Originally Posted by zipazoid
For what it's worth, and I am not a fan of the BCS system, but they got it right this year. ND v Bama.
See, you gotta let the season play out first. It's too easy to say after Week 10, with five teams with a single loss (or whatever) that this team deserves it & that team doesn't. It is designed to determine #1 versus #2 after the season has finished.
ND went undefeated. Bama beat Georgia in the SEC Championship. No brainer.
I used to not be a fan of the BCS as well, then I changed my tune. (For the record, I am not against a playoff, just not sure we need one - more on that later ...)
I had plans to come on here this week and show everybody how good for college football the BCS has been by comparing this years bowl games to what they would have been pre-BCS. The problem with that is, for one, that Notre Dame is one of the top two teams this year, so its likely they would have had a title game no matter who ended up in second since Notre Dame in an independent has no bowl tie-ins. Also, the conferences have realigned so much (specifically the Big-8/SWC/Big-12) that it's pretty difficult to guess who would have won which conferences. The point, though, is that the BCS - while certainly not as good as a playoff in determining a "true" national champion - should really be compared to system it replaced if you want to be fair.
In that system, all major conference champions had bowl tie-ins that didn't line up with any other conferences except for the Rose Bowl. If Oregon and Kansas State or Alabama, for example, managed to finish undefeated, there would have been no chance that any of them would have played each other in a bowl game. It's easy to rip on the BCS because its not a playoff, but I feel we should be giving it credit for what it eliminated.
Lastly, my only argument against a playoff is ... why do we need one? The answer to that one is obvious, right: "Because that is the only way to truly determine a consensus national champion." That may be true, but it also may not ... keep in mind that this year if we had a 4-team playoff it WOULD NOT include Kansas State, Stanford, Georgia, LSU, or Texas A&M. So maybe an 8-team playoff would do the trick. I don't know.
My point is, is it really that important that we have a consensus national champion? If so, why?