tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1549089718489651445.post3942115854753421033..comments2007-12-11T20:29:08.058-06:00DCScraphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06109944563728433069noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1549089718489651445.post-54465612043190492962007-12-11T20:28:00.000-06:002007-12-11T20:28:00.000-06:00Do you really think that a tournament can decide the two teams deserving of playing for a title better than a system designed to evaluate all teams under as similar criteria as they can come up with over the course of an entire season?<BR/>Doesn't a tournament simply tell us who the best two teams over the course of those 5 weeks are?<BR/>The BCS tells us who the best two teams are over the course of an entire season. Those are the two teams I want to see in the championship game.<BR/>Hawaii doesn't play anyone and that is why there being undefeated doesn't put them in a championship game, no matter where you come from.<BR/>The BCS is a fantastic system. It has flaws but its flaws are so much less severe than all other playoff formats. College football is the only sport that can say that the best two teams are playing for the title because of their system and not because of chance.<BR/><BR/>If you want to argue that the BCS stinks, I think the appropriate argument is not that it doesn't get it right most of the time, but rather that it destroys the chance of a cinderella story, which is pretty fun to root for.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com