If USC, Oklahoma and Auburn finish unbeaten, who should get left out?

read this before but didn't see it posted.

best cases are made against USC being left out once all the factors are weighed. the other 2 teams simply had a tougher road and have been more impressive as well. that's enough for me.




Pete Fiutak
Q: So if USC, Oklahoma and Auburn win out, which one should be left out?

A: First off, I'm not sold they're all going to finish unbeaten. It wouldn't be stunning if Auburn lost to Bama or Tennessee and you shouldn't fall off your chair if USC lost to a Notre Dame team good enough to beat Michigan and Tennessee. UCLA isn't going to be a walk in the park either. Oklahoma apparently has it the easiest, but after last year's Big XII title game and past gaffes against Oklahoma State, a loss in the championship could happen. It won't, but it could.

There's no right answer here. All three teams deserve to play for the national title if they win out. If you're going on who the two best teams are, after seeing every game all three have played at least once (with the exception of Auburn's win over The Citadel), my gut reaction is that Auburn and Oklahoma are better than USC. The two have been sharper from start to finish and they have everything USC has. I'm not sold that USC's offense can't be slowed down against a team with a dominant defensive line. Get pressure on Matt Leinart and hit him, something that hasn't been done in two years, and you'll beat USC.

I wasn't impressed by the Trojans' performance against Stanford while Cal and Virginia Tech came within a play of wins. Of course, USC would step up its play in a national title game, but those three struggles looked worse than any problems the Sooners and Tigers had. Auburn might have played a 3.5 game season so far (the half being Arkansas), but it crushed Tennessee in Tennessee and the 24-6 win over Georgia might as well have been 60-6 considering how well the team played. The only struggle was against LSU. Oklahoma's defense had problems with Oklahoma State and Texas A&M on the road, but the offense looks unstoppable. However, if Oklahoma State and Texas A&M could throw on Oklahoma, Leinart and Jason Campbell would have a field day on the Sooner secondary. Auburn, despite playing in the SEC, still hasn't dealt with a high-powered offense yet (Georgia's inconsistent attack doesn't qualify). .

So it comes down to this: Do you like Texas, California or Georgia the most? I know Texas has had issues lately, but I still think this is one of the four best teams in the country. The win over the Longhorns, along with better-than-given-credit-for road victories at A&M and Oklahoma State and good wins over Bowling Green and Texas Tech justifies Oklahoma playing for it all. I don't put any stock in the opening game of the year since teams are far different after a few games to get the kinks out, but USC's win against Virginia Tech is looking more and more impressive. Despite weird formulas circulating out there to the contrary, the Pac 10 sucks this year. Even so, I like Cal a little more than I like Tennessee or Georgia while beating UCLA and Arizona State is roughly the equal of beating LSU and Alabama. I don't like it, but if I'm being forced to leave someone out right now, it would be Auburn. I might change my mind if the Tigers beat Alabama with ease. In the end, Utah is probably the best of the bunch anyway.

Richard Cirminiello
Q: So if USC, Oklahoma and Auburn win out, which one should be left out?
A: If you’re 100% convinced you’ve got the right answer, you either have a rooting interest or you’re fibbing. All three are fit to be national champions, and the separation between them is nominal, at most. That’s what makes this issue so tantalizing for the media and the fans, and such a time bomb for the BCS and the NCAA. For the backers of the No. 3 team, you can bet this injustice will be debated for at least another generation.

First off, forget about Auburn. No way, no how can you dismiss an unbeaten team from the SEC, the deepest conference in America. That’d be heresy. Yeah, their out of conference schedule looks like it was crafted by Bill Snyder, but that’d be offset by wins over Georgia, LSU, Alabama and Tennessee—twice. In their last two huge games, they were dominant, which cannot be said about either USC or Oklahoma. The Tigers current No. 3 position is more a product of where they began the season than where they should end it.

That leaves the Trojans and the Sooners. The Sooners and the Trojans. Heisman favorite at quarterback. Check. Heisman contender in the backfield. Check. A beatable secondary behind a terrific front seven. Check. Great players on special teams. Check. Impeccable coaching staff. Check. How do you differentiate between these two? How in the world has Troy built such a comfy lead at No. 1? Who in the hell decided on this question?

Oklahoma gets an uncertain nod of approval because it’s tougher to navigate the Big XII this year than the Pac-10. Beyond Cal, the Pac-10 is extremely average, and when the Trojans played the Bears on their own soil, they were outplayed in every facet of the game except the scoreboard. In a choice between equals, that game has left a lasting impression.

John Harris
Q: So if USC, Oklahoma and Auburn win out, which one should be left out?

A: Although Auburn has dominated Southern football this year, they’re having this great season against a seemingly weaker than usual SEC. Furthermore, it’s very difficult to get a read on how good they truly are, as they have played no one from an opposing BCS conference (USC beat a Virginia Tech and OU handled Oregon who took Cal to the brink). Georgia and Tennessee are good, not great, and they’ve not been 100% healthy or at their best all year long. Although LSU is playing better lately, they had all kinds of problems (especially at QB) earlier this year when Auburn barely escaped that game (just remember the Tigers were a 4th and 12 away from losing to the Tigers). And, outside of the Tennessee game, the Tigers have dominated at home (playing only four games – three to this point - all year on the road). Furthermore, the Auburn defense has not truly been challenged all year long – if you think they have – tell me who. Georgia’s schizophrenic offense was slowed significantly by Marshall, who allowed 56 points to Bowling Green. Granted, Oklahoma’s defense is nowhere near being as stellar as they were in 2000 or in 2001, but they did shut out Texas in Dallas. Also, if a defense can stall the Tigers’ running game, the Auburn receivers won’t carry this offense to a championship. USC and OU are the more complete teams, if only by a millimeter.

Matthew Zemek
Q: So if USC, Oklahoma and Auburn win out, which one should be left out?

A: I refuse to answer on the grounds that I might be incriminated. I shall not even give the slightest appearance or suggestion that I accept, in any remote way, the BCS system we have. All three teams deserve to play for the national title, either before or after the bowls. Period.

However, a federal court ruling earlier this morning demanded that I cannot use the Fifth Amendment to duck the inquiry. Therefore, without saying anything about who SHOULD get left out (because no one SHOULD get left out in the first place!!!), my rankings are as follows: Auburn 1, Oklahoma 2, USC 3.

http://collegefootballnews.com/2004/Tuesday_Question/NumberThree_OrangeBowl.htm

 

WOW, did you let TE borrow your handle? :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: :hihi: Got dizzy after the 10,000 words and went back to the title. Strength of schedule means a ton in my book and USuCk doesn't have it. OU vs AU.

 

tirk...great post.

many people in the media are afraid or not willing to admit USC is the weakest of the three teams. they bring up the tough PAC 10, mainly Cal and Arizona St. I call Bullsh!t on that claim. You put Cal, Arizona State, or even mighty USC in a real conference and they lose at least 2-3 games.

But, the media loves USC, and they feel as though they have to justify ranking them #1 this year after they were "screwed" by the system last year. I have heard some reporters on ESPN and talk radio say that USC has a right to be #1 until they are beaten in order to defend their MNC from last year......WTF? If that is the case, Auburn beat the real BCS defending Champion, so therefore Auburn should be BCS #1.

I hate the BCS. I hate the polls. I am ready for a playoff.....if all three go undefeated you can bet the system gets tweaked again.

F USC!

 

Yes they will make a change to say that USC MUST be ranked in the top two at all times so there is no chance of them being left out thus ending all contoversy as far as the media is concerned.

 

yes but be sure I wrote none of it. :grin: :grin: Also, it reads as easy as Grisham. :thumb:

 

Are we really being compared to Arizona State and UCLA... just doesnt sound right... we are 8-2 in the SEC... just dont see the comparison.

 

Maybe they all three could just flip a coin like in "Friday Night Lights."

 

I think you should take the top 8 teams coaches and have them full contact toughman competition. Last two coaches standing go to the OB.

 

Auburn preferably, but USC would be alright as well

 

Bob Davie (former ND coach) just voiced an interesting proposal at halftime of the ESPN game.

Assume USC runs the table, give them the #1 seed and a spot in the Orange Bowl. Assuming Auburn & OU run the table, send the last three tapes of the OU & Auburn games to the 117 Div 1A coaches. Give them three days to review the tapes (put a moratorium on recruiting) and vote on who gets the spot opposite USC in the Orange Bowl. Toss out the polls and the BCS formula and leave it to the 117 Div 1A coaches.

Interesting proposal that on the surface has merit.