if Mizzou loses will UGA go to Nat'l Championship???

Actually, I think Georgia is the best team in the country...USC second.

What part of "A playoff would prove it" are you to fucking bound up to understand? LSU beats OSU, it's proven nothing because Kansas/Mizzou/Va Tech/Hawaii/USC/Illinois/many others never got a chance to prove otherwise. Nor did the have a chance to play thier way into it...and don't argue the regular season was thier chance, if that were the case it would be Hawaii in the championship and everyone knows handing that to them would be wrong.

UNI was the #1seed in the 1AA field and they got beat by a team that was better this weekend. They fucked up thier opportunity to pay for a national titleand that was decided on the field. If they used a Bullshit Championship Series UNI would have been in and Delaware would have been playing for a door prize/meaningless trophy.

 

You just said "USC lost two but fought injuries all year and is probably the best team in the country in the real world."

Probably the part where I already proved in other threads earlier today that a playoff absolutely would not "prove it."

That's a preposterous thing to say, but pretty par for the course for you. Sometimes it seems like you say outrageous things just to get attention. In any case, your retarded logic could be extended to say that a four team playoff wouldn't prove anything because the fifth team might have run the table, or an eight team playoff wouldn't prove anything because the ninth team might have run the table, etc. Everyone can't play everyone else, and even the top teams can't play all the others unless you do away with the regular season. Illinois "proved" it was the better team by beating Ohio State, but Michigan "proved" it was better by beating Illinois, and Ohio State "proved" it was better than Michigan by beating them. Ditto for Georgia, LSU, and Tennessee. Do you see the paradox created by faulty logic? Winning one game does not necessarily make you a better team.

It was, and that has nothing to do with Hawaii. Hawaii didn't play anyone of significance besides Boise State, and they didn't even win games against bad opponents convincingly.

That's precisely my point. A playoff is a horrible way of determining which team was "the best," and actually crowns an inferior team more often than not. Because of that system, it's irrelevant that Northern Iowa dominated the regular season (winning by an average of 22 points), or that Appalachian lost twice. How does a system with such obviously flawed results "prove" who the best team is?

 

Probably...key word and based on what the media hype has said, but I think Georgia is the team on a roll. USC has more talent, but Georgia is the TEAM that is playing best together IMO.

All you proved is that IN YOUR OPINION, the system works. You base it on the body of work, I base it on the games being physically played. The Patriots aren't already in the Super Bowl because they have to beat teams A and B to get there.
We look at it from different angles and I am open minded enough to say that if I were considering the body of work the system in place works most of the time...but I don't like looking at it that way. I feel it needs to be decided on the field, not by a computer.

Iowa Beat Illinois, so they should be in th Rose Bowl...FUCK NO, they should be sanctioned by the NCAA for the shit they called football. The BCS Chumpionship proves nothing in reality, just gives a two teams chosen by a fucking computer the chance to win a more prestigious trophy...again, the thinking is relative and I think there are more every day people who believe a playoff system is needed...but not superior folks like you.

UNI pissed thier chance away, but there isn't a player on that team nor a coach on that staff that would trade it for being handed an opportunity to play in the Championship. It's has t be earned, and they didn't earn the right to play for it.