Now that the bowls have been played, it seems clear the #2 Florida vs. #3 USC matchup in the semi-final round would have been the decider. Previously, I had picked USC over Oklahoma in this tournament format, but following the bowls I'd probably have to give the USC/Florida coin flip back to Florida, with Florida taking the tournament. Pete Fiutak's piece on rating Florida #1 on CollegeFootballNews.com lays out a very good case why Florida should be considered an undisputed #1. Among the strong evidence: Florida played eleven - ELEVEN - bowl teams this year and beat two different teams rated #1 at the time. Fine - in the redux, we'll give it to Florida over Oklahoma and BCS supporters can feel good that the proper champion was crowned.
But...
Could Utah have beaten Oklahoma as Florida did? Maybe. Florida has a stronger defense than Utah and that made the difference in the BCS National Championship game. Would Utah have had the speed to match up against Oklahoma's spread attack? And had they played, who would have won between USC and Florida? Though again deferring to Florida given their actual bowl play, it seems that any of the top four seeds (Oklahoma, Florida, USC, Utah) could have had a legitimate chance to win a tournament like this. Unlike Fiutak, I'm not so sure that Utah couldn't have hung with Oklahoma, Florida, or USC and given a good match, if not outright winning.
It would have been nice to find out.
No comments:
Post a Comment