OK, UCLA has done their part (thanks, Jane!). Now, I’m watching to see if Arkansas can beat Florida, which will make any debate moot. If Florida wins, look for another debate over how screwed up the BCS is (which every year is a given…).
[Update at end of Florida-Arkansas game]
Florida won by ten points. Now the emotional debate (that will shed much more heat than light) over who is number two will begin…
[Update at quarter till five PM]
OK, it looks like Florida has been named number two. I have to think that’s because of the strong desire of many to avoid a rematch, rather than an honest assessment of who’s number two.
I’ll be quite amused if Ohio State blows out Florida, and Michigan trounces USC. We know from an existence proof that Michigan and Ohio State are well matched (or at least as well matched as anyone’s been against Ohio State), and provide an exciting game. If we have two blowouts in the Rose and Championship games, the country will know that they chose the wrong number two, and wondering if the real national championship game didn’t occur on November 18th.
One more thought. I think that dual blowouts are in fact quite likely. I don’t think that Florida will be able to handle Ohio State, and does anyone think that UCLA’s defense is better, or even as good as Michigan’s? USC has been a pretender all season.
Pete Fiutak says that the humans have taken control away from the machines:
The voters have spoken, delivering the message that they didn’t want a rematch by keeping Michigan out of the national title game and putting in a good, but underwhelming, Florida team to face Ohio State in the first stand-alone BCS Championship. While many outside the Detroit and Ann Arbor metropolitan areas may be pleased about this, there’s still something a bit hanging-chad slimy about the process.
I understand the arguments against a rematch, but I think that they should have lived with the rules they set up at the beginning of the season. I also think that Wisconsin was robbed by the two-team-per-conference rule.