Utah didn't play nearly as tough a schedule as Troy! No way they'd be even .500 in the Big South Conference.
Bill, I believe Terry is a proponent of the 16 team playoff. The argument is beyond invalid. You're propping up a team that ended the regular season with 4 losses to one who was unbeaten. But I see ya trying... just keep trying.
Correctomundo...which is of course why I dont' really give a rats ass if Utah got screwed. They weren't the only team, we all were screwed and will continue to be tilll we have a 16 team playoff.
Well that should have convinced Ya!! I'm proud of ya Corey, you passed up the Porn for the Gator Bowl....You da Man!!
AJ, I have said before that USC has come up on the short end of the BCS more than once. I think it is very possible that the last two years they may well have been able to beat the team that won. And for the most part it's the computers that screw them. Corey doesn't like to talk about that part but it's true.
I don't because it is a straw man. Why bitch about one part of the system when the whole thing is flawed? Toss the whole **** bag out the window and go with a 16 team playoff.
And thus ignoring the past several posts that I've made saying that Florida isn't the problem, the BCS is. You cannot and will not admit any link between the BCS and the SEC...for that, you win the Ray Charles sportsfan award... I've also, over the years, have done a fair amount of bitching about the Big12...including a VERY undeserving Nebraska playing for a title over Pac10 Oregon... of course, back then it was just about me whining over the Pac10 again.. And a once beaten Oklahoma getting to play for the title over USC... but those are all things that escape your memory, you only concern yourself with the SEC/Florida. It is the super conference format that receives the 'bump' from playing a championship game. We've seen in the Big12 that you don't even have to win that game to play for a national title. However, they are also 2 separate issues... Either way, my problem is the BCS itself. I would venture to say that most Gator arguments are misguided, by both pro and perceived 'anti' Gator parties. I suppose it is natural that any team or conference enjoying the fruits of a spoiled system might be a little defensive about the integrity and preservation of that system. I mean, where were you before this system?
Let's say the BCS did not exist and we had the old system going...way back even before the Bowl Alliance...the poll system which is the system utilized when Notre Dame last won a national title. It would have been Florida vs. Texas in the Sugar Bowl and if the Gators beat the Longhorns to go 13-1, I am pretty certain that Florida would still have been the final #1 team in both polls that determined the National Champion. May have been a split for #2 between OU and USC and Utah would still have been checking in at #4 most likely after a bowl win in the Fiesta Bowl over Ohio State...if they were actually invited to a bowl that high and if they could even beat Ohio State. OU would most likely have played Alabama in the Orange Bowl in what would have been a pretty damned good game instead of the Orange Bowl snoozers we have today. In any event the Gators would still be #1 and you wouldn't be happy with it.
with a 16 team playoff, which is what I am arguing for, you don't know what would have happened. THAT is my point. You guys keep trying to assume my position by reverting back to previous systems. While I much preferred the old poll system to this crap, what I want is the 16 team playoff. 11 conference champs, 5 wildcards, no excuses. Why are you guys from the 'traditional power conferences' so afraid of this? I think that is the much better question.
Hey at least this past season it would have been a close comparison. I have agreed the biggest BCS goofs I have seen involved the ones you mentioned with the Big 12 teams getting hammered in their conference at the end of the season and yet still playing for the NC. I think a lot of that nonsense is now corrected. I reiterate my stance that a plus one format is what I would like to see and is also the one most likely to happen.
Terry, Dave, Because it is your conference teams getting in to play for the title with 1 and 2 loss. The single biggest difference is that you've won the title game whereas the Big12 team didn't. Essentially, you're winning an exclusive, inbred 1 game playoff... nothing more. 16 team playoff and sort it out on the field.
In 2001 Nebraska didn't even make the Big 12 conference championship game ....losing in their last game of the season on 11-23-01 by the score of 62-36 to Colorado. OU in 2003 lost the Big 12 title game in Dec. by 35-7. Yet...both teams crazily made the BCS national title game. These kinds of scenarios have been permanently disabled since although it was close with Michigan almost getting a rematch with OSU after giving up 41 points in a loss at the end of the season. However....you somehow draw a comparison in the above Big 12 examples with one loss SEC teams? That's a very, very weak comparison. UF lost on a blocked kick in September by one point to an eventual top 15 team in Ole Miss. LSU did benefit greatly from the SEC title game in 2007 but WVa screwing the pooch vs. Pitt is what got the Tigers in. UF in 2006 lost a hard fought, controversial game at Auburn in October as their only loss. The SEC's scenario of the last three years is not a favorable comparison by any means to what happened in those Big 12 examples I gave. I have another question for you. Since you said you favor the old poll system more than the BCS I have to wonder why do you not credit the BCS present formula for utilizing the two human polls as 2/3 of the equation? I agree the computers still need tweaking and weeding out of any possible bias but otherwise you should be happy with the changes the BCS made to favor the human polls more than before.