Sometimes the system works and sometimes it doesn't...and it is never agreed upon completely.
But the fact that the system only works some of the time indicates that it is broken. Dan Wetzel put it all in perspective with the comment shown below (read the entire article here) and another Wetzel BCS column here that answers the playoff nay-sayers.
"In the end we get Florida vs. Oklahoma; an intriguing and possibly great matchup. Both are fantastic teams and are as qualified as anyone. It’s as good of a pairing as any other.
Not better, mind you, but just as good.
You can’t definitively say it is any more correct than USC-Florida or Texas-USC or maybe even Utah-Oklahoma. What about Penn State-USC, which actually will be played but due to the system has no more value than the Motor City Bowl.
No one can say those games are better than UF-OU. And no one can say they aren’t....
That six or seven teams have a legitimate claim on a spot in the BCS title game is how it is now and will be going forward. Like the NFL, college football is too competitive for perfect seasons to be common.
Yet the championship system is built for just that thing. It’s built for the 1990s.
Four conference commissioners – the Big East’s Mike Tranghese, the Big Ten’s Jim Delany, the Big 12’s Dan Beebe and the Pac-10’s Tom Hansen voted last spring to refuse to even discuss a forward-thinking plan brought forth by the ACC and SEC. Tranghese and Hansen were pathetic enough to vote against the future only to promptly announce their retirements.
Clearly college football is lacking courage, vision and competency. Those commissioners fear that any adjustment to the current antiquated system would prove so popular and profitable people would want more and more of it.
So they prefer this inexplicable crap shot. They prefer voters who don’t even know who’s undefeated. They prefer to keep the parking brake on the sport, stick their heads in the sand and pretend this is working."
