If Kansas got their offense untracked, wouldn't that be a negative? Perhaps they should get "on track" instead.

Depends on how lousy of a track they're on. If the track is headed towards certain defeat, then getting untracked might be beneficial.

For those of you who follow the Big 12 closely - Did OK suggest today they were a force to be reckoned with again, and if so does either Kans or Missou stand a chance in the title game?

Don't know if it would have made a difference with how Daniel was playing, but those two missed FGs are big.

dang it.

I would take LSU or USC over Mizzou or Kansas any day. Mizzou making the NCG will again tarnish the BCS.

Congrats to Missouri. They were the better team. But KU will be back.

Why do people still trumpet the virtues of the faux Tigers when clearly the real Tigers would triumph easily. There is no way LSU could stop or slow down Chase Daniel. Mizzou by two TD's.

Kirk - the only thing that would tarnish the BCS is if they broadcast a game with a bunch of empty seats that no one tuned in to watch. The BCS is interested mainly in making the most money it can for Fox, the various bowl committees/local communities and the six major conferences. It wants the best matchups possible that will maximize attendance and ratings. It wants schools with national name recognition that will draw casual fans. Why else would the BCS create a special clause just for Notre Dame? If you don't like the BCS, the strongest statement you can make is to not watch the games.

To those who are saying Missouri has no place being in the NC game, I'd ask if they bothered to watch the game tonight. Missouri looked VERY tough...quick, fast, aggressive, great passing, fast defense, etc. Based on what I saw tonight, they could hold their own with ANY team in the country right now. Kansas started to come back, but it was too little, too late. Congrats to the Tigers on a really good game.

It won't matter whether anybody's "tracked" or "untracked" because there's an express train roaring out of Morgantown and somebody needs to get the women, children, and livestock out of the way! White, Slaton, Devine, Reynaud, et. al. -- We are now seeing a Mountaineers team that, if not of historical stature vis-a-vis the history of college football, is potentially the best in the history of the West Virginia University football program. Unfortunately for any prospective bowl opponent, WVU is playing respectable defense and their team speed on offense, so long as everyone stays healthy, will leave opposing defenses just plain dumbfounded.

I was happy to see a little more creativity out of the Pitt offense during the first half of this week's game against USF, but after a defensive breakdown on the first series of the second half -- Matt Grothe scored on an 80-yard run from his own 20, the longest South Florida run of the season, if not in the team's entire brief history-- Wannie went back to the same-o, same-o during the second half. Just who's the genius who decided that Pitt could afford to sit on a 4-point half-time lead against South Florida, anyway? No matter now, I suppose -- Even if "Shady" McCoy turns out to be the second coming of Tony Dorsett, for this year, at least, the young Panthers will be no match for the WVU juggernaut. The Mountaineers came up big in the Big East "title game" and will likely come up big again if they get a chance to play in the BCS title game. But what are the possible match-ups? Mizzou could win the Big 12 title and play the 'eers for the mythical national championship. Alternatively, Oklahoma could win the Big 12 title game and the 'eers could instead play LSU, Kansas, or Ohio State in New Orleans for the mythical national title. (Right now, I share your apprehension, Stewart, that an Ohio State-West Virginia match-up could result in a repeat of last year's OSU debacle versus Florida. And I also have to agree with Mark May -- The 'eers are peaking, are hitting on all 22 [or more] cylinders, and are looking pretty much unstoppable. Maybe, in the end, OSU wouldn't fare any worse than the rest of the teams I've mentioned -- The 'eers are just looking too, too fast and have too large an arsenal of 'weaponry' to deploy in nearly every imaginable situation and aspect of the game.)

Good game to watch tonight. Us Sooners are excited about the rematch with you Tigers in San Antonio. See ya soon, Mizzou...

mizzou can definitely beat oklahoma, they nearly had them on the sooner's homefield. san antonio might not be quite neutral, but it shouldn't be quite as difficult for them as norman, where OU doesn't lose. mizzou's offense looked outstanding against KU. no prediction, but missouri should be the #1 team in the country and can definitely beat oklahoma.

im glad i got to see daniel and the mizzou offense tonight. scary stuff. as an ohio state fan, i was wondering to myself the entire time ' could we stop that air attack?' i cant wait to see the big 12 championship game which will certainly be one of the most significant of the year. finally, couldn't be happier that a league other than the SEC is in the spotlight, even if it isnt the Big Ten. Go Bucks!

I agree with Larry, Mike and others. Missou clearly has a good chance against either OK or WV, and I think even OSU. Kansas was virtually untested, seemed to play at top levels, but fell short. I think in Missou we are seeing a team that has passed a few more tests than Kans. Kans may even remain a BCS bowl candidate if OK loses next week.
I now think if Missou wins the Big 12 then OSU is out. I realize OSU fans consider this a dead horse, but it could be like a few years ago with Auburn, and OSU sitting out because its schedule was not as impressive. Before too many trip out I believe that not only is OSU better than WV, but faced at least as good a strength of schedule. But the perception seems to be that OSU did not. If left out I wonder if OSU will revisit its philosophy of raising money for state schools, like Youngstown, Kent St & Akron, and also not rely on one game (Wash) to gain respect.
A 3-way tie may ultimately be good for the sport, or at least those of us not wishing a steady diet of Troy or Toledo against anybody. Coming that close but missing may encourage schools to put a bit more beef in the schedules, and no slight intended against the few like USC who do so on a regular basis.

Well, it appears that the title game is down to 3 teams with the Buckeyes having a real chance to once again play for the national title. That's not to say that something can't happen next week to again surprise us all.

Anyway, if WVU and MIzzou win out, they do deserve to play for the NC game and if OU wins then the Buckeyes deserve to play.

If the NC game is WVU vs. Mizzou then the Rose bowl could end up as the most interesting game for the whole nation. Not to take away from Mizzou and WVU which will be an exciting battle but most people will be interested in possibly seeing a resurgent USC face OSU in a classic Rose Bowl face-off.

However the dominoes fall, it is going to be a great bowl season once again and CFB fans should enjoy the competition for what it is.

Good luck to all your teams in the final week and the bowl season!

Regards to all!

Well, it appears that the title game is down to 3 teams with the Buckeyes having a real chance to once again play for the national title. That's not to say that something can't happen next week to again surprise us all.

Anyway, if WVU and MIzzou win out, they do deserve to play for the NC game and if OU wins then the Buckeyes deserve to play.

If the NC game is WVU vs. Mizzou then the Rose bowl could end up as the most interesting game for the whole nation. Not to take away from Mizzou and WVU which will be an exciting battle but most people will be interested in possibly seeing a resurgent USC face OSU in a classic Rose Bowl face-off.

However the dominoes fall, it is going to be a great bowl season once again and CFB fans should enjoy the competition for what it is.

Good luck to all your teams in the final week and the bowl season!

Regards to all!

Reading previous blog from Stewart about the "SEC is overrated"... Well, I do laugh about it and have been saying... What took you so long?

Reading all the SEC fans stating about their conference is way superior and could beat all the teams in other conferences make me think.. Where is the intelligence?

As Stewart has stated... It was a strong conference but it is way overhyped and overrated. You can't see an untanked Arkansas beating LSU? Alabama losing to ULM? All these nail biters between each other during conference play? What most SEC fans forget is that all the other conference goes through the whole thing as well.

Again, there is no dispute that SEC is a strong conference. What most people are sick of is the SEC superiority complex that you guys elude each week. To only be disappointed by your very teams. Do not talk about rankings because all them started high in the rankings and ironically, only 4-5 are showing in the polls. If they started low, realisticaly there will be only 3 teams in the Top 25 (Florida, Georgia, LSU). Do not go there with Tennessee and Auburn..

So the lesson learned for the SEC fans.. Shut up about you being the superior conference and how much you could knock other conference down. Any day and circumstances, teams could lose. So I do not see LSU, Georgia, or Florida win all games in the Big Ten. Play in the cold and then we could talk about they are the best.

Those of you GA fans (as well as Kansas) who believe their team should be in the NC is out of your mind. They have to win their conference title to be eligible. If they do get it, then it would be the biggest fraud with last year Michigan and Florida scenario. I do not care about the Florida-OSU game because it is not the point. Most voters are on the gun with this if they allow Ga or Kansas to make it... Then we know there is a conspiracy.. LOL

I believe Mizzou is a great team but I think Oklahoma could knock them out. The way they were playing, they were slow and sluggish. If it was not for some penalty and bad decisions from Kansas, the game could be other way around. I do not think Missouri won it but rather Kansas shot themselves in the foot and lost it. But it would be very interesting next week. This is the game of matter (and ironically, it ain't the SEC).

With all these coaching changes, I wonder how it will turn out.

1) I believe Les Miles is going to Michigan (heck, I am a Michigan fan besides my beloved Buffalo Bulls and was a stalwart supporter to Lloyd Carr. I believe in the man and still do compare to Urban Meyer, the BS Political coach who has no class.. Remember last year people). It would a bit different from Lloyd but it is a nice transition if it all falls through
2) Bo Pelini to Nebraska is not going to happen if Les Miles moves on. But if Les does stay, Nebraska would salivate Bo because they need defenese
3) Turner Gill going to Nebraska (though I doubt it more and more because Nebraska need defense and Turner Gill got UB Bulls to a level of respect .. Plus, we lost 3-4 people this year. We could have a breakout year where he looks very marketable for big schools)
4) Jon Gruden to Nebraska? That does not make any sense but it was brought up
5) Steve Spurrier to LSU? The SEC has so much drama and side switching that I do not know what to make of it
6) Tuberville to A&M? That would be very interesting too...

Kansas has done well, built some confidence with a weak schedule, and with the next bowl game may accomplish even more.
But I am slow to get on or off bandwagons. Missou may still be the third best team in the conference. It will take more than a couple of slow seasons for Texas before I move Missou above them, especially if OK handles Missou easily in their title game. Unless Texas gives more evidence that their fall is greater, or Missou provides more evidence that their rise is real, I still place Missou behind Texas in the Big 12. I will not argue with experts who think differently though.
OSU left out of the mix would be a shame as they may easily be the best of the three. Given the resurgence of USC not only is Dink accurate in stating that the Rose could be the most interesting bowl, but of what we face it may be the real NC game.

"Given the resurgence of USC not only is Dink accurate in stating that the Rose could be the most interesting bowl, but of what we face it may be the real NC game."

Indeed. I found it interesting as I bounced around channels yesterday and Friday: the one thing every announcing team agreed on (including Verne, surprisingly): nobody wants to face USC right now. I think a OSU-USC Rose would absolutely be the premier matchup of the bowl season, as much as I dislike the idea of seeing these two teams go at it 3 (or more) times over the course of the next 20+ months.

I have waited years for this day, thanks Mr. Daniels, you looked as calm and relaxed as Mr. Young did when he was faced with a 4th down and the NCG on the line. Go MIZZOU I am from there but live in Texas now, I will be in SA in my black and gold

Let's go on the assumption that OK defeats Missou, which is realistic given the results of the previous encounter. That elevates OSU to the NC with WV. I think it unrealistic to think Pitt would upset WV. But the Big Ten may not have a team ranked high enough to replace OSU in the Rose. OK, if it wins, and LSU (if it beats Tenn) cannot go to the Rose. LSU if it loses would be free but have 3 losses.
Of the teams with 2 or 3 losses we have Illinois, GA, Fla, Missou and ??? to face USC in the Rose. Who should be chosen? I do not mention Kansas as they lost the only game they played with anyone but a mediocre team.

Good question, Charles. I'm inclined to think that the Rose, with its Big Ten/Pac 10 history, would want Illinois in there. Even if we don't believe Illinois is 'better' than Georgia, Illinois and USC are probably the two 'hottest' teams going into the post-season. It's also a nice preview for two expected powers going into next year. That being said, Georgia obviously would give USC a strong game as well.

>>> The 'eers are peaking, are hitting on all 22 [or more] cylinders, and are looking pretty much unstoppable.

Against a ridiculously weak schedule......

I agree that an OSU-USC Rose Bowl would be the premier matchup. I suspect that the television ratings from such a matchup would trump a WVU/Mizzou NC game by LIGHT YEARS.

usc is not as hot as people would like to think, one good win has not erased losing to stanford, osu will handle them in the rose. the best matchup in the NCG would be Mizzou and Ga., tigers vs. dawgs. these are the two hottest teams going right now. sorry wvu fans, just dont see it with you guys.

for donroberto & others - Yes USC has shown cracks in their armour, like last year, but Carroll would get USC up for the Rose, IMO, just like last year. Given the choices Illinois may be as good as any named, if OSU must be replaced, but I think Illinois fans should temper their wait until next season attitude. Zook can recruit with the best of them, but could not match wits with the best coaches in the SEC. Does anyone see evidence that he can match wits with Tressel?

I don't think there should be a two loss team in the NC game unless it's absolutely necessary. Georgia isn't even in the SEC title game, so I don't know how they could possibly be in the big one, regardless of how hot they are now. You have to take their whole season into account.

Also, I think Kansas should be considered for one of the major bowls. Yeah, they lost the one game they played against good competition, but they acquitted themselves of being frauds with those four straight touchdowns in the 2nd half. And they had those four or five trips into the red zone before that with no points, which I think can be explained by the fact that they hadn't been in a game with good competition all year combined with not having played in a game of this magnitude probably ever. I imagine their mentality must've been very effected by those factors. It's like when you're a kid and you all asleep in one room and your parents move you to another, annd then when you wake up you don't understand what happened, you're completely disoriented and upset. I think that's where Kansas was the first half or so last night. ANYWAY, long story short, they deserve consideration for the Rose, Fiesta, etc. And with the way their fans are likely to travel, they'll probably get it.

Can we please once and for all get over the "USC doesn't deserve anything because they lost to Stanford" garbage? Yes, it was a horrible, stupid, avoidable loss that, like the UCLA game last year, pretty much cost them an appearance in the NC game. Because without that loss, I guarantee you, they'd be in. But it was neither the melodramatically overhyped hand-wringing "worst upset in history" nor was it the defining performance of this year's team. So many factors went into that loss, it isn't even funny.

Without beating a dead horse too much, the team was plagued by injuries all year. Booty was playing injured and should have been pulled from the game. That is both Booty's fault for insisting he stay in as well as the coaching staff's fault for letting him. And enough about the point spread. 40+ point favorite? That was ridiculous to begin with. Anyone who has followed USC over the years knows that when it comes to a Trojan game, take the under 9 times out of 10. USC rarely runs up scores that way.

Bottom line is that so many top 10 teams have lost to unranked opponents this year - and by more than USC's 1 point loss - that it is clear that no one is immune to screw-ups, bad days, and missed opportunities. But unlike some other teams that have suffered unfortunate losses, USC did not collapse, but came back in the end even stronger.

But barring any further upheaval in the top 5, I'm sure I'll be rooting for Mizzou over Oklahoma so that we can have what I agree would be another classic Rose Bowl matchup (although I imagine quite a few people are quickly going to become sick of seeing USC play OSU repeatedly over the next 2 seasons). Still, I'd love to see WVU lose to Pitt, OU beat Mizzou, USC leapfrog Georgia in the rankings, and have OSU and USC in the NC game. It would be the most bizarre cherry to top off this bizarre year.

The Coaches Poll has LSU ranked below Kansas. I would love to declare a 2-week cease fire and put money on that one. I think I can safely say that I would find few coaches who voted Kansas higher willing to back their votes with money.

Why? All kinds of teams have played LSU close this year, it's not exactly a stretch to imagine Kansas doing just that, and in a close game there's no reason to think Kansas couldn't have more points at the end. I wouldn't spot LSU any points, but Kansas could beat them.

for Mike - The game should be played on the field and not with paper speculations. Which victories would you point to in order to claim that Kansas has had a great season? Since when does a track record against mediocre teams or worse qualify for anything? They have beaten one BCS team with a winning record, and that record is so good the coach has been fired. The other team they have beaten with a winning record is 1 - 4 against BCS teams.
Kansas did well to stay in the game against Missou, but Missou hardly has any great wins on its own. Before I will agree that a team can stay with one the caliber of an LSU I expect to see it do so on the field, not in your imagination. The game is supposed to be played on the field. Has Kansas beaten one team whose season even comes close to being called Top 25 caliber?

I really dont think LSU could stop Ks. offense, it would be a close game. I do think that I would take the Big 12's top four and match them up against the SEC and feel good about it. I would not have said that a few weeks ago. I think the Big 12 has the best mix of O and D in the country, the SEC is all O.

Can the OSU people please stop with berating Stew over his 'great national nightmare is over' comments? He was referring to Paris getting out of jail. It was a bad time for all of us. Let it go.

Charles,

Yep, I saw that Coach's Poll. While I would not strongly question the Kansas ranking, it is a bit puzzling why they put Virginia Tech above LSU.

I seem to remember a game between those two this season . . .

*shrug*

Sas

Sasquatch - You or anyone else who proposes Kansas over LSU because on a given day anything can happen is correct. But I cannot remember a case ever when a team acknowledged that they had no quality wins and pointed to a presumed quality loss as evidence they belonged in the same sentence as teams who have earned their status on the field. When Kansas fans have to stretch that far to seek respect it is an argument for their detractors.
A reasonable theory for the Missou game was that Missou was up for it intially, thinking they might be challenged, then let up when they realized it was going to be easy. It is not the mark of a championship frame of mind but plausible none the less. We could also propose that Missou played over its head for a while then settled into a level close to Kansas. Both theories are plausible and neither complimentary of Kansas.
Some teams want to play easy ooc schedules, hoping that in conjunction with a few conf wins they qualify for a bowl. Kansas played one and only one of the teams in the Big 12 which have the four best records and lost.
Those who say that the Big 12 best could stand with the SEC best hopefully will acknowledge that the Big 12 best have not had that great a year. Texas did not have a Mighigan year, but came close. Texas does not appear to be that far behind OK. Missou has shown no hint that it can handle either and points to an Illinois team putting itself together as evidence of its greatness. It took Illinois almost the entire season to play at a level deemed Top 25 quality by the voters.
Sasquatch - Look at the Big 12 year and tell me that there is not evidence of erosion at the top, and no evidence that another member has what it takes to take over the top two positions.

Charles,

You make some very good points. I had questioned Kansas (still do) on strength of schedule. But, as I posted last week I think Mizzou is pretty good and anticipated the "upset."

Here's why I think more of Mizzou than you. First, they have a great quarterback. Daniel seems to "see the field" more than anyone I have watched this year, and he gets protection. Second, they complement his strong arm with Macklin and a good defense. Third, I think that Pinkel has amassed talent at receivers and line to build a team around the QB he has.

There may have been "erosion" of traditional powers in the Big 12. OU losing to Colorado and Texas Tech? Texas having to bail out every week at the end (jeez . . sounds like my Tigers) and losing to the Aggies? Parity.

Part of that parity was how close Mizzou came to beating OU in Norman. Without an injured Macklin, and uncharacteristic mistakes, they win that game. So I am less than confident that Mizzou will lose to OU in San Antonio. Sorry OSU fans (unless WVU loses to Pitt, which I think we can all agree is unlikely).

I think it will be Mizzou and WVU in the NGC game, a very good tOSU-USC Rose Bowl, and LSU in the Sugar Bowl. What do you think?

Sas

Charles my friend, I'm pretty sure you were using your imagination as well when you said LSU would beat KU. They haven't played on the field. And speaking of playing on the field, I'm pretty sure that LSU has proven many times this year that they aren't deserving of the reverence that so many still give them, including yourself when you infer that they're better than Kansas. And what you say about the Big 12 having erosion at the top could certainly be said about the SEC this year as well.

It seems that people are waiting for Mizzou to beat Oklahoma to make them legit, and I don't understand that. They've lost to Colorado and Texas Tech, just like LSU, Florida, Ohio State, USC and pretty much everyone else has questionable losses, while Missouri and Kansas have maybe the two most forgivable losses. I'm pretty certain that it's hard for people to take teams like Mizzou seriously until they've beaten a "name" opponent, regardless of what that opponent has done on the field that year. I don't agree with that. (not to say that Oklahoma won't be a huge test, but it's not like Kansas didn't win in Boulder)

Sasquatch - I cannot remember too many times I felt negatively about your posts. But I must say that you could have found a gentler way to prepare OSU for disappointment.

i think your matchups look pretty close to reality. I think the rainbow warriors will score a lot of points on LSU in the sugar, win? probably not. has the big 12 had an incredible year like 1971 when they finished 1,2,3 in the country (an unmatched feat), no they have not. the point here is that the sec has not had the kind of year they anticipated, their schedule strength is predicated on their conference games being so tough, but with alabama and auburn being bad and a terrible tenn team winning a division it just did not happen. their out of conference schedules (see LSU) were as weak as a big 10 team. Mizzou hammered Illinois and Mississipi (which while winless in the sec gave many teams all they wanted) combined with a tough conference schedule will reward them in the end.

Charles . . er . . sorry. Should have been gentler and more diplomatic I guess. *laugh*

Mike - If your comments are valid then college football is the only sport where quality victories are not the mark of a true champion. It is true that most of the elite schools have questionable losses.
Fla was beaten by GA and Aub. OSU was beaten by Ill. Match those teams against Missou and I will grant you that Missou has a good chance to beat any of them. But Missou has not had to contend with the likes of many very good schools that have been ranked off and on during the season as Fla and OSU have. I cannot believe that you would equate Hawaii going undefeated with OSU going undefeated last season. But if you want to claim that Brennan would have put up the same numbers with a Big 12, Pac Ten, SEC, or Big Ten schedule no one can prove you are wrong. Put Missou against WV in the NC and OSU against USC in the Rose, and televise the games at the same time on different channels. My guess is that true fans would be watching the Rose Bowl, but if you want to watch the other game go ahead. Jesus warns us about being judgmental and I will say no more.

for donroberto - so much of what you say is true. But as bad as Alabama and Auburn may be they are probably superior to any team Hawaii has played this year (at least in the minds of experts). Plus LSU has had to drag the likes of Fla, Ark, Kent and others up and down the field on a regular basis.
Overcoming challenges make us strong, or is that garbage. Hawaii, Kansas, Boise St have faced no challenges on the field this year. Tex A&M may have produced a couple of very good results this year, but very good teams don't lay as many bad eggs as they have.

I guess that depends on how one would define "true" fan. If you mean "those who care more about a program's body of work over decades rather than the year at hand," then you're definitely right. If you mean "people who would rather watch two teams play each other that have proven that they are better than two other teams who are playing each other but are ranked higher," then you're wrong. Ohio State and USC haven't proven themselves to be more deserving of respect. Put Missouri in a Texas uniform and WVU in a Miami uniform and we're not having this discussion.

And what was that Jesus comment about? If you need Jesus to tell you that you shouldn't judge people based on college football opinions, you're barely hanging on.

Arkansas and Kentucky aren't good teams, LSU having to go up and down the field with them this year doesn't prove anything more than Kansas doing it against Colorado and Texas A&M. Not to mention that LSU lost those games.

Food for thought: why is Florida's destruction of tOSU last year such an indictment of the Big Ten?

It seemed to me that Florida was the perfect team, with its team speed and spread offense, to take out a muscular tOSU last year. It's analogous to George Foreman completely annihilating the previously undefeated Joe Frazier. Sometimes the matchup just isn't right but doesn't detract from an otherwise great adversary.

Somehow, that defeat became an indictment of the entire Big Ten (particularly when compared with the SEC), which by the way won its other two bowl game matchups against the SEC last year and has 10 bowl eligible teams this year (compared with 11 for the 12-member SEC; don't both stats deserve a wow?). It resulted in an underappreciation across the board for what actually has been a decent but not great Big 10 year, which still could end up great pending the bowl game results.

If this is the result of a down Big Ten year, next year could be off-the-charts great in the Big 10 with strong teams from at least tOSU, Michigan, Illinois, Penn State and Wisconsin. In any event the ride will be great, as it appeared to be this year in the SEC!

I don't see reasonable minds can't get past the 'overrated stuff' and why there can't be more acknowledgement that more than one conference (based on your regional bias) has been great for the game... We've all have a decent share of bowl victories and national championships (admittedly some more than others). I think that it's unnecessary and incorrect to have to build our teams up by pretending that our competition has no claim to its success. Until a playoff exists, we'll never really know.

Maybe the perception just has to do with the Big Ten style of play, necessitated by the less perfect weather, which is one reason the Rose Bowl games against the Pac-10 are always so challenging.

Best to all and thanks for the great posts!

Mike - Regardless of what happens on the field my life goes on unaffected. So I try to keep things in perspective and stay light. The Jesus comment about not being judgmental of others, while a good idea, was only meant to be humorous in that context. Sorry.

gotcha, no problem.

There are the rankings and the voters. Some evaluations are easy, but some are too close to call to rely on. I am sure that there are others like me who would look at a USC/OSU game as the true NC. Although it would be better on a neutral field.
Experts rate the talent at USC and OSU easily over what WV and Missou have put on the field. Tressel and Carroll are as good as they come at developing that talent, and both have had to replace some superstars. There is no question in my mind that the Pac Ten is the strongest of the four confs represented so USC having two losses and the others one is not so big a deal. USC had two losses last year and the team many thought was #2, Mich, had only one, but look what happened. The records of the four teams are very similar, but as to the two playing the best right now I like OSU and USC. You may not like my conclusions but I did set out an argument for you.

Charles,

I think it would be a good Rose Bowl. I am not sure who would win, but I'd expect to see USC favored in it. Who knows?

I do not think that outside Los Angeles or Columbus that it would be regarded at the "true national champtionship game." If we step away from Mizzou and WVU for a moment, I think that claim could be made by fans of any team getting to a BCS Bowl, assuming that the selections give us some good matchups.

But I don't think it's legit to step away from Mizzou and WVU. To me they have both earned it, Mizzou probably more than WVU. To suggest that two other teams deserve it more because at least one of them (USC) is "back to playing their game" is silly as Stewart points out in his "five lessons" this week.

It all suggests to me that we need a rational playoff system. But that, of course, is a well worn path . . maybe if we keep up pointing it out in a way that Bowls, College Presidents, and the media could see it as "win-win" it might happen for our children. Maybe.

Sas