BCS analysts: December's Florida/Bama loser might not drop below #2

[Fiyero]

Assuming the two finish 12-0 and clash in the SEC title game, the loser may not drop below #2 and therefore will create an immediate rematch in the BCS title game. That is because their lead over #3 Texas is wide enough and should only become wider during SEC play, as the computers become more impressed with the two.

Initial hypothesis
Later analyzed and agreed to in the BCS blog
Idea now gaining steam on ESPN

[CardiacCoug]

Assuming the two finish 12-0 and clash in the SEC title game, the loser may not drop below #2 and therefore will create an immediate rematch in the BCS title game. That is because their lead over #3 Texas is wide enough and should only become wider during SEC play, as the computers become more impressed with the two.

Initial hypothesis
Later analyzed and agreed to in the BCS blog
Idea now gaining steam on ESPN

I think there would be a huge uproar over two straight games between Florida and Alabama (SEC Championship and then National Championship). I also think that either Florida or Alabama will have a loss prior to the SEC Championship game.

Florida sure didn't look dominant last week against an unranked team. Surely an undefeated Texas team would jump over the loser of Florida-Alabama. The interesting thing would be to see if a one-loss third place team would leapfrog a one-loss loser of that game.

[TripletDaddy]

I haven't read the links, but wouldn't the human voters take care of this, not wanting to see the same game twice in a row?

I imagine that the human voters will also be the undoing for BSU's bid to play in the NC game. Other teams will keep jumping them in the polls, thereby keeping them out.

My guess is that in the Florida/Alabama 1/2 scenario, the loser of the SEC championship game will drop to 4 or 5, if anything to ensure that there is no rematch.

[Babs]

It will never happen. The voters would prevent it. They have enough sway to essentially handpick who plays for the title among the top few teams headed into the final standings.

[Babs]

I haven't read the links, but wouldn't the human voters take care of this, not wanting to see the same game twice in a row?

grrrr. *&%^$#* you, TD.

[jay santos]

I can't keep up with the BCS rules, but I think it's 2/3 human 1/3 computers now, right?

If you have a consensus #2 in the human polls, it would be very difficult for them to be ousted by #3.

Also, chances are voters would drop 'Bama more than one spot. It's the nature of human polls.

Best chance for it to happen would be #3 Texas and #2 Bama to both lose on same day with an unimpressive #4,5,6 fighting to move up.

[Babs]

What would be fun would be for the two teams to rematch, only with the conference-game loser coming out the winner in the BCS game, just to underscore the absurdity of the whole thing.

[Fiyero]

When a top team dominates all season long and loses the last game of the regular season, there have been instances when they don't drop below #2, for example Michigan three years ago. They were 10-0 and ranked #2, and lost to 10-0 #1 Ohio State, and stayed #2. A week later, Florida jumped them in the BCS standings thanks to the SEC Championship game.

If the Florida/Bama doubleheader idea gains steam... it all boils down to campaigning, so I think it's notable that Ivan Maisel has made it a Page 1 story.

[TripletDaddy]

The BCS should adopt the rule that you must win your conference title to be eligible for the NC game.

[Jarid in Cedar]

The BCS should adopt the rule that you must win your conference title to be eligible for the NC game.

Signed,

The Big 12

[Babs]

The BCS should adopt the rule that you must win your conference title to be eligible for the NC game.

[Jarid in Cedar]

Don't worry Babs, he was probalby talking about Nebraska.

[Babs]

Don't worry Babs, he was probalby talking about Nebraska.

who?

[Jarid in Cedar]

who?

The person you are desperately wanting to ignore today.

[Babs]

The person you are desperately wanting to ignore today.

I meant nebraska-who. That's a blast from the past.

As for TD, I'm not here to make friends.