The BCS Debate

According to http://www.bcsfootball.org/, The Bowl Championship Series, or the BCS as it is commonly referred to, was formed in 1998 and is the selection system in which the top two teams in NCAA football play for the national championship. In order to determine these two teams, teams are ranked through a combination of the USA today Coaches Poll, the Harris Interactive College Football poll and an average of six computer rankings. Each of the three factors is weighed equally in a team’s BCS score. This system also selects the teams that will play in the other BCS bowl games: The Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl and Fiesta Bowl. The teams come from the 11 division 1-A conferences and the University of Notre Dame (an independent school). Six of these conferences had bowl tie-ins before the formation of the BCS, so they had to be guaranteed this in order to agree to the new system. For example, the Rose Bowl always plays the winner of the Big Ten v Pac 10. As a result, certain conferences get automatic qualifications to a BCS game. Notre Dame does not belong to a conference, so their agreement says if they are ranked #8 or better in the final BCS standings, they will automatically receive a BCS berth. The other teams/conferences are at large teams and have to earn their way in.

Many people agree that this is not the most fair or best system out there. The National Championship is out of the reach of some deserving teams, just based on the conference they belong to. For example, Boise State was 44-4 during the last four seasons. This includes 4-1 against major conference opponents, and going undefeated several times over the span of years (Wetzel). The problem Boise St has is they play in the Western Athletic Conference, which the BCS feels is a lower competition (Wetzel). However, Boise St has practically been begging BCS worthy teams to play them, and no one is jumping at the chance. Why is this? It is not due to the fact that BCS teams will not play weaker opponents. It is rather the point that the BCS teams are afraid of losing to an underrated team. In fact, it was proven again this season. This past Sunday, the BCS rankings were released and once again top ranked teams like Florida were not matched up again teams like Boise St and TCU. Boise St and TCU were chosen to play each other. Many people feel this is a prime example to the bias in these games.

Another problem with the BCS system is the way teams are ranked. The BCS standings take into consideration the USA today Coaches Poll and the Harris Interactive College Football poll. Throughout the season, teams are ranked based on who they play and how many wins they have. If a team loses early in the year, they have plenty of time to redeem themselves and achieve a high ranking again. However, if a team loses late in the year, they do not have that opportunity. For example, last year Florida lost early, but won their remaining games and scored a chance to play for the national championship. A team who wins all year, but loses their last game would more than likely not get that same chance.

The BCS debate has even hit Capitol Hill as people believe the BCS unfairly allocated millions of dollars, and stacks the deck against smaller conferences that have a legitimate chance at the title (Casteel). The bigger schools and conferences get a huge chunk of the BCS money. For example, last season saw Boise St and T.C.U. being ranked higher in the BCS than Cincinnati and Virginia Tech. However, Boise St went on to the San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl, and brought home $750,000. Cincinnati and Virginia Tech played in the Orange Bowl, and brought home $18 million for their conference to share (Bakalar). Even President Obama has also expressed his displeasure with the BCS system, and strongly advocates a playoff system. Although, not everyone agrees Washington should get involved in this debate, it proves how strongly people feel this is an important issue.

In order to make college football fairer, and allow more deserving teams such as Boise St a shot at the title, a college football playoff needs to be created, similar to the highly successful and popular March Madness that college basketball offers. Every major sport in the United States has a playoff system to determining the winner, why should NCAA football be any different? A playoff system would allow more deserving teams a chance at the title. For example, in NCAA basketball, 64 teams start out competing for the chance at the title game. In the BCS system for football, only two teams are given the chance. On top of this fact, the two teams may not even be the most deserving. Almost every year since the implementation of the BCS in 1998, there has been some kind of controversy involving which teams were chosen, and who the champion turned out to be. Take for example the 2004 season. USC and Oklahoma were chosen to play in the title game, even though Auburn was also undefeated. USC blew out Oklahoma in that game and Auburn won their bowl game (Dougherty). Many people felt it would have been a better match up between USC v. Auburn. Another example was the 2001 season. Nebraska lost to Colorado in a blowout, which denied them a chance at their conference title game. The computer ranking system failed to drop Nebraska down far enough, so Nebraska actually made it to the BCS championship over Colorado, the team that beat them overwhelmingly, and who was the Big 12 champion (Dougherty). Last season, Utah went undefeated, but was skipped over by the BCS. The BCS chose Florida and Oklahoma to play in the title game, at one loss apiece.

Opponents of a playoff system think it will commercialize or professionalize the sport ( Wieberg). However, the sport is already commercialized. All one has to do is look at the names of the Bowl games: The Tostitos Fiesta Bowl, the Fed Ex Orange Bowl, the Citi Rose Bowl and the Allstate Sugar bowl just to name a few. Schools also sign contracts with companies such as Nike or Adidas, in which the school gets a huge sum of money, and the players only wear their brand of shoes and clothing. Opponents also argue that the traditional bowl games would be lost in a playoff system. The BCS coordinator says money spent on advertisements would now be spent on playoffs instead of bowl games (Frommer). Why not include the conduct the playoffs as part of the bowl games? It would be a win-win situation. Tradition does not have to be lost in order to improve the current system. Furthermore, opponents argue that regular season games would no longer matter. However, in a playoff system, a team still has to do well in order to make the playoffs. Teams are still going to play with the same intensity in order to win each game, in order to guarantee a playoff spot.

There are many flaws with the current BCS system, and there just seems to be excuses as to why it can not be changed. Too many teams do not get a fair chance to play for the national championship, or receive the recognition they deserve. A playoff system may not be perfect, but it would improve the current situation dramatically. In a playoff system, the best team may not always win, but at least they have a chance to play, and many more fans and teams would leave happy.

WORKS CITED
Bakalar, Nicholas. “In BCS, Dollars are the Only Relevant Numbers”. The New York Times. 3

Jan. 2009. 14 Nov 2009.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/04/sports/ncaafootball/04score.html?

_r=2
Casteel, Chris. “BCS Controversy Heats up on Capitol Hill.” NEWSOK. 2 May 2009. 14 Nov.

2009. http://newsok.com/bcs-controversy-heats-up-on-capitol-hill/article/3366139
Dougherty, Robert. “The Worst BCS Controversies.” Associated Content Sports. 20 Oct

2008. 14 Nov. 2009.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1091385/the_worst_bcs_controversies.html
Frommer, Frederic. “Game-Changing Call to College Football: Playoff”. ABC News. 1 May 2009.

14 Nov. 2009. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=7478888
Wetzel, Dan.”Boise BCS Blocked”. Yahoo Sports. 7 Nov. 2009. 14 Nov. 2009.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-boise110709&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
Wieberg, Steve. “No Final Answers to Those BCS Questions”. USA Today. 9 Sept 2009. 14 Nov.

2009. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-09-09-things-to-change-bcs_x.htm

Survey Reflection

The survey results supported my argument that the BCS system needs to be changed. 85.7% of the respondents felt a change to the playoff system needed to be made. Only 9.6 % of the respondents were satisfied or extremely satisfied with the current system. And 90.5% felt that money was the reason the BCS system is in place.

One reason I felt the BCS should change was that the system is biased towards larger schools, and 100% of the respondents felt that was true, including the few who actually supported the BCS. 100% of the people also agreed that the way the BCS is set up excluded deserving teams from a chance at the national championship in past years.

I found the number of people who dislike the BCS system to be very interesting. 52.4 % were dissatisfied and 19% were extremely dissatisfied with the system, with one person adding a comment that he was EXTREMELY dissatisfied. I also was impressed with how many of the respondents went above and beyond the requirements of the survey, and gave their input in the comment box. Their thoughts helped guide my direction when writing the final draft of the survey. The only thing I would change if I had to do it again was to try and gather more input. A larger survey sample would have been even more interesting!

Reading Response #3

Brent Staples writes in his essay, “Just Walk on By”, the stereotypes and racial profiling he faces being a young African American. When he walks the streets at night, he faces people who cross the street, lock their doors, or give him nervous looks. He also brings up the police treatment, and how a fellow journalist was mistakenly reported as the killer, and dragged to the police car at gun point. Staples, and this journalist mentioned, had not done anything to deserve this treatment, the people are just attributing their skin color to their fear.

What is interesting to me is Staples response to the situation. He seems to understand their point of view, bringing up the point that women are often vulnerable to street attacks and that black males over represent the perpetrator in those cases. He even goes to the extreme to try and make sure those around him know he is “safe”, by giving people space, and to not follow them if going to the same place. He started whistling classical music, because he thinks people wouldn’t believe a mugger would do that.

It is really unfortunate in this day and age that people have to experience this. I understand people, especially women alone at night, want to be aware of their surroundings and be safe, but they shouldn’t assume a person is dangerous based on his skin color. If you think about it, statistically, the majority of serial killers are middle age white males. Why is the fear attributed to black males?

It is sad to me that good guys like Staples, experience this on a daily basis. He mentions feeling, “surprised, embarrassed, and dismayed” the first time someone did this to him. I can’t imagine the feeling one has when you are assumed guilty without doing anything to deserve it.

The Pride of Running Out of the Tunnel- Michigan Stadium

Michgan State Football- Another Big 10 School

Michigan Football Stadium- Home of the largest crowd for college football games.

Reading Response #2

Denis Wilson writes in his essay, A Look Under the Hoodie, that even though the hoodie is popular, it signifies outcast status. He states that it's popularity crosses the board from infants to grandparents. Today, even popular brand clothing such as Tommy Hilfiger and Ralph Lauren, and high end brands such as Gucci and Versach are making their own versions of the hoodie. How can a piece of clothing fall into the category of both outcast status, and be popular at the same time?

Wilson states the hooded sweatshirt was invented by Champion to be just practical clothing to keep the workers warm in New York warehouses. As time went on, hoodies were also made for sports. Athletes would lend their hoodies to their girlfriends, thus leading to more and more people adding it to their wardrobe.

When did the hoodie transform from practical clothing to outcast status? In the 1970's, hip hop culture was becoming prevalent on the streets of New York City. These trendsetters used the hoodie to isolate and hide beneath, and create anonymity. Society began to see people wearing hoodies as possibly being up to no good. They began to become popular among muggers and graffiti writers. Skaters, snowboarders and punk music fans also adopted the hoddie in their culture, which caused them to also adopt the outcast status. This time period also saw the rise of the Rocky movie. Rocky Balboa was a steet thug, as well as a striving athlete. At the same time these different subcultures were adopting the hoodie, Rocky sports a gray hoodie in the film, leaving a "us against the world" mentality.

Today, a hoodie can be found in almost everyone's closet. It is as much about comfort as it is about style. In fact, the people who do not own a hoodie nowadays may actually be seen as the outcast.It is interesting to see how something as simple as a piece of clothing can be viewed upon differently throughout the years.

The Faces of Hezbollah

Hezbollah is a militant fundamentalist Shiite organization in Lebanon that many see to be a terrorist group. They have strong ties to Iran, and oppose Israel. They seek to create an Iranian-style state in all of Lebanon, and wish to remove all non-Islamic influences. Shawn Teresa Flanigan and Mounan Abdel –Samad discuss Hezbollah’s motivation to provide social services, and how this in turn increases public support for them, even though their main objective is the destruction of Israel, in their article “Hezbollah’s Social Jihad: Nonprofits as Resistance Organization.

Flanigan and Abdel-Samad based their article on an empirical study of health and social service organizations in Lebanon. Through their interviews of the organizations employees, they found that the poor demonstrate their loyalty to Hezbollah, even though it may not be heartfelt. Basically, since Hezbollah controls their social and health services, both through controlling resources and the need to get a referral from a Hezbollah political leader, people are forced to show their support even if they do not agree with it. The group primarily serves the Shiites, who are known to be the least favorably treated group of people in Lebanon.

Hezbollah created this service organization, called the Social Unit. Under this unit, people can receive social, medical and educational services. One thing the authors pointed out was the services primarily benefit the Shiite population, and are not usually advertised to the general Lebanese population. However, after an Israeli attack, their services are covered a great deal by the media. Hezbollah seems to want to put themselves in a good light, and that they are a good organization that was attacked by Israel. Hezbollah maintains its power and influence by focusing on the Lebanese government’s neglect of the Shiite’s. As long as people are in need of services, and Hezbollah controls what these people need, the support for their group will only grow larger.

Hezbollah seems to have two faces. On one hand, they have provided services and built schools and hospitals for the low income Shiites in Lebanon. On the other hand, they are seen as an evil terrorist group that must be stopped. In Daniel Byman's article, "Should Hezbollah be Next?", he discusses that Hezbollah should be the next target on our war on terror. In the eyes of the United States, this group is nothing but a terrorist group that tries to mask its evil ways through positive movements such as offering schools, services and hospitals that the Lebanese government was not offering. Also, its political wing holds 12 seats in parliament. Because of these factors, the United States would have to accept the risks and consequences of taking action, and realize it would be difficult to find allies for another war. Hezbollah seems to want to stay away from conflict as well since they think any conflict with the U.S. will lose supporters. Byman feels if the U.S. can dismantle Hezbollah's militant activity, then they would only need to focus on their political efforts, minus the violence. They would still be a prominant force in the area, but it wouldn't be a threat to the rest of the world.He feels The U.S. needs to hit indirectly, and go through Iran or Syria.

Bilal Y Saab writes in his article, "Rethinking Hezbollah's Disarmament", that Hezbollah receives political support from Syria through their political influence in Lebanon. Syria also supplies them with arms. He further points out that the United States could recruit Syria to side with Israel, and cut off support for Hezbollah. He says Iran's generous religious, financial and military assistance has given them staying power. However, Iran's foreign policy agenda often undermines their Islamic project.Saab feels there are a few different ways to turn Hezbollah from a terrorist group to a normal political party. He says this can happen through two separate stages. The first involves Iran's cooperation in telling Hezbollah to end its armed struggle with Israel. Once this is done, Lebanese politicians will be able to negotiate. Many people believe it will be hard to destroy the group as a whole, but many believe they can focus their activities to the political institution, instead of the terrorist group.

Reading Response #1

After reading Manuel Munoz's essay, "Leave your name at the Border" in Convergences, I'm left to ponder a few thoughts. Munoz talks about identity among Mexicans, when it comes to pronunciation of their names, or even the Anglicization of their names. He uses the example of family members distancing themselves from traditional Mexican names to more Americanized names like Brandon or Kaitlyn.

Why are people replacing their culture with appearance? Munoz states that the perception of Mexicans being lower class illegal immigrants, basically forces them to. For example, his step father changed his name from Antonio to Tony; Not because he wanted to , but because he didn't want to be passed over for work. In a day and age of supposed equal opportunities, it is sad to see such stereotypes still exist. When someone has to actually change their name, and abandon their culture in order to be accepted in our society, what does that say about us?

One thing that surprised me in the article was when Munoz pointed out in a few different occasions when he was shocked to hear a name pronounced correctly, or to see someone still using a traditional Mexican name. They have become so accustomed to people not respecting their culture, or attempting to pronounce their names correctly, that it actually shocks and confused them when someone does.

Another thing I found fascinating was the gate agent, a Mexican woman, at the airport. She called a Mexican man overhead, and he had a traditional Mexican name. He wondered if she would speak to him in Spanish or would she speak loudly to him as if he were deaf, assuming he didn't know English due to his Mexican name he didn't change. Basically, he was wondering since she has a good job and is using make-up to lighten her skin color, if she totally abandoned her heritage. It's sad to think a person has to separate themselves from their background in order to feel accepted by their own society.

Screen Shot

How does composing change shape in digital spaces?

When I first saw my work as a photograph, it reminded me how often we take technology for granted. There are so many things we are able to do, and it has made our lives so much easier.

In reality, a computer could hold everything a person needs to compose a paper. Back in the day, one had to gather a notebook, pen, books and notes. Digital composing allows for someone to have access to everything they need in one place.

Digital composing is more organized, and allows a person to collect their thoughts more effectively and neatly.It also allows us to easily make edits, and correct any mistakes. I can simply press the backspace button and fix an error I find. If I had to do this manually with a pen and paper, I would probably have to rewrite the paper. I am also able to find any spelling errors with a click of a button. Digital composing saves time and stress.

How can we better understand digital composing processes?

The best way is research or trial and error. In order to learn anything, someone has to try and experience it. For example, I was aware of how to do a screen shot, but I have never had to save it as a jpeg before. I went on the Internet and entered my inquiry in Google, and found my answer in less than a minute. To better understand anything, we have to have the willingness to learn something new.