Using that logic a Hawaii team that has played absolutely no one should be ranked ahead of LSU, Oregon and Oklahoma. If the championship game were held today it would be Hawaii vs Kansas. LSU has played 6 teams ranked in the top 25 while Kansas and Hawaii have combined to play ZERO. A system that doesn't take strength of schedule into account would be much much more flawed than one that does. Is the BCS a flawed system and should there be a playoff? Yes and Hell Yes!!!! However strength of schedule is one of the few factors that makes sense and should be included in the formula if we are stuck with the BCS.
As long as you're thinking in terms of BCS rankings, of course my logic is flawed. The fact is that if Hawaii and Kansas go undefeated, they deserve a shot at the jackpot. The fact is that lots of teams deserve that shot, and only a playoff works to accomodate them all.
I agree that Kansas if they go undefeated deserves a shot because they have top quality teams remaining on their schedule. However I see no difference between a Hawaii team that's 12-0 or 0-0 because either way they have played no one and proven nothing. If Hawaii played in a major conference with real contenders this conversation wouldn't ever take place because they would have 3 or 4 losses already. I'd take the #5 or #6 SEC team against Hawaii every day of the week. No way they deserve a shot over a 1 or 2 loss team that puts in on the line 6 or 7 times a year against quality competition while Hawaii beats up on cream puffs.
Who decides who the real contenders are? Who determines who is quality competition? For the most part, real contenders are assigned their "good team" status because they have been perennially good teams in the past. If South Florida, previously a nobody, had played Michigan, previously a powerhouse, at season's beginning, the prediction would've been a beatdown of the Bulls. There's no way to measure how good a team is by looking at their schedule alone. If they are winning, they are generally a good team, and that's the only conclusion we can reach.
That's an indictment of PRESEASON polls, which is a very poor indicator. But rankings at 5-6 weeks into the season can take into account the current state of a team's ability. So going 3-1 against 4 consecutive cream puffs is now the same as what LSU had to endure in October and the 1st week of November? That's absurd on its face. SoS ain't perfect, but being forced to work inside the BCS box, there must be some objective measure of the quality of teams played. Should an undefeated Hawaii be punished for a soft schedule? In a perfect playoff world, no. But the alternative in the real world would be disastrous, since it would send the message that teams in tough conferences should load up on weak OOC schools, and even then wouldn't have a chance against the Boise State's and Hawaii's in "big fish, small pond" conferences.
