The extra game only when needed would be a logictical nightmare. Not know till a week in advance would make it impossible for a NC to be staged.
I think there would have been less uproar if this guy had been defending the system instead of apologizing for it. He can disagree with the system behind the scenes but his public face should have been one of support. He was a weak leader in a situation that needed a strong one. Knowing he is from the Big East I cannot help but wonder that since there is talk about the Big East losing its automatic bid he like the AP would like to see a weakened BCS. I am also tired of hearing about how the system was not designed for three close and "deserving" teams, but that is exactly what it was designed for when there can be only two teams chosen. Miami vs Ohio State was easy, but when you have all one loss teams you need to dig a little deeper and be more objective than the human polls to get the two best teams. I like the computers that treat each game the same whether in Sep or Dec, using strength of schedule, and also adding the human polls who should be able to deal with results due to injuries, bad calls, hot teams, personal changes, ... etc. As long as there is just one championship game I like the BCS equation with a few tweaks like accounting for Conference Championships, playing teams twice, getting quality win bonus for beating a top 15 team (maybe even 20) by continuing down the same sliding scale used for for top 10 wins in current system. I mean you get .1 bonus for beating the #10 team but nothing for beating #11. I think for beating number #11 you should get a .09 bonus and so forth. Part of dealing with Conference Championships is that you cannot automatically exclude non-conference winners when not all conferences have to play this extra game. Until all conferences are on the same page there should just be a penalty for non-conference champions, which may be overcome.
The system was set up to get #1 and #2 to play for a National Championship and it did. Next year you might have two 1 loss teams and three 3 loss teams why should we have an extra game after the two 1 loss teams play. This was a strange year and if the shoe would have been on the LSU foot (outside looking in) not one person would have made this big of a deal. The AP never considered LSU #1 not even the first time they should have after the SECCG. AP is a biased vote and that is why the system we have works better then the AP telling us who is #1. Does anyone here think that before the BCS that is LSU and Notre Dame go undefeated or USC or Michigan that LSU would ever have a fair shot at #1 ever. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!! The BCS works.
