First of all, I think Congress has much more troubling things to investigate before trying to decide who should play in college bowl games. Secondly, the old method of picking a mythical "champion" WAS on a concensus basis using UPI and AP voters. Unless there was one overwhelmingly dominating team, the coronation of the "champion" usually ended in controversay. The BCS is all about getting a #1 vs #2 to actually play a "championship" game on the field. Yes, it can still be flawed but, for the most part, and absent any real play off system, it has been reasonably effective. However, it has created a tough situation for the Bowls, especially the smaller ones, that are not hosting the championship game. They have had to forge alliances with conferences to insure that they can meet their financial goals by getting fans in the seats. Conferences have seen the $$ benefits of a championship game and have jumped on the $$ wagon. FSU did not invent the system, they just have to perform within it..which they did. Also, even in the "good old days" (pre-BCS) the Alabama's and Notre Dame's still went to the bowl games instead of the "have not's" regardless of records. Perhaps if the PAC 10 had a championship game Oregon could plead it's case.
FSU gets a BCS Berth.
First of all, I think Congress has much more troubling things to investigate before trying to decide who should play in college bowl games. Secondly, the old method of picking a mythical "champion" WAS on a concensus basis using UPI and AP voters. Unless there was one overwhelmingly dominating team, the coronation of the "champion" usually ended in controversay. The BCS is all about getting a #1 vs #2 to actually play a "championship" game on the field. Yes, it can still be flawed but, for the most part, and absent any real play off system, it has been reasonably effective. However, it has created a tough situation for the Bowls, especially the smaller ones, that are not hosting the championship game. They have had to forge alliances with conferences to insure that they can meet their financial goals by getting fans in the seats. Conferences have seen the $$ benefits of a championship game and have jumped on the $$ wagon. FSU did not invent the system, they just have to perform within it..which they did. Also, even in the "good old days" (pre-BCS) the Alabama's and Notre Dame's still went to the bowl games instead of the "have not's" regardless of records. Perhaps if the PAC 10 had a championship game Oregon could plead it's case.