BCS Debate: First Question

The first question in our ongoing debate with Derek.

Today's questions come to us from a J. Paterno from State College, Pennsylvania:

"While USC and Texas have the two best records in the country, how are we so sure that they are the two best teams in the country? Of course a game between them is the matchup we want, it’s the matchup that has been hyped all season long. And while USC and Texas have each beaten a Top 10 opponent (Notre Dame and Ohio State respectively, both games VERY close), their conferences were the 5th and 4th most competitive this season out of six major conferences. Would USC and Texas be undefeated if they were to play in the Big Ten or the SEC? The point is not to diminish the accomplishment of USC and Texas’ undefeated seasons, but to make my primary point. In a field of 117 teams from 10 conferences, why is a “leap of faith” taken to only determine the top 2 and declare them eligible for the National Championship? Why wouldn’t an extended system test the validity of these teams’ seasons?"

Well, Joe, that certainly is a long question. We are sure they are the two best teams in the country because they have survived the season-long single-elimination tournament. Yes, USC and Texas played in weaker conferences this year, but even in the event of a playoff there's no way to guarantee every team will face an equal challenge. In a field of 117 teams from ten conferences only two are undefeated, so it would be MORE arbitrary, not less, to subject these teams to a playoff. While a playoff would be exciting for two weeks, it would be less valid in determining the best team because a team with two losses or more could get lucky and win three games a in row to become the champion. I've often heard the argument "let them decide on the field." I think the current system does that, through a 13-game tournament, instead of a 3 game playoff.