Yes actually it does make them the better team for that year. Why in the hell hold the NC game if the better team is going to lose anyway? Makes no sense.
Texas beat USC one time, that was the only chance USC got, they are not getting a retry here so it doesn't matter if they'd win in a second game. Football doesn't hold a series, all Texas needs to do is win the game.
USC had a 90% chance to win...says who? You? ESPN? Doesn't matter, the better team won, get over it please.
By saying this, you are saying that every championship has no merit because the better team can lose.
So you need to go back in history, and look at the matchups and tell everyone which one was the better team, why they are the better team, why they would win the game
OR
You could have the two guys face off to see who is better.
If I were to play you in a game of one on one, and I won. Would it make sense for you to say you are the better player?
You cannot lose a game and still be qualified as the better team.
If I wanted to , I could go back and say "Notre Dame should have beat USC any ways" but I would be doing what you do, shoulda woulda coulda's.
USC knew they had one chance, one game, to beat Texas, did they do it...No. But in your case, it doesn't matter, because you can say "Well, if they played again USC WOULDA won."
Whatever. I hate it when teams win championships and people reply "But they were not better" just give the team their respect.
Like people though the Mavs would blow out the Heat, but when the Heat won some people were saying "The MAvs were the better team though." I thought so BEFORE the series, but the HEat won those games just to prove that they were the best in the league. You don't see the HEat winning the championship and turnaround to see people claiming the Mavs were better do you?