College Football Week 12, in which Les Miles reads Houston Nutt's will

Because the field is bigger.

No one is saying Houston shouldn't go to a bowl game. It should and it will.

 

Esther Vergeer has won 429 consecutive tennis matches, including 39 Grand Slam titles.

She has never played Novak Djokovic, Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal, though. Do I need empirical evidence she's not good enough to beat them?

 

All the Boise bandwagoneers seem to have jumped over to Houston. And I bet just as many of them have seen the Cougars play.

 

I saw Houston play just this Saturday. They looked pretty good against SMU. How good that really is I have no idea. But undefeated is undefeated. If Houston does qualify for a BCS invite, fine. If not, I hope they at least get an interesting matchup in whatever bowl they're in.
As a fan, this is my primary problem with the current setup. Not only does it make a mockery of the idea of competition, it has generated a huge number of really boring matchups. Since bowl games are exhibitions, that sort of defeats their purpose.

 

I'm fine with Houston playing in a BCS bowl game.

I'm not fine with Houston playing for the national championship.

 

If Arkansas loses, it will have finished third in its division, and arguably fourth in its league (behind Georgia as well). It was destroyed by Alabama. It's best win is over South Carolina, who has defeated exactly one good team (Georgia); its best OOC win was against A&M, who is average at best.

Arkansas is way overrated.

 

Why is that absurd? How can you prove you're good enough if you don't get tested the same way others get tested?

In UH's defense, UCLA was potentially a quality win, but UCLA underachieves.

 

Boise played a similar schedule for years and according to some people it was the biggest injustice in the fucking world that they never played in the national championship game. If Boise's shit schedule with one BCS team on the ledger each year was enough, why isn't Houston's?

 

You never got that argument out of me, that's for sure. Boise's wasn't good enough either.

 

Not to this some people, it wasn't.

 

I think the same people who supported Boise being in the big game in the past support Houston now. The people who were against Boise in the past are against Houston now. There may be some pro-Boise people who are anti-Houston now based on the "legacy" argument. To them, Boise isn't just good this year but has been sustained good over the course of several seasons ("hey, they proved it against OU a few years back, didn't they?"). But generally speaking, the camps are the same.

 

That ship has sailed. It's been said it's not going to happen. Resign yourself to it.