Because the BCS doesn't want to face the controversey that might result. Say, for example, that #2 OU beats #1 USC in a lackluster game and #3 AU beats #4 Cal/Texas in a rout....... Ironic when you consider that the BCS couldn't possibly be any more revealed for the sham that everyone already knows it to be The games are earmarked for specific conferences so that university presidents can be assured of their "economic share," regardless of how good their representation happens to be.
Well, well, well...welcome to the club. It seems like last year, Auburn fans couldn't understand what LSU fans were complaining about. Wait until OU beats USC and your guys beat Va Tech and you still finish behind the Condoms. Then you'll understand why we are still b!tching one year later.
It's coming. Be patient. It will happen when the BCS goes to the "plus one" scenario. That should happen in the next three years.
Bowl tie ins. The bowls would not agree to a BCS formula that did honor their traditional tie ins in some way or form. The Sugar bowl wants an SEC team and the Rose Bowl wants that whole Pac-10 Big-11 nonsense. It is all about putting butts in the seats when they are not the championship game. The bowls want some power to decide what teams they have.
The BCS was designed to pair 1 and 2 to decide a national championship. It was never intended to pair teams other then 1 and 2 or decide who was ahead of who in individual confeerence races. Which it is being used for.
That shouldn't be too difficult to overcome. If the schools tell the Bowls that they are going to change the system to match 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs 3 so that one more game could be played to determine a champion among the top four, and that the Bowls could participate or not, do you think they will play ball, or just settle for a team outside of the top four, which would likely not be their coveted conference champ?
Another urban legend. All of a sudden a minority opinion has become "the Auburn masses." Don't get me wrong, there were some AU fans that indeed felt that way, but so what? The overwhelming majority are SEC-homers, as am I. Auburn first, SEC second is the prevailing opinion and always has been, even with ourt most hated rival (Bama). I recall attending the '79 Sugar Bowl with several AU friends and yelling as loudly as I ever have for a CFB team. No way were we going to let those Penn State wussies think the SEC wasn't the dominant conference.....and it's still that way today. :thumb:
