Maxx Wolfson

The NCAA made the right move yesterday when it eliminated margin of victory in the formula to determine the teams that play for the Bowl Championship Series.

During the past four seasons, margin of victory has been one of five factors determining who should play in the BCS championship game.

ăI think getting rid of the margin of victory is a great idea,ä said Scott Pelluer, Wildcat special teams coordinator and inside linebackers coach.

College football coaches around the country have used margin of victory as an excuse for their teams to blow out their opponents because they needed the added boost in their teamsâ BCS standing.

Because of that, margin of victory has become a very controversial part of the BCS formula in the past. Some feel that it is both unsportsmanlike and unfair, and I tend to agree.

To use the Arizona football team as an example one only has to look as far back as last season to see how margin of victory should not be a determining factor in the BCS formula.

In the Wildcatsâ second game of the season they took a 29-point lead into the fourth quarter against Idaho.

Rightfully, UA head coach John Mackovic pulled his starters and put in second and third string players for what he thought would be the remainder of the game.

Despite losing, the Vandals scored 29 points in the quarter before Mackovic put his first string players back in.

The Wildcats won the game by seven points, but could have won by more if they had kept in their first string players to add to their margin of victory total.

ăThe kids learned a big lesson that day,ä Pelluer said.

Three games later, the Wildcats were on the receiving end of that strategy.

In Arizonaâs meeting with Oregon, the Ducks blew out the Wildcats 63-28, in a game in which some UA players and coaches thought OU poured it on when it was not necessary, likely to add to their margin of victory.

ăI thought that was a little much,ä Pelluer said. ăThey ran hitch and gos late in the game ÷ and you donât use those when you are up by that much. That will definitely be something we will remember when we play them in the future.ä

However, in the long run it was the same margin of victory that kept the Ducks out of the Rose Bowl last season.

Five of Oregonâs 10 wins came by a touchdown or less, while Nebraska outscored its opponents by 21.6 points per game ÷ giving the Huskers the slight edge over both Oregon and Colorado to play in the Rose Bowl.

In the four-year history of the BCS, the problem has not been determining the National Champion ÷ because each year the team has gone undefeated ÷ but rather who will play the No. 1 team.

Furthermore, the computer rankings have greatly differed from the human rankings over the last two seasons.

The argument for keeping the margin of victory factor is that sometimes the score does reflect how much better one team is than the other based on a teamâs depth. If a team that is winning by a large margin is still able to outscore an opponent with its third and fourth string players, shouldnât it get full credit?

Remember that a football game does last four quarters.

The only problem is that more times than not, a score doesnât reflect the true outcome of a game. Computers canât take into account factors such as weather, injuries and rivalries.

Two late touchdowns by one team can make a blowout count as much as a close game in the computer rankings. College football teams should play to win, not to impress some computer rankings program.

So does this spell the end of 60-point blowouts that teams like Florida have become famous for?

Probably not, but some feel this is one step in the right direction.