This is precisely the situation that proves my point. In 2003, we have Michigan, Ohio State, and Miami arguing. Whoever the BCS says is #4 gets that spot. What do you tell Ohio State and Miami? Sorry, but you are not deserving at a shot at the National Championship. Michigan may not be either, but that's not the point. The point is all the teams with a legitamate claim to the title have a chance (LSU, Oklahoma, and USC). If the top teams deserve to be there, they will beat the likes of Michigan (as USC did easily). In 2005, if USC or Texas loses, then the one that didn't lose is the only one who we could say legitamately deserved to have a shot at the National Title. Well, they're in. Three other teams get lucky and get a second shot, but they were not entitled to it by any means. If the team that's on top is truly worthy of being National Championship, they can win to games against "inferior" competition. Now in 2004, there were 3 teams that legitamately had a claim to be the best team in college football. One of those teams never got a shot. That in no way could ever be seen as fair. What other sport on any level could you not lose a single game and still not even have a chance to be the champion of that sport?
I agree Auburn got jobbed last year. Beleive me I'm not a fan of the BCS. I'm also not a big fan of playoffs either. I don't have an answer to the problem either.The point is, without a full blown playoff system, meaning at least 8, possibly 12 or 16, theres no real way of knowing who's the best. With a field that large, more than one team can make it from each conference. That would lessen the impact of the regular season game.
I'm a firm believer in the 4 team playoff. I think a 4 team playoff involves all teams that have a legitamate claim to be National Champ 99 times out of 100. I don't like the 8 team playoff either because it does lower the significance of the regular season. But with a 4 team playoff, the ONLY way you can be guaranteed to have a chance for the national title is to go unbeaten. If you lose a game, you may get in, but it's not worth the risk.
the question though suppose Virginia Tech jumps LSU in the computers after the acccg. would you still be in favor of the 4 team playoff with LSU watching 2 teams with the same record having a shot. It would be just like Auburn being left out last year. How could you give Penn St. and Virginia Tech a shot but not LSU and Oregon?
I'm fine if LSU doesn't make it this year even if Texas or USC loses. We haven't had a very good schedule, and we haven't looked like a National Champion a lot of times this year. I just don't ever want to be in Auburn's shoes of running the table and being left out. That's unacceptable.
I agree, its unaccepteble. Another scenario, usc loses to UCLA, UT loses once. Now you have USC, UT, LSU, Penn ST., Virginia Tech, Oregon. which 4 are going into the playoff? There's almst no way to pick 4 without screwing SOMEBODY.
bs. it would only ruin the regular season for teams that suck. a team could lose 3 or 4 games and still win the NC.
If that happens, then somebody will be justifiably upset. But if you didn't go undefeated, you left your National Championship hopes to chance anyway. The top 4 from the BCS go, and the other two will just have to deal (even if that's LSU). Remember what you said about the regular season being significant, it would apply here. The only scenario that someone would have a legitimate grip about being left out of a 4 team playoff is if there are 5 or more teams undefeated, all from major conferences. That might happen once in a hundred years.
There is a lot less heartbreak leaving out the 5th team than leaving out a very controversial # 3 team(ex. Miami 00, Colorado 01, USC 03, AU 04). I don't think there has EVER been a a situation w/ more than 3 teams much less 4 teams w/ a legit stake at the NC. Nobody ever remembers the 5th team in the nation anyway. Even in a plus one, which encompasses 4 teams, the 4th team would be included for shts and giggles anyway (ex. Utah 04, Michigan 03, Ga 02, Oregon 01) As for college football being popular, I think it's more bc fans can identify with a team that bears the home state name and composed of mostly home state players. College football seemed to maintain it's popularity despite non-controversial seasons ('02 Miam-OSU, '99Va Tech-FSU)
