I could go on and say the BCS is unfair (which it is) and exclusionary (again, yes it is) but that is a retread topic. Virginia Tech being selected over Boise State -- and even Kansas State -- had nothing to do with merits on the field. I understand that Virginia Tech got was selected to the Sugar because their fan base will travel, spend money and other bla, bla, bla.
Here is a fun look from SB Nation's Samuel Chi about the Hokies selection:
Sugar Bowl CEO Paul Hoolahan explained his rationale pretty clearly - and we've provided the helpful translation (in parenthesis) from bowlspeak to plain English:
"I think Virginia Tech ... will perform extremely well (in terms of buying up its allotted tickets)," Hoolahan said. "I think that's a team that will be a great performer (on Bourbon Street food and beverage sales) for us.
"Obviously, it was a difficult decision (trying to tally the number of K-State and Boise State fans). ... In the final analysis, we just felt the two teams we have chosen really give us in the long run the best opportunity to put together a matchup that will provide a very exciting football game (even if it's 45-0, as long as the no vacancy signs are hanging from the French Quarter to Metairie and you can't get a reservation at Commander's Palace)."
An accurate statement there and no one could convince me other wise that tickets were the only reason Virginia Tech was taken. Now, the job of the BCS is to pick No. 1 vs. No. 2 and that is all, the rest of the bowls are roped together so that they can double-host the BCS title game and make money by forcing schools to buy inflated ticket prices, making band members pay for their own tickets and other things.
Going by merit alone, Virginia Tech should not even be in the discussion for a BCS bowl bid. Virginia Tech's non-conference schedule was Appalachian State, East Carolina, Arkansas State and Marshall. Now compare that to Boise State who played Georgia, Tulsa, Toledo, Nevada and Fresno State. The edge has to go to Boise State since they did not play a FCS school and beat SEC East champion Georgia, soundly.
The conference schedule does favor Virginia Tech to an extent. The Hokies lost to Clemson by 20 points in the regular season and then by 28 in the title game. That was also the only team to finish in the final BCS top-25, whereas Boise State only lost to TCU by a single point and who also are ranked in the final BCS standings.
Also, Virginia Tech struggled to beat a 3-9 Duke team 14-10 and were shut out in the second half, and Virginia Tech nearly lost to a 6-6 North Carolina team. I get that competition is tougher, but Boise State rolled every opponent and their closes win was a 37-26 victory over Air Force and that game was not even in question since Air Force scored late to make the final score look respectable.
Maybe just blame the rules.
From the non-AQ ranks the BCS rules state to win the automatic bid that one must be a conference champion and be ranked in the top-12. While that is the same for the other automatic qualifying leagues in that to earn an auto-bid they must be a conference champion. However, I doubt the BCS thought the day would come when a non-champion from the non-AQ ranks would still be ranked in the top-12. Maybe a better rule could be for the non-AQ's could be an and/or in the rule book; where a team must either be ranked in the top 12 and/or be a conference champion with conference champion being given preference over a team that might be ranked higher but not a conference champion.
This would open up these schools to a big money game, but the odds of this occurring would be rare. So, in this case Boise State would be in but had Houston won against Southern Miss in the Conference USA title game and somehow ranked lower, Houston would be in. This may just sound like complaining to get a school in, but if competition were truly the reason in picking team then Boise State would be in a BCS bowl game.
One way to ensure that the best teams make a bowl game is to go with the proposed rule that takes the top-10 teams only and no limit on the amount of teams for any particular league.