IN MY OPINION, THIS WOULD BE A TRAVESTY.
For USC to be able to win a National Title by virtue of only playing one hard game against the same team TWICE, would be a joke.
I also believe that a team should be excluded from the national Championship game if they couldn't even win their conference.
Having said all of that, I do think it is possible for Oklahoma AND Auburn to lose once. But, should that place them behind a Cal team with the same damn record?
Suppose Cal beats USC in the Orange Bowl, and Oklahoma wins it's bowl game. Shouldn't Cal have to share the title with them? That's what happened last year.
For USC to be able to win a National Title by virtue of only playing one hard game against the same team TWICE, would be a joke.
I also believe that a team should be excluded from the national Championship game if they couldn't even win their conference.
Having said all of that, I do think it is possible for Oklahoma AND Auburn to lose once. But, should that place them behind a Cal team with the same damn record?
Suppose Cal beats USC in the Orange Bowl, and Oklahoma wins it's bowl game. Shouldn't Cal have to share the title with them? That's what happened last year.
You all make great arguments AGAINST the BCS system. Pete, I agree that if you don't win your conference, you shouldn't play for the BullCShit National Championship. Tell that to USC last year and Oregon in 2001. However, if you win your conference and you have two losses, you should not play for the national championship either. Your analogy about Cal beating USC and Oklahoma winning depends on where Oklahoma is rated in the AP Poll. If Cal is ahead of Oklahoma in both polls going in to the Orange Bowl..then no, it's not like last year at all. Cal should be the unanimous national champion.
As for USC's easy schedule, they are the only team to beat three other teams in the Top 25. They still have OSU, Notre Dame, and UCLA on their schedule so it's no cup of tea.
Wisconsin is ranked 6th in the BCS...Cal 4th. Without a doubt they would be getting screwed if Cal played in the title game over Wisconsin if they go undefeated and Oklahoma and Auburn lose. However, I don't see it changing...Cal still has games against Oregon and Southern Miss which should keep them ahead of Wisconsin.
As for Cal, they are by far the best one-loss team in the country, and just might deserve to be the 3rd best team in the country....I certainly think they would handle Oklahoma easily...don't know if they could get by Auburn.
To me, Auburn is the odd man out and they are getting screwed. Oklahoma should not be ranked 2nd in the country. Auburn should. And if the remaining teams go undefeated...the Auburn nation should rise up and scream murder.
Earl...same tired arguement every year about the Pac 10. Check their BCS record...best there is. Check there bowl record last year. They are ranked higher than the SEC and Big 12 in computer polls for a reason. Without a doubt they have some serious slugs at the bottom, but there is no better one-two combination in any conference than USC/Cal...and ASU handled a top-20 Iowa pretty easily.
Who knows at this point...All of the top five teams may still have losses in them...an All Pac 10 Orange Bowl is just one scenario.
As for USC's easy schedule, they are the only team to beat three other teams in the Top 25. They still have OSU, Notre Dame, and UCLA on their schedule so it's no cup of tea.
Wisconsin is ranked 6th in the BCS...Cal 4th. Without a doubt they would be getting screwed if Cal played in the title game over Wisconsin if they go undefeated and Oklahoma and Auburn lose. However, I don't see it changing...Cal still has games against Oregon and Southern Miss which should keep them ahead of Wisconsin.
As for Cal, they are by far the best one-loss team in the country, and just might deserve to be the 3rd best team in the country....I certainly think they would handle Oklahoma easily...don't know if they could get by Auburn.
To me, Auburn is the odd man out and they are getting screwed. Oklahoma should not be ranked 2nd in the country. Auburn should. And if the remaining teams go undefeated...the Auburn nation should rise up and scream murder.
Earl...same tired arguement every year about the Pac 10. Check their BCS record...best there is. Check there bowl record last year. They are ranked higher than the SEC and Big 12 in computer polls for a reason. Without a doubt they have some serious slugs at the bottom, but there is no better one-two combination in any conference than USC/Cal...and ASU handled a top-20 Iowa pretty easily.
Who knows at this point...All of the top five teams may still have losses in them...an All Pac 10 Orange Bowl is just one scenario.
That is not true. I think Georgia and Aunurn are BOTH better than Cal.....and are certainly a better one-two combination.WC Bias said:
As far as the conference arguement goes......
If Cal had to play at Georgia, at Auburn and at Florida.....back to back to back....they would be nowhere near the top ten.
LSUpete has a point. Cal and USC are great teams, offensively and defensively, but they don't fight the wars week-in and week-out that the SEC teams fight. That takes its toll on a team physically and emotionally. SEC is loaded this year, top to bottom. It is head and shoulders above any other conference IMO....and I'm not even an SEC fan! Big XII South is tough, but Big XII North is a joke. ACC not bad, but still some patsies in there. Pac 10 has 2 powerhouses and....who else? Hopefully come bowl season we'll get some good inter-conference match ups and find out who's really the best.
Agreed. If Cal or USC had to play an SEC scheduale they would have it much harder. I'm not saying they would lose but there is a much better chance when you have to get up for 4 or 5 games a year not just 1. If USC had to play for instance UGA's schedule they would have much more of a chance of lossing. UGA has to get up for games against S. Car, LSU, Tenn, UF, and Auburn, plus an SEC champ game against Auburn again. Thats 6 quality programs. USC big games are VT, Cal, and Notre Dame. Thats 3 big games and thats if you want to count ND as a big game.
I'm not here to bash the SEC because I think that they are the best football conference year-in and year-out, but not this year.
The SEC is ranked no better than 4th in most of the national polls that rank conferences (Sporting News, Sagarin). SEC has its fair share of bottom feeders, to include Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State. The mid-level teams in the SEC (Arkansas, S. Carolina, Ol' Miss, Florida, Alabama) are no better than Arizona State, Oregon, UCLA, and Oregon State. One of its better teams, LSU, is 8 points away from a losing record, and that includes home struggles against Oregon State and Troy State.
Stop with the week-in week-out ****. Auburn has had the luxury of mixing a steady diet of UL Monroe, Miss. State, La Tech, Kentucky, and Citadel between their less than impressive win against an average LSU, Arkansas, and one impressive win against Tennessee.
Easy Money...you think a schedule that includes Cal, at Virginia Tech, Arizona State, Notre Dame, at UCLA, at Oregon State is easier than the one posted above for Auburn? Maybe at year end if Auburn beats Georgia and then wins the SEC championship game, but as of today that schedule looks pretty soft.
USC's schedule strength is rated in the top 5...only Georgia from the SEC is close.
Pete, I don't know if Cal is better than Georgia or Auburn, I think they are simply because I have watched them play more than Georgia and Auburn. We shall see as the season unfolds.
Sorry fellas, the SEC is down this year...all conferences are. But USC would be doing just fine in the SEC, as would Cal.
The SEC is ranked no better than 4th in most of the national polls that rank conferences (Sporting News, Sagarin). SEC has its fair share of bottom feeders, to include Kentucky, Vanderbilt, Mississippi State. The mid-level teams in the SEC (Arkansas, S. Carolina, Ol' Miss, Florida, Alabama) are no better than Arizona State, Oregon, UCLA, and Oregon State. One of its better teams, LSU, is 8 points away from a losing record, and that includes home struggles against Oregon State and Troy State.
Stop with the week-in week-out ****. Auburn has had the luxury of mixing a steady diet of UL Monroe, Miss. State, La Tech, Kentucky, and Citadel between their less than impressive win against an average LSU, Arkansas, and one impressive win against Tennessee.
Easy Money...you think a schedule that includes Cal, at Virginia Tech, Arizona State, Notre Dame, at UCLA, at Oregon State is easier than the one posted above for Auburn? Maybe at year end if Auburn beats Georgia and then wins the SEC championship game, but as of today that schedule looks pretty soft.
USC's schedule strength is rated in the top 5...only Georgia from the SEC is close.
Pete, I don't know if Cal is better than Georgia or Auburn, I think they are simply because I have watched them play more than Georgia and Auburn. We shall see as the season unfolds.
Sorry fellas, the SEC is down this year...all conferences are. But USC would be doing just fine in the SEC, as would Cal.
WC,
I never said anything about Auburn's schedule. I showed UGA's schedule. And yes I think UGA's is harder than either Cal's or USC. Actually if you think about it by time the year is over Auburn will play Tenn and UGA twice. Thats 3 very tough games. USC has 1 tough game and a bunch of decent games against teams like UCLA, ND, VT, ASU. And yes these are all decent teams not great teams. VT has 1 win against W Vir. Other than that they've beat powerhouses like W. Mich, Duke, Wake Forest, Florida A&M, and Georiga Tech. What scheduale would you rather have. A bunch of games against decent teams or 3 very hard games that you will lose if you don't play well.
Also you make the argument that USC scheduale is rated higher than everyone else's. But here's what you need to know about your stregth of Scheduale. It doesn't look at the teams. It only looks at win loss record. For example, say USC plays Navy, who has a 7-1 record and Michigan plays Miami with a 6-1 record. Technically USC would have a harder scheduale but come on. Obviouslly Michigan's game against Miami would be a much tougher opponet than USC's game against Navy.
I never said anything about Auburn's schedule. I showed UGA's schedule. And yes I think UGA's is harder than either Cal's or USC. Actually if you think about it by time the year is over Auburn will play Tenn and UGA twice. Thats 3 very tough games. USC has 1 tough game and a bunch of decent games against teams like UCLA, ND, VT, ASU. And yes these are all decent teams not great teams. VT has 1 win against W Vir. Other than that they've beat powerhouses like W. Mich, Duke, Wake Forest, Florida A&M, and Georiga Tech. What scheduale would you rather have. A bunch of games against decent teams or 3 very hard games that you will lose if you don't play well.
Also you make the argument that USC scheduale is rated higher than everyone else's. But here's what you need to know about your stregth of Scheduale. It doesn't look at the teams. It only looks at win loss record. For example, say USC plays Navy, who has a 7-1 record and Michigan plays Miami with a 6-1 record. Technically USC would have a harder scheduale but come on. Obviouslly Michigan's game against Miami would be a much tougher opponet than USC's game against Navy.
Easy M...you're logic is beyond argument. USC beat Virginia Tech, who beat the best team in the Big East. They beat Cal, the 4th ranked team in the BCS. They crushed Arizona State, who destroyed 20th ranked Iowa.
Auburn did beat Tenessee, which has beat only one team currently ranked in the top 25 this year. They squeeked by LSU, which has not beat a team currently ranked in the top 25 this year. And they have not played Georgia yet, but will have played 4 straight games against teams at .500 or losing records going into the game. Do you really think Tennessee and LSU are that good to throw props at that schedule?
If you want to make the argument that Georgia has played a tough schedule, you'll get no argument here. And perhaps at the end of the year if Auburn goes undefeated then you can compare their schedule to USC's, but at this point, Auburn has played two tough games all year, and USC would blow away that schedule....quite frankly, so would Cal.
Auburn did beat Tenessee, which has beat only one team currently ranked in the top 25 this year. They squeeked by LSU, which has not beat a team currently ranked in the top 25 this year. And they have not played Georgia yet, but will have played 4 straight games against teams at .500 or losing records going into the game. Do you really think Tennessee and LSU are that good to throw props at that schedule?
If you want to make the argument that Georgia has played a tough schedule, you'll get no argument here. And perhaps at the end of the year if Auburn goes undefeated then you can compare their schedule to USC's, but at this point, Auburn has played two tough games all year, and USC would blow away that schedule....quite frankly, so would Cal.
