re: BCS works __% of the time? 27%

quote:

---

Right, which is why we need an objective system to determine those teams in the other years. All those other years people can argue either way, but we have devised a system that combines a subjective component (the human polls) with objective computers to determine those two teams.

If you stop and look at the history of the BCS you will see that in almost every case you can say "yes, those two teams had the best combination of record and Schedule Strength of the field and were the most deserving". Find me 2 cases where you couldn't make that statement

---

I can come up with two cases, but the difficulty is that it considers factors that are not considered by the BCS.

Nebraska 2001 and Oklahoma 2003 do not meet the third of your criteria - "and were most deserving". But the reason is that they did not perform in a game that counts more than other games. Oklahoma lost only one game that year. The world recognized that the game they lost had extra weight - it was for a conference championship, and it was the last game of the season. However, the BCS is not allowed to give extra credence to any games, nor is it allowed to consider margin of victory or margin of defeat, so that game was just treated as another loss in their schedule.