Irish, Trojans & Bearcats (Oh My)

Well folks, let's just do it. Let's get the damn cat out of the bag once and for all. I've been holding this back because in most of my articles I want to be neutral. But of course, I have a particular team in my heart, as most of us do, and I cannot sit silently anymore and watch this happen.

Last night (8) Cincinnati beat (21) South Florida 34-17. It was billed as a Big East showdown of two unbeatens, ranked nationally in the top-25. The commentators discussed whether or not the winner of the Big East, provided they're undefeated at the end of the season, should play for the national title. One of those guys said they should. Another topic that emerged toward the end of the game was the idea that Cincinnati had proven itself as a worthy top-10 team because it had demolished - so they called it - a ranked opponent, South Florida, in South Florida's stadium.

Holy baby Moses in the basket floating down the river in Egypt. Are you f*cking kidding me?!

Yesterday I briefly mentioned Cincinnati's breathtaking schedule in my article about Boise State. The comparison between the two teams is inevitable: both are pretenders. And now it's Cincinnati's turn to face the music. I don't give a rat's behind if they end up undefeated and winning the Big East. Once again, we must ask ourselves who they've played and who they've beaten when we look at their record.

Cincinnati's record is currently 6-0. They're nationally ranked at no. 8. Their wins have come against Rutgers, Southeast Missouri State, Oregon State, Fresno State, Miami (OH), and (21) South Florida. Rutgers is 4-1, having beaten such formidable teams as Howard, Florida International, Maryland, and Texas Southern, with their only loss coming to Cincinnati; their record is obviously weak. Southeast Missouri State is a pathetic 1-5, their only win coming against Quincy (who in the holy living hell is that?), and their other losses coming from Eastern Illinois, Tennessee Martin, Tennessee State, and Austin Peay. Wow. Way to go Bearcats for that one. Next up is Oregon State, who is 4-2 with wins against Portland State, UNLV, Arizona State and Stanford, and losses to of course Cincinnati and Arizona. Oregon State's record is unstable at best. Fresno State is 2-3, having beaten UC Davis and Hawaii, and having its other losses to Wisconsin and Boise State (don't get me started). Miami (OH) at 0-6, has lost its other games to Kentucky, Boise State, Western Michigan, Kent State, and Northwestern. And now we have South Florida, at 5-1. The Bulls have beaten Wofford (um...), Western Kentucky, Charleston Southern, then-(18) Florida State (now unranked at 2-4... don't get too excited), and Syracuse, before losing to that Mighty Casey of a team, Cincinnati.

Yes ladies and gentlemen, this is your Number 8 team in the country: the Almighty Cincinnati Bearcats. (1950s corny male superhero voiceover): Undefeated, sitting alone atop the mighty Big East conference, they stand for Truth, Justice, and the American Way...

Enter the University of Notre Dame. I'm not your typical whining, blame-it-on-the-refs, run of the mill Irish fan. I'm an alumnus. I take pride in that fact, and I take pride in the traditions of Notre Dame football. But I also face the reality of the situation: Notre Dame has not had a significant football team in my opinion since it was briefly ranked no. 1 in 1993 after ousting Florida State. I won't even bitch about the "Bush Push" of 2005. All that being said, let's examine Notre Dame's schedule this year, against its 4-1 record and no. 25 national ranking.

The Irish have beaten Nevada (2-3), Michigan State (3-3), Purdue (1-5), and Washington (3-3), and lost in the final seconds at Michigan (4-2). Their opponents are far less than impressive, having currently a combined record of 13-16, with only one opponent sporting a winning record thus far. I'm going to come right out and say this: if we're rewarding, in the polls, teams like USC (4-1), Ohio State (5-1), Cincinnati (6-0), Boise State (5-0), TCU (5-0), South Florida (5-1), BYU (5-1), Houston (4-1), and Utah (4-1) for beating very weak opponents and compiling either undefeated or one-loss records, then I see no reason to not reward Notre Dame for doing the same thing. But if we're going to punish Notre Dame in the polls (or any other team) with a no. 25 ranking for beating weak opponents, in spite of an undefeated or one-loss record, then we should be doing the same punishing to the other aforementioned teams with similarly weak schedules and similar records. Again, we must examine who these teams are beating, who they're losing to, and measure that schedule strength against their overall records to determine an accurate ranking.

Enter Oklahoma. OU sits at 3-2, ranked no. 20 in the country. They've lost to then-(20) BYU and then-(17) Miami, their only two ranked opponents thus far. They've beaten Idaho State (0-6), Tulsa (a very weak 4-2), and Baylor (3-2). With a 3-2 record, wins over unranked, weak teams, and two losses, each to a ranked opponent, Oklahoma is still nationally ranked only because of its preseason no. 3 ranking. Compare, quickly, the other 3-2 teams in the country who've beaten similarly weak opponents: Baylor, Texas A&M, Uconn, Central Florida, Temple, Arkansas, Mississippi, and several teams in the Sun Belt and Pac-10 Conferences, including Cal. Why aren't those teams ranked at 3-2? This brings up an interesting point: Cal beat some weak teams, lost to (13) Oregon and then-(7) USC, and dropped out of the rankings with their 3-2 record. Cal lost to better teams than Oklahoma lost to, beat similarly weak teams as did Oklahoma, yet Oklahoma remains ranked in the top-20. Cal was preseason ranked no. 12. OU was preseason ranked no. 3. You tell me what's going on here.

So what we gather from the polls after all this examination, is that a 3-2 OU is supposed to be better than a 3-2 Cal, despite Cal losing to better opponents than OU lost to; that a 4-1 USC, 4-1 Houston, and 4-1 Utah are better teams than a 4-1 Notre Dame, after they've all beaten similarly weak, inferior opponents; and that we're rewarding undefeated and one-loss teams (except Notre Dame) for beating the poop out of weak opponents with (usually) losing records. You ready for the mind f*ck? I'll just lay it out there to stir the pot a little bit, to see who's really paying attention to the complete lack of logic inherent in this ridiculous ranking system: USC (4-1) lost to Washington (3-3), while Notre Dame (4-1) beat Washington (and lost to a 4-2 Michigan team), and USC is ranked not only higher than Notre Dame, but 19 spots higher than Notre Dame. Not only did Notre Dame beat the team that beat (6) USC, but its loss came to a better team (4-2 Michigan) than USC's loss (3-3 Washington).

I'm not at all saying that Notre Dame has a better football team than USC, or even that Notre Dame will beat USC this Saturday. But I am saying that this is a perfect example to illustrate the utter absurdity, the completely random and senseless nature, of the ranking system.

A 6-0 Cincinnati, who beat the shit out of nobody teams, is ranked no. 8.
A 4-1 USC team who lost to a 3-3 Washington is ranked no. 6.
A 4-1 Notre Dame team, who lost to a 4-2 Michigan team, is ranked no. 25.
A 4-1 Notre Dame team who beat that 3-3 Washington team, who in turn beat no. 6 USC, is ranked no. 25.
A 3-f*ckin-2 Oklahoma team who can't beat a ranked opponent is still nationally ranked at no. 20.
A 3-2 Cal team who lost to better ranked opponents than no. 20 OU is not ranked at all.
And we haven't even discussed the likes of Houston, Utah, TCU, and BYU yet this season.

I'm irritated, folks. I'm lost in the senseless lack of logic here. Someone remind me again why we don't play a full season, examine record versus schedule strength at the end of the year, place conference champions and the remaining certain number of teams with the best records versus schedule strengths into a ranked bracket system, and play a playoff to crown a true national champion. Anyone? Bueller? Buuuuueller? Buuuuuuuuueller?