Bummer will be ranked lower than LSU on Monday when LSU beats them this Saturday. And we will both be behind any undefeated teams by the end of the year.
We win this weekend we go ahead of Bama. The end. They drop to at least 5 unless another one of the undefeateds lose as well. We win CONVINCINGLY and they might be getting jumped by Georgia too (but I doubt it). We win, the story won't be which undefeated team does Bama stay ahead of (none aside from Louisville). We win, the story will be which undefeated team do we jump.
Or ask the 2004 Utah team. Or 2006 Boise State. Or Tulane. Undefeated is undefeated. That's prestigious enough. Auburn won the Sugar Bowl and got a No. 2 final ranking. They were plenty rewarded. And... if you have 3 unbeaten teams, with 2 ranked above, what other decision was to be made? Auburn's schedule wasn't quite as strong as the other 2. Tulane in 1998 went undefeated. Why wasn't the Green Wave in the national championship? Same thing, dude. Schedule strength.
So why have the BCS at all and just revert to the old bowl system if undefeated is prestigious enough? And I'd argue people wanted to see a playoff more than perfection, since the conference commissioners finally got their asses in high gear to abandon their BCS cash cow.
Well...we'll just have to see how things shake out. It's possible that any or all of the three unbeatens not named Bama coulld drop one of their last few games. Oregon has Oregon St. and USC, either of which can reach up and slap a duck, ND has USC, which will NOT want to lose another game, especially if they lose to Oregon this weekend, and K-State has Okie Light, who has post-season positioning to play for, and Texas, who...well, upsets happen, right? All we need is for two of the three to take a dive in the next four games.
Disagree about Auburn's schedule in 04 as well. They're three respective schedules were actually about what and what. USC and Oklahoma benefitted from going wire to wire at 1 and 2. That's all. USC might've actually had the weakest schedule of the 3 when you drill down to opponents overall records and the teams they played. Oklahoma probably beat the strongest opponent out of the 3 (a 1-loss Texas). USC didn't beat anyone as good as Texas or Tennessee for that matter (who Auburn beat twice that year). It's really pulling teeth to narrow it down to schedules. The biggest argument Auburn has is the fact that Okie got curb-stomped by USC. That will always leave the question of "what-if" in the air.
'04 Auburn would've beaten USC. Good Qb, 2 great power runners and strong defense... the Tiggers got hosed that year.
