Alabama lost to a virtually indesputable #1 on LSU's home field by 3 points, in OT, the game was ass numbingly dull. So was, as described by some, not by me, the 1966 "game of the century", in which Michigan St and Notre Dame tied 10-10. Game of the century to me will always be Oklahoma-Nebraska, 1971. OSU on the other hand lost to Iowa St, a barely 500 team. Recent BCS history of the performance of the high flying Big 12 offenses is not particularily reassuring. OSU gives up gouts of yards, relies on turnovers to stay alive. I think they'll have all they want with Stanford, and I question Stanford's ranking as #4, coming off a shellacking loss to Oregon. That said, I'd have no issue with OSU, in the title game, I'm a Big 8 fan, Big 12 not so much, merely rationally describing the reasoning for the BCS selection. Without putting on my rose colored Big 12 glasses, I would have to say the Big 12 is down a little, Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri, Texas Tech, and Texas A & M, all worse than a year ago. Then there's KU! Only Iowa St., Baylor, and KSU demonstratively better than a year ago. With KSU way better. Have to add Nebraska's gone, would have been a factor as well. Bottom line, a really good year to be a little better, and be in the Big 12, Pac 12, or the BIG rusty 10/11/12, whatever. I am sympathetic with the idea that you should win your conference to play for the national title, but you should be able to mop the floor with the 500 teams, on your worst day. it can all be solved by a playoff, as suggested by the SEC several years ago, but rejected by Big 12 commisioner Beebe, "We like the system as it is", "there is no interest by our administrators in a 4 team playoff", and I quote.
