Could've Been The One

It's been two full weeks of debate over the final BCS standings, and I'm sure it's not over, and will probably never be. I've read so many arguments that it makes my head spin. The Dawgs are woofing, the schooner is spinning, and another host of 2 loss teams are pissed off at the final tally. Some have legitimate arguments, while others have no leg to stand on. But who really presents the strongest case, of all the teams feeling they are most deserving of a title shot? How about Virginia Tech?

The Hokies fall victim to change. The new and "improved" system, since the tweakings of the past, may have cost VTech a trip to New Orleans. And it's not that the trip would have held any logical weight, because I sure can't see any, but more because of what the computers have always lacked, common sense.

Virginia Tech ended the 2007 season with the highest computer ranking, coming out as the nation's No. 1 team in 4 of the 6 computers. In the 2003 format, with the computers having two thirds of the equation, there is a great possibility that the Hokies (No. 5 in both human polls) would have secured one of the top BCS positions. It was the computer ranking that enabled them to place just shy of the top spots, seating them 3rd in the final 'o7 standing.

If we eliminated the human polls, our championship game would be a rematch of the Computer's No. 1 Virginia Tech versus No. 2 LSU.

How the hell did the computer find the Hokies to be better than the Tigers? Both teams have two losses, and they actually faced each other in the regular season. One of VTech's losses was to LSU, yet the computers find the Hokies to be better. LSU embarrassed Virginia Tech, racking up close to 600 yards of offense in a 48-7 victory, but the Hokies are greater than the Tigers? The Billingsley computer ranks LSU's strength of schedule at 7 and Tech's somewhere in the 30s, but Vtech comes out on top? It's not even close in quality win opponents, but Virginia Tech is superior to LSU? Exactly what is that motherboard seeing that this mother's child is not?

Why are we still banking on this system? Why are some people still insisting that the computer knows best and defending its final tally? Is it because this is one of the first places we come for answers, to this electronic genius? This genius has NO common sense, which is why Mapquest gives me the longest friggin route to get to a simple destination.

Well, the BCS mapped out a route to the championship game, and took a long road of digits to find Virginia Tech at No. 1 and better than LSU, when common sense will tell us that's a crock of $h!t. That's the easiest team to eliminate from the debate, because they LOST a head-to-head battle with LSU.

You think you have a big debate now? Imagine if the '03 system went unchanged, and Vtech slipped in above a one loss Ohio State team, and your 2 loss OU and Georgia teams? Well, OU shouldn't even complain. First, because Bob Stoops claims to love the system. And second, because the Sooners were able to benefit from that old format in '03. But believe me, hell would break loose on other college campuses, and we'd be looking at another possibility of a split title.