If either USC or Texas lose this weekend...

[pokerdirty]

[ QUOTE ]
USC, on the other hand, deserves the Rose Bowl even with a loss. They haven't lost in three years, got shafted 2 years ago and deserve to go for a 3-pea

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know how I feel when I hear a statement like this. The purpose of the National Championship is to match No. 1 vs. No. 2. I don't necessarily think that the previous 1 or 2 years should come into play. The ESPN culture has become obsessed with the dynasty though, so it is impossible to eliminate this factor.

For those of you that say PSU was 2 seconds from going undefeated, enough! You lost the game! OSU was a dropped pass from beating Texas, but in the end its just another L in the loss column.

If Texas and USC both lose this weekend, here is a list of the once beaten teams.

Texas
USC
PSU
LSU (if they beat UGA)
Virginia Tech
Oregon
UCLA
West Virginia

For those of you that say USC should be a lock regardless of a W or L Saturday, how can you do that when a 1 loss UCLA team beat them?

[holeplug]

I think if either USC or Texas loses then Penn State should play in the Rose Bowl. I would have to see what Texas/USC's computer ranking would be though if they drop a game this weekend. Right now PSU has by far the highest computer ranking of all the 1 loss teams and has played the hardest schedule.

[bernie]

I think Penn State/USC would be a better game than Texas/USC.

b

[lastchance]

Texas and SC have dominated the past season. They would need to lose by a lot for me to think Penn State deserves to get in.

[TheHip41]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if either one of them lost i would imagine they would drop to around 4th-6th in the polls (as long as no one else in the top 5 lost).

[/ QUOTE ]

Remember Oklahoma in 2003?

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone that year had 2 loses besides OK.

If USC or Texas loses...

we are penn st.

[TheHip41]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if either one of them lost i would imagine they would drop to around 4th-6th in the polls (as long as no one else in the top 5 lost).

[/ QUOTE ]why would you think they would fall that far? Everyone below them has at least one loss.

[/ QUOTE ]
i feel like all the pundits would argue that LSU, etc were the stronger team at the moment (since their losses came early in the season).

i'm not sure though. Texas-USC is what everyone wants to see.

[/ QUOTE ]

If texas loses to Colorado, you don't think a 10-1 Penn state team deserves it more than them?

Penn st. lost 1 game, at Michigan, by like 3 points, on the last play.

[MyTurn2Raise]

[ QUOTE ]
The BCS got lucky this year. I really do hate the BCS.

It just shows how screwed up the NCAA league officials are. I mean all this is driven by $$$$$. They can add an extra game to next year's schedule but not a playoff system.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because a playoff system would suck more ass...This is the one sport were the champion proves it throughout the whole year.

Who would make the playoffs anyway? 4-teams, 8-teams, 16? How does one decide who makes it? Should a Notre Dame team that lost to Michigan State at home be in the playoffs? Should a Virginia Tech team that got their ass spanked at home be in the playoffs? Does the Big East get a representative? What happens with Oregon? LSU blew a 21 point lead to a non-bowl team on their home field. Penn ST lost to Michigan, which Notre Dame, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Ohio State handles (3 of which at Michigan Stadium). Ohio St lost twice, once at home. Auburn lost twice, once at home. Why should these teams get an equal chance again?

Since the BCS, only one team that's handled its business did not get the chance to play for a national title (Auburn 2004). Is it so bad that they just went undefeated? National titles always come with flaws to the system, but the BCS isn't that bad. You cannot seriously suggest the team hot enough to win 6 straight games in basketball is a more worthy national champ than college football--look at the teams that have played for and won in basketball. Last year was a very rare exception.

More teams= more BS and more controversy

Also, tough luck to the non-name programs competing to get spots in a playoff system.

The only problem I've seen with the BCS was the mockery of officiating that led to tOSU as national champs, which would happen under all proposed systems.

[PokerFink]

Atleast a playoff system would allow a team that is #1 in both polls a CHANCE to play for the championship.

Which is more than the BCS can say for 2003 USC.

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
This is the one sport were the champion proves it throughout the whole year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tell that to USC in 2003, or to Auburn and Utah last year. The BCS is the worst of both worlds. It renders the other Bowl games totally meaningless, and it still doesn't approximate a true champion year-in-year-out.

[pokerdirty]

well, i don't think we have to worry about texas not being there. 35-3 after 22 minutes...