I don't know why everyone is complaining so much about a playoff. THE REGULAR SEASON IS A PLAYOFF. The consensus top-4 this year was some combination of Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, and Alabama. Fortunately, these four teams played during the regular season, de facto national championship semifinals if you will. The winner of the Florida-Alabama game will face the loser of the Texas-Oklahoma game to decide a national champion ON THE FIELD. What more do you people want? If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The system is fine as it is.
On the Sports Reporters this weekend, Saunders again defended the BCS by saying that a playoff would diminish the regular season. He actually asked the panel "if you had an 8 game playoff, would the Texas-OU game have had the same meaning this year". Nobody made the obvious response that it didn't mean anything this year.
John Saunders is a dogmatic hack with an amateur level of knowledge in sports, let alone college football. I can't reiterate this point enough: this is the man who, in 2005, argued that instead of Vince Young, Matt Leinart, or Reggie Bush; Marcus Vick should win the Heisman Trophy and that he was the best QB in college football that year. He's a moron with absolutely no credibility whatsoever. Fitting that such a moron of that caliber would be the poster boy for the pro-BCS/anti-playoff crowd in the mainstream sports media.
Tex Pete... How can a sarcasm-impaired old fart respond to anything so clever? I tip my hat to your clevernessness.
Some of you still don't get it. The BCS did its job choosing between Texas and Oklahoma. How else would you decide who should play in the Big XII championship or BCS title game?
