Did the BCS get this wrong or what?
 

Oklahoma is terrible. I think Auburn would beat both of these teams. Virginia Tech could compete against both of them. USC played no one, all year long after the first game of the year. And do not say California - look what happened to them in the bowl.

I think even Pittsburgh could play with these two teams. Kidding.

The BCS is crap. It is time for a playoff.

USC's defense is so fast and skilled. Their offense is explosive. I really believe they would beat Auburn by at least 2 touchdowns. Don't forget they smacked them down 23-0 last year. But neither of us can know since they will not play this year on the field. I agree however that I'd like to see a playoff.

I disagree. Auburn can at least get some pressure on the QB. That guy has all day to throw. Auburn has also the best corners in the game right now.

No, god got is wrong.
:)

USC beat Va tech this year....much more impressivley then that crappy auburn win...VA teach blew like 6 shots to win...USC deserves to be here, and i dont think anyone could hang with them right now....this is just all the anger of the last two years being released

Who was 2nd in the nation in sacks. Auburn? No. Oklahoma was. I don't see any reason to expect Auburn to do a better job of getting pressure on Leinart than Oklahoma is doing.

But a playoff system would hampre the real point of college football: the education of the said athletes. :D

Virginia Tech was sloppy just as Oklahoma is. They missed the chances to makes plays. USC is just tearing apart Oklahoma.

Why does anyone say, hey, maybe USC is awesome. I mean, they are WINNING 45-10!

USC and Auburn are about even. OU just isn't on their level.

Auburn wasn't very impressive last night.

You're kidding, right? VT was one bad call away from going up two scores on USC. Just like Auburn, USC is a step up fom VT...but not that much.

Exactly. Auburn wasn't impressive last night. USC is playing GREAT. They have great talent. They look better than both teams. By the way USC was #1 in sacks not Auburn. USC has the most balanced team in college football.

Awww, sheesh. You guys know what hindsight is? You should, you're swimming in it. Auburn can barely beat VT and you are saying they could be both USC and OU? Sure, when everything goes right. Why not just pick two teams from the top 20 out of the hat. That's what a playoffs would be like - whoever gets on a streak. It would likely be Arizona State and Iowa or something like that. Then fans would say - what a lousy matchup - if only it could have been team X and team Y - now that would have been a great matchup. I'll bring this up the next time there's a Super Bowl blowout, okay?

USC's run defense is dominant as well. They would shut down the Auburn running game (as they did last year) and that would bode very badly for Auburn. That is White's biggest problem tonight, they have taken Adrian Peterson out of the game.

USC could beat some nfl playoff teams right now

I thought the real point of college football was to be able to bitch about polling snubs.

Btw, look at the first page of this thread http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/for...t=34098&page=1

I like it how everyone was predicting a USC blowout. :rolleyes:

I'll be the first to admit that I didn't think USC would be this dominant. Oklahoma looked very good that first drive, and I was worried. I certainly didn't predict a blowout. However, after seeing them blowout Oklahoma tonight, I'm quite confident that they would beat Auburn. Auburn is not that much better than Oklahoma, if they are at all.

Oklahoma is as over-rated as Nebraska was for a decade. They're getting their asses handed to them tonight, period. Auburn? who the hell is Auburn? Oh yeah, they went undefeated....they also played a DIV I-AA school, shucks ma, they must be tough...

Auburn showed me nothing last night. VA Tech sucks, seriously, that team was NOT good, and they blew so many chances to score its not even funny. Auburn should bury their heads and hope no-one remembers that they felt snubbed at a title shot, they didn't deserve one.

USC is better then Auburn.

Outside of USC, the only team I would consider is Utah.

are you drinking?

Who was it in that threat that predicted an OU blowout after OU scored? I'll have to check :D.

edit: It was Senator.

I was a little depressed about not getting my test scores, and that fed into my despair of the early performance by the Trojans. They quickly made me absolutely jubiliant.

No, but GOD IS.

OK, everybody, put the bong away. USC couldn't beat the 49ers or any other NFL -- they probably couldn't even finish at .500 in the CFL. Two different worlds, chill out.

Is USC that much better than Oklahoma? Of course not. If you catch somebody on a bad night when you're up, it can get like this. The Chiefs blew out the playoff-bound Denver and Atlanta to the tune of 56-10 and 45-17. Does that mean Kansas City should be in the playoffs and those teams not? No, because you don't determine greatness based on one game. Anyone who does is silly.

The BCS gets plenty wrong, but it's goal to match the two best teams was more or less achieved. Auburn certainly had a case, and I'll give Utah all the credit in the world. But just because this game is ugly doesn't mean Oklahoma sucks or they are slow. It just means tonight USC was better.

If you get into the game of comparing scores and placing emphasis on one game, then let's talk about how USC and Cal played a nip and tuck game, but Cal got run out of the stadium by Texas Tech who couldn't keep up with Oklahoma. You could do this all night.

They were kidding about USC beating the Niners (though I wouldn't doubt it), and the NFL. Are you smoking the bong about the CFL?

I was definitely kidding about them beating the 49ers. As I mentioned, even on a team as good as USC, well under a 1/3 of the players can make it in the NFL. I have no doubt the 49ers would beat USC.

I also agree with your point that USC is playing very well and Oklahoma is playing poorly making the score non-indicative of the talent level between the two teams. I just disagree with those who think Auburn would beat USC. I think USC would win most nights against Auburn. Anything can happen in just one game though.

I think we have we may have an OU fan who isn't the mood for jokes ;) (btw, that was another joke)

That first drive reminded me of the USC ND game during the 1st quarter.
It was scary how fast USC wuz.

I didn't think Oklahoma would get beaten this bad either.. hell, who did?

I'm a Big 12 homer, but I would like to see a playoff system as well.


Todd

I would love to see Auburn play USC, Utah just isn't in their class, but there isn't a doubt in my mind that USC is the true national champ, just like LSU last year.

Well OK, maybe not Auburn. Utah then.


I really wanted to see Auburn and Utah. I knew it couldn't happen, but that was what I considered the dream matchup for Utah. Pitt was hardly a speedbump. I think USC was the team this year, but a playoff would still be better.

the problem with this championship game is they need to play them after the season is over...not wait like over a month to play it..

i bet the score might of been closer if they play right after the season was over..


we really need a 16 team tourney and have it start right after the college season is over..

I totally agree with this. I love the people who say Pac 10 sucks because Cal lost big to Texas Tech. Texas Tech lost to Oklahoma who got crushed by USC who almost got beat by Cal. It's a circular argument.

Bottom line is different teams play different opponents at different times of the season with different factors including injuries. It' nearly impossible to compare them all.

I have no alegence to Auburn, Oklahoma, VTech or USC, but having watched the games USC is by far the best team ... at least this week. Defense, running game, passing game, special teams - they were firing on all cylinders. My only disappointment was that we didn't get to see Utah play against top notch competition to really guage them.

We desperately need playoffs (not that that guarantees the best team), but I think the BCS lucked into getting this one right.

My only comment is that this is 2 years in a row now that Oklahoma has been dominated in the BCS Title game, and they got beat in their conference championship game last year. Looks like Oklahoma is a nice regular season team but is having big issues stepping it up for the championship games.

I actually prefer the old Bowl system to this. Under the old system, there was a mythical National Championship as voted by the polls. But it also left some room for fun debate.

With this travesty of a system, there's still the debate, but now there's some annointed National Champion to try to give some appearance of legitimacy to the process. But it's just a smokescreen. Smoke and mirrors, baby.

Utah proved this year that without a playoff, a mid-major team will NEVER be able to earn a shot for the title. Just look at today's polls - Oklahoma, after being embarassed last night, is still ahead of an undefeated Utah team that has destroyed all its opponents by an average of almost 4 touchdowns. Think it's going to get any better with the majors now choosing in committee the participants?

Agreed!

I would prefer traditional bowl alignments plus-one. That way, we could preserve tradition and the meaningfulness of the regular season, while adding an additional data point for determining who should get into the plus-one game.

Mid-majors will get even more screwed with a play-off system, as the power conference teams will still get the most consideration. Witness the div 1-aa playoffs: this year, non-scholarship Harvard (10-0) (because the Ivy League won't let it's member schools compete in the playoffs), and mid-majors Monmouth (10-1), Drake (9-2), and Cal Poly (9-2), all got shut out of playoff berths. I don't remember the last time a 1-aa mid major team even sniffed a berth in the playoffs. At least in the 1-a, the mid-major schools have a chance at a bowl.

Seriously what good would that have done this year? Oklahoma would have likely beat Cal, Auburn would have beat Texas, USC beat up on Michigan, and Utah beat some small school like Boise St.

That'd leave us right back where we were with 4 undefeated's arguing about the +1 game, and USC would face OK again.

Do we know that Auburn would have beat Texas, etc.? The bowls would have allowed for some things to shake out...

Quit making sense! According to all of the pundits Utah, Boise State, etc are going to take up the playoff spots. But what you are saying is that maybe Texas, Cal, and other major conference teams would take up the remianing spots. Unfathomable!!!

As an Auburn alum, I also think that USC would beat Auburn this year. That being said, this Auburn team is not the same one that played USC last year. If you remember two years ago on Monday Night Football, Auburn was only down 6 in USC in the final minutes.

I posted on an earlier thread about Oklahoma's defense being hammered by A&M and OSU giving up 70 points in those two games. I was flamed on this site after making the statement that their defense didn't belong and then people are surprised to see that a team with great athletes can throw on Oklahoma.

My only complaint is with the BCS love affiar with the always overrated Big 12. The Big 12 has played in 4 of the last 5 title games with their record being 3-1. Their only win was Oklahoma 5 years ago against a FSU team that should not have been in the game by an exciting score of 13-2. Since then Nebraksa has been demolished and Oklahoma was destroyed 2 years in a row.

Even this year - the top Big 12 teams:
OSU was shut out
A&M scored 7 against a Tennessee team that Auburn handled twice
Oklahoma - we know the result
Texas - it took the best single collegiate effort I've seen since Michael Vick's game against FSU for the national championship - to beat an above average Michigan team

Once again, I believe that Auburn would lose USC. My complaint is with Oklahoma playing in the game. Let's give another conference a chance.

Yup. Utah might get a playoff berth, but I'll bet that the powers-that-be filling up the playoff grid will like runners-up and 1 loss teams from major conferences even more...

It's not just the BCS that has the love affair. The AP poll had OK up there too before the bowls (still have them at 3???) and I believe ESPN had them 1 or 2.

Must have playoffs .... grr.....

I said this in an earlier thread. A bowl is a very bad indication of how good at team was 6 weeks ago. A playoff would have the teams playing it out on the field immediately after the regular system. Another huge advantage to the playoff system.

Wow! That would be a real, valid point *IF*:

a) Every other NCAA football division didn't play a playoff.

b) The other divisions didn't do that with real student/athletes.

How did they get it wrong? I thought leading up to the game everyone thought it was going to be a "classic" or a great battle.

After the fact it's easy to say otherwise but prior I think everyone for the most part thought the two best teams were on the field.

The playoffs in other divisions still leave plenty to be desired. As has been mentioned before (probably by me), the div 1-aa playoff is bordering on being a sham, since not all conferences participate. Also--1-aa mid-majors have virtually no shot at berths: the selection committee seems to favor power teams that have been there before--they'll take 8-3 Montana over 11-0 Nonscholarship U., every time.

Will a 1-a playoff be any better?

It would be easy to make it so. ANY playoff would be better than what we have now.