And for the guy who said that VT wouldn’t bring in as much money……….you, my friend have never had the privilege of attending a Virginia Tech game of any kind.

To add credence to the BCS conspiracy plot put forth in your comment, and yes, it is really about the cash however, don’t forget the fact that the only two conferences with BCS tie-ins that don’t have conference championships are the PAC 10 and Big 10. What better way to protect a “system is designed to match up Ohio State and USC every year” than to have one less chance for either of these two teams to get beat by their closest rivals and ruin the master plan of the BCS.

As far as VA tech goes I think they would pound Ohio State just like LSU will. And incidentally, just like Florida did last year. The fact is, Virginia Tech is will bring in less money. I think they would have provided the best game. Their offensive line has much improved since the second game of the season. Interestingly enough, its fun to dismiss the computer rankings, but their system doesn’t change after the right before the final ranking. Look who they ranked #1.

LSU lost 2 games in triple overtime in the midst of a difficult SEC schedule, and let’s face it, by the end of the season, a schedule like theirs will take its toll on you.

Fact is, the rankings are a farce anyway. I mean, did anyone honestly consider Missouri to be the best team in college football last Saturday? No way. Hell, the oddmakers didn’t even think they were the best team in San Antonio! Rankings are stupid. We all know that the team anked #1 is not always the BEST team in the country, and that the #5 team is not always truly a better team than the #6 team and so on.

It is time for a revamping of the whole system….

Head to head matchups are important. Just ask Boston College. They beat VT in a miraculous effort and then VT turned around and beat the crap out of them in a rare gift of chance to vindicate themselves and avenge the loss.

You can’t consider a head to head matchup in the second week of the season as a “tie breaker” and call that part of a theoretical playoff.

Firstly, we should ask the Coaches why they voted VTech above LSU a week earlier. The have the same record, and they are both conference champs. So the tie-breaker: LSU beat VTech in the head to head.

Fortunately, the Coaches corrected this mistake when a Title berth was on the line, and they had to disclose their ballots. Only one coach voted VTech into the Title game position, and that was Frank Beamer of VTech voting his team #2. But you know what - he voted LSU #1, because he knows the head-to-head does matter.

We have little inter-conference play amongst top teams. When we do, we should respect the head to head. It matters - that is why poor Georgia was not at the SEC Title game.

How can you say we need a playoff and then disregard the LSU-VTech matchup? We had a playoff between these two teams. Score: LSU 48, VTech 7.

If I were a team, I’d try to follow Ohio State’s plan for dominance and avoid joining a real conference with a conference championship game, too. Playing less games than everybody else sounds like a great idea to me.

It just makes more sense to me that you would have a way better shot at winning a national championship if your conference was terrible (like Ohio State) and you played less games than everybody else (like Ohio State) and you quit playing before Thanksgiving so you could rest up (like Ohio State).