Why is Oregon #1?

It would be an understatement to say that the BCS is fascinating. Say what you will about college football’s “official” ranking system (and I will say that I hate it, as about 9 out of 10 Americans do) but it’s impossible to deny that it’s downright intriguing. Perhaps that’s the case with all clearly flawed systems; we are forced to live in a world where the champion of college football’s highest division is determined by a hodgepodge of politicking, opinion, and spurious mathematical formulae, and so we watch, not because we are curious to see who we will eventually crown America’s best college team, but because we are engrossed by the results that the system spits out. Like the politburo inspiring a unique gallows humor in the former Soviet Union, the BCS, like Mother Russia, tells us who is the best football team, and while we can joke and complain and hem and haw all we like, we must ultimately accept the decision, as that is the only choice we have.

And that’s what makes it interesting: if the BCS were to tell us that Akron (0-10) was the #1 team in the nation, we would be forced to accept it. We would be forced to watch them play in the BCS National Championship Game, and if they won it, we would be forced to accept them as BCS National Champions, even if undefeated, major-conference teams failed to get in. And we could watch a team like TCU (10-0), which is at the mercy of the BCS, get left off the polls altogether, if for nothing else to satisfy the desires of the big-conference backers who would love nothing more than to see a top 25 filled with nothing but automatic qualifiers, “the way it should be.” Each of these scenarios is equally unlikely, but it does intrigue the diehard college football fan to know that quirks in the system cause one to sit on pins and needles every time the standings are released, especially if your team is one of the precious few with a legitimate shot at the title game. We trust that the system will make the “right” decision—or at least, we hope it will—but rarely is the proletariat content with the decision of a higher power that they don’t support nor fully understand.

I should make my biases clear: as an avowed BCS hater, I want nothing more than to see at least one non-AQ team make it into the title game this year. That doesn’t mean I lack the ability to discuss the system rationally, but I do view the BCS with an eye toward getting TCU or Boise State into the title game, mostly because it would foil the big-conference commissioners and athletic directors who perpetuate the system, and more than likely lead to its demise.

But fair is fair, and as long as the current system is in place, I don’t want to see any of the big boys get sandbagged either, which is why I’ve found it so curious this week that many sports commentators have been raising the issue of whether TCU should have supplanted Auburn in this week’s polls. I don’t agree with this notion; Auburn has played the 7th toughest schedule in the nation and is the only team besides TCU sitting at 10-0, and they deserve to be #1 more than any other team in the country. My concern is why writers and talking heads have declined to go after a more obvious target: Oregon.

I am not nearly alone in my dislike of the BCS, but even commentators who have acknowledged the fact that TCU might be unfairly left out of the top two seem to be content with the notion that Oregon is #1. The gushing praise from commentators, in fact, can be downright sickening. They mostly seem to love Oregon's offense, currently #1 in the nation in both yardage and points, and point to this as proof of Oregon's stature as the #1 team in the country. Granted, their offense has been nothing to sneeze at this year. But Oregon's accomplishments have been a mirage, and the schedule played by the Ducks, more than anything, has allowed them to gain the status they now enjoy.

Let's take a look at the average national total defensive ranking of each of the BCS conferences:

Big East: 26.1
SEC: 41.8
Big Ten: 50.5
ACC: 51
Pac-10: 64.1
Big 12: 72.6

There are a few surprises on this list-- I know quite a few people who would be shocked to see the Big East easily atop this list, and probably just as many who would be surprised to see the Big 12 at the bottom. Indeed, though, one of the least surprising things about this list is who is just above the Big 12: the Pac-10, which boasts only three teams (Oregon, Cal, Stanford) among the top 50 defenses nationally, the only BCS conference besides the Big 12 with that distinction. But perhaps the most surprising thing about this list concerns who is not on it. Let's take a look at that list again, with one small alteration:

Big East: 26.1
SEC: 41.8
Big Ten: 50.5
ACC: 51
Mountain West: 63.7
Pac-10: 64.1
Big 12: 72.6

Yes, that's right. Even if we count bottom-dwellers like New Mexico, Wyoming, and UNLV (all in the bottom 20 defensively in the nation), the MWC still bests the Pac-10's overall defensive rankings nationally. Yet TCU is an impressive 8th in the nation offensively despite not yet playing New Mexico (118th nationally) while Oregon has yet to play California (12th) or Arizona (60th). And while Oregon holds the top spot in the nation due mostly to its flashy offense (567 yards per game), TCU has been no slouch either, putting up 493 yards per game. And while Oregon has also been allowing 329 yards per contest, TCU has only let up 216. Oregon outgains opponents by 238 yards per game; TCU outgains opponents by 277. So if Oregon's overall game isn't as dominant as TCU's, why do they get all the love?

The general argument is that playing in the Pac-10 gives Oregon a much stronger schedule, and any team that goes undefeated in the Pac-10 has had a more difficult road than one that sweeps the lowly Mountain West. This doesn't explain why Oregon is ahead of Auburn; after all, Auburn is undefeated in the hallowed SEC, and as I mentioned earlier, they have played the 7th toughest schedule in the nation thus far. By season's end, their schedule is projected to be the 2nd toughest in the nation overall. Common sense would dictate that for Oregon to finish the season ahead of them (assuming Auburn remains undefeated), Oregon will have to have played the toughest schedule in the nation. They won't. (That dubious honor will likely go to Iowa State).

As of now, Oregon hasn't played the toughest schedule in the nation. Nor the 2nd or 3rd. Or the 25th. Or 50th. As of right now, Oregon has played the 94th toughest schedule in the nation. This weekend's game against underperforming Washington actually managed to give them a boost; they were 101st before that. The 94th hardest schedule in the nation puts them directly above New Mexico State, Idaho, and Western Michigan, in that order. Not exactly the most illustrious company to be in. Three spots ahead of them, tied for 90th, are Eastern Michigan and Louisiana-Lafayette. That means that if they had swapped schedules with Eastern Michigan, they would have statistically been marginally more likely to have lost a game by now.

This is the mightiest team in the nation?

They've played the 4th easiest schedule out of all the BCS conference teams. Only Louisville (100), Syracuse (104), and Northwestern (106) have played easier schedules (is it any shock that all three of these teams have had "surprisingly" good seasons this year?) You'll also notice that Oregon has played the easiest schedule in the Pac-10; the next hardest is USC, way up at 75th. This is no doubt aided by Oregon's stiff out-of-conference schedule featuring the powerhouses New Mexico (1-8), Tennessee (3-6), and Portland State (2-7 in the FCS). Auburn's OOC schedule didn't exactly set the world on fire, but at least they challenged Clemson (currently 5-4).

TCU's strength of schedule thus far ranks 60th; not world-beating, but a far cry from the 90's. They faced (and beat) Oregon State (4-4) and Baylor (7-3), two teams who have winning in-conference records in the Pac-10 and Big 12, respectively. They also beat June Jones' respected 5-5 SMU Mustangs. Boise State, of course, challenged themselves by besting Virginia Tech (7-2, undefeated in the ACC) and Oregon State; even while playing in the sorry Western Athletic Conference, Boise State has managed to top Oregon's schedule strength, ranking 70th nationally. Should we allow a team to claim the #1 ranking if they don't even attempt to challenge themselves any more than they have to?

It's one thing if a team plays in such a strong conference that they genuinely feel they can rest on their laurels and play a bunch of nobodies out of conference. But even a particularly dense observer can see that the top talent in the MWC is better than their counterparts in the Pac-10; over the past calendar year, they've gone head-to-head numerous times. This year, the Pac-10 can proudly claim a 1-2 record versus the Mountain West. Oregon State lost to TCU, and a team everyone seems to continue to believe in, Washington, lost to a team everyone seems adamant about dismissing, BYU. The conference’s only win? Oregon defeated New Mexico, padding their offensive numbers with a 72-0 victory against a team that just got their first win two days ago. Congrats, Oregon.

During last year's bowls, the Pac-10 also faced the Mountain West a couple times. BYU crushed Oregon State 42-20. Utah beat Cal by 10. That's an 0-2 record when some of the best talent in the Pac-10 matched up with some of their counterparts in the MWC. (Overall, while USC beat an overmatched Boston College team and UCLA managed a 9-point win against the MAC's Temple, Arizona got shut out 33-0 against Nebraska, Oklahoma defeated Stanford, and in the Rose Bowl, Ohio State bettered the cream of the Pac-10, and this year's #1 team, Oregon. That's 2-5 in the bowls, including 2 losses to the lowly MWC.)

But that was last year, and this is now. How did the Pac-10 do against top opponents this year out of conference? Against OOC FBS opponents whose records are currently above .500, the conference collectively has gone 6-7. If you wanted to be more generous, and include opponents whose records currently sit at .500, that record actually manages to get worse: 6-8. Their total OOC record, as a conference, sits at 14-9 versus FBS opponents. That means the conference padded their win totals with an 8-1 record against opponents below .500 (the lone loss was BYU's defeat of Washington). Natually, the Pac-10 teams all had their rounds against the best and brightest of the FCS as well, going 7-0 versus such luminaries as The Citadel, UC Davis, and Montana State (that last team only lost to Washington State by a point). Essentially, this conference-- which has been hailed as much-improved compared with last year's group-- only looks good when they're beating up on each other. When they have to play even moderately good teams from other conferences, they falter, and in cases like Oregon's, they might not even dare to play any good teams at all.

This is an Oregon team that has been virtually coronated for going undefeated (so far) in a supposedly tough conference, when that conference has been mostly smoke and mirrors this year. In case you were curious, Auburn's conference, the SEC, has gone 11-2 against out-of-conference FBS foes who are currently over .500 (one of those defeats was Tennessee's loss to Oregon). And in the interest of fairness, the MWC, which includes a few guns-for-hire that are paid to be preyed on by top-20 teams, still managed to record an 8-12 record versus FBS teams currently .500 and above, worse than the Pac-10's 6-8 but only by a few percentage points.

So why is Oregon #1? It's obviously not the numbers. But reputation clearly plays an important role, and Oregon was a popular Pac-10 pick by pundits at the beginning of the year. Even though Oregon began the year at #11 in the AP Poll, they inexplicably jumped to #5 by Week 3, having beaten only New Mexico and Tennessee. From there, it was a question of staying undefeated, as voters would surely boost them over the likes of TCU and Boise State after playing against Pac-10 competition. Auburn, on the other hand? No one thought they'd do much with a JUCO quarterback and a team that went a mere 8-5 last year. So they started the year at #22 in the AP, and even after they made it clear that their offense was a force to be reckoned with, it still took them until Week 8-- with a 7-0 record and a fresh win over Arkansas-- to get into the top 6. And after that, while they got to #1 in the BCS poll following their defeat of LSU, Oregon is now back on top, where they seem likely to stay despite playing in perhaps the most overrated conference in football, and facing some of the worst cumulative competition in the nation. Auburn is stuck at #2 despite having beaten four currently-ranked opponents and playing in the toughest conference in the nation, and TCU is at #3 despite defeating the highest-ranked opponent of the three of them (BCS #5 Utah) and facing superior competition in an arguably superior conference.

Ah, the intrigue of the BCS continues...