he players were pleased to dent the rep of another big conference. Illinois isn’t good, but the Big Ten was clearly schooled by a Big East club.
Add this one to UC’s win at Oregon State – which will play Oregon next week for the Pac-10 title and a Rose Bowl appearance – and it’s not hard to see that conference affiliation doesn’t guarantee success the way it used to.
And those who still snicker at the Big East have some homework to do. Who’s clearly better than the Bearcats at this point? Who knows?
Texas, likely title-game participant? Not necessarily, cowboy.
The mighty Longhorns got all they wanted Thursday from a 6-5 Texas A&M team that had lost by a combined 127-24 to two Big 12 partners, Oklahoma and nondescript Kansas State. The Aggies ran up 532 yards on Texas’ supposedly tight defense. If they’d tackled well, they might have won.
That leaves the SEC and its superiority complex. Could UC tame Tim Tebow and beat Florida? Could the Bearcats muscle up with Alabama? I don’t know. And neither do you.
This is why we need a playoff. Not just to identify a true champion. The BCS does that, more often than not. It’s not just about winning and losing, or shouldn’t be. It’s about having the chance. It’s about letting other worthies into the ring. Whether they play in a pedigreed league or not.
“We shouldn’t be looked at as a conference not deserving of its BCS bid,’’ said Kelly.
He was right, but he didn’t take it far enough. UC deserves a BCS bowl, if it beats Pitt next week. It also deserves a puncher’s chance at a title game.
For now, the Bearcats will have to be satisfied with playing Pitt for a likely trip to the Sugar Bowl, where they’d play either Florida or Alabama. Wouldn’t that be interesting?