[PiEp299]

The Stats:

Here's how they stacked up before the bowls:
- National ranking in schedule strength: 1. Oklahoma (11th); 2. LSU(29th); 3. USC (37th).
- Games against the BCS top 25: 1. LSU (4); 2. OU (3); 3. USC (1).
- Wins against the BCS top 25: 1. LSU (3); 2. OU (2); 3. USC (1).
- Games against teams with five or more losses: 1. LSU (7); 2. OU (8);3. USC (11).
- Points scored: 1. OU (587); 2. USC (506); 3. LSU (454).
- Points against: 1. LSU (140); 2. OU (193); 3. USC (225).
- Margin of victory: 1. OU (35.16 points); 2. LSU (24.15); 3. USC (23.42).
- Total offense: 1. OU (461.38 yards per game); 2. USC (450.67); 3. LSU(426.54).
- Total defense: 1. OU (255.62 yards per game); 2. LSU (259.54); 3. USC(337.75).
- Scoring defense: 1. LSU (10.77 points per game); 2. OU (14.85); 3. USC(18.75).
- Pass defense: 1. OU (145.92 yards per game); 2. LSU (191.38); 3. USC(276.67).
- Margin of defeat: 1. USC (3 points); 2. LSU (12); 3. OU (28).
- LSU lost at home to Florida, 19-7. Florida (15th in BCS, 17th in
polls)finished 8-4 against the nation's fifth-toughest schedule. The Gators beat the BCS's No. 2 and No. 12 and lost to No. 7, No. 8, No. 9 and No.19.
- Oklahoma lost on a neutral field to Kansas State, 35-7. Kansas State(10th in BCS, top 10 in both polls) finished 11-3 against the nation's10th-toughest schedule. The Wildcats beat the BCS's No. 1 and No. 20teams and lost to No. 6 and No. 21.
- USC lost at Cal, 34-31, in three overtimes. Cal (unranked in BCS and both polls) finished 7-6 against a far weaker schedule than either Kansas State or Florida. The Bears defeated the BCS's No. 3 and lost to No. 10.

- Note that USC received an early bump in the polls by beating a
far-overranked Auburn team 23-0 in the season opener.
- Note also the overlooked fact that the only reason the BCS came down to the now-infamous Boise State-Hawaii contest is because the system penalized LSU for beating a top 10 team twice (Georgia), eliminating the Tigers' quality win component.
- Note also the fact that USC is ranked No. 1 now for no other reason than this: THE TROJANS LOST FIRST. Had either OU or LSU (or both) lost before USC, there is zero debate about USC's merits as a national champion. The season would have progressed and USC would be ranked somewhere in the
top three, and perhaps playing for the championship - but NOT simply having it handed to them for the timeliness of their defeat.
- Now note that the Trojans beat their first top 10 BCS team in the Rose Bowl. That opponent was Michigan, a team with nothing but pride on the line that had won its own "championship" a month earlier when it beat Ohio State. The Wolverines' prize was the trip to Southern California, and it was painfully evident that they didn't show up to play against USC in Pasadena (see dropped passes/interceptions, missed tackles,
etc.). Easier stated: It's not a national championship game unless both teams have the title on the line. Period.

Bottom line: USC has had a great season, better than most, but not better than LSU or Oklahoma. The system may be imperfect, and screams louder than ever for a playoff, but the system was created in part to eliminate human voting bias and match up the two most deserving teams in a national championship. Oklahoma and LSU are those two teams, and the winner of the Nokia Sugar Bowl deserves the national championship, in full. That being LSU.