|
Perhaps it's my female perspective (not being as competitive in general), but I'm not sure I see why college teams have to have a national champion. Why can't there just be conference champions for each conference? Even the pro sports have "wildcards" in their playoffs and sometimes those wildcards win, even though they didn't have the best record. I'm not convinced that's a perfect system either (even though it allowed the Tigers to go to the World Series this year). Why does there have to be one national champ? Why can't the champs of each conference just be recognized as being excellent?
ETA: I thought the BCS standings were based on a statistical analysis of performance and wins and losses, so it's more objective and less subjective than Coach and AP ratings. Therefore, I don't see how "opinion" should affect the BCS championship game. If the two teams with the highest scores are in the same conference, then so be it.
|
Threaded Mode
