Now see, You're not paying attention again. Stoops never said that about winning a conference title in order to play for the big one. He said it's not right that two conferences (the SEC and the Big 12) have a conference title game when all the others don't, and that the outcome of that extra game is taken into consideration in the polls. His words were prophecy. Either get rid of that game so it doesn't matter one way or the other, or make everyone do it. If OU had won that game, people would be complaining that they had an extra opportunity to impress the computers and writers that USC didn't have.

USC is 11-1, losing to an unranked team. OU is 12-1 and lost to a ranked team. So USC plays one game less than OU, and loses to an unranked team, and since it was early enough in the season, that's a good reason to forget about it and to rank them number 1? That's the beauty of the BCS computers. It looks at the entire season. It's not biased like the sports writers that only remember that OU lost in a big game to a good football team. These are the same sports writers that had OU #1 since before the season began. They are the same sports writers that have moved teams around like a monopoly board this year. They've had USC in positions that most people (including most of the commentators) disagreed with all year long. Why doesn't the fact that USC doesn't have a conference title game weight into those writers decisions? Not only that, but there isn't a team in the PAC10 that's worth a darn and could even give USC a good game. Maybe if there were, and if USC played them and beat them for the title, then they'd be justified in putting them #1. In fact, it was the loss on December 6th by Hawaii and Notre Dame (two opponents that USC beat) that hurt their chances of being in the big one ahead of LSU. Is USC the best team in the country? Or did they just play a bunch of nobodies? I'm sure you still feel that Texas and OSU are both good teams. And look at what OU did to them.

Margin of victory is NOT part of the BCS and hasn't been a part of the BCS since last year or the year before. Running up the score?? Maybe OSU and Texas weren't very good after all. It's up to the team on the field to stop the other from scoring. Neither did a very good job did they? Did you run up the score against Tech? If I remember right OSU was up by a bunch at halftime. Good thing you did, the way Tech came back or OSU would have had their 4th loss of the season.

OU was so far ahead of everyone else, that the loss didn't hurt them in the computers. Is that their fault? And everyone, and I do mean everyone, was talking three weeks ago that OU could lose the Big 12 title and still wind up #1 or #2 in the BCS. Why wasn't there such a fuss back then about it? Not one negative comment (except from Lee Corso, who bashed OU all season in 2000, until we won the title) came from any announcer about that until after OU actually did lose.

I think two things are going to be proven come bowl time. One is that USC is overrated and Michigan is going to win the Rose Bowl. And two, that win by Michigan will vindicate the BCS computers and show, once and for all, that the two best teams in the country are playing for the National Championship.