For the second year in a row, Oklahoma doesn't bother to show up for a national championship game. The good news for those of us who are college football fans is that we could easily go to bed by halftime since the game was pretty much never in doubt by the middle of the second quarter.
But what the game also showed is that Oklahoma had no business being in this game--kind of like last year. Looking back now, we can see that Auburn is, by far, the better choice to go to the Orange Bowl and probably give USC a better game. I'm still convinced that Auburn would beat USC in the game had the two been allowed to play since Auburn comes from the superior conference of the SEC.
It's just too bad that once again Oklahoma got to the big dance only to choke and deny a team that deserved to be there the right to be there.
Over at USA Today
, Christine Brennan has a column
that USC pretty much put an end to the debate over whether there should be a playoff system. She said their performance erased any doubts. Ummm, sorry Christine but no. All their victory did was make me wonder how Auburn would fare. Or Utah. USC ripped Oklahoma, yes. But would they have as easily handled Auburn, which is from a superior conference to start with? No, I don't think they would. I'm not saying Auburn would win, but they should at least get the chance to prove it on the field. Same for Utah.
posted by Michael Hickerson at 1/05/2005 07:50:00 AM