Alabama
    12. Arkansas
    15. Mississippi State

    ALL of these teams are in the SEC West. The SEC West alone is a power conference, the East was down this year, but they usually produce some pretty good teams at Florida, Georgia, Tennessee and South Carolina.

    A 16 team bracket is a good idea, but you cannot leave out some of the top 16 teams when you set it up. Really, West Virginia instead of LSU and Alabama this year????

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!