2007: Ohio State, Michigan, Florida

Remember when Florida jumped over Michigan in the final BCS standings?

Why should 2011 be any different?  Everyone who voted Florida over Michigan said that the final standings are cumulative, while all other polls are the best teams that week.

A couple of more points.
- I know this is a betting forum, but margin of victory/loss shouldn't determine who plays in the BCS title game.
- There seem to be two camps regarding the BCS Title game.  The best two teams and the two deserving teams.  Both camps would probably want playoffs, but because that's not the case, the argument is always, "the college football season is the playoffs".  Well, if that's the case, Alabama lost the playoffs already.  They had their shot.  And they lost.  I think it's OSU to get their chance.

We can talk all we want about spreads, mathematical formulas, strength of conferences, and records against ranked teams ad nauseum.  They are all bullshit.  Because anything can happen on the field - it just matters who is the best team that day.

I don't care to argue over the BCS, as we have no control over the situation.

But replay your logic real quick, bud. Alabama lost its playoff already...they had their chance?

Then I can assume you agree Okie State had their chance and were also eliminated...by ISU.

Okie St or Bama........like the past 3 weeks, my $$$ will be on LSU.

Throw records out the window.

LSU is the SEC champion.  To become champion, they beat Alabama on the road.

OSU is the Big 12 champion.  Yes, they lost, but they are still the champions.

So, we know that LSU>Alabama.  If there is a rematch and Alabama wins, it just opens up a whole new can of worms.

Alabama may be better than OSU, but that doesn't matter, it's who is better than LSU.  We know for sure Alabama is not, so OSU should be given a chance.

This happened in 2006/2007.  It should happen in 2011/2012 for the sake of consistency and to show the BCS is the 'scientific' system it claims to be.