There’s something about the little guys that makes us root for them.

The totalitarian regime that is the Bowl Championship Series is once again on the verge of denying the little guys their chance to become a champion. TCU and Boise State are both undefeated, and as some would argue, untested.

The big argument against Boise State and TCU is that their strength of schedule is too weak, that they could never handle the grind that say Oregon and Auburn do. Take a closer look though and you’ll find a dubious double standard in the way the teams are perceived and subsequently ranked.

Oregon has become the prohibitive number one in the polls and BCS standings. The Ducks received 49 of the 60 first-place votes in the AP poll. Their BCS edge is slipping, and if Auburn can get by Alabama, the Tigers should usurp Oregon for first-place heading into the SEC title game against South Carolina. Still, the Ducks are a full .08 above TCU and .11 above Boise State. In layman’s terms, the Horned Frogs and Broncos are nowhere close.

Here’s where thedouble standard comes in. The Horned Frogs’ opponents’ combined record is 52-60. That means their opponents have combined to win 46 percent of their games. Boise State’s opponents’ combined record is 57-63, winning 48 percent of their games. Meanwhile, Oregon’s opponents have gone 47-60, winning only 44 percent of their games, less than both TCU and Boise State.

Even without their dominating 47-7 victory over then fifth ranked Utah, the TCU’s opponents would have won 43 percent of their games, just behind Oregon. So much for strength of schedule.

Yet, Oregon’s supporters will tell you that the Ducks are more than their schedule, and that you only have to see them to know how good they are. Apply that argument to TCU and Boise State, however, and you’ll be laughed out of the conversation. Hence, the double standard.

It’s perhaps just as perplexing to try and understand why the Ducks are ranked above Auburn. You’ll hear time and time again about the strength and superiority of the SEC, so the fact that an undefeated team from that conference is not ranked first produces yet another double standard.

To make the strength of schedule even more farcical, take a look at Auburn’s résumé. The Tigers’ opponents are a combined 77-43, winning a staggering 64 percent of their games, a full 20 percent better than Oregon’s.

So impressed was the BCS with Oregon’s 15-13 over mighty Cal (read: 5-5, lost 52-31 to Nevada, struggling to become bowl eligible Cal) that it lengthened their lead over SEC West champion Auburn from .02 to .07. Meanwhile TCU and Boise State’s glimmer of hope became that much dimmer.

The BCS bias could not be more obvious. The voters unfairly apply the strength of schedule argument to the non-AQ schools only, otherwise Oregon would not, could not be the No. 1 team. Style points, preseason perception, and outright prejudice outweigh the merits of a team’s record and schedule. The idea that Oregon somehow has “proven it” or “deserves it” more than Boise State or TCU is patently absurd.

Instead, their lofty perch is the product of a system that employs inaccurate and inconsistent mathematical formulas and polls compiled by largely uninformed voters to decide which teams will play for its national championship.

Maybe the BCS is flawed. Maybe it isn’t. Maybe like so many things in this world it is sound in theory but faulty in practice. Maybe under the BCS all teams really are created equal. It’s just that some are more equal than others.