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

The BCS gets it right most of the time. But its far from perfect...

quote:

---

2000 - OU and FSU. Everyone likes to say that Miami was shafted, but they lost to Washington, who was #4 in the final BCS. Here it was a hard choice, and this would have been a perfect year for a 4-team playoff.

---

FSU lost to Miami, Miami lost to Washington. So really, Washington should have gone based on head to head competition.

quote:

---

2001 - Miami and Nebraka. Agreed. Nebraska should not have been in. It should have been Oregon.

---

Without a doubt it should have been Oregon

quote:

---

2003 - LSU and OU. Agreed. OU, again, as a team that didn't win its conference, should not have been in.

---

Yep it should have been LSU vs. USC. I don't think anyone would have had a problem if that was the matchup (besides Oklahoma)

quote:

---

2004 - USC and OU. The BCS had to make a determination to pick 2 out of 3 undefeated teams, and based on the information and data we had, it made the right choice. Auburn played absolutely no one OOC that year.

---

I disagree, this is where margin of victory would have come into play. Auburn dominated everyone they played in 2004 besides LSU so you really couldn't ask much more from them and imo looked like the best team. USC almost lost a few games and so did Oklahoma, Auburn was only in danger once during the season against LSU and maybe for a little while against Tenn. in the SECCG. ALso remember this was the first year the BCS changed its rules, everyone wanted to see Oklahoma and USC. But Auburn would have given USC a great game that year.

In 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 the BCS got it right, so the system is improving.