f*ck you.

What if I have a stick-shift bid?

Air Force
BYU
Colorado State
New Mexico
San Diego State
TCU
UNLV
Utah
Wyoming

You're telling me a team that plays in that conference deserves an auto BSC bid?

For people who want the actual farking rankings instead of discussion about farking rankings:

Link (^)

1 Florida
2 Alabama
3 Texas
4 TCU
5 Cincinnati
6 Boise State
7 Georgia Tech
8 LSU
9 Pittsburgh
10 Ohio State
11 Oregon
12 Oklahoma State
13 Iowa
14 Penn State
15 Virginia Tech
16 Wisconsin
17 Stanford
18 USC
19 Oregon State
20 Miami (FL)
21 Utah
22 Brigham Young
23 Clemson
24 Houston
25 California

Actually, BCS 05 worked out pretty well. That's pretty much the only year there was no controversy over who the two best teams were.

You mean one of these teams deserves an automiatic bid if they win their conference championsip:

ACC Atlantic
Clemson 5-2 7-3
Boston College 4-2 7-3
Florida State 3-4 5-5
Wake Forest 2-5 4-7
North Carolina State 1-5 4-6
Maryland 1-5 2-8

======================================================

Big 12 North
Nebraska 4-2 7-3
Kansas State 4-3 6-5
Iowa State 3-4 6-5
Missouri 2-4 6-4
Colorado 2-4 3-7
Kansas 1-5 5-5

colin-: Air Force
BYU
Colorado State
New Mexico
San Diego State
TCU
UNLV
Utah
Wyoming

You're telling me a team that plays in that conference deserves an auto BSC bid?

Hell yes I do. Utah has gone undefeated twice in the last 5 years and beat Pittsburgh in the Fiesta Bowl and Alabama in the Sugar Bowl (who was ranked #1 most of last season). TCU and BYU are almost always in the top 25, and TCU will definitely be a BCS buster this year. Even the shiatty teams from the MWC can compete with other conferences, last year Wyoming beat Tennessee at Tennessee.

SigmaAlgebra: Actually, BCS 05 worked out pretty well. That's pretty much the only year there was no controversy over who the two best teams were.

'02. Ohio State and Miami were the only 2 unbeatens, and the only 1-loss squads left were #4 Georgia and #5 Boise State.

colin-: Air Force
BYU
Colorado State
New Mexico
San Diego State
TCU
UNLV
Utah
Wyoming

You're telling me a team that plays in that conference deserves an auto BSC bid?

Look at Texas' schedule and tell me it's not easier. That is, if you've actually seen any of these teams.

Better yet, don't bother, just look at the numbers.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/polls/119

Strength of Schedule:

TCU: 25
Texas: 37
Cinci: 43

The BCS computer rankings are bullshiat, because they don't serve any purpose except to validate the polls.

Every time the computers have disagreed with the polls, they force a change in the computer rankings.

If you want to use a computer ranking, then let the statisticians come up with a rational ranking. But what they have now is a joke. If you want to be this way, then fark the computer and just go with the polls alone.

Dafatone: colin-: Air Force
BYU
Colorado State
New Mexico
San Diego State
TCU
UNLV
Utah
Wyoming

You're telling me a team that plays in that conference deserves an auto BSC bid?

Look at Texas' schedule and tell me it's not easier. That is, if you've actually seen any of these teams.

Better yet, don't bother, just look at the numbers.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/polls/119

Strength of Schedule:

TCU: 25
Texas: 37
Cinci: 43

You...you...mean...big conference schools don't take scheduling risks, because they know if they win out in their conferences they'll go to BCS games?

/color me surprised
//NOT

whistleridge: Dafatone: colin-: Air Force
BYU
Colorado State
New Mexico
San Diego State
TCU
UNLV
Utah
Wyoming

You're telling me a team that plays in that conference deserves an auto BSC bid?

Look at Texas' schedule and tell me it's not easier. That is, if you've actually seen any of these teams.

Better yet, don't bother, just look at the numbers.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/polls/119

Strength of Schedule:

TCU: 25
Texas: 37
Cinci: 43

You...you...mean...big conference schools don't take scheduling risks, because they know if they win out in their conferences they'll go to BCS games?

/color me surprised
//NOT
///USC, OSU and Oklahoma excepted
////respect where it's due

Colt4545: colin-: Air Force
BYU
Colorado State
New Mexico
San Diego State
TCU
UNLV
Utah
Wyoming

You're telling me a team that plays in that conference deserves an auto BSC bid?

Hell yes I do. Utah has gone undefeated twice in the last 5 years and beat Pittsburgh in the Fiesta Bowl and Alabama in the Sugar Bowl (who was ranked #1 most of last season). TCU and BYU are almost always in the top 25, and TCU will definitely be a BCS buster this year. Even the shiatty teams from the MWC can compete with other conferences, last year Wyoming beat Tennessee at Tennessee.

Don't forget Air Force. They were 8-4 last year, and usually provide competitive games against the top 3, and beat the rest of the MWC. If the MWC really does add Boise, Fresno and Tulsa/Nevada as they're rumored to be trying... that's a better football conference than the Big East or ACC.

Also, arguments on strength of schedule are dumb, and selectively argued anyway. Even if you try to schedule top flight teams, there's no guarantee they'll accept (see Boise's scheduling problems) or that those teams will end up being as good as advertised (see: Utah vs Michigan, last year). And even if you manage to put together a strong enough schedule, as TCU has, that'll be ignored if the other undefeated teams have better name recognition (see: TCU ranked below Texas, as stated above)

Sword and Shield: SigmaAlgebra: Actually, BCS 05 worked out pretty well. That's pretty much the only year there was no controversy over who the two best teams were.

'02. Ohio State and Miami were the only 2 unbeatens, and the only 1-loss squads left were #4 Georgia and #5 Boise State.

I really hope Cincy wins out, so that the Big East is able to start complaining about the BCS system not giving their teams a fair shot. That would be fantastic.

Either TCU or BSU is going to get farked. Fark college football and their bullshiat BCS. Division 2 does a playoff, division 1 can do it too.

Any competition where you can win every single match and still not be declared champion should not receive federal sponsorship through the NCAA. Not saying you can't have it, just that you can't get any federal money, for things like scholarships, land grants, etc.

If only there were a system that could determine who the best team really is...say a system where all the best teams played against each other in some form of a scheduled competition. The teams could be ranked 1-8 or 1-16...the higher seeds could play the lowest seeds. And by process of single-elimination, we would eventually have a champion. I'm surprised that I am the first to come up with this idea.

The BCS is about money, plain and simple. The non-BCS conferences don't bring the same number of fans, tv ratings, and money that others do. That's why the BCS doesn't want to give them automatic bids, nothing really to do with the "strength" of those conferences. Not saying it's right, but that's how it is.

Also, before we get into the inevitable "those conferences are so much better than the ACC/Big East/Pac 10/whatever conference I don't like", here (new window) are the Sagarin rankings by conference for 2009:

1) Pac-10
2) SEC
3) ACC
4) Big East
5) Big 12
6) Big 10
7) Independents
8) Mountain West
9) WAC
10) Conf-USA
11) MAC
12) Sun Belt

histakes: You mean one of these teams deserves an automiatic bid if they win their conference championsip:

ACC Atlantic
Clemson 5-2 7-3
Boston College 4-2 7-3
Florida State 3-4 5-5
Wake Forest 2-5 4-7
North Carolina State 1-5 4-6
Maryland 1-5 2-8

======================================================

Big 12 North
Nebraska 4-2 7-3
Kansas State 4-3 6-5
Iowa State 3-4 6-5
Missouri 2-4 6-4
Colorado 2-4 3-7
Kansas 1-5 5-5

This is an interesting point too. If you're in favor of playoffs, then there shouldn't really be complains about teams like this being able to make it to one of the big games. Conference championship games are a mini-playoff for that conference.

Great, so ten games in we still have six undefeated teams and two one-loss teams. Man, an 8-team playoff would be good right about now.

Instead, it seems the BCS is all but ready to hand over the trophy to a Florida team that has played no one except very overrated LSU, which was about as tough for them to beat as Washington was to them. Luckily, Alabama will get a chance to fix that. Anything can happen on the gridiron, but Alabama is clearly better on paper (for what their competition's worth, they've been dominating it like no other). I don't care for them, but I want them to crush Florida by 30 points, if only to prove just how much of a farce this system is.

The Top 3's opponents next week are Florida International, Chattanooga and Kansas. Oh, for crying out loud! We're gonna get a gamed SEC team in the title game no matter what, it seems, and joke-of-a-schedule Texas will likely have to play Nebraska -- Nebraska -- for the Big 12 title game. So barring any unlikely shockers these teams have taken great pains to avoid, two of the top 3 are all but automatically in, leaving TCU, Cinci and Boise State to suck eggs. In particular, TCU and Boise State are very tired of the snubs.

Not that anyone would give a fark, but this could be the last straw for me. When college football looks even more fixed than the NBA, there's no incentive to watch.

Lost Thought 00: Any competition where you can win every single match and still not be declared champion should not receive federal sponsorship through the NCAA. Not saying you can't have it, just that you can't get any federal money, for things like scholarships, land grants, etc.

How about hookers and blow? That's still okay, right?

Wont karma set this right when it comes down to selection time for the at-large bid(s)?

4 TCU
6 Boise State

TCU and Boise State will have to be seeded in a BCS bowl game no matter what correct? I mean Ohio State is going and they SUCK this year. What they hell are they going to do? Find a way to send USC?

Seriously... Why has no one tried to explain this in plain english on ESPN?! WHY?! There are 10 slots...

"Automatic Qualification"

1. Top team in the land
2. 2nd team in the land
3. The champions of the Atlantic Coast
4. The champions of the Big East
5. The champions of the Big Ten
6. The champions of the Big 12
7. The champions of the Pac-10
8. The champions of the Southeastern conference

So that means 2 at large bids?

Quoted: As long as the 2 at-large teams meet these:

"A. Has won at least nine regular-season games, and"
"B. Is among the top 14 teams in the final BCS Standings."

So why is this so hard?

Is there another automatic qualifier i dont know about?

SigmaAlgebra: Actually, BCS 05 worked out pretty well. That's pretty much the only year there was no controversy over who the two best teams were.

Yeah, 'cause we really needed a convoluted system to set the two remaining undefeated teams against each other.

YouWinAgainGravity:

Sagarin ratings are inherently biased against the "lesser known" conferences because it only takes into account schools they want to take into account, not every school in the nation. There is a built-in assumption that any team in the country which they have not looked at is inherently inferior to any team that they did look at, which is complete BS

smerfnablin: Wont karma set this right when it comes down to selection time for the at-large bid(s)?

4 TCU
6 Boise State

TCU and Boise State will have to be seeded in a BCS bowl game no matter what correct? I mean Ohio State is going and they SUCK this year. What they hell are they going to do? Find a way to send USC?

Seriously... Why has no one tried to explain this in plain english on ESPN?! WHY?! There are 10 slots...

"Automatic Qualification"

1. Top team in the land
2. 2nd team in the land
3. The champions of the Atlantic Coast
4. The champions of the Big East
5. The champions of the Big Ten
6. The champions of the Big 12
7. The champions of the Pac-10
8. The champions of the Southeastern conference

So that means 2 at large bids?

Quoted: As long as the 2 at-large teams meet these:

"A. Has won at least nine regular-season games, and"
"B. Is among the top 14 teams in the final BCS Standings."

So why is this so hard?

Is there another automatic qualifier i dont know about?

The automatic qualifier for non-BCS conferences is:

"The champion of Conference USA, the Mid-American Conference, the Mountain West Conference, the Sun Belt Conference, or the Western Athletic Conference will earn an automatic berth in a BCS bowl game if either:

A. Such team is ranked in the top 12 of the final BCS Standings, or,
B. Such team is ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS Standings and its ranking in the final BCS Standings is higher than that of a champion of a conference that has an annual automatic berth in one of the BCS bowls.

No more than one such team from Conference USA, the Mid-American Conference, the Mountain West Conference, the Sun Belt Conference, and the Western Athletic Conference shall earn an automatic berth in any year."

They CAN be eligible for at-large berths, most definitely. However, the bowls are extremely reluctant to take teams from those conferences unless they HAVE to, because they can make more money by taking a traditional power school.

Krymson Tyde: Lost Thought 00: Any competition where you can win every single match and still not be declared champion should not receive federal sponsorship through the NCAA. Not saying you can't have it, just that you can't get any federal money, for things like scholarships, land grants, etc.

How about hookers and blow? That's still okay, right?

That's covered under sub-section 3.a.5 for the exceptionally excepted uses.

Your Average Witty Fark User: Either TCU or BSU is going to get farked. Fark college football and their bullshiat BCS. Division 2 does a playoff, division 1 can do it too.

Divisions 1-AA(FCS), II, and III have a playoff, as does the NAIA. I think they all have 16 team playoffs. I guess only the college presidents of Division 1(FBS) schools only care about the athletes academics.

At least during football season because the same presidents don't give a farking care in the world when it comes to basketball season and week long conference championships and month long NCAA, NIT, and CBI tournamnets. I must be mi$$ing $omething.

lacydog: Sword and Shield: SigmaAlgebra: Actually, BCS 05 worked out pretty well. That's pretty much the only year there was no controversy over who the two best teams were.

'02. Ohio State and Miami were the only 2 unbeatens, and the only 1-loss squads left were #4 Georgia and #5 Boise State.

I really hope Cincy wins out, so that the Big East is able to start complaining about the BCS system not giving their teams a fair shot. That would be fantastic.

It pains me to say this as a WVU fan, but Cincy will probably lose to Pitt. They simply have no answer to a power running game. This was shown against UConn and WVU even though they managed to win both games (The latter was due to a terrible overturn by the officials and the fact that Bill Stewart is retarded). Dion Lewis will run for 200+ yards against them.

Lost Thought 00: Sagarin ratings are inherently biased against the "lesser known" conferences because it only takes into account schools they want to take into account, not every school in the nation. There is a built-in assumption that any team in the country which they have not looked at is inherently inferior to any team that they did look at, which is complete BS

Where are you getting this from? The Sagarin rankings are considered to be some of the most unbiased rankings, and give no weight at all to whether a school is a traditional power or not.

smerfnablin: "Automatic Qualification"

1. Top team in the land
2. 2nd team in the land
3. The champions of the Atlantic Coast
4. The champions of the Big East
5. The champions of the Big Ten
6. The champions of the Big 12
7. The champions of the Pac-10
8. The champions of the Southeastern conference

So that means 2 at large bids?

Not quite. Since the Big 12 and SEC champion will be "top team in the land" and 2nd top team in the land", there will be 4 total at-large bids.

Right now, only the 2nd place SEC team and the highest-ranked non-AQ (TCU/BSU) are a likely lock for these positions. That leaves 2 more spots up in the air.

smerfnablin: Wont karma set this right when it comes down to selection time for the at-large bid(s)?

4 TCU
6 Boise State

To be fair, Cinci hasn't impressed anyone but they haven't done anything NOT to deserve a shot. They decisively beat decent teams in Oregon State and South Florida, and held off West Virginia. We'll see how they do against Pitt, but any system that's hoping for the underdogs to get upset is thoroughly broken, really.

Florida's only marquee win this year is against LSU, but if you look at what LSU has done this year (struggled against Washington, Mississippi State and Louisiana Tech), I wouldn't give them any advantage over Oregon State, head-to-head. So, everyone likes to laugh at the Big East, but I don't see any reason in the data why Cinci should be ranked below Florida at this point.

dragonchild: SigmaAlgebra: Actually, BCS 05 worked out pretty well. That's pretty much the only year there was no controversy over who the two best teams were.

Yeah, 'cause we really needed a convoluted system to set the two remaining undefeated teams against each other.

Before the BCS, USC would have been playing in the Rose Bowl against Penn State and Texas would probably have played WVU or Georgia. Anyway, I was just pointing out in response to the comic posted above that BCS 05 didn't have any problems. I've stated in another thread my ideas for a playoff system.

SigmaAlgebra: dragonchild: SigmaAlgebra: Actually, BCS 05 worked out pretty well. That's pretty much the only year there was no controversy over who the two best teams were.

Yeah, 'cause we really needed a convoluted system to set the two remaining undefeated teams against each other.

Before the BCS, USC would have been playing in the Rose Bowl against Penn State and Texas would probably have played WVU or Georgia Notre Dame or OSU.

FTFM.

How is Devry doing?

dragonchild: smerfnablin: Wont karma set this right when it comes down to selection time for the at-large bid(s)?

4 TCU
6 Boise State

To be fair, Cinci hasn't impressed anyone but they haven't done anything NOT to deserve a shot. They decisively beat decent teams in Oregon State and South Florida, and held off West Virginia. We'll see how they do against Pitt, but any system that's hoping for the underdogs to get upset is thoroughly broken, really.

Florida's only marquee win this year is against LSU, but if you look at what LSU has done this year (struggled against Washington, Mississippi State and Louisiana Tech), I wouldn't give them any advantage over Oregon State, head-to-head. So, everyone likes to laugh at the Big East, but I don't see any reason in the data why Cinci should be ranked below Florida at this point.

Because everyone 'knows' Florida would KILL Cincy in a matchup. Which is what would likely happen. Huge double-digit loss. Which would be a financial disaster for the BCS, since no one would watch the game. And since the BCS is all about money and TV revenues, they do everything they can to make sure this doesn't happen.

But then...there was that BSU win over OU a couple of years ago. Not only did BSU not get killed, they produced one of those 'instant classics' that everyone will remember for decades.

The BCS is like a day trader who is only interested in quarterly reports. The vision of short-term profits has blinded them to the possibilities of long-term riches.

If the BCS currently makes Y amount of dollars, a playoff would almost certainly make Y x 5 or 10. But they can't see that. And so we limp along with our shiatty system.

/at least it generates lots of juicy controvery and good 'woulda coulda shoulda' arguments.

Until you have a playoff, the BCS will always be suspect. Hell, you you hardly have any of the biatching and moaning during the NCAA tournament (though there normally is some), but everyone pretty much accepts that the best team won because there was a playoff/tournament, so everyone at least had a shot to win.

But because there is entirely too much money tied up in the current bowl system, without some big guns pushing for a BCS tournament, there will never be one.

whistleridge: The BCS is like a day trader who is only interested in quarterly reports. The vision of short-term profits has blinded them to the possibilities of long-term riches.

If the BCS currently makes Y amount of dollars, a playoff would almost certainly make Y x 5 or 10. But they can't see that. And so we limp along with our shiatty system.

The 'problem' as the BCS conferences see it, is that while a playoff would make more money overall, it would also have to be shared more evenly, and they'd get less than what they get now. There's also somewhat of a belief that fans might not travel to multiple playoff games for their teams, which could reduce ticket revenue for the earlier rounds.

Even the Big-10 commissioner, who is completely against a playoff, says that a playoff would be better for college football overall, but not his conference.

smerfnablin: I mean Ohio State is going and they SUCK this year. What they hell are they going to do? Find a way to send USC?

Seriously... Why has no one tried to explain this in plain english on ESPN?! WHY?! There are 10 slots...

"Automatic Qualification"
5. The champions of the Big Ten

Bolded the relevant bit. Big 10 champion has an automatic bid.

As someone who has their own computerized college football rankings (new window) one problem is that EVERYONE has their own opinion of how you're wrong, but they aren't consistent with their complaints.

One week: "WTF?!? Oregon beat the crap out of USC and you still have USC one spot higher than OU. Your system is useless!!"

Next week: (me) "OK, since Stanford just beat the crap out of Oregon, does that mean you think Stanford is better than Oregon?"
Response: "No. Oregon has a better record and SOS than Stanford."
Me: "Like USC beat Ohio State and didn't lose to Boise State?"
Response: "fark you. That's different."

People want the computers to validate their own views of which team is better than certain other teams. I like the poster who compared BCS supporters with day traders; they're looking for one specific comparison or outcome amongst hundreds of data points and if your system doesn't provide that answer than it's clearly useless.

This is easy to fix.

Take for four big bowls and divide them up among the major conference champs with two wild card spots.

Rose Bowl: Big 10 vs PAC 10
Sugar Bowl: Big 12 vs SEC
Orange Bowl: Big East vs ACC
Fiesta Bowl: Wild cards(TCU vs Boise State for example)

These bowl winners pair off for a semi final round and of course the winners of that play for the national championship. Everyone else plays in their minor bowl games. See, it's not exactly rocket surgury.

whistleridge: Because everyone 'knows' Florida would KILL Cincy in a matchup. Which is what would likely happen. Huge double-digit loss.

Florida's done well in bowl games recently, but look a little closer at what they've done this year instead of just saying "FLORIDAAA" in a deep voice, as if their name automatically adds 30 points to their margin. Which is what the polls seem to keep doing.

They beat an LSU team that has done nothing impressive by 10. They beat Tennessee by 10. They beat Arkansas by 3. Oh, I'm sure Charleston Southern's team went to bed on the night of September 5th wondering what hit them, but look at what Cinci did to Southeast Missouri State. Florida's only real case for being #1 is that they've won out so far, but. . . that's Cinci's argument. From what I've seen on paper, I'd give Cinci 50-50 odds to beat Florida, given a fair chance. . . Which is the one thing the system is designed to NOT give them. Otherwise, we could just let the teams decide instead of bickering about it in a thread.

Just bear in mind I'm only talking about what's going on right now. I'm not perfect, but based on what I've seen, I predict Alabama will beat Florida and I don't give Cinci good odds to beat Pitt. What grinds my gears is that even if Cinci beats Pitt, it will never see a shot at the title that Florida's being offered by fiat.

Cubs300: If only there were a system that could determine who the best team really is...say a system where all the best teams played against each other in some form of a scheduled competition. The teams could be ranked 1-8 or 1-16...the higher seeds could play the lowest seeds. And by process of single-elimination, we would eventually have a champion. I'm surprised that I am the first to come up with this idea.

playoffs might be a better system, but isn't the best system either, since the best teams don't always win (see nfl playoffs).

maybe some kind of round robin type thing, best eight teams, two groups of four (1,3,5,7 and 2,4,6,8), everyone plays everyone in the groups, top two from each group play each other in a bowl game on january 1, winners play for title following week.

/just throwing something else out there...
//qnd

Wait, I thought the BCS worked?

bsharitt: This is easy to fix.

Take for four big bowls and divide them up among the major conference champs with two wild card spots.

Rose Bowl: Big 10 vs PAC 10
Sugar Bowl: Big 12 vs SEC
Orange Bowl: Big East vs ACC
Fiesta Bowl: Wild cards(TCU vs Boise State for example)

These bowl winners pair off for a semi final round and of course the winners of that play for the national championship. Everyone else plays in their minor bowl games. See, it's not exactly rocket surgury.

IMO it should be seeded. For example, with that system the national title game this year would probably be TCU or Boise vs. TX or Florida. I have no problem with screwing the good teams in bad conferences by seeding, but you at least have to give them a chance to make it to the big dance.

m1ke: Wait, I thought the BCS worked?

It's only really worked in '02 and '05, the years where there was no real debate with or without the BCS.

It can be solved much easier:

First sort: Your W-L record
Second sort: Your strength of schedule

Now run iterations until it stabilizes. This way you force schools to schedule opponents of even strength and win against them to be in the BCS. You will still get some sort of cluster effect because of conferences, but the out of conference games will sort that if you just add one more game to the schedule.
Given their projected end of seasons strength of schedule, Alabama and Florida would get in the championship because they both have 2 decent opponents left that will up their SOS. Texas would not because of the weaker south part, so they would most likely be overtaken by Cincinnati.
Since nobody wants to see that championship game, this is a bad idea :)

smerfnablin: Is there another automatic qualifier i dont know about?

It won't apply this year, but Notre Dame gets an automatic BCS slot if it is in the top eight of the final BCS standings.

ffish: Next week: (me) "OK, since Stanford just beat the crap out of Oregon, does that mean you think Stanford is better than Oregon?"
Response: "No. Oregon has a better record and SOS than Stanford."
Me: "Like USC beat Ohio State and didn't lose to Boise State?"
Response: "fark you. That's different."

That's a bit of a fallacy. It's possible to lose to a team you're clearly better than -- are you seriously making the case that Ohio State is inferior to Purdue? There is such a thing as an "upset" and there is also such a thing as mismatch. As an example, if you're a middling team with a nasty pass defense and rushing game and you go against a Top-5 team that lives & dies with the pass and is vulnerable against the run, you have that team's number. Doesn't mean you're better. Then there's that Texas-Oklahoma-Texas Tech clusterfark that was the Big 12 South last year. Laughably, about the only thing the fans could agree on is that the teams weren't at parity. I know everyone wants to see a champion, but I stop short when arguments get completely irrational.

There will always be disagreements, but that's because with 12-13 games and well over 150 teams, no one can play everyone else and there will be a fair amount of parity at certain levels every year. Is Oregon State better than Miami? Who the hell knows? I'd give the advantage to Oregon State on paper, but for all I know Miami might beat them by four touchdowns.

With that in mind, we are painfully dependent on the likes of USC, OSU, Notre Dame and Oklahoma to give us some idea of how the conferences compare, and this is where Florida's and Texas' xenophobia causes serious problems. Their records are damn near impossible to evaluate. They're playing a political game, which is shrewd and not necessarily unethical, but it is cowardly and disingenuous. For better or worse, Urban Meyer is doing what he has to do to get his team to the title game. I grok his philosophy, but what he doesn't understand is that his methods also ensure that title game won't mean anything. By gaming the system to avoid any adversity, the trophy his team hoisted up last year had all the meaning of a "good jorb!" gold sticker Gen-X helicopter parents give their kids for doing nothing. Anyone who isn't an irrational SEC hardcore wonders what Utah -- after demolishing Alabama -- would've done to Florida if they had a chance. People talk about the snub to Utah, but it's more than that. It's a disservice to the concept of a title game, and it's a backhanded insult to his own team. By scheduling the likes of Troy, he's saying he's not even sure they could beat a mediocre FBS team -- which, by the way, last year's Florida didn't run the table.

Call me crazy, but I like my pride to be earned. I wouldn't want to play for a coach who's scared to pit me against some tough teams.