Keep coaches out of BCS process: It's fairest way

NORMAN, Okla. -- The most honest man in the stadium Saturday night was Mike Leach.

After the loss to OU, Texas Tech's Mike Leach thinks Bob Stoops' Sooners are better than the Longhorns. (US Presswire)

After a crushing defeat, the last thing Texas Tech's coach wanted was to discuss poll issues. But that was the obvious question for the only man in the building with a coaches poll vote.

Which team, he was asked, deserves to be ranked higher, Texas or Oklahoma? Either not knowing or not caring about the implications, Leach quickly said, "I would put Oklahoma ahead. They beat us and they deserve it."

Texas remained ahead of Oklahoma in the BCS standings released Sunday on the strength of having beaten the Sooners six weeks ago. That was despite the human polls which have it flipped -- Oklahoma over Texas.

You can see how this might be a problem to some folks. Two rivals, chasing a Big 12 and national championship. One separated from the other by .0084 of a point in the BCS (Texas .9209-Oklahoma .9125). One having beaten the other but both involved in a three-way tie in the Big 12 South. It is becoming obvious that tie could be broken less by play on the field and more by whoever shouts the loudest. Or worse. It could be decided by petty jealousies or long-held grudges.

We don't know for sure because the coaches poll is and has been largely a secret ballot. Maybe that's why Bob Stoops gave up his vote last season. Maybe not. He'll have to risk leaving the vote up to the six other Big 12 coaches in the coaches poll.

Leach risks incurring the wrath of every Longhorn with access to a keyboard or worse, the coach's cell phone number. Believe me, it's out there and someone industrious enough can get his number.

Leach truthfully answered the question that is going to rage at least until the end of this week. His colleagues won't be as forthcoming. As we face perhaps another BCS meltdown, Saturday's win by Oklahoma pointed up the biggest fallacy of the system.

The coaches should have nothing to do with the selection process. It stunk from the moment American Football Coaches executive director Grant Teaff unveiled the coaches' involvement in the BCS in the summer of 1998 at a downtown Chicago hotel.

We questioned then why the coaches would have a hand in awarding themselves and their schools millions in bowl money -- and the ancillary contract raises and bonuses that go with it. We should question it now.

Leach at least was up front Saturday, revealing a small part of his ballot. The 61 coaches who comprise the coaches poll that is overseen by the AFCA are only required to release their final ballots to the public after the regular season. That's a little bit like alerting an athlete that he is going to be drug tested.

That small step came about only after the Associated Press dropped out of the process a couple of years ago. The AP decided, nobly, it didn't want to make news, it wanted to report it.

AP still crowns a champion each year but doesn't have a direct hand in awarding schools millions in bowl booty. Led by the stubborn Teaff, the coaches consider their opinions sacrosanct -- and mostly secret.

There is a reason most fans trust a con man more than the BCS. At least one-third of the process is transparent as fog.

What was to keep, for example, a coaching friend of Mack Brown's from voting the Longhorns No. 1 and Oklahoma 10th on Sunday? That alone should be considered outrageous. What if a coaching buddy of Bob Stoops ranked Texas 25th?

Missouri's Gary Pinkel has a small hand in deciding who he wants to face in the Big 12 title game. The Tigers already have clinched the North Division. A three-way tie in the South would go to the highest-ranked BCS team.

"We don't have a hard and fast line (for flagging ballots)," said Craig Bennett, administrator of the coaches poll for USA Today. "Each ballot is subject to the sniff test."

The newspaper does its due diligence. If a ballot looks irregular, the paper contacts the voter. If a problem still exists, it will call the AFCA to intercede, Bennett said. Sorry, but that's kind of like allowing Enron to do a self-investigation. What would motivate the AFCA to make public a Stoops' coaching buddy voting Texas 25th?

Nothing. To be fair, USA Today does make available a "range" of votes each week. (For example, stating that Texas was ranked anywhere from second to 25th).

All that doesn't preclude a group of rogue voters from manipulating the final BCS standings. Think it couldn't happen? The AFCA already manipulates the poll, mandating that its voting members select the winner of the BCS title game No. 1.

That has always been an attempt to falsely legitimize the BCS and the coaches poll. Whatever happened to free will?

Do I think funny stuff is going on? I think the overwhelming majority of voting coaches are honest and upstanding. I also believe coaches aren't immune to being human. They can hold grudges and have petty jealousies.

A couple of weeks ago, the coaches poll was the only part of the BCS that had Oklahoma ahead of Texas despite the fact that the 'Horns had beaten the Sooners. After a week of outcry from the Texas camp, the coaches swapped the order.

There was speculation that some coaches, somewhere, had it out for coach Brown. Texas' head man, though, is one of the most liked coaches in the profession. More likely, a large portion of the 61 didn't pay attention to the Texas-Oklahoma score when filling out their ballot.

Questionable voting is a longstanding tradition in the coaches poll. Who can forget 1997 when the coaches gave Tom Osborne a retirement gift, awarding him a national championship a month after the coach announced his retirement?

Perhaps they felt guilty. A few weeks earlier, Nebraska had dropped from No. 1 to No. 3 after beating unranked Missouri.

With a wink, Steve Spurrier for years gave his No. 25 slot to Duke, the school that gave him his first head coaching job.

New Mexico State's Hal Mumme last year listed Hawaii No. 1 on his final regular-season ballot. The Warriors finished No. 10 overall. Penn State's Joe Paterno admitted years ago to having an aide cast his ballot. Ohio State coach Jim Tressel refused to vote two years ago after his team beat Michigan, basically removing himself from a highly-sensitive process. Actually, that wasn't such a bad thing. Like Leach, at least he was honest.