Maybe I'm one of the few, but none of the teams really looked to completely dominant this year. Oklahoma pulled off some lucky wins this year. LSU could have easily beat Auburn this year. I'm sure alot of people think they should have beat them and it was luck that Auburn one. Auburn also played pathetic against a beat up Alabama team. USC vs. California probably should have had a different outcome as well. Several other teams played USC close as well. Similar things happened with Oklahoma and they definitely showed huge weakness in several games.
Oklahoma was very very impressive in most games last year save the final two where it really mattered. In my opinion, Oklahoma, USC, and LSU all seemed dominate the league more than the USC, Auburn, and Oklahoma of this year. Teams each played weak games last year just at the championship teams did this year. For example, LSU played weak against Georgia the first time and almost lost to Ole Miss. However, even though each of the 3 teams lost a game last year, they seemed to actually play more dominantly than any of the undefeated this year. Watching USC and LSU's attack on the quarterback in their bowl games was amazing. In the SEC championship LSU's talent really showed.
However, the BCS system is messed up no doubt. An SEC undefeated team should be in the national championship. I think most people would agree that the SEC is the most physically demanding conference in the nation. However, while I am a big fan of SEC football, there are definitely several things Auburn could have done differently. They knew how the polling system worked yet they still did some shitty planning on schedule as well as playing some bad games at the end.
What also seems strange about the current situation is that Auburn has no chance to be the national champion. With the old system, Auburn could still have been the champions with Oklahoma and USC bowl losses.
Last edited by Justsomeguy; 12-07-2004 at 04:39 PM..
|