Under my logic, they aren't the best. (I know, I know, on any given Saturday,,,) but when you agree to decide it "on the field" then you also agree to accept what happens on the field and quite whining. I will, what about you?
Good polls could get 'good' voters too.
I suppose in an imaginary world. But I would bet good impartial refs (backed up with TV replays) could be found in the real world. Sit in the back of the room while a bunch of coaches from different schools try to pick an all league team. It makes Congress look good. There is nothing that can be done to "poll" a team when you are asking the people who know how hard coaches and players have worked for the honor. Everyone has a soft spot for teams they worked with, grew up with, lived near, went to school at.. and these prejudices make it very difficult to set one team over another by balloting. But on the field, everyone has to accept the truth.
I believe this year USC would be picked nat champ even with a loss say to Cal, (I know they did not lose that one, but they could have, right?) But would that make Auburn or OU the new number one to the voters who have picked USC number one for two years in a row?
"Under my logic, they aren't the best. (I know, I know, on any given Saturday,,,) but when you agree to decide it "on the field" then you also agree to accept what happens on the field and quite whining. I will, what about you?"
Quite frankly, the only ones 'whinning' are those who dislike the BCS.
The problem I have with a playoff system is that I don't think it will necessarally produce the 'best' team. Nor do I think that being undefeated means you deserve a shot at a title.
"Sit in the back of the room while a bunch of coaches from different schools try to pick an all league team."
Completely understandable. Each coach has a different style offense/defense. Each coach considers some attribues more important than the other coaches. Also, there's probably not a lot of difference once you get past the few very special players. And, that's probably why I'm 'ambivalent' about a playoff. You see, I really don't think that there's a significant difference between the top four or five teams. Sure, there's a difference between the top five and the bottom five of the top twenty, but not much.
"I believe this year USC would be picked nat champ even with a loss say to Cal, (I know they did not lose that one, but they could have, right?) But would that make Auburn or OU the new number one to the voters who have picked USC number one for two years in a row?'
I just don't put that much stock in being undefeated. Maybe USC would still be the best team even if they did lose one or two games. I really don't know. I'm not an expert.