Schedule plenty of mediocre teams, blow them out, and watch as those with the balls to play big-time programs fall one by one. That is what I have learned from this. I would like to say it is the writers, but even a lot of our fans now side with USC over OU. Let's just switch schedules with TCU, destroy teams 50-3 and get hailed as a great team year in and year out. I will call it the USC-Plan. Oh yeah - it wont be OUR fault the teams suck right?
Well it did (no sarcasm) According to them AND the AP writers, the Rose Bowl is the true national championship... They will probably still end up with a share if they win, which I think big blue will not allow
USC scheduled Notre Dame and Auburn for this year's schedule, probably 4-5 years ago. Did you really know a few years back that Notre Dame would have a losing season this year and that Auburn would lose 5 games? Also, Hawaii is having an off-year. Plus their conference, which isn't under their control, sucked more than usual, apparently.
Having said all that, by the way, I don't think USC would beat LSU or OU, but I still think they deserved to play in the Sugar Bowl over OU after OU's loss to Kansas State.
Then with everything you just said, USC SHOULD NOT HAVE LOST A SINGLE GAME. It is unfair they do not get a shot. Until we nut up and go to a playoff system everyone will have some sort of bitch. But of the three - USC lost to the worst opponent and had the LOWEST SOS. There is no other argument that is purely objective. We had no idea about the teams we scheduled 4-5 years ago, and neither did OU. So that is not a disadvantage to USC, it is a disadvantage to all teams.
Oh yeah and a great point a OU Sooner made. You should hand over the Pac-10 trophy to Cal right, since they beat USC. No? OH so now you want to look at what they did the entire season. So it is not just what happened on one day?
I agree... without a playoff it's going to be much easier and more legitimate for teams to complain. And I agree that USC lost to the worst opponent. And that USC is (in my opinion) the weakest of the 3 teams in question. But having said that, if I were in charge I would not allow a team that can't win their own conference play in the national championship game.
So USC rightfully won the Pac-10. Again all things are not equal. You are penalizing an OU team that played for the championship, and wanting to give it to a team that had it handed to them. IF USC had to beat the 2nd best team in the Pac-10 in a championship, then maybe I see your point. Oh and if they do that, and win, their SOS goes way up and they are not bitching right now b/c they would be in the sugar bowl.
Part of the "BrettStah Master College Football Revamp" includes requiring all BCS conferences to have 12 (or more) members and a championship game. I would have the highest ranked teams that won their conference play in a 4 team playoff. So we'd have the highest ranked conference winner play the 4th highest ranked conference winner (LSU vs. Florida State this year). Then we'd have the middle two conference winners (USC vs. Michigan this year). Those two games would occur on January 1st. A week or so later (probably the closest Saturday to January 1st that is at least 7 days away) the winners would play the championship game. So we're talking one extra game for only two teams. I personally think it's very workable, and we could settle most valid arguments on the field.
