I assumed this subject would reach enough angry Trojans and curious observers to make a decent discussion. anyway....
First off, I would like everyone to know that I actually kinda like USC and its football program...
...but ever since this whole BCS fiasco, they've all become stupid, whiny, pretentious little babies. For example, everytime a reporter mentions anything to anyone involved with USC football about their ranking they say "We don't care what the BCS ranking says, the AP & Coaches Polls have us at #1, and that's where we consider ourselves to be." This would not bother me a bit, if it weren't for the fact that it was a huge frigg'n lie! What ever did USC do to deserve that ranking? Play one less game than OU. Lose to Cal, but since it was early in the year everyone forgets about it. CAL! 8-6 CAL! Not even receiving any votes CAL!!!
Oklahoma lost the Big 12 Division title to an amazing KSU team that, having not lost Ell Roberson for a few games, would probably be playing in the title game themselves. As it is, K-State is 10th and currently en route to finally getting a chance to crunch a team I've considered to be overrated for some time now, Ohio State, but that's another topic for another time. I recall almost every reporter saying something to the effect of "No matter what happens in this game(bigxiich.gm.), I think everyone can agree that Oklahoma will be playing in the title game for the national title." Why would they say something like this. Could it be because they annihilated every opponent they came up against? or is it because of the current top 3 teams, they have the best schedule strength? [Ou - 11, LSU - 29, USC - 37]
Another point that speaks volumes as to why USC was missing from the title game is that in most football games, there are two teams playing. Hey look, the Sugar Bowl follows these same conventions, so there must be another team playing Oklahoma. Oh, there is, and it's not USC either! It's LSU! Why? Because they are ALSO a better team than USC. So let's get this straight, there are two teams that are playing for #1, and neither are USC. If USC should be #1, one might argue, then, that they should certainly at least be #2, right?
Finally, why did we create the BCS if it creates such problems? Well, it takes out human bias and relies on FACTS. The BCS wasn't the problem here, it's the AP & Coaches Poll that screwed everything up. If {instead of dropping Oklahoma to #3 because they just now lost to KSU and moving USC to #1 because they won against Oregon State that same day} they remembered USC also has a loss, they would have kept Oklahoma at #1 and all of this would have been completely unnecessary. But since humans can't remember and don't care about what happened a few months ago, we have a huge problem that should never have gotten so huge.
First off, I would like everyone to know that I actually kinda like USC and its football program...
...but ever since this whole BCS fiasco, they've all become stupid, whiny, pretentious little babies. For example, everytime a reporter mentions anything to anyone involved with USC football about their ranking they say "We don't care what the BCS ranking says, the AP & Coaches Polls have us at #1, and that's where we consider ourselves to be." This would not bother me a bit, if it weren't for the fact that it was a huge frigg'n lie! What ever did USC do to deserve that ranking? Play one less game than OU. Lose to Cal, but since it was early in the year everyone forgets about it. CAL! 8-6 CAL! Not even receiving any votes CAL!!!
Oklahoma lost the Big 12 Division title to an amazing KSU team that, having not lost Ell Roberson for a few games, would probably be playing in the title game themselves. As it is, K-State is 10th and currently en route to finally getting a chance to crunch a team I've considered to be overrated for some time now, Ohio State, but that's another topic for another time. I recall almost every reporter saying something to the effect of "No matter what happens in this game(bigxiich.gm.), I think everyone can agree that Oklahoma will be playing in the title game for the national title." Why would they say something like this. Could it be because they annihilated every opponent they came up against? or is it because of the current top 3 teams, they have the best schedule strength? [Ou - 11, LSU - 29, USC - 37]
Another point that speaks volumes as to why USC was missing from the title game is that in most football games, there are two teams playing. Hey look, the Sugar Bowl follows these same conventions, so there must be another team playing Oklahoma. Oh, there is, and it's not USC either! It's LSU! Why? Because they are ALSO a better team than USC. So let's get this straight, there are two teams that are playing for #1, and neither are USC. If USC should be #1, one might argue, then, that they should certainly at least be #2, right?
Finally, why did we create the BCS if it creates such problems? Well, it takes out human bias and relies on FACTS. The BCS wasn't the problem here, it's the AP & Coaches Poll that screwed everything up. If {instead of dropping Oklahoma to #3 because they just now lost to KSU and moving USC to #1 because they won against Oregon State that same day} they remembered USC also has a loss, they would have kept Oklahoma at #1 and all of this would have been completely unnecessary. But since humans can't remember and don't care about what happened a few months ago, we have a huge problem that should never have gotten so huge.
