Free Bagel wrote:While I'm here, I wanna touch on this "additional game" thing that people are talking about. People keep saying "one more game," and that USC should play LSU now, and that's how they think the system should work.
Well sure, that would work out nicely THIS year. It worked out in the perfect way so that there were split nat'l champs and that an extra game would decide it THIS year. How long has the BCS been around? And it took this long for it to happen, what's that, 1 in 8 years?
The bottom line is that "extra game" wouldn't work right every year, and in most instances it would do more harm than good.
What if OU had won the Big 12 title game and beat LSU, and Mich had beaten USC? Then we would have 13-0 OU against 11-2 Mich, so say Mich beats OU in the "extra game," now weve got 12-2 Michigan as #1 and 13-1 OU as #2.
More times than not, there's either 1 undefeated team left at the end of the year, or one 1 loss team left at the end of the year, is it fair to them that they would have to play an extra game against someone with a worse record?
Again, two years ago Miami beats Nebraska in the nat'l title game to finish 12-0. The #3 team ithat year was my beloved Gators at 11-2, would matching those two up be fair to the canes? No. Even if you did some kind of seeding where #1 played #4 and #2 played #3 first, then if UF won, we would still have 12-0 UM against 11-2 UF for the national title?
What about last year? OSU beats Miami, then who do they play? Who was #3 last year? If I can't even remember, do they deserve a shot at the national championship against a team that just went 13-0 and knocked off the only other undefeated team? Everyone was saying USC was the hottest team in the country last year and that they could've beaten anyone, but they were #6 going into bowl week, so an extra game wouldn't have helped them.
Sure, an extra game would've been nice this year. But this happening once in 8 years doesn't mean should screw up the other 7.
Well it's more of a take all comers thing. The idea is, if Michigan beats USC, they are obviously better than people thought and they deserve a shot at OU in the championship. Like when a wildcard gets to the Super Bowl. We don't look at them like they aren't the champs because they had a worse overall record than everyone else.
The only way you could EVER come up with a true undispuated champ would be a double round robin tournament, and I don't think anyone wants to see that.