Can’t wait to make it down there to the swamp next year!…

I hope we give you a decent game…

The only way to get a playoff scenario for college football that would encourage a team to schedule tough would involve a format of 12-16 teams. And that’s probably 20 years away. The first adventure down the slippery path towards playoffs would be a 4 team deal. Then 8. Then years later 12.

The problem with 8 teams. Is the structure would not be the Top 8. It isn’t the Top 8 in any college or pro sport. All playoff formats start with some concept of conference champs (regardless of relative record) and then wildcards/at-large teams.

A. First 6 teams would be Power Conference Champs
B. Next Team would be a mid-major Champ given preferential treatment to avoid a lawsuit / anti-trust case
C. Notre Dame exemption. Because EVERY other format has involved this so far. No reason to think that will discontinue.
D. At most you’d have 1 at-large team.

You’d schedule to be undefeated to get the 1 at-large birth. Not schedule tough to get the 1 at-large birth.

You need at least 4 at-large births to have any real jocking at the 1 loss level.

PWD

Teams Auburn beat, 80 wins Not including the Citadel
Teams OU beat, 74 wins (helped by that 9 win Bowling Green team)
So at an average of teams they beat on the field (D1A opponents of course)
Auburn’s averaged 6.66 wins
USC’s averaged 6.3 wins
OU’s averaged 6.16 wins

OU had an easy schedule

I still stand by my statement that on Dec 3, 2004 USC and OU had the better body of work.

@ #27 Amos: Lucking into the games is better than being left out of them.

OUs wins: 0 top 5, 1 top 10, 1 top 15, 1 top 20, 3 top 25
vs.
Auburns wins: 0 top 5, 1 top 10, 3 top 15, 3 top 20, 3 top 25

“Why would SEC fans – especially Florida fans – want a playoff? The SEC has gotten the benefit of the doubt pretty much down the line where the MNC is concerned under the current system.”
I’m a Florida fan and can tell you why, we don’t like lucking into these games, all SEC fans are pretty confident that they would win if a playoff was put into place. The best example I can give you of why Florida fans want it is the 2006 championship game. If UCLA had not somehow pulled a rabbit out of their ass and beaten USC in the last game of the regular season (I assure you my friends and I all had a second TV set up in order to watch that game as well), there wouldn’t have been the argument between Michigan or Florida to play tOSU, it would’ve been a USC v. tOSU game for the BCS. Florida likely would’ve gotten Notre Dame that year in the Sugar instead, and no matter how much we beat them by no one would’ve given us the time of day. Have even a 4 team playoff though and Florida could’ve shown their dominance as they got the opportunity to do against tOSU because they got lucky that UCLA won.

@CincySooner
Not that I care but, “the AP … before expanding to 25 teams in 1989.” So 20 years not 40 years. Completely agree with taking a look at the ranking pre-bowl games though.

I figured the Top 25 was a good place to start considering it is one of the most long-lived metrics in college football dating back 40 years or so.

You are quoting rankings AFTER the bowl season is complete. I was quoting final BCS rankings, at the conclusion of the regular season, BEFORE the bowl season. It was at that point in time that voters had to make a decision between USC, OU, and Auburn.
Also, at that point in time Auburn had not yet played VT, thus it would be impossible for voters to award a win to Auburn for a game not yet played.

Forget for a moment how the bowl season went…
The bottom line is that on December 3rd, 2004 when the voters cast their ballots, USC and Oklahoma both had better football resumes than Auburn.

And your rankings are way off too:

Auburn’s opponents that ended the season ranked were: #7 UGA, # 10 VT, #13 Tennessee (2 wins), and #16 LSU
Auburn wins: 0 top 5, 2 Top 10, 4 top 15, and 5 top 20

USC’s opponents that ended the season ranked were: #3 Oklahoma, #9 Cal, #10 VT, and #19 Arizona St.
USC wins: 1 top 5, 3 Top 10, 3 Top 15, and 4 Top 20

Oklahoma’s opponents that ended the season ranked were: #5 Texas and #18 Texas Tech.
OU Wins: 1 Top 5, 1 Top 10, 1 Top 15, and 2 Top 20

Do your homework, no matter what you look at OU is the fat stepsister. I can’t believe you tried to pass off a 7 win aTm and a 7 win Ok. St. as quality ranked opponents…

Now look at the scedules of USC and Oklahoma at the end of 2004.
Going by final ranking, USC owned the scalps of #8 VaTech, #5 Cal, #19 ASU
USCs wins: 1 top 5, 2 top 10, 2 top 15, 3 top 20, 3 top 25

Oklahoma had beaten: #22 Texas Tech, #4 texas, #24 Ok St., and #17 aTm
OUs wins: 1 top 5, 1 top 10, 1 top 15, 2 top 20, 4 top 25

In the beauty pageant that was the 2004 season, blemishes like Citadel really stand out. USC and Oklahoma simply had fewer zits.

You beat #4 LSU 10-9
Destroy #8 Tennessee 34-10
You beat #5 Georgia 24-6 (17-0 at half)
Hand Tennessee a second (of three total losses all year) loss

But you screw one goat . . .

Thanks Orson. Maybe we can put that on the cover of the media guide or something.

I mean, he isn’t rea