re: BCS: If you had to pick either polls or computers...?

It should be computer-based, to take out as much bias as possible, and even should factor in the secondary wins considered (e.g., x, who lost to y, needs to beat z by 20 points to get y into the championship game). But the computer is just a tool. Once it determines its results, a pre-agreed upon committee, perhaps one representative from each BCS conference, should be able to perform a sanity check to affirm the results or tweak by consensus, two thirds vote, etc.

For example, in 2003, a sanity check would have most assuredly replaced USC for Oklahoma. In 2004 or 2007 for that matter, the committee could have looked at the results and determined if there is sufficient reason for Auburn to replace USC or OU, or in the latter year, settled whether someone else really deserved to play for the championship more than a two triple-overtime loss LSU team.