Four team Playoff 1988-1997

It seems a college football playoff is coming. At least one of the four team variety. All over the internet, there have been pieces examining what would have happened during the BCS era under the various scenarios. That's all well and good, but many of the greatest controversies would have occurred before 1998 and the advent of the BCS. Here is a look at the 10 years pre-BCS, starting with Notre Dame's 1988 championship season using both the top four and the Big Ten proposed conference champions in the top 6 plans (when necessary). All playoff seedings are determined by the AP Poll, just because its easier to work with.

1997

Top Four

1 Michigan vs 4 Florida St.

2 Nebraska vs 3 Tennessee

Teams left out: Not much. 5 UCLA and 6 Florida both failed to win their conferences and lost two games each. 7 Washington St. was the Pac-10 champ with only one loss, but they were the only team with a beef at all.

1996

Top Four

1 Florida St. vs 4 Ohio St.

2 Arizona St. vs 3 Florida

Teams left out: 5 BYU was 13-1 from the WAC with the only loss to Pac-10 runner up Washington. Everyone else was clearly behind in the pecking order. Considering what happened during bowl season with both undefeated teams losing to the one-loss teams, this is probably the shining example of what a playoff could be.

1995

Top Four

1 Nebraska vs 4 Ohio St. or 4Tennessee (teams tied in AP Poll with exact number of points)

2 Florida vs 3 Northwestern

Conference Champs Top 6

1 Nebraska vs 4 Ohio St/Tennessee or 6 Notre Dame depending on if 9-2 Notre Dame is being treated as a conference champion

2 Florida vs 3 Northwestern

Teams left out: Not much. 10-1-1 Texas won the final SWC crown but finished 9^th in the AP Poll. Everyone else has very little claim of jumping into the playoff. The big debate would have been Ohio St. or Tennessee. I tend to side with Ohio St. that season as the Buckeyes didn't play Northwestern and likely would have beaten them.

1994

Top Four

1 Nebraska vs 4 Colorado

2 Penn St. vs 3 Miami

Conference Champs Top 6

1 Nebraska vs 5 Florida

2 Penn St. vs 3Miami

Teams left out: Under the top four scenario, the SEC would have blown its collective stack. Going into the SEC Championship, Alabama was undefeated and ranked 3^rd. They were beaten by one point by Florida (who had one loss to a top 10 Auburn team and the famous Choke at the Doak tie against Florida St.). SEC apologists would have been arguing for Florida over Colorado and the rematch against Nebraska they would be getting (sound familiar anyone). Meanwhile, Alabama fans would be complaining about the existence of the SEC Championship game knocking them out of the title race when nobody else had to play a title game (nobody else had a title game to that point). Just a mess. Also, 7 Florida St. as champs of the ACC and with a tie against Florida also would have made a claim to deserving a playoff berth.

1993

Top Four

1 Florida St. vs 4 Notre Dame

2 Nebraska vs 3 West Virginia

Teams left out: The SEC would have blown its collective stack just like 1994, but probation was really at fault as the best team was undefeated Auburn but the Tigers were on probation. Tennessee and Florida finished just behind Auburn in the polls, but Florida was the champ. And the champ had the weakest claim with two losses and a ranking of 8.

1992

Top Four

1 Miami vs 4 Texas A&M

2 Alabama vs 3 Florida St.

Teams left out: None controversial. Notre Dame was ranked 5^th but with a loss and a tie. Michigan won the Big Ten and finished undefeated, but with three ties. Of course we now know Notre Dame should have been the fourth team as the Irish pounded undefeated Texas A&M 28-3 in the Cotton Bowl.

1991

Top Four

1 Miami vs 4 Michigan

2 Washington vs 3 Florida

Teams left out: None. Florida St. and Penn St. were ranked 5 and 6 but both had two losses. They then played each other in their bowl game. All of the one-loss teams behind those two had a loss to one of the top four making this really easy.

1990

Top Four

1 Colorado vs 4 Miami

2 Georgia Tech vs 3 Texas

Teams left out: Notre Dame, Florida St., and Penn St all had the same record as Miami and were ranked behind the Hurricanes as did Pac-10 champion Washington. Of course this season was just a total debacle at the top of the country (think 2007 style upsets pretty much every week) considering this was the Colorado team that won the famous 5^th down game.

1989

Top Four

1 Colorado vs 4Notre Dame

2 Miami vs 3 Michigan

Teams left out: Another collective blowing of stacks from the SEC as tri-champions Alabama, Auburn and Tennessee were all not close despite one-loss seasons. Also, SWC champion Arkansas (remember this was before SEC realignment) was 10-1 and left out as well.

1988

Top Four

1 Notre Dame vs 4 Florida St.

2 Miami vs 3 West Virginia

Teams left out: Anyone in a conference. The top four were all independents while 5-7 were all one-loss conference champs (USC in the Pac-10, Nebraska in the Big 8 and Auburn in the SEC). None had any real claim though. USC was beaten by Notre Dame in its last game while ranked number 2 (and city rival UCLA was briefly ranked number one during the season). Nebraska was in a mostly weak Big 8 that was a year away from the rise of Colorado to give it another top team with Oklahoma on the probation down slope and Auburn won the weakest SEC in conference history.

BCS Championship Game Quick Thoughts

The Alabama defense is one of the greatest of all-time – There have been very few defenses capable of taking apart teams like Alabama has done this season. In recent history, I can think of only four others: 1992 Alabama, 1995 Nebraska, 1999 Florida St. and 2001 Miami. Even being mentioned with those teams is an accomplishment, but I think Alabama this season is better on defense than those teams. Just look at the LSU offense. As it turns out, the LSU offense maxed out in the first game with its 9 points. It didn't play well here and we all saw the results. Sadly.

Despite the loss, the LSU defense was its usual self – The LSU defense is the second best in the country. It stood on its head to keep Alabama out of the endzone for most of the game before finally running out of gas. Kudos to the effort put forth by LSU, especially the front seven that bottled up Trent Richardson entirely before the late touchdown run

On some level, the Maze punt return was the end of the game – Yes, Marquis Maze was injured on the punt return and yes I have been extra critical of him this season. Still, his punt return really shook LSU's confidence. All season, nobody had even bothered to return a punt against LSU. When Maze took off on his return, it was like the energy and will was sucked out of the LSU sideline. The one certain advantage was no longer an advantage.

LSU's offensive gameplan was pathetic

Thank to @Year2 of TeamSpeedKills for the image

Just know the graphic isn't really all that far off from the truth.

Even with the bad gameplan, LSU's limitations offensively were on display – All season, nobody really thought much of LSU being a below average team offensively, as least as far as yards go. Mostly because it always had great field position and scored a ton of points. In this game, the field position was bad and there were no turnovers. Combined with a great defense, this was the result, as it might always have been destined to be. The last time this happened, the average Mississippi St. defense held LSU to 19 points, so we should have seen this as a possibility.

Jordan Jefferson should have been pulled – Jefferson was miserable in this game. No other way to describe it. He was inaccurate, made dumb decisions and was slow both in movement and in his reads in the option games. Quite simple, he was atrocious (even without the awful interception). Jarrett Lee may not have been better, but it wouldn't have hurt to try with the National Title on the line and the team in need of a spark down 15 in the 4^th quarter.

The Alabama offense found a savior at wide receiver with Norwood – Kevin Norwood was pedestrian for all of his two seasons so far at Alabama. All season long, I decried the lack of a deep threat or big play receiver as the main Alabama weakness. With Marquis Maze out injured, Norwood suddenly became that guy, catching four passes for 78 yards after catching only seven passes all season. With Norwood a threat, the Alabama passing game had one of its best games of the season against the best secondary in the country.

Alabama is lucky this didn't become a kicking contest again – The Alabama kicking game was all over the place again. 5-7 and a missed extra point shows this is still a problem. At one point I said on twitter not to kick the field goal. The only way to lose was to get one blacked and returned for a touchdown.

Jordan Jefferson, you have earned the top lowlight of the season – For those who missed the interception, here it is, in all its lowlighty glory.

Follow me on twitter

Final Thoughts and Pick for the National Title

Alabama was the better team other than its special teams the last time around. That won't happen again. Either Alabama will be better again and it won't matter or LSU will be the better team.

The best quarterback will win the game. A.J. McCarron was average against LSU the first time around. He missed some plays and some pickups that he will have to do better with. Jordan Jefferson has been as schizophrenic as ever since returning to the lineup. He was great against Arkansas and awful against Georgia.

Les Miles is the best coach in this game. Conventional wisdom says Nick Saban is the better coach in part because his reputation and previous coaching stops say so. The reality is that Les Miles doesn't lose with extra time to prepare. Since getting to LSU, Miles has lost one game with more than one week to prepare his team. The only loss was to Penn St. in a bowl game with a terrible field two seasons ago. Included in those stats are the last two years against Alabama, where LSU was an underdog and won anyway. Given extra time, Miles just doesn't lose and while Saban is very good, Miles has proven to be better.

There will be touchdowns. In the first game, both teams had plenty of opportunities to score touchdowns and didn't take advantage. In this game, all it takes is one. One touchdown for either side will open the offenses a bit and allow some scoring to occur.

The gameplans won't be so relentlessly conservative this time. In the first game, Alabama started throwing the ball a bit, but went more and more into a shell as the game went on. LSU was conservative from the start and never came out of the shell (possibly out of necessity with Jordan Jefferson coming on in relief of ineffective Jarrett Lee). Both teams will be more aggressive and both will find some success with that aggressiveness that neither found in the first game.

Special teams won't play a major role. Conventional wisdom says special teams are a big part of expected close, defensive games like this one. It won't matter much. There won't be a game changing play on special teams here. No blocked punts, no big kick returns, nothing. Except maybe a missed kick, but nothing beyond the ordinary level.

Alabama can't come from behind. A.J. McCarron is just not going to be able to come from behind if they get behind more than one score. He can't get the passing game cranked up well enough (no deep balls) and he has never been behind as the starting qb. Even in the first game, he never trailed, only losing on the final play.

Whichever team hits the first deep ball will win the game. Neither team hit anything down the field in the first game. This time, I expect more of the same. Except this time, I expect someone to find something deep and whichever team does it first will win the game because of the space it gives to the running game.

Trent Richardson is not the key for the Alabama offense. Yes, Richardson is the most likely MVP for Alabama in the game. He also was the best player on offense for either team in the last game. None of that mattered. It didn't matter because Richardson can't do everything on his own. Where was Marquis Maze and the passing game? It disappeared at the 30 yard line, every time. If the passing game can't get going, Richardson, once again, won't matter despite being the best offensive player on the field.

The pick: Alabama has more overall talent. It has the better defense. It doesn't have the explosive talent in the positions needed to exploit the LSU defense. Given that, I expect it to be close and low scoring. Not as low scoring as the last time, but low scoring, especially compared to the other BCS games. In a close, low scoring game, the big mistake will decide the game. Last time, Alabama made the big mistakes in the kicking game. This time, Alabama will once again make the big mistake, this time coming from McCarron and the passing game.

LSU 20, Alabama 16

Learning from the past – what to take from the first LSU-Alabama matchup

There are a lot of things to be learned from the first game between LSU and Alabama. Only some of them are relevant to this game. Here are a few of them.

Alabama must figure out a way to throw deep on LSU – In the first game, Alabama had some success in the first half on intermediate passing routes. It found nothing deep (as I suspected might be the case in the pregame analysis). Somehow, someway, Alabama must find a deep pass. And I mean a legit deep ball. Getting Trent Richardson 50 yards on a screen is not a deep ball. Throwing down the field for a long completion, preferably a touchdown is what is needed. If Alabama can do it, even once, it will open the field up. In the last game, only Richardson's greatness kept Alabama from being totally stagnant after the first two drives. The lack of respect for Alabama's receivers by the LSU safeties and coaching staff completely negated everything else and would have negated Richardson too if he wasn't so good. With a deep completion, even one, the rest of the field reopens, including the midrange passes that Alabama used to great effect (seven completions over 15 yards) for the first quarter and a half of the first game.

Jordan Jefferson's legs are the key to the LSU offense – Last time, Jarrett Lee was still the starter for LSU when the game started. By the end of the game, Jefferson was the unquestioned starter. Without Jefferson, LSU wouldn't have got the second field goal that sent the game to overtime. His legs were necessary. Without those legs that make him mobile, Jefferson is Lee with a lower completion percentage and a few less interceptions. Now, he should be ready to play better in round two. At the very least, he should do well with knocking the rust off since he did it in the middle of the first game.

Alabama's defense will not be beaten by traditional means – When Lee was in the game in the first game, Alabama ate the LSU offense alive. I already mentioned Jefferson's legs. In addition, LSU should get the gimmick plays out. The TE Around play that LSU used on 4^th and 1 to seal the win in the 2010 game was a great example of the type of unconventional play calling that will be needed to move the ball on Alabama. Without some plays like that one built for deception at a key time, LSU won't move the ball again and there will be another stalemate.

The Alabama offense will continue to stall just outside the redzone – All game long in the first game, Alabama stalled just before the red zone, causing long field goal attempts. I don't see any reason why that will change in round 2 (making hitting a deep ball for a TD all the more important). The main reason why is the lack of a go to receiver. LSU's corners are so good, the Alabama receivers got erased in the first game. Nowhere does a lack of receivers become more evident than the area between midfield and the redzone. That area, more than any other, is where receivers make the offense go. This is because the defense generally becomes more aggressive in its blitz packages in this area and good receivers allow check downs to be made gaining more yardage. With no receivers open, the extra pressure becomes sacks, like what happened to Alabama in overtime. In what we've seen since then, the Alabama receivers just aren't up to the challenge. That means the field goal unit must be ready this time after its failures in the first game.

BCS Previews: Orange Bowl

Matchup – ACC Champion Clemson vs Big East Champion West Virginia

Road to the Orange Bowl – Clemson: Early in the season, Clemson appeared to eliminate the “That's why your Clemson” problem from its DNA, beating Auburn, Florida St. and Virginia Tech in succession on the way to an 8-0 start. From there, the wheels kind of fell off after getting beating by Georgia Tech before Clemson exposed Virginia Tech as way overrated, blowing them off the field in the ACC Championship Game.

Road to the Orange Bowl – West Virginia: Be the preseason favorite. Given the schedules and the teams beaten, a case can be made for Cincinnati as a better overall team in the Big East 3-team tiebreaker (though not Louisville who lost to Marshall and Florida International). That said, West Virginia has better name value and was the preseason favorite, thus the BCS standings gave the Mountaineers the nod.

Clemson offense vs West Virginia defense: Advantage Clemson

Something Urban Meyer said on one play for Clemson while calling the Clemson-Auburn game back in September still sticks out to me. That play was one part great scheme, one part great execution and one part great recruiting. Just from that play, you could tell Meyer the spread guru was impressed with the Clemson spread offense (so much so that he reportedly tried to hire Clemson OC Chad Morris as his OC before Morris stayed at Clemson) because it gets its best players good matchups and then lets the talent take over as long as they execute it well. West Virginia has had some problems against offenses that execute well, even if they lack talent (see Syracuse destruction of Mountaineers). When one that has talent executes well, West Virginia's beleaguered defense rarely has the answers.

West Virginia offense vs Clemson defense: Advantage West Virginia

The West Virginia spread passing game is really good. Not as good as its cousin at Oklahoma St., but still really good. It was the only passing game all season to find success against the LSU defense (over 400 yards in a losing cause) and it pretty much did the heavy lifting on its own with little to no running game. Against the Clemson defense, it will find a secondary that is flammable at times and a defense that only really shut down Virginia Tech.

Final Verdict: West Virginia is good. Clemson is very good. The talent difference will show here as Sammy Watkins and Tajh Boyd have a field day and the Clemson defense does just enough to win going away.

Clemson 40, West Virginia 27

BCS Preview: Sugar Bowl

Matchup – Michigan vs Virginia Tech

Road to the Sugar Bowl – Michigan: It is well publicized, but Michigan stunk the last few years. Since its epic loss to Ohio St. with a trip to the National Title Game on the line in 2006, the Wolverines have been bad. Then came new coach Brady Hoke. With him came less changes than expected to a good offense and a defense that found a pulse. With that defense came a 10-2 season that probably should have been one better (how did Michigan lose to Iowa?) and an at-large berth to the Sugar Bowl for its suffering fanbase that was key to the whole bowl situation considering nearly every bowl in the country would be falling over themselves to get Michigan this season after the last few years.

Road to the Sugar Bowl – Virginia Tech: Beat nobody at all (only Georgia Tech even had a pulse), win a weak division in a weak conference, get roasted by the best team on the schedule twice and get a massive favor done for them. Seriously, the Virginia Tech schedule was an embarrassment this year. There is a reason I picked them to go to the National Title game in the preseason and quality of team wasn't that reason. And if not for Clemson being much better than expected (and banishing at least some of the Clemson demons in big games), there is a very good chance I would have been right. Thankfully, the Hokies ended up here, even if it was undeserved and not in the National Title game with a 13-0 record against a weaker schedule than Boise St.

Michigan offense vs Virgtinia Tech defense: Advantage Michigan

Last I saw, the Virginia Tech defense was getting stomped by the Clemson offense. Michigan's offense is near the same caliber and runs the same type of system. The reality is that Virginia Tech is ill-equipped to deal with spread type teams of any type and Clemson was the only one with high level personnel the Hokies played. Expect this to look more like those game instead of the grinding defense first games we normally expect from the Hokies defense.

Virginia Tech offense vs Michigan defense: Advantage Michigan

The Virginia Tech offense was much better than usual this season. David Wilson is a very good running back and Logan Thomas, while still developing, turned in a fine first season as a starter. That said, Wilson can't do it alone and first year starters in bowl games can get overwhelmed because of the xtra scheming that can happen with the time off. Given a year, Thomas shreds most defenses (look out everyone next season). Right now, he will have his moments, but the formerly maligned Michigan defense will generally bottle things up like it did against Nebraska and Ohio St. (at least in the 2^nd half).

Final Verdict: Virginia Tech is the most overrated team in all of college football. It is also the most undeserving of all the BCS teams this season (including West Virginia). That is generally a bad combination, especially against a team that appears to be underrated because some of the voters can't get the images of the Michigan defense being destroyed with the same players the last couple of years. With a fans firmly in Michigan's corner, I expect a great performance from the Wolverines to launch them into the beginning of next season and a hyped up season opener against Alabama.

Michigan 37, Virginia Tech 20

BCS Preview: Rose Bowl

Matchup – Pac-12 Champion Oregon vs Big Ten Champion Wisconsin

Road to the Rose Bowl – Oregon: After playing for the National Title and being beaten by Auburn on the final play, hopes were high for Oregon again. National Title hopes were dashed early though as the Ducks were steamrolled by LSU at Jerry World in Dallas to open the season. From there, it was what has become the annual procession through conference play for Oregon with one speed bump this season, a home loss to probation saddled USC in November. Despite that, Oregon smoked Stanford for the second straight season and has lost just two Pac-10/12 games over the last three seasons (at Stanford in 2009 and USC in 2011). The Rose Bowl berth was clinched by whipping poor UCLA at home in the Pac-12 Championship Game, completing an 11-2 season.

Road to the Rose Bowl – Wisconsin: When Russell Wilson transferred into the program from NC State and became eligible immediately, the defending Big Ten Champion Badgers suddenly were looked at as national contenders as nearly everyone of consequence on the roster returned from last season's 11-2 team. Then Wilson played and played well and the hyperbole got out of hand as Wisconsin smoked loads of overmatched opponents at home culminating in a demolition of Nebraska in early October. Then came the road where the Wisconsin pass defense crumbled late allowing Michigan St. and Ohio St. to steal late wins, first on a Hail Mary and second on a desperation heave with under a minute to play. After the losses, Wisconsin scuffled but didn't stumble, ultimately getting its mojo back by obliterating Penn St. in a de facto division title game and outlasting Michigan St. in another shootout in the Big Ten Title Game.

Oregon offense vs Wisconsin defense: Advantage Oregon

The Oregon offense is one of the best in college football. The Wisconsin defense is average, especially away from home. Even with the extra time to prepare (the main kryptonite for the Oregon offense going back to 2009, Boise St., Ohio St., Auburn and LSU all had extra time either in a bowl game or the beginning of the season), Wisconsin is unlikely to slow the Oregon offense much. It lacks the overall personnel needed to do so.

Wisconsin offense vs Oregon defense: Advantage Wisconsin

The Wisconsin offense is also one of the best in the sport. It pounds between the tackles and uses Wilson to throw play action deep balls with great efficiency. Against Oregon, this approach has worked twice this season to great effect. LSU pounded the Oregon defense into submission in the Ducks first loss and USC hit the play action deep passes with Matt Barkley to win at Oregon. Considering Wisconsin uses both of those traits very well, it could be a long day for the Oregon defense.

Final Verdict: Oregon will win the game. There are just more ways for the Ducks to do it on offense and, despite Wisconsin's great offense, I don't think anyone (me included) has enough faith to believe it can score 40 points in this game.

Oregon 43, Wisconsin 35

Fixing the BCS – Because no matter how much people want it, we aren't getting a playoff

There are a ton of problems with the BCS. Everyone is aware of that. And even if they aren't actively thinking about it, nearly everyone has that agitated college football fan friend that is frustrated annually (of course the frustrated friend is all of us discussing this).

Knowing that, I am still pro-BCS. It has done wonders for the popularity of college football (even though everyone hates the system). It has kept the meaning of the regular season (most of the time, there are four terrible cases where the system screwed up badly). It brought the Pac-10 and Big Ten into the system allowing for a true championship game (no matter how much everyone hates the BCS, any year where a Pac-10, now 12, or Big Ten team is in the title game is a point in favor of the BCS because it couldn't have happened before, allowing for split national championships like the 1991 Miami-Washington and 1997 Michigan-Nebraska splits). And it moved college football from a mostly regionalized sport where nobody cared about anyone outside of their own area to a national sport where LSU against Alabama matters in California and Oklahoma against Oklahoma St. matters in Big Ten country. All of these changes are good things for the sport and good things for fans of the sport.

Of course that is the rosy view of the BCS. There are problems. Start with the four total failures of the system where undeserving teams reached the BCS Title Game: 2000 Florida St., 2001 Nebraska, 2003 Oklahoma and 2011 Alabama I am looking at you here. Each of those seasons had teams that caused the majority of America to be outraged at the BCS Title Matchup. Go from there to all of the ridiculous off the reservation choices bringing undeserving teams to BCS games (2011 Virginia Tech and 2007 Kansas most notably). Then add in the automatic bids even for awful champions from BCS Conferences (2011 West Virginia, 2010 Connecticut, 2004 Pittsburgh, 1999 Stanford, 2002 and 2005 Florida St., 2006 Wake Forest). Mix all of that together along with college football's general bizarreness and you get total chaos, regularly, even when there is an argument over teams in teams where the system does its job (2008 Florida-Oklahoma, 2007 Ohio St.-LSU, 2006 Ohio St.-Florida, and 1998 Tennessee-Florida St. are all years where there weren't the perfect two undefeated teams and the system did its job very well, picking deserving teams).

So what needs to be done? As a note, there are some things that I believe are non-starters and so I won't suggest them even though they might be good ideas. Some of these are a selection committee, a plus one system, and eliminating the coaches poll from the system (one of the best ideas anyone has had).

1 Only Conference Champions (or Independents) are allowed to play for the BCS Title – Years system got this wrong: 2001 (Nebraska), 2003 (Oklahoma), 2011 (Alabama)

The argument in favor of the BCS is that the regular season means everything. If the regular season means everything, then winning your conference is a prerequisite. In a playoff type system, the playoff means everything so this is less of an issue. But everyone wants to keep the best regular season in sports. That means only Conference Champions need apply for the National Championship.

Matchups in failed years under this system – 2001 Miami vs Colorado (replaces Nebraska), 2003 LSU vs USC (replaces Oklahoma), 2011 LSU vs Oklahoma St. (replaces Alabama)

2 Give the BCS formula a makeover with the computers having more power

I know some will say that the computers had too much power, causing some of the stupid matchup in the early years of the system. That is exactly right. The computers did have too much power in the early days of the system. Now though, they have too little. When the formula was changed after the 2003 debacle, the influence of the computers went from too much to too little. Now, it is 1/3 of the rankings. In the early BCS days, the computers were closer to 2/3. It really should be half. The computers need to have a say because they are objective and unbiased. They don't need the entire say because computers can only read the data. And the data being put into them is often flawed (especially right now, more on that later). Despite that, there is space for the computers to have a legitimate say in matters here. We need some objectivity.

3 Make changes to the computer components

This goes along with number 2. Right now, the computers are limited in what they can do. Other than a cap on Margin of Victory (but bring it back), let the computer programmers do whatever the heck they want. The only rules are a three touchdown cap on Margin of Victory and the formula being used must be released to the public, even if nobody in the public would understand what the heck is actually happening with the formula. From there, more computers should be brought into the system. There needs to be a cross section of computer rankings. Kenneth Massey (who runs one of the BCS computer rankings) keeps a composite ranking that includes over 100 different computers plus the human polls and the BCS in a composite rankings. Why not go get some of those rankings that take some different things into account and broaden the spectrum of computer rankings? If nothing else, having more of them could allow them to be easily arranged into a poll like set of rankings that the public can more easily digest than what occurs now (when they are just dismissed) or what happened with the old formula (when the public yelled WTF is going on, get rid of these stupid things because I don't understand).

4 Automatic BCS bids to any conference champion of any league that finishes in the top 8, at-large pool extends to 14.

Rose and Sugar Bowls automatically get their traditional champions if in the top 8 and not in the National Title Game. Rose Bowl always gets first at-large pick to take either the Pac-12 or Big Ten Champ if ranked below 8 and in top 14 as Rose Bowl would not allow this plan otherwise.

Does this fix everything we have with undeserving teams getting into the BCS? No. Of course not. As long as the bowls are involved, there are going to be some befuddling picks. Would it fix a lot of the problems that we have seen the last few years? Absolutely.

5 Three team limit per conference instead of two

Do some want the cap eliminated entirely? Yes. That just can't happen. No conference is strong enough to be deserving of sucking up four out of ten BCS slots. The only way to get four teams ranked that high is to be top heavy, meaning it is likely that at least one of those teams is overrated and not really deserving (2011 South Carolina I'm looking at you). In the rare event that none of those teams was overrated (2010 SEC West), well the lesser bowls will be glad to have you as always and you should have beaten the better teams in your league when you had the chance. That said, the unbalanced schedules that nearly every league now plays makes a cap of two teams as exists presently impractical.

With those changes (in particular 1 and 4 that we can apply to ), this is how things may have looked each season since the expansion of the BCS in 2006 (I didn't worry about pick order too much so the teams would likely be close but the matchups off).

2011	Actual	New System	3 Auto-Bids – LSU, OK St., Oregon
BCS Title	LSU vs Alabama	LSU vs Oklahoma St.	No non-conference champs allowed
Rose	Oregon vs Wisconsin	Oregon vs Wisconsin
Sugar	Michigan vs Virginia Tech	Alabama vs Baylor	With Alabama dropping down, no need or desire for VT
Fiesta	Stanford vs Oklahoma St.	Kansas St. vs Stanford	With Ok St. in the BCS Game, KSt. Lands here to replace
Orange	Clemson vs West Virginia	Arkansas vs Michigan	2 team cap abolished gets Orange a good game, finally
2010	Actual	New System	5 Auto-Bids – Auburn, Oregon, TCU, Wisconsin, Oklahoma
BCS Title	Auburn vs Oregon	Auburn vs Oregon
Rose	TCU vs Wisconsin	Stanford vs Wisconsin	Rose Bowl gets desired matchup, sorry TCU
Sugar	Arkansas vs Ohio St.	Arkansas vs TCU	Didn't worry about pick order here, these 6 are the teams though
Fiesta	Oklahoma vs Connecticut	Oklahoma vs Michigan St.
Orange	Stanford vs Virginia Tech	Ohio St. vs LSU
2009	Actual	New System	8 Auto-Bids, Bowl pairings unchanged
BCS Title	Alabama vs Texas	Alabama vs Texas
Rose	Oregon vs Ohio St.	Oregon vs Ohio St.
Sugar	Florida vs Cincinnati	Florida vs Cincinnati
Fiesta	TCU vs Boise St.	TCU vs Boise St.
Orange	Georgia Tech vs Iowa	Georgia Tech vs Iowa
2008	Actual	New System	5 Auto-Bids – Oklahoma, Florida, USC, Utah, Penn St.
BCS Title	Oklahoma vs Florida	Oklahoma vs Florida
Rose	USC vs Penn St.	USC vs Penn St.
Sugar	Alabama vs Utah	Alabama vs Texas Tech	No 2 team limits allows Texas Tech
Fiesta	Texas vs Ohio St.	Texas vs Utah	Utah is pick since Ohio St. would be off board
Orange	Cincinnati vs Virginia Tech	Ohio St. vs Georgia Tech	GT is a stretch, but options were lacking (Boise finished 9th, no AQ)
2007	Actual	New System	5 Auto-Bids – Ohio St., LSU, Virginia Tech, Oklahoma, USC
BCS Title	Ohio St. vs LSU	Ohio St. vs LSU
Rose	USC vs Illinois	USC vs Illinois
Sugar	Georgia vs Hawaii	Georgia vs Missouri	Hawaii finished 10th (No AQ) and Missouri was deserving
Fiesta	Oklahoma vs West Virginia	Oklahoma vs West Virginia
Orange	Virginia Tech vs Kansas	Virginia Tech vs Florida	If you have to have undefeated Hawaii, replace Florida
2006	Actual	New System	5 Auto-Bids – Ohio St., Florida, USC, Louisville, Boise St.
BCS Title	Ohio St. vs Florida	Ohio St. vs Florida
Rose	USC vs Michigan	USC vs Michigan
Sugar	LSU vs Notre Dame	LSU vs Wisconsin	No 2 team limit allows Wisconsin
Fiesta	Oklahoma vs Boise St.	Oklahoma vs Boise St.
Orange	Louisville vs Wake Forest	Notre Dame vs Louisville	Orange is happy to be rid of Wake Forest

Bowl Selection Review (Annual BCS Travesty Included with Admission)

BCS Matchups + First Thoughts

BCS Title Game – LSU vs Alabama

The expected title game. Over the next few weeks, the debate will rage (both here and elsewhere) about if this was really the correct matchup or not (regular readers here know I stand with the anti-rematch group). Nonetheless, the first game was a close game. I expect this to be close too. And also very low scoring. Long layoffs tend to favor the defenses as the offenses lose their timing. That prospect makes an even worse offensive game a possible, but it also brings a defensive touchdown into play that wasn't there in the first meeting. That is LSU's domain as I believe the Tigers will win again and win easily by a score of something like 17-7.

Rose Bowl – Oregon vs Wisconsin

The most correct matchup of all the games, this would have been the matchup 40 years ago just the same as today. I was talking with a friend at church earlier tonight about this game and we agreed that Oregon has more ways to win this game, especially with Wisconsin lacking defensive linemen like the ones from LSU, Auburn and Ohio St. that have killed the Ducks the last few seasons.

Fiesta Bowl – Oklahoma St. vs Stanford

The Title Game's loss is the Fiesta Bowl's gain as the Fiesta Bowl gets the best matchup of the bowl season with Andrew Luck and the Oklahoma St. offense set for a wild shootout. That said, the Oklahoma St. defense will win this game. With turnovers as Luck has been surprisingly susceptible to interceptions at some bad times in games this season.

Sugar Bowl – Michigan vs Virginia Tech

The Sugar Bowl went off the reservation with this pick and they are going to pay for it with a bad football game. Virginia Tech just isn't very good and the signs have been there all season despite a terrible schedule (remember that I picked Virginia Tech for the BCS Title Game in the preseason because of that schedule that, other than Clemson's surprise improvement, was every bit as bad as it appeared) that allowed the Hokies to rack up wins. Clemson destroyed them twice. Miami nearly came back from oblivion to take a 4^th quarter shootout in Blacksburg. North Carolina gave the Hokies a good run in Blacksburg as well. There were no games against teams that finished ranked except the Clemson games. This won't be the same. The Hokies will be tested and they will fail against Denard Robinson and Michigan's improved defense.

Orange Bowl – Clemson vs West Virginia

This bowl is actually quite happy, all things considered. Though this matchup is weaker than quite a few non-BCS games, it is an immense improvement over a week ago. A week ago, this bowl was looking at 7-5 Louisville against Virginia Tech for the 4^th time in six years. As for the game, Clemson is the balanced version of West Virginia with more skill position talent. The result will reflect that.

Who got screwed (BCS Title Version)? Oklahoma St.

Oklahoma St. should have been in the BCS Title Game. The reasons have been stated over and over all over the place (except for on ESPN where everyone is 'mysteriously' pro-rematch this season), so I won't get into it here and now because it will go on for quite some time. It is an argument for a full post.

Who got screwed (BCS Version)? Boise St. or Kansas St.

Looking at the rest of the BCS games, there are two teams that could make a decent BCS case for the Sugar Bowl spot opposite Michigan (let's be honest here about Michigan who went 10-2 and has a huge fanbase and tv cache. The Wolverines were all but conceded in at 10-2 weeks ago and I have no problem with it despite its slightly lower ranking). Boise St. is the highest ranked team other than SEC 3 Arkansas (who can't go) not in the BCS. There is a case to be made for them to be in the BCS, even with a loss (though I find Boise's overall resume lacking and not quite BCS worthy this season). I think Kansas St. should have gotten the call for this game. The Wildcats were 10-2 in the conference ranked as the best in the country by the computers (another reason Oklahoma St. should be in the championship game) and finished in the top 10. Also, its fans travel extremely well because any chance to get out of cold, snowy Kansas in December-January is one you take. I don't think Virginia Tech will be traveling all that well as a disappointed fanbase but that's just me.

Who got screwed (Rest of Bowls)?

Penn St. - The players weren't the ones that perpetrated the scandal. Sad for them that they fell all the way to the TicketCity Bowl. Just awful for a team (emphasis on team and not program) that deserved better (even if they got a better opponent than expected with Houston).

Alamo Bowl – Obviously, the Alamo Bowl didn't know USC was staring at 2 years bowlless when they signed to bring in the Pac-12's second pick, but that and the Pac-12 getting 2 in the BCS both years so far has killed this game. Last season, it was 7-5 Arizona (instead of bowl ineligible USC) coming in with a four game losing streak to be sacrificed to Oklahoma St. This season, its 7-5 Washington (instead of bowl ineligible USC) and its flammable pass defense to play against Robert Griffin III and the most prolific deep passing game in college football.

Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl – This bowl works on behalf of a good cause (much better than when it was the Diamond Walnuts Emerald Bowl), but they got stuck with the biggest turd of the bowl season, no question. UCLA and its 6-7 record with a waiver to even be allowed to play and no coach is going to be a big favorite in this game somehow. Of course that somehow is that the Bruins are playing Illinois, former home of Ron Zook and possessors of a six game losing streak. In addition to the horrible matchup, this bowl also got a horrible time slot this season. They are on New Year's Eve in the middle of the day at the same time as Georgia Tech vs Utah in the Sun Bowl and Cincinnati vs Vanderbilt in the Liberty Bowl. Either of those games is far more appetizing.

Who got a gift?

Cotton Bowl – Talk about a charmed existence. This game got Arkansas and Kansas St. in a game that is a better matchup than two of the BCS games. This the year after getting the kickoff of LSU's championship run. Things are starting to go really well for this game again after a long spell of dry years.

Southern Miss – Normally, the Conference USA champion gets a trip to Memphis for the Liberty Bowl. Because of some odd contractual shenanigans between the SEC, Big East and the bowl in Birmingham, Southern Miss gets a Hawaiian vacation instead. Believe me, Christmas Eve in Hawaii is a much better proposition than New Year's Eve in Memphis, and if you want to experience both, Memphis close enough to Southern Miss that the players can do that if they so choose (though I have no idea why unless Memphis is home).

ACC teams other than Clemson and Florida St. - Clemson earned its way into the BCS. Florida St. was locked into the Champs Sports Bowl against Notre Dame pretty much no matter what. Virginia Tech got a gift Sugar Bowl bid and everyone else benefits from moving up one slot in the pecking order. In particular, Virginia should be happy to be going to Atlanta and the Chick-fil-a Bowl to play Auburn instead of the Belk Bowl or the Music City Bowl.

New Year's Day Football Fans – The games are on January 2 this season (because the 1^st is on a Sunday), but they are the best set of New Year's games in a long time. In the morning, we get Penn St-Houston, Michigan St.-Georgia, Ohio St.-Florida and South Carolina-Nebraska. Then we get a traditional Rose Bowl with Wisconsin-Oregon. After that, we get the best matchup of the BCS with Stanford-Oklahoma St. I have nothing to complain about there. It will be a great day of football.

Why there should never be a BCS Title Rematch

I am staunchly anti-rematch. Back in 1996, I understood Florida getting a rematch against Florida St. because it was before the BCS system and before the Pac-10 and Big Ten were allowed into the championship game. In some years in that era, it was unavoidable. The Big Ten and Pac-10 champions were ranked too high for any other outcome to be possible. That said, I still didn't like the rematch and would have favored Nebraska to get the spot over Florida had they not lost to Texas in the Big 12 Championship game.

I bring this up because we, unless you have been living under a rock (which is certainly possible for some of you), are staring down the barrel of an LSU-Alabama rematch. And I don't like it at all. Here are my reasons:

There is not enough non-conference play to determine with sort of true merit that two teams that played each other are definitively better than everyone else in college football, even if it appears to be so.

In the context of this season, I bring to you the Big 12. Yes, Iowa St. is a middling Big 12 team. So is Texas Tech. Those two teams beat the elite of the conference: Oklahoma and Oklahoma St. But if you look closer, neither team lost a non-conference game. They only played three each and both teams won all of them. How can we say, with any certainty that these teams are weaker or stronger than middling SEC teams like Auburn and Florida (who, by the way, are higher on the SEC foodchain this season than Iowa St. and Texas Tech are on the Big 12 foodchain)? We can't, because we haven't seen enough evidence. We can speculate and guess (if I had to, I would guess Auburn would beat both Big 12 schools and Florida would beat Texas Tech but not Iowa St.), but there is no empirical evidence that one set of teams is better than the other. This applies to the conference as a whole, an increasing problem when conferences are often judged as a whole.

So if the loser beats the winner, which should be ranked higher

Obivously, the one that should be ranked higher is the one with the better body of work. Except in the BCS, if we have a rematch and Alabama wins, they will be the champion with an inferior body of work. I'm ok with this normally with a head to head win, but not when the loser would also have a head to head win. Honestly, if I were voting and we have a rematch, an Alabama win doesn't affect my vote at all. LSU is the number 1 team in a rematch scenario, period.

Shouldn't the National Champion also have to win its conference

Obviously, this is not the case in some other sports (college basketball in particular where every so often you get a champion that won neither its regular season or conference tournament championships), but those sports have playoffs that are designed to reward more teams with a postseason trip and a shot at the title. This sport also rewards teams, but with a bowl game. Not a championship shot. And as long as that is the case and only two out of 120 get a shot at it, the National Champion should be a conference champion unless they aren't in a conference. Go back to 2001 and 2003. How loud was the screaming that non-conference champions got into the National Championship Game. How loud would it have been had Michigan gotten a rematch against Ohio St. without even a share of the conference championship (particularly from the same SEC country that is now arguing in favor of an Alabama-LSU rematch)? With all of that and the whole we won the conference over the National Champions thing to stain the title and it's just not worth it.

Every game counts right

The crux of the argument. In the BCS, every game is supposed to count. And, despite all the controversy in past years, every game has counted (expect one). Even in 2001 when Nebraska didn't win its division and got to the title game, there were many things that could have prevented (chief among them being the playing of the Washington St.-Colorado game canceled because of 9/11 that would have lifted either 2-loss Colorado or Pac-10 Champ Oregon into the championship game) the Cornhuskers from reaching the game. The one time a game didn't count, we got the single most unsatisfying result of the BCS era, and that's saying something considering the existence of so many unfulfilled seasons and controversies. That year was the year of the split national title because the Oklahoma-Kansas St. game didn't count in the eyes of the BCS. Now, we have reached the same point. The LSU-Alabama would not have counted in the eyes of the BCS if we get a rematch and we are setting ourselves up for a fate that is quite awful and terrible if we allow it... of course the fact that it is so awful and terrible for the BCS, is one of the many reasons people are in favor of a rematch.