Big deal about the NCAA’s strength of schedule. CBS has the SoS as: Oklahoma (15), Auburn (19) and USC (25). Not very much difference at all. From the final AP rankings, USC took down the #3, #9, #10, and #19 teams, never played a team not in I-A, and never played a team in a conference easier than the MWC. Auburn took down the #7, #10, #13 and #16 teams, played a I-AA school and had a game against a team from the Sun Belt Conference, which is borderline I-AA.
And saying that Auburn played a tougher schedule because they played five teams ranked in the top ten at some time. This is the AP poll from Week 3 (the earliest I could find):
USC
Oklahoma
Georgia
FSU
Miami
LSU
Texas
Michigan
Ohio State
West Virginia
Only 4 were left in the top 10 at the end of the regular season - USC, Oklahoma, Georgia and Texas. Hell, West Virginia isn’t even ranked in the top 25 anymore.
I forgot to address this. Of course, now with the BCS we have one more thing to argue about which makes it all the more entertaining. If it didn’t consistently screw up the Rose Bowl, I’d say that the BCS is worth it. But it does, so it needs to go.
Well, the Rose Bowl wasn’t screwed up last year, and it wouldn’t have been fucked this year if Mack Brown didn’t beg for votes for Texas.
Right now it is good to be a Trojan fan in Austin. Not only are the UT people happy with their Rose Bowl win, but they are almost as happy with the way that 'SC handed Choklahoma their asses.
I really doubt that Auburn would have fared much better against USC, but of course we’ll never know. If they think that they were unfairly screwed they just have to do what USC did this season after getting shafted last year. They should, depending on returning starters, start the year ranked #2 - that puts them in prime position to make the BCS title game next year.
Which is another thing wrong with the system. Your performance last year shouldn’t have anything at all to do with your ability to play for the “championship” this year. But it does.
Of course, the team being screwed more than anyone in this is Utah. At least Auburn has some people arguing that they deserve a share in the title. Utah, because of the conference they’re in gets, “Oh, you finished undefeated. How nice. You absolutely clobbered a conference champ from one of the “big six” conferences. How nice. But we’re going to ignore that. In fact, we’re going to rank you lower than a team that just got humilated.”
And don’t tell me that Utah wouldn’t have stood a chance in a playoff because we’ll never know. The history of sports is full of championship teams that “never had a chance” to win.
Stanford vs. St. Joe’s (NCAA basketball championship game).
Lakers vs. Pacers (NBA championship game).
USA vs. Yugoslavia (Olympic men’s basketball gold medal game).
Yankees vs. Cardinals (World Series).
(Actually, I disagree. In BCS world, the Pacers would never have been considered for the championship game because they were in a weak conference. The match-up would likely have been between the Spurs and the Timberwolves considering that the Lakers had an uneven regular season.)
Three first place votes for Auburn? What the hell type of convincing do these 3 stooges need to place USC over Auburn? Was Auburn’s win that convincing for these 3 idiots? Did USC not score enough against OU? Should USC have kept their first string D out there and not let OU score that last touchdown? Let me guess…it was that safety that convinced these morons that USC ain’t all that.
Don’t get it? Auburn and Utah fans are upset because they didn’t get the opportunity to play, and possibly whip, Southern Cal.
That Oklahoma defense that gave up 55 this week also gave up 35 to OK. State and Texas A & M, the latter being a team that managed to score only six against Tennessee in their bowl game.
I’ve felt that Auburn is better than Oklahoma since mid-season. The Utah folks may feel the same about their team. Southern Cal? I’d love to get the chance to play 'em, but it can’t happen, and that’s that.
But it’s (BCS) all not that big a deal to me. Auburn, 13-0, is the State Champ, Conference Champ and Sugar Bowl Champ. WAR EAGLE!, and congrats to Utah and So. Cal on having great seasons as well.
That’s exactly the way I look at it. The Auburn players will have this season to remember the rest of their lives. Sure it would be nice to say Auburn is #1, but after what I saw last night down deep I’m sure all of us are glad it came out this way. I feel sorry for the OU team which had such a wonderful season until the last. WAREAGLE
OK, here’s a question. When you say State Champ, does that mean they had a better overall record than Alabama or does that mean that they just won the head to head game? Or do you need to do both (which they obviously did this year, I’m talking about in general)?
As a Texas fan I was hoping that a complete rout by OU would bump Texas up in the polls, but I found a certain satisfaction in the rout **of ** OU in that it gave a good bitch slap to all those whining about west-coast sportswriter bias.
Things in Alabama are not so complicated as the BCS. We are simple folk here: Win the game, you’re the State Champ!
Strength of schedule, computers, polls, comparative scores against common opponents and which school the Governor attended matter not a bit when it comes to winning the State Championship. Just win, Baby.
Look folks, the BCS is doing exactly what it was supposed to do: fail miserably. If the BCS worked even reasonably well, there might never be a true playoff system at all. As it is there will be rioting in the streets if the BCS contract is renewed. The more pissed off the BCS makes people, the better for college football.
I got every second of that game and unfortunate half-time “entertainment” on tape! Years from now, I’ll whip it out and we’ll all ask each other, “Who the hell is that?”.
