The reason USC is out!!! LSU : lost to a ranked opponent OU: Lost to a ranked opponent USC: lost to an unranked opponent
I'm sorry I watch the USC game yesterday and it's a joke how people are blinded by the hype the media has for USC. I mean they are a good team but they are definitely not #1. Oregon State put up 500+ yards and 28 points. Do you honestly think they would move the ball on LSU? I'm sorry but I don't think USC deserves to be there. The media is so in love with them, but they play in a pathetic conference that doesn't play defense so they have huge offensive numbers.
I think that all 3 have legitimate arguments. IMO, the best 2 are in the Sugar. USC's main argument now is that they are #1 in both polls. What they fail to realize is that it is only b/c they lost their game earlier, not because they are best in the nation.
We have a BCS to take the human subjectivity out of the system; the old way was broke also, hence the BCS. Suppose the BCS got it right, LSU 1, OU 2, USC 3, Mich 4. Absent a playoff, sounds right to me. USC didn't play the strength of schedule and lost to a weaker team than LSU or OU. So why do the AP have USC #1. Sounds like that is the problem, the writers are still biased to their favorite team or region, and there are a lot of them on the west coast because of their population out there. And the writers vote still heavily influences the BCS. If every conf. had a championship game and that started the playoff, and 1-4 played off, with the winners meeting in the BCS championship at bowl time, with the rest of the bowls operating under the BCS rules of today in selecting their teams, might work. Only problem is adding the playoff game before the bowls. For 4 teams, we are putting a big burden on the players. They are young and getting their education. Used to be 10 games and a bowl, then 11 games and a bowl, then 11 games, a CCG, and a bowl. Its too much for these kids. Playoffs are great for the pros. No system is perfect. Leave it to the writers? Nah. Didn't work before, not working correctly right now. USC #1, gimme a break! Hogwash! Does losing late to a very good team drop you farther than losing early to a poor team? Is it just "who's hot now" or who had the best season? If its who had the best season, it OU before USC. If we had a playoff system, clearly OU lost and is out of the playoff. In that system, its who's hot NOW. I think OU has a better team than USC, and I am happy to play them in the Sugar Bowl. Without a playoff system, I think the BCS got it right, and what the people should be asking is not what's wrong with the BCS, but "What's wrong with the AP/ESPN pollsters? USC is not #1.
I think the human voters are the problem. Why in the hell do I care what the media thinks, and more importantly who they think is a better football team. It's all timing, opinion, and politics with them. If LSU had lost their game before USC, LSU might be #1 in the polls right now. If Oklahoma had lost in October, they could have possibly worked their way back up to #1 by now. If you want to talk about a lack of system, lets talk about the human voter. What system do they use, the old "I think they look better than them system". Look at USC in the computer polls. They come in #1 only in the NYT POLL(which should be eliminated as a poll next year, IMO) Take this little senario as a reason the media should have no part in the rankings. Preseason, Oklahoma #1, Auburn #6, USC #8, LSU #16. Auburn's use in this example is to show that the media doesn't know shit. Secondly, Why should LSU have to make up 8 spots before anyone kicks off. Let's say USC and LSU and Oklahoma win every game. AP rankings would be #1 Oklahoma, #2 USC, and #3 LSU. Why? Because that's how they stacked up at the beginning of the season. I feel the need to bring up Auburn again. Why should LSU have to make up 8 spots to catch up to USC before the season starts? I can't find a fair system here. If there was a system here, we wouldn't have the BCS. There's no doubt in my mind that USC doesn't deserve to be in the national championship. If Oklahoma had won, USC still doen't deserve to be in the national championship. I'm not saying they suck and they aren't a good team. But comparing each of the one loss teams OK and LSU are better.
We could fight about this forever.You will never know who the best team is,without the best 2 playing each other.I think one day that will happen.But, theres so much MONEY involved with the bowl system.You always hear a large companys name attached to the bowls.Such as Fedex,or Nokia.I doubt we will ever get to see the "Blue Bull 40 oz.Malt Liquor Bowl." I doubt we will ever enjoy the "Ez-Pawn halftime show".If there is a playoff system in the future that takes the bowls and the sponsers out of it.Unless , Its on Pay-Per-View.Maybe Don King could help. Later The Dirtymidget
I think if the BCS stays and SOS is so important, then non conference games should be scheduled the year before. Not 4 years early like Arizona. That way there is no backing out as well.
What would end the controversy is a playoff. As for as I’m concerned, any team crowned the National Champs will be mythical until the championship is earned on the football field. The KSU/OU game last night exposed the myth of the BCS for the farce that it is. Excuses like the teams will play too many games are lame since most teams aren’t in the playoffs every year and only the two finalists will play 3 or 4 more games depending on if it is an 8 or preferably 16 game format.
I can't see why you can't have both -- a playoff and the bowl games. Hell, there's 117 Div. IA football teams and only a small percentage of them would make the playoffs in any given year, and of those that would make the playoffs, fully half of them will only play one extra game. Hence, those teams could also easily be recycled into the bowl format.
hey sooner, thanks for the post. ya'll lost a game that usc didn't have to play, but you lost and lost big. Are you the best team in the nation? hell no, but i'll give #2 all day. That being said, you have no right to play in the sugar. Dude, you choked. should be LSU/usc. Doesn't really matter though, you're arguing for the right to lose to LSU
