A few things the Alabama-Utah game means nothing about who the better team really is between those two. Alabama had nothing to play for, it was a reward for the players so they could get there 400 dollars and go to a theme park and parade. Utah actually had something to play for mainly the argument that they should be ranked higher in the polls and to have a shot at the national championship game in the future. That and that they belong in the BCS so if they go undefeated or with 1 loss in the future that they can be expected to get the 7 plus million. Hawaii on the other had will never be invited back.

Someone already mentioned that the old system was better and I agree. The current system is busted in that except the national title game and the rose bowl the other BCS bowls do not matter at all to anyone except boosters. There is no motivation to play anywhere near full effort as this is just an reward for a good to near great season. This system also hurts the regular season by allowing teams lets call them U Florida to continue to run from everyone OOC and yet still play for the National Championship and teams like OSU, UT, Neb, FSU and USC that regularly play top tier teams OOC get screwed out if they lose a tight game.

And Texas was not that screwed. The game was close and there was controversy late in the game. Texas lost to a team that got blown out of the state by Oklahoma. If they did not play each other but instead had the same retaliative wins and losses Oklahoma would be the no brainier pick. Texas should not have lost is what it really comes down too. Especially when they had to know that no matter who wins the SEC they are now basically an auto in to the championship game because of the successful bullshit campaign.

Also, to whoever said it, I’d rather be arguing about which team goes 8th or sitting outside at 9th rather than arguing 1, 2, or 3.

The BCS is a joke. It’s relies on inertia to keep it viable. The system is archaic. There isn’t a single good reason, explanation, or argument for why it is made the way it is.

Then, take the top two teams that won their bowl game and won their conference championship and have a title game.

Radley, I’m sorry but I have to agree that this usage is wrong. Really, that was an “epic fail.”

You guys just don’t get it. The whole point of the BCS is to include all the big boys (and some of the little kids), give the system a way to match up the best teams, not in a playoff, and then, the most important part, get everyone to talk about it for 5 months!!!!

I think the interest generated by the BCS is overrated if it means that people are no longer interested in most of the games. I used to watch most of the major bowls, and don’t anymore because all but one is utterly meaningless.

Proponents of the current system act as though the choice is between the BCS and an NCAA tournament style field of 64(which admittedly destroys the value of the regular season). The small playoff that D1A could institute wouldn’t need to be like that. By limiting the tournament to conference champions, the fun of the college regular season would be preserved.

One last stray point. If they’re going to argue that they isn’t time in the academic schedule to accommodate the extra games, why do they play the BCS title game a full week after the other bowls?

Talk about takin numbers and clockin’em out they did that and BIG time! About the time Saban realized the game had started Utah had 21 points on the board. Yeah Baby!

Bama woke up and played one hella game to almost the very end, but could not pull it out. Congrats to them they were, for sure, a worthy opponent.

Unlike some of the supposed “big” games this bowl season, this one was everything it was billed to be!

We sure wouldn’t want a situation where teams that have locked up a playoff spot rest starters for part of a game. Power teams never sit players in blowout wins over the scrubs they schedule to make themselves sexier for the BCS. That never happens.

Did you have the best teams in the championship?

No, they played in the semifinal, where the best team won, and then that team went on to become national champion. What argument does Oklahoma really have? “We should have had a chance to delay the inevitable for one more game by trouncing a weaker team in the semifinal”? They still had their shot, which is all anybody is really asking for with a playoff. Honestly, what was your point again?

They’ll never have a playoff, and that’s really not that bad. Right now they have an exciting season, where there is suspense and drama every week. There’s no ‘coasting into the playoffs’ like happens in every other league. Every game matters. Maybe some of the polls matter a little too much (preseason polls should be entirely ignored, because you get too much credit for being high in that, even if you’re a more mediocre team), but overall they get the results they’re looking for:

Buzz
Probably 2 of the 3 best teams playing each other for a championship.
Buzz
Participation from all conferences, with the opportunity for lesser schools to get into the deal.
Buzz
More Buzz
Lots of money

Why go to a playoff? So that we can sit around and say ‘Oh yeah, they were the best team’? Even THAT wouldn’t happen. Say you have a playoff this year, and in the semi’s USC plays Penn State in that meh game they had, and then Florida and Oklahoma play a complete corker that has everyone on the edge of their seats, and OU wins. Then they go and TROUNCE USC into the ground. Did you have the best teams in the championship? Really? Or do you talk about how USC shouldn’t have been there… just like we do now!

Isn’t this allready happening?

Comment fail.